It appears that Mr. Hoser can't tell the difference between a logical argument and a logical fallacy. He may be a scientist, but if he can't even understand basic logic, he can't possibly be a very good one.

Here are just a few of the fallacies this guy commits just about every time he posts:

Argument from Authority. He claims to be a scientist, and therefore whatever he has to say is right. Related to that, he claims that his "peer reviewed" journal is proof of his claims, when in reality there have been numerous instances in which the credibility of his "peer review" process has been challenged. But notice what he ISN'T doing: presenting real evidence to back up his claims.

Ad Hominem. More than once, I have seen him dismiss valid arguments against his claims based solely on his opponent's lack of experience. But in reality it doesn't matter how much experience his opponents have: if the arguments are valid, they are valid no matter who makes them, whether a newborn baby or a 100 year old expert. What matters isn't who says it - or the credentials of the person saying it - what matters is what is being said, and whether the points being made are valid.

Another example of ad hominem, or poisoning the well, is his use of the terms "trolls" and "flamers" to describe his opponents. Again, he doesn't seem to want to deal with the actual points themselves, but simply dismiss his opponents by using terms that imply that their opposition is meaningless.

The bottom line is, the burden of proof is on Mr. Hoser, both to present his evidence in full and to make his arguments based on sound logic. He has thus far not done so within this forum. Instead, he resorts to insisting that he is right for no other reason than that he is a scientist (never mind that other scientists disagree with him) and that his opponents are not (never mind that they raise valid criticisms and arguments). This has done little but prove to me that this Mr. Hoser is not a rational man, but is rather attempting to browbeat less astute hobbyists into supporting his position without adequate reason. This is not the hallmark of a good scientist, and in fact, in my mind, casts doubt on his expertise and his credibility.

Once again, I would urge Mr. Hoser to focus his efforts on discussing his "findings" with appropriate scientific authorities and let them make whatever decisions will be made. And until such a time comes - which I sincerely doubt - this is the THAMNOPHIS forum, a place for discussing the genus THAMNOPHIS, and not Gregswedoshus, because the latter genus does not even exist.