  In 1980 Otto G. Ruehr made some puzzling comments that a certain identity A,
that he proved, is equivalent to another identity B, but he did not explain why
they are equivalent. Recently J.-P. Allouche tried to explain why they are
"equivalent", using about eight pages. We comment that it is extremely unlikely
to be Ruehr's reasoning (he probably got mixed up with a different problem),
but be that as it may, it is not worthwhile to try and deduce B from A, since
both A and B are routinely provable using Wilf-Zeilberger algorithmic proof
theory (implemented in Maple) and the Almkvist-Zeilberger algorithm.
