Quote Originally Posted by Thaatu
Considering this is your opening for this discussion, you might see why people have a problem with your attitude:

The problem is that you don't articulate your words to fit a scientific debate taking place in this arena, meaning in a place where people can't see your expressions. In most of your posts it seems as if you don't even consider about being wrong or changing your own perspective, you only focus on proving others wrong.

You do seem to know a lot about the subjects you comment on and I believe you do. But remember that in an internet forum no-one knows if you're some kid who knows how to google, or a university professor. English is a language in which every word can be insulting, it's just a matter of the delivery. The EB team is very easily insulted, because the pressure and past experiences has put them on the defensive. Still, I'd like to see everyone keep their cool.
I understand what you mean. The reason I automatically took a negative stance in this debate is because it was being held up as being historically accurate without actually citing any evidence (not by the EB team, but by other posters). As I have told paullus, I do consider my own position, and I have changed my opinion on many subjects in the past based on careful consideration (case in point: The extensive RAT forum discussion on linen vs. leather armour in the Greek world). However, this is one issue, along with a handful of others, which without any further evidence to consider (and it seems there may be, but it needs to be found first) is fairly clear. It's also ironic that I am told that I am not budging on an issue or considering the evidence when that's exactly the case with the EB team, who seem to defend their decisions no matter what.