If you're going to call someone stupid for a grammatical error, ensure your grammar is correct. It's "analysis," not "analyses." He didn't provide more than one analysis. And your second reference to "analysis" is probably wrong too. If there was more than one analysis, you should have said "analysis was," not "analysis were." And if there was more than one analysis, you should have said "analyses were."
Oh . . . and Ozmo is a whole lot smarter than you. Just fyi.
Clearly you did not read his reply to the end. Otherwise, in your infinite wisdom, would have noticed he analyzed both acoustics and
comspiracies in general; ergo my usage of "analyses" stands, and
you are wrong. Kindly note my previous comment regarding laziness and stupidity. Unless, as I am starting to suspect, those are prerequisites to moderate this board, in which case carry on
Yes, I too am wrong as I should have typed "analyses were".
Regarding his stupidity, he was asking questions that can only be described as infantile in the context of a
Select Committee on Assassinations of the U.S. House of Representatives. Further to that point, and to answer the calls from “Ozmo” for a simplistic explanation of the apparently overwhelming information provided, there is nothing of value I can add that was not clearly explained in the links furnished. Sadly, I do not have a knack for "dumbing things down" for the likes of you.