Rollins tips his hat as to what he really thinks in his footnote to this section. One would have to accept assign an insane state of mind to Davison for Rollin's remark to be sure. Rollins attempts to analyze those lists to establish that Davison did not know, the writer. Yet, Robbins, for some strange reason wants it to be otherwise. Rollins' argument is involved, illogical, irrelevant and an evidentiary non sequitur.
Lets see it.
He doesn't produce any, because he can't. It is all a house of cards. If Rollins took this case to a court of law he would be Sanctioned for a Frivolous claim and Abuse of Process. Its title page identifies the author of this section as Anomos. At page 181 a new subsection begins which is a continuation of the first one.