It's jarring because it's false, falsehoods being used to drive...

It's jarring because it's false, falsehoods being used to drive home a point will always be jarring to me. Poetic licence, what a crock. The periodic table has been added to, with 'new elements' ever since it was conceptualised by Mendeleev. One of the salient features of mendeleev's table was that it was used to predict the occurence of elements that had not yet been discovered, as well as their likely properties, which again makes a mockery of the statement "there is no precedence for adding a new element to the periodic table". Moreover no, they do not all have half lives of seconds, some like the most stable isotope of einsteinium have half lives measured in days (471) many have half-lives measured in hours. So again, wrong! and besiddes which the half-life of an element has no bearing on whether it is included in the periodic table or not, I don't understand what you are getting at with such a statement, other than it deflects the blow, which I note is your modus operandi in such circumstances, as obviously you are not comfortable with admitting to or owning errors.

@nasabear , you can't tell me that being told we're marching to production late in 2015 and now we're halfway through 2017 with nary an ounce brought to surface isn't at least a little disappointing. I'm not saying this means FGR is therefore never going to get anywhere, but still...