"Proof Is Not Necessary What counts is what we all think about you and there is amble evidence that as long as you continue to insult each of us, we all think less of you. Why do you need to be insulting. You can get all your points across with politeness."
You don't answer most of my posts with much substance, and that is not an insult. I am merely
reporting the evidence fairly which is freely available in the archives. Instead, you and
Harv/Nicholas especially have beaten a steady drum of character assault toward me.
Now you are saying it is "polite" to convict someone without proof. You are saying the
process of science is informal, motive-driven social consensus.
"What counts is what we all think" is what sent
Lavoisier to the guillotine, Bruno to the stake,
and Galileo into silence. Aristotle's ideas, such as that women have fewer teeth than men, stood for centuries with your way of thinking.
Voltaire fought against your kind of consensus.
The Declaration of Independence was written about
the spirit found in your inner circle's excessive self-satisfaction.
Fortunately, we set up a better system, the
modern system, for detecting flimflammery and making things more honest. Why not take advantage of the invitation to more formal processes rather this group's cozy consensus, which is not science?
You had said you were a lifelong democrat, but with your ethics, you sound like an executive from Enron before the fall.
Or a scientist before Galileo et al.