David,
I have a question.
Despite what you think of Tom Paul and the way he's going about this, from a purely technical standpoint do you think that the methodology he's describing by having a surveyor compare the 1910 Lloyd deed with the 1928 Merion survey will yield the correct results?
Good question. The answer is NO for a number of reasons.
1. It is not a transparent process.
- We will have no way to know what TEPaul will ask of the surveyor, or what the surveyor will answer. It is all being done behind closed doors, and there is no reason for this at all.
- No matter what the surveyor comes up with,
we are at TEPaul's mercy to convey the information to us. Given his abhorent record of misunderstanding and/or misrepresenting, this would be ludicrous. If the surveyor comes back with information that hurts TEPaul's claims, do you think we will ever hear about it? Of course not. At best we will hear a deceptive and twisted version.
2.
There is no need for a surveyor. The western border of the Johnson farm is a straight line and plotting it is a simple matter. All Bryan needs is the bearing.
3.
THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO JUSTIFICATION FOR KEEPING BRYAN AND/OR ME FROM FIGURING THE CALCULATION OURSELVES. This is true even if TEPaul hires a surveyor. Verification is essential in this sort of thing, yet he refuses to open up the process to have the information verified.
In short, with TEPaul involved in the process, we have absolutely no reason to trust it. But even if it was someone honest and capable, I WOULD STILL INSIST ON TRANSPARENCY AND VERIFICATION, and Bryan or any HONEST person would gladly welcome TRANSPARENCY and VERIFICATION. That is the only acceptable way.
In your opinion, should this type of exercise get to the Francis Land Swap answer?
In other words, I would expect that if the Land Swap happened before the November 1910 Land Plan, then those maps should show no difference. Would you agree?
No. TEPaul's theory doesn't make any sense, even on the face of it. I have no idea what he thinks he is accomplishing it, but it seems like he thinks if he can get a measure from a surveyor, then we won't be able to refute him. But the measure from the surveyor doesn't necessarily have anything to do with any analysis that will tell us anything about the swap. He hasn't (and can't) explain exactly how this is supposed to work, because he has no idea.
It is a bit like when you guys claimed that you had "respected scientist and expert researcher" who would undermine my methodology. There was no substance to it. You guys just wanted someone with supposed expertise, so you could flaut his credentials without ever addressing the issues. Turns out the "expert" never came up with a single specific problem with my essay, and had no expertise whatsoever with this kind of research. It was just another false claim of authority to justifiy an argument that was otherwise unjustifiable.
That is what is going on here. TEPaul is trying to use the letterhead of a surveyor to bamboozle us into buying his flawed analysis without him having to actually prove it up.
I hope that answered your questions.