Where did I ever say I had the ability to read the mind of a dead man?
I merely quoted from his interviews and presented valid and multiple-choice conclusions based on the observed facts. But I'm open to listen to other conclusions.
If you ever quoted the man I have missed it. If you quote him and then provide what you identify as your own interpretation of the quote, you won't hear from me unless I find your interpretation so lacking in foundation as to demand rebuttal. This is a pretty open floor. All kinds of ideas get tossed out here. One has to be seriously deficient to stir me to post. Your ideas- even those with which I disagree- are not the problem. It is your inference that you know the motives of someone who, on the subjects you are discussing, didn't leave us a record of his motives.
This thread has vividly revealed that when it comes to the person of Franz Joseph the amount of excuses on his behalf is impressive.
You are the author of these "excuses", by virtue of your own claims to knowing things you cannot know. If you had the courage to simply put forth your own ideas as such without the need for tearing down what came before you, you would not prompt others to expend energy not on discussing your
work, but on discussing your undefensible claims.
If you feel an ongoing need to tear down what you believe to be the remnants of dead Franz Joseph's "reputation" in order to make room for what you wish to present as an alternative, then go to the Trekplace interviews and quote accurately and in context and identify your assessment of the quotes as that- your
assessment. Tell us your
qualifications - drafting experience, aerospace degrees, whatever- so we might weigh them against his. And let your ideas stand on their own in contrast to the quotes without the need for this Schnaubelt-bashing you refuse to stop.