Bunch of stuff, here, Doug...
First of all, the reference to Nitrogen/Helium came up as a normal pat of the discussion. As a sidebar, it has had its run and looks to be thoroughly considered. You should know by now that there are all sorts of ancillary sidebar discussions in pretty much all the threads on this forum. You, yourself, have contributed to that reality more than anyone I can quickly recall. To hop on the righteous soapbox at this point is considerably less than genuine.
- - - - - -
Nobody has dug any kind of deep hole from which they will, as you have put it..."wallow in it, sooner or later." You tossed out a goofy reference from a magazine article. One that was not supported in any way, shape, or form, by substantive quotes, photographs or links to a developed article from a credible source. In short, at the time, you willingly spread gossip based on pure vapor.
You then proceeded to produce info from another vaporous source, which was conveniently omitted. Whether that source of yours will turnout to be substantive, or not, is outside the basic argument.
1. It is not only the right, but also pretty much the responsibility of those reading a story/report, to call BS for any element they find to be lacking in depth, or substance. That does not mean that the topic never happened. It simply means that it has not been supported properly by he who has brought it forth. This is an objective discussion.
2. You may be confusing the fact that people may simply find your style of reportage to be something less than credible. When that style is mixed with the business of dropping some inside dope on the gang and calling it good, it spells trouble.
I would suggest that you are the only one who can fix that problem. An example of which is the attached piece that was supplied by Paul B at post #35 on page 3 of this very thread, with regards to your AeroSKIFF, its foiling realities and what you said about same on these pages.
http://www.boatdesign.net/forums/multihulls/usa-technical-details-helium-used-32082-3.html Something there just doesn't come together cleanly with your current claims. It's that kind of stuff that hammers cred.
Having your story raked over the coals does not mean that the story has no substance. It simply means that you likely did a poor job in presenting that substance and you asked the readers to make a colossal jump to gain the necessary credibility that this type of story demands.
So, now that we have clarity on your affront, What About That Archived Quote Regarding Your AeroSKIFF and Your Open Statement That It Didn't Get Out Of The Water As You Later Claimed? (see below)
No time like the present to reestablish a bit of that lost member cred. ;-)
.