Armand Premo wrote:
"I think it is past time that we revisit the Gilbert-Nelson theory. I
trust that it is not heresy to challenge their theory. Based on
primary sources , using a larger sample and not restricting the study
to just box cars the results could be much different."
Not sure what you mean here, Armand:
- Primary sources? The UP and Southern conductor's books used by Dave and Tim weren't primary enough? What do you mean exactly?
- Larger sample size would be great; however, lacking more conductor's books and train records for given stretches of railroad, I'm not sure that you could get there.
- Restricting the study to box cars and flat cars was the whole point! The intent was to come up with a better model for general service cars. If you include more specialized cars such as hoppers, OF COURSE the results would be different.
It's not heresy to challenge Tim and Dave's work; however, lets not ruin a good methodology with a flawed one just for the sake of coming up with different results. There's enough bogus thinking out there already.