[mrlqban]

Let me just say something...I've been following Leo's work since 2008 and I do believe in the validity of his research. With that said, unlike Vick, I do have a background on programming languages and I know how a simple syntax error can leave you head scratching for days. By no means I am implying that the Justia story is full of crap and this was an unintentional error, at the contrary, i believe it needs more attention than what it deserves. However, there are times that computer languages can play the dirtiest tricks and can really mess up with your heads. This is the reason why I was somewhat skeptical for a moment there when Vick brought that hypothesis and as a programmer, you should look for those type o patterns when you are debugging the hell out of the mess.

So to go after the facts, and deviate from opinions a bit,I read Vicks explanation and from the pattern recognition perspective, it made sense to me so I went through Leo's snapshots and I found one case that debunked Vick's hypothesis, I just needed one case to prove it, see my previous post.

So no, I am not trying to come from the other side or have a specific agenda in mind. I was just trying to make sense of the pattern and analyze Vick's statement

[Danae]

That makes sense to me. My husband is an architect and builds enterprise applications. He did the same thing when I showed him the images... and laughed. :)

[Vickery2010]

“So to go after the facts, and deviate from opinions a bit,I read Vicks explanation and from the pattern recognition perspective, it made sense to me so I went through Leo’s snapshots and I found one case that debunked Vick’s hypothesis, I just needed one case to prove it, see my previous post.”

I disagree that it takes just one case to disprove my hypothesis. What we see in Kepner is an anomaly, yes, but it’s anomaly that could also be consistent with my hypothesis. I just don’t have the coding know-how to draw any conclusions.

Plus, if it only takes one anomaly to deflate a theory, then Leo’s theory is thoroughly punctured. His theory starts with alleging that Justia removed references to “Minor v Happersett” to, I guess, hide the significance of the case.

And then that they did the same thing to references to the Slaughterhouse Cases. And to Dred Scott. And to Osborn v US.

And to US v Babbitt. And to Hylton v US. And to Bartemeyer v Iowa.

That’s one WEIRD cover-up scheme. And even though Leo tries to hide this a little by grouping the first three together as ‘citizenship’ cases, the fact is that Osborn is primarily a BANKING case, and Dred Scott and the Slaughterhouse Cases are two of the most famous Supreme Court decisions of the 1800s. Trying to obscure their significance would be like trying to hide Brown v. Board of Education.