Reply #118: Double standard?

[RH]

A "small hole" is proof of a small plane or no plane but a large pole gap is not a proof of a large plane; is that the argument, or what?

The abysmal failure to suggest any other actual, feasible, credible method to fell poles is noted, and not at all unsual in view of the challenge.

Would you also have another way to explain the damage to the electricity generator? Or perhaps not?

Thanks for trying, anyway.