And I pointed out that what you say about the Sonics' experts agreeing with you is pure advocacy to show something at trial, yet you fail to address that and continue to spew further nonsense which has absolutely nothing to do with the trial.

Recall I pointed out that when one economic expert testifies as to a fact, you have to have another economic expert which testifies as to the opposite. The goal of which is to muddy the water enough to show that both methods are complete voodoo and hopefully, in the Sonics' case, save them millions of dollars in liability. It's not perjury. You can't perjure yourself by advocating an opinion, which is what you see happening here. These economic experts are advocating their professional opinions because that's what they've been paid rather handsomely to do. What you see is trial advocacy. You're reading too much into it.

I'm all for a spirited debate on what should and shouldn't be public funding, but please don't hijack threads just to make an off-topic point.

__________________
It's a friendlier OKCTalk!