[RedBean]

[ QUOTE ]
For example, he has made several assertions calling the Game of Shadows book into question... but he has not made a detailed, sourced, point-by-point refutation of all of the detailed, sourced, point-by-point pieces of evidence in the book.


[/ QUOTE ]

You say GoS has "detailed, sourced, point-by-point" pieces of evidence?

It's a narrative opinion of the authors based loosely on some anonymous and other uncorroborated sources.

Did you know that the Chronicle submitted the work of the authors in their articles to Pulitzer for nomination?

Buster Olney reported on ESPN News that the author’s articles, which were submitted to the Pulitzer by the S.F. Chronicle:

[ QUOTE ]

"...never made it beyond the initial jury stage to the Pulitzer committee. Their work was deemed by the jury too based upon unsubstantiated and uncorroborated evidence and was therefore not able to be viewed as factual."


[/ QUOTE ]

Think about that....

The initial jury that decides Pulitzer nomination merit deemed their work to be based on <u>unsubstantiated</u> and <u>uncorroborated evidence</u>, and was NOT ABLE TO BE VIEWED AS FACTUAL!

Oops!