Did you every figure which statement was true?
Only because you're insisting on missing the point.
My following point was that comparing the two stories is silly. One is in the past. We all know how it turned out. This one is developing. We don’t know all of the facts.
...all of which is entirely irrelevant to the valid point he made, which you are either lamely dodging, or failing to see.
When I read Jacobsen’s version it seemed to be filled with an inordinate level of detail…detail aimed at her perception of what was going on.
She's a *writer*. If she's like most, she's a keen observer of people and events, and can describe them in great detail later on paper.
It read like she had an overactive imagination.
It reads to me like like she was keeping a close eye on things and reported it well, including the observations which were key to supporting her conclusions.
That’s my judgment for now.
Such as it is.
Did you every figure which statement was true?
Did you ever figure out that you're acting like a jerk overimpressed by the "cleverness" of his misses-the-point remark that was silly the *first* time you made it, much less the third or fourth time you beat it into the ground as a cheap excuse to badger someone and childishly accuse him of "talking crap"?