This post reminds me of a court case I read about... Basically a printer was in dispute with the local municipality tax assessor. The Tax assessor was improperly valuing the depreciation of the of the property which was artificially inflating the property value of the assets for tax purposes. The net difference was about $140,000.00 total. After a few years that really adds up, so the printer was suing the Tax Assessor's office. So, the printer has a witness come up on the stand. The plaintiff's attorney (the printer) begins asking questions of the witness. The witness begins to talk about how the Tax Assessor was doing everything wrong and that they weren't properly using the depreciation scheduling. The whole time, the witness is quoting a book, which is the industry accepted standard for assessing property in the printing industry. The attorneys for both sides have a copy of the book on their desks and had been citing sections of it to support their respective cases. Then, the defendant's attorney (Tax Assessors) get to cross examine the witness. The first thing the defense attorney does is challenge the witness' credentials starting with asking for the witnesses name again. The witness then gives their name like it should be self evident about their credentials. The defense attorney then asks why he (the witness) thinks he is right when everything he (the witness) was stating was false, as per the guidelines set out in the book. The witness then instructs the defense attorney to open the book on his desk to the first page and to read the name of the author. The witness then repeats his name again. It turns out, the witness [i]was[/i] the author of the book that the entire United States uses when assessing the property value of printing equipment... There is a moral in this story, somewhere. But you probably have to be an [b][i]expert[/i][/b] in philosophy to understand it...