Thank you Jeremy (and Jonathan) for mentioning my work and coming to my defense. First, let me say that I try and stay out of these threads because I think when a CT person (or at least an agnostic-I am unsure of the position of some) speaks out against the Armstrong theory it has more impact than my own statements as an LN do-especially here at what is essentially a CT forum.
Next let me mention that I no longer have the source material that I quoted from (Denial #2). I sold all my Armstrong material years ago (at a profit I might add). I would say that my quote was almost certainly accurate though. It was my experience that Armstrong's early material was even more inaccurate than his book (if you can believe it).
Jeremy has accurately represented the point I was trying to make, which I will concede is a minor one. That was written around the beginning of the anti-Armstrong movement (2002), so we were looking at everything, I guess. It is good to see that LNs and CTs alike have pointed out the absurdity of the Armstrong theories in the years since and have greatly expanded on my work. As a result, very few researchers pay much attention to the theory these days. But when it comes up, you can always rely on Jim to have a "data dump" ready to go.
One other thing I do want to comment on is Sandy Larsen. A moderator is supposed to be someone with a neutral mindset. Now, we all know that everyone has bias and since we are all human beings that bias will show through. But Sandy is not even trying to hide his. I think a moderator should remember his role and temper his comments if he/she is to be effective. I don't see Sandy doing that unfortunately.