Gentlemen, enough! This wrangling is not the way forward and I beg you to cease forthwith. I have tried to present some evidence in the form of photographs and some findings which are by no means conclusive, in an attempt to show the structure in a new light, and to share some of the astonishing things the quoit has revealed about itself.
I dismiss nothing, discount nothing and have little objection to the idea of Trethevy being a "portal tomb", it is simply that this archeological theme forms no part of the present inquiry, which is astronomical in nature. During the course of the inquiry the structural theory which maintains its equilibrium has also revealed itself, and no less astonishingly.
But what am I to do? I am told I have provided no proof. Of course not; proof I cannot provide, naturally. I can present evidence and others can see it, that is all. How can I present this evidence best, and avoid the puerile level to which some of the debate has descended? All failings in this respect are mine.
There is little point in responding to being called an arrogant big headed know all, but it might help if I were to be asked some particular questions. I will try to answer them; otherwise please pardon my redundancy.

David Kane.