“This is your assertion, Fred, not mine. Turns out it’s inaccurate.”
The chronology of the images and the images themselves show when that family group photograph must have been taken. Mark identified the children in that group as himself and David. I’ve shown that is not correct. You maintain it is. Fine. It’s not compulsory to see what our research shows. It’s a free country. People give you information, you disregard it. Want me to recant? I can’t. The facts remain as they are. The children have been misidentified, and I think it’s for a reason.
It’s a take it or leave proposition. You are insinuating that I am a liar, which I find most offensive. You inability to follow the progression of images and chronology does not me a liar make.
This is what you said, Fred:
‘Yet the dark child Mark claims is he, is at least five years old in 1966.’
But it turns out Mark never said any such thing. I am frankly quite surprised. Your statement is open and shut: Mark said he was five yo in ‘66. But he never said that. Why would you say he did when he didn’t?