Allan, I'd like to thank you for your reaching out to Elaine Ingham and now Mark Purdey. The energy and kindness you extend to all of us by bring these 'special lecturers' amazes me. Thanks once more. ****
As to Mark Purdey's work, summarized in a few lengthy postings, it seems, er, right on the mark. Though I don't have enough science to prod and poke it for holes, his thesis appears sound and provides the best fit to all the variables. Also his method and single-mindedness, and lack of crankiness, seems in line with how I've seen other major problems solved and steps forward taken...usually by men, because only they seem to have the desire to run something to ground once in theirs sights. At some point women on such a chase change their gaze and look at all the collateral damage the obsession is doing to their lives, family, and at times, sanity, and will more often choose to maintain or repair these (some don't I recognize, but many will). I hope Mark hasn't had to pay this price yet. But once again the pattern of an outside, freethinking individual attacking and possibly cracking a problem seems to have repeated here. And the complimentary pattern of crushing blindness and deafness by official science has also emerged. I don't don't understand why there's this reluctance to look at what Mark has done, given the societal and financial cost of doing this. I suspect his contribution may end up being forgotten, or usurped by an 'official' scientist at some point. But I can't and won't forget what I've seen him piece together from this mess if and when this does happen. Mark, as a Canadian and someone likely to have Charles as king one day too, the brief summary you gave of your meeting with Charles (a man who seems to realize some of the deep systemic problems in agriculture) I think it horrible but predictable that his handlers have cut you out. If any one deserves some of the Duchy of Cornwall or Prince's Trust funding to get at this problem in a way that can't be ignored, it appears to be you. ....Now, Mark, you've told us what has fit together and been picked at until the connections finally emerge. What have you come across that still is unclear to you, either in cases/clusters, or the physiology of the problems? Cheers, Geoff Heinricks Prince Edward Co., Ontario
