Admin's summary was accurate, brief and concise.
Further discussion is always possible. And it seems to serve an additional purpose -- to draw attention away from other controversies which are more pertinent and thus more risky to discuss openly -- you know...issues upon which we would need great amounts of honesty and rigor to reach true clarity.
Those other controversies are generally approached, if ever, via:
1) obedience to a recognized authority, even if its information is archaic by scientific standards;
2) a rhetorical power struggle where, finally, winner is the one who, like Ronald Reagan in 1980, can stun the opposition by saying,"I'm paying for this microphone!" (There are very few other ways to adjudicate a _rhetorical power struggle.)
3) resort to distractions such as the list posted by Stormcrow (?) a couple of years ago.