So then it won't matter whether I read the book or not. If I don't take away the company line, then I'm wrong & there is no way the author of the book can be questioned. It seems I was called a total fool & idiot last year for questioning how the river control structure works & what parameters are use to make those decisions to open & close the fllod gates. I was told I was an ididot for stating that the flow rates of the river are estimates & are not absolute indisputable numbers, yet every day I could go to the Corps of engineers site & they would arbitrarily change the flow rate estimates that they had figured the day before or for the last two days or the past week. Whatever it took to suit their needs is what the flow rate "estimsate" became. Yet I was constantly harranged by some who saw the numbers being changed on an almost daily basis, but I had the problem. Now you want me to read another work with I'm sure what will have some truth & redeeeming value to it, but may not be a complete validation of past events from every perspective. Yet when I ask what your reaction will be if I question it, or have problems with certain parts of it for whatever reason, you say you will judge me to be incompetent no matter what I question.
Yet I am supposed to at this point WASTE my time reading something that I should have NO RIGHT to disagree with in any way? But I would be the close minded one if I did? On the other hand I'm close minded if I don't. Is this the complete method of education for everyone at the University of Louisiana? Either you fall in line every day on every issue or we will brow beat you into submitting that we are right, because in our little world we make the rules & that is the way it is? Wasn't that the heart of the issue that was the root cause of UL's trouble to begin with? It's funny how the apples don't fall very far from the tree.