The only irony is your continued insistence upon evidence but then refusing to provide it for your position.
My position is that the NIST report is invalidated by critical omissions and therefore a new, transparent and fully accountable investigation should be conducted—naturally to include a review of the NIST report’s conclusions and how they were obtained.
The evidence for this is there and has been presented on this thread. What you call “whining” about evidence for any other position is you whining to yourself, and has nothing to do with me.
One of the several things that makes your comments at post 998
comedy gold, people
is your obvious failure to understand what the null hypothesis is in this case.
I suggest you read up on the null hypothesis and when you can demonstrate your understanding to the forum you can
get back to us.
I would expect a man of your intelligence to spend some time thinking about this, so I’ll see you after the festive season.
But as something of a clue to get you started, I’ll leave you with this little gift.