Steorn Jury Update: Good Circumstantial Evidence
Tuesday, August 14, 2007
Forum member "Crank" said yesterday:
"The way I'd look at it is...I was shown the names of two jury members. At any time over the past six months if Sean pissed me off sufficiently (and Sean is good at pissing me and everyone else off ) I could have phoned those scientists and asked them if they really were on the Steorn jury.
If they weren't, they could and would have publicly disassociated themselves from the Irish crackpots who were using their name in vain. So if it was a house of cards, it would all have come tumbling down over quite a simple thing.
Therefore...the names he gave me had to be genuine. Therefore...there is a jury. Therefore...anything Sean has stated publicly about the jury has to be real, or jury members would be kicking up a fuss."
--------------------------------------------
I have to agree with Crank on this one since Crank could have easily proved the non-existence of a jury by a simple phone call. Steorn have indeed been upfront about the jury and it is now only the more heavily skeptical people who would dispute this now.
Also today, the forums were opened up again and you no longer need a login to read the posts.
http://www.steorn.com/forum
