You know, although a lot of these defenses are clearly written by the same person (given the style, manner, etc.), these might be written by different people employed to defend Kip. I listen to NPR a lot and some of their programming in my area is underwritten by a company involved in protecting people's and companies' online reputation. Perhaps that is what is going on here. I am interested in seeing how this plays out.
show stopper wrote:
For those of you who think just because something is in print in a magazine its true or that the New Yorker has a rigorous fact checking process, you are dead wrong about both. Kip's friend purposely lied to Mark Singer about the food eating incident at his party that was mentioned in the article. The New Yorker printed this lie, OBVIOUSLY without verifying it!!!!!!
Mr. Singer omitted information from the article that would have cleared Kip. His wife and kids watched him run many of these races and have made it clear to everyone that it was not possible for him to have cheated. Furthermore, one of Kip's training partner's verified that Kip's race finish times were all well within Kip's capabilities.Yes, this fabricated tale would qualify as a witch hunt.