Well Tony, It looks like proof is in the pudding and you are still on the entree. Perhaps if you spent your time validating your own studies and looking at some of the reasons why the 'tests' failed then your argument may hold some water. I am sure you will agree that in order to validate someone else's hypothesis or theory or knowledge, it makes sense to a) have a deep understanding of the mechanics and knowledge of that field. b) be able to re-demonstrate that working knowledge into a set of appropriate tests and studies.  c) don't use statistical analysis as a component for measuring human activity. (it just does not work!) And yet, even the best of the scientists in their own chosen field fail! So what does this say about the world.. it is wrong. Hardly.. NLP is not and should never fall into the vault of statistical analysis, only to be viewed by the dark art statisticians with results let loose onto an unsuspecting public in which to confuse and create mysticism and wander over. But validation is through the individual, through the mindshare and knowledge of the community at large. Leave the stats and the figures to those oh so great mystics, use and learn your art and know the results are not to be viewed in some vaulted journal but in the faces of those who come into contact with NLP, in whatever capacity that may be. And of course, it will always have its failing.. not NLP that is,, because it is not a thing, but a process, but the phrase NLP, because it will get linked again and again and even again to those who purport its greatness yet and do not have the skills yet, to be able to demonstrate it. So the words NLP will unfortunately be linked to '''''It doesn't work…. It's all hot air…."" NLP cannot not work.. it is no thing.. only the people who use it are the ones to demonstrate the various communicational forms of NLP. And they like anything are prone to that singular fault. Called Being Human. We do not walk on the rivers edge together unless we can both see, hear and feel the water. You will gain more favour in demonstration that in rationalisation of NLP. If you can't do it, then you don't know it. So while I respect your opinion, please provide some groundhog to it first. All the best Robert