pop_pop!_v2.2.1 wrote:
larkimm wrote:Lol, here I am posting to get the case against Paula made clearly and succinctly
So you can then post a long and circuitous denial that, if you hold your head at the right angle, squint, and look at the sun at 6:55 pm in Fiji, makes perfect sense.
larkimm wrote:
All I want is a public resolution of this issue. It seems to me that the only place this is being actively worked on is on this thread - that's not right.
For some reason you seemed to keep defending her anyway despite the IAAF wrapping it up in a way that should have pleased you long ago. The IAAF declared her clean and has moved on. You could have stopped a long time ago. That's a serious answer.
You're massively misunderstanding me. I've no capability to rebut the scientific stuff, and I'm trying to be objective here, despite my self-professed belief in Paula based on what is in the public domain and the analysis that "experts" have publicly reported on so far.
There are perhaps 5-10 people in the world on this thread that are interested in discussing this. Of these, at least one (me) is a middle-aged bloke from the UK with no links at all to elite athletics and no expertise in the "science" at all. I'm just an interested fan, and (to be honest) a fan that is relatively late to the party (I only started getting properly interested in athletics about 8 years ago). Knowing that about myself, I therefore suggest that I am utterly unqualified to comment on the scientific stuff about Paula's blood values (despite having tried, badly, earlier in this thread!).
And I suggest it is also possible that others on this thread are, when it comes down to it, equally unqualified to comment.
All I was suggesting was that the case be put clearly in a way which doesn't allow Tucker to say "Hmmm, interesting, but not telling me anything new", but instead gets him (or other appropriate individuals) to say "Hmmm, really interesting - let me follow through on some of that, and perhaps get this aspect discussed more widely by qualified individuals" so that we can get a wider (and more qualified) discussion about it. I want the issue putting to bed - is she likely a doper or not? (With that question being asked and answered not by anonymous thread posters on here). Wouldn't that be helpful?