You don't seem to understand the meaning of the term "cognitive rigidity." You seem to think it applies to anyone who doesn't believe as you believe and who looks at the facts, instead.
You also don't seem to understand the term "ad hominem" which you've been using a lot in this thread.
Saying someone suffers from "cognitive rigidity" because they will not convert to your beliefs is a demonstration of an "ad hominem" attack. It doesn't address the facts of the argument but is instead a personal attack upon the person with whom you are arguing.
Good observations and good logic never grow old. And, if good observations and good logic are not easy to sell, that doesn't necessarily make them wrong.
Ed, it is you who uses terms in a unique way. For example, it is not a FACT (as you regularly claim) that a 1st grader wrote the anthrax letters. It is an opinion. Your opinion. Not shared by any handwriting expert. With the only person sharing the opinion the webposter you stole it from 7 years ago.
Relevant evidence (putting aside questions like admissibility and hearsay) would be the type of conclusion referenced in the FoxNews email that John Ezzell doesn’t deny writing. The email related to samples tested by USAMRIID and which was was the closest match. Do you see that subject? Doesn’t it say PDF images? Isn’t Dr.Ezzell commenting on the PDFs from Microbial Forensics showing silica? He’s retired now from USAMRIID and very likely would be very responsive to an open-minded inquiry from you. He has a major paper coming out soon on anthrax in a major, highly regarded publication.
As for cognitive rigidity, an example would be that you argued on your webpage that the hijackers had no accomplices when it is an established fact that they did — for example, Jdey. Why didn’t you revise/correct your page after this was pointed out? The fact is established by his martyrdom video, the statements made by detainees, the FBI’s investigation etc. Yet rather than disclose his existence you just claim it is an established fact the hijackers had no accomplices and don’t even address Ken Dillon’s argument that the evidence points to Jdey as the anthrax mailer.
A Palladin only ever rides a white horse (unless, of course, studio execs force him to ride a black horse for marketing reasons).
Philip Shenon, “Lawyers Fear Monitoring in Cases On Terrorism,” April 28, 2008
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/28/us/28lawyers.html?ref=us
Your friend, the documentary maker, wrote the ultimate treatise on “Have Gun, Will Travel” and was nice enough to send me an autographed copy when I asked him.
I’ll send it to you so you can learn the ways of a palladin.