Oh, I don't know. I think there reaches a point where you can be pretty definitive that something didn't happen the way someone described it.
Exactly. And that one of Edward's shameful deceptions was a perfect example of that.
I suspect I may be one of (or 'the') 'particular member/s' who suggested he be given those marching orders, and I'm very pleased to see that LO took action - well played as usual, LO! But allow me to explain a bit more..
I accept that this forum relies to some extent on people proclaiming wildly inaccurate stuff - and that some latitude (maybe quite a lot) must be applied. I don't mind crazy ideas, as long as the holder of said ideas is prepared to discuss in good faith and does not *deliberately* lie or misinform. I've had many quite pleasant debates with some pretty crazy folks here and elsewhere.
But of late, I've noticed that an increasing tactic with the last dwindling few who push Apollo denial, and also some UFO=alien and Nibiru/PlanetX/Mayan-calendar-extinction believers/trolls is to simply
lie their ****s off, whether by completely misrepresenting authoritative references (a special hello to 'MacG' at Unexplained Mysteries..
), or by giving very obviously false accounts of their personal experiences, eg Edward's absolutely ridiculous assertions about his streetlamp-(un)affected stellar viewing ability.
That was very obviously not debating in good faith, and makes it very clear that the person is trolling (or perhaps completely deluded), and in either case I don't think they should be allowed to continue getting their fifteen Kb of 'fame'..
It's been a pleasure to note that this website (and a couple of notable others) are taking action against such 'people'.