Phase I planning with GROWTH

Thanks for your input on this growth topic. YOU consider these theories, but I have seen this work in cases...hard evidence, over and over again, utilizing the POS documentation as the resource to check and test the 'theory'. After a theory is tested and shown to work, it is no longer a theory. I was blown away, and you are expected to be scratching your head, especially when you read so much stuff in the ortho literature.
I do not care about transverse growth, I do not care about vertical growth, and I do not care about horizontal growth if the maxilla is growing the same rate forward as the mandible. These do not change the dental occlusion and our diagnosis + treatment.
What I have identified through the A point overlay is 'differential HORIZONTAL growth' that is the key to a PRACTICAL new level of orthodontics. I am gathering data from past POS documentation and it will be done scientifically. While I do this, I have so much confidence in the system, that I am incorporating this into today's diagnosis in the form of a 'growth adjusted dental vto'. This addition makes more class II cases NON extraction, and changes anchorage planning in others.
Couple basic replies: Guess SNA and SNB are the wrong variables. Differential 'horizontal' growth will happen in all cases. This is helpful in class II cases, undesireable in class III cases, and yes the teeth seem to stay together in class I cases...leading to loss of lower archlength and crowding of the lower incisors. If you can predict the growth coming in the future, you can factor this into your diagnosis...this is what I am doing. Ricketts tried to do this, and it remains as the only semi-practical system in the specialty. This system will be FREE to all that have IPsoft, available immediately on a case by case basis, and is more accurate in predicting than the RMO system....yes, I checked cases with both.
YOU are not obligated to adopt this theory. You can continue doing what you have always done, and what POS taught in previous years. A debate over what is in the literature will lead nowhere. I am thinking in another (very simple) way, and it works.