The post you are reporting:
Neil, in reference to your post 100, I have not got the faintest clue what you are on about.
I have never had a position on King Arthur, let alone a final one, nor ever used him in support of any argument against or for development. The rest of your paragraph is equally strange, with reference to Celtic half legend, disputed history on the early Church in England, Saxon Kings and about my name signed under articles not being my name.
So if I am not called Alexander. I suppose I'll have to present a photocopy of my ID documents now to probe I do exist under this name, from day 1 of birth! Strange, all very strange, Neil!
I've pasted the paragraph in question, and am wondering what legend you are creating, as this goes about as far as one would expect of DPPT anyway.
"Alexander, my apologies, I may be mistaken about your final position on King Arthur. I was remembering your argumentation on another thread on this very forum where you used the Arthurian Legend as a support of your argument against development, this was back in May and left me with an abiding impression. I also traced the blogs concerned and the general subject themes whilst being similar to yours (Celtic half legend, Disputed History on the early Church in England, early Saxon Kings) are not the same subject matter that you list above and the name they are signed with is different on each occasion and isn't your name."