I replied in a sarcastic manner after I was given a condescending reply.
I was actually learning something in this debate.
I do in fact see a sensory advantage to keeping a stationary head...a truly stationary head...but I don't see an advantage (sensory that is) in a head that is allowed to rotate.
Adam Scott's eyes moved. How is that a sensory advantage?
Smithers,you started with your opinion,then proceeded to refer to H,K and Lynn B as "still " being opposed to your opinion,In my "opinion" you STARTED in a sarcastic manner.
I'm glad you are learning something.
You also, possibly ,agree that a stationary head is the ideal .
ROTATED eyes(ON AVERAGE- unless you can spin your head!) move less than swaying ones -or dipping ones,
The Ideal is no movement of the head,-Homer Kelly chose his words carefully,how close you can get to ideal is the question.Adam Scott is doing O.K.
Threaded Mode
