>>For years, JR has used a technique that has often frustrated me - but I'll borrow it for one day.
>>JR has used literary quotes and "voices" from others to answer a question - without actually giving his opinion. :)

Some people are not realists, but observers who believe that there's no monopoly on truth. If somebody wants to cast their views as undeniable or obvious certainties, such a person ought to be able to say exactly why. Rutherford, who split the atom, insisted on this- though he also proclaimed that science consists of physics and stamp collecting, which he felt was sufficiently obvious not to require explanation. Less illustrious observers agree that people who refuse to explain their certainty or insist there's no need because it's obvious, are disappointments. To them I would paraphrase Keynes: when the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do sir? Sometimes it seems the answer is "if I plug my ears the facts can't change which proves I'm still right." I suppose it must sometimes look as if observers are tilting at windmills, quoting third party evidence or voices that the absolutists ought to be able to demolish.

No, that's not directed at you; and yes, I did just do exactly what you accused me of; whereas you said you intended to, but didn't. ;-)