Poor old Thomas takes a licking and keeps on ticking. Very good at spitballing explanations for the results of tests which didn't meet the demands of scientific rigor; I continue to believe that the duration of stimulus shorter than response time argument (somewhere about top of p. 238 in the first Gun Book) remains an ingenious and inviting hypothesis. Human beings aren't capable of being certified as calibrated instrumentation so such tests (however methodically scrupulous) are simply flawed in the premise that they are in any way more than a thought problem. Naturally old Gough would jump ahead and begin to think about the contribution of human neurology. Incidentally, how many distinct arguments can dwell on the head of a thread?

jack