I'll make one post, trying to civilly answer, and that's it.
Astounding that with the thousands of posts, threads and many detailed links and evidence, you would dismiss all of it with that argument from some unseen authority.
Have you been to the RS or RBR forums?
Usually with sharp logic, and facts. Unfortunately sometimes these same posters skin wears really thin and they give smart-as
s, snarky responses, as you've now seen.
As has been posted here, and other forums many times, this is not a case of "innocent until proven guilty", as this is not a court of law. It's a sport with rules written in contract all participants sign. If it takes conviction, as in sanctioning by said governing bodies, for you to accept proof, then you are right, Lance has not been "proven guilty" (though Levi Leipheimer, who you also reference, has). None the less, a huge preponderance of evidence has shown that any person thinking with logic, unclouded by admiration, would determine he has doped. It's listed in this thread, and many more.
It appears you collapse everyone who believes Lance's guilt as an "anti-Lance hater". It is the position of many here that it is logical conclusions, based on factual evidence, that determine Lance has doped. Not whether they hate him, or anyone else, as a person.
Which shows you are starting with a biased viewpoint.
So does Betsy Andreu. I'll bet she knows more about him than you do.
Not exactly. This has been covered over and over and over in here. You say you are a long time lurker, if so, it's surprising you're trying to push this over onto people.
It's also either convenience, or just interesting for us, that you completely ignored the
Michael Ashenden interview, and all he had to say regarding the 1999 EPO re-test.