Review of Comments By the Followers

    The publication of Randich and Grant's article in July 2006 set off a flurry of posts in the two main JFK newsgroups to the effect that Rahn and Sturdivan were now debunked, and the NAA analyses were proven once and for all to be inconclusive. However, nothing could be further from the truth.
    The comments by the Eldenaar followers are practically all wrong, irrelevant, or unnecessarily argumentative. They are accepting the Randich-Grant paper at face value and reciting its tenets to the newsgroups without really understanding it. To make things easier, I have grouped illustrative comments by them into the major categories of history of NAA, limitations of the NAA, the Rahn/Sturdivan papers, alleged claims of Rahn/Sturdivan, Rahn/Sturdivan's behavior, needed steps to take, and claims by RG being repeated. I am not linking the claims to specific posters, so as not to overpersonalize the discussion.

History of NAA
Limitations of the NAA
Rahn/Sturdivan's papers
Alleged claims of Rahn/Sturdivan
Rahn/Sturdivan's behavior
Needed steps
Claims by RG being repeated

Back to Introduction