"if I were as odious and contemptible as Mark suggests"

So where did I say you were odious or contemptible?

1) I recommended 2 of your sites

2) I pointed out that you weren't completely objective and had demonstrated a grudge against Goldin.

If you think this qualifies as calling you odious or contemptible you are just as guilty as Zubrin and Goldin of being intolerant of even mild criticism. You are certainly quilty of blowing my comments out of proportion just as I believe you have the comments of others in your BBS posts.

Do you honestly think you have no grudge against Goldin or that you tried to portray him in a balanced manner?

My title only applies to the comments above. I fully believe you only report information you have reason to believe is accurate on your websites. That doesn't mean you are always correct. Neither are the other space news sites mentioned. I only meant to imply your error rate was slightly higher due to the nature of your sources.

For the record Keith

I think your websites are of great value to space enthusiasts and as a tool for space advocacy. I also have always believed a face to face discussion over drinks would make it clear we agree on far far more than we disagree on.

One of the few things I strongly disagree with you over is your personal BBS posting demeanor and debate tactics. The numerous name calling rounds with BD (when you should have been able to easily outclass him on intellectual ability and technological knowledge) turned off far more people than it convinced Barry was a loon.

When you have gotten irritated with me you have sounded as pompous and self righteous as BD and Grondine and presented arguments just as devoid of technical detail. Siting credentials is certainly more valid in your case, but not any more informative. Gil Levin has credentials too. They don't make him right. Again, I know you can do FAR better.

Letting your ire lead you to mistakes like assuming
mentioning "some autotrophs produce toxins" implies a lack of knowledge about red tide or to claim you fully support comments like Nealson's on the same thread you make decidedly contrary statements is not in your best interest or that of the space advocacy community.

Regards,
Mark