I attack your crappy science as the psuedoscience it is Barry. You attack me personally to avoid dealing with the sloppiness and contradiction in your own work. Prime case being your steadfast refusal to face your panspermia contradictions. I have absolutely no respect for you because of your psuedoscientist tactics and it shows. If you debated honestly rather than with your change the subject when your errors are exposed attitude I would be far more respectful despite major disagreements. I have had major disagreements with others here, but do not in general make personal comments with one other exception.

If you don't want personal comments made about you don't make them about others. Our recent debate started with me stating I hope the answers don't go over your head. You may consider that a personal attack yet you failed to address the linked Q&A that contradict long standing positions of yours and went straight on the personal attack. I think it is clearly debatable who started personally attacking who. Is debunking a psuedoscientist a personal attack?

Your dishonesty in calling the habs plywood structures and the land grant recommendation souvenirs as false promotions are only the latest dishonest tactics on your part. The Mars Society does not claim its habs are close simulations of life on Mars. The only claim made is that we can learn something about human factors and procedures meeded for Mars from using modest Mars simulations. You are again being dishonest if you claim that is not true. It is entirely honest however to question whether or not the activity is worth the expense as others have.

It is also notable that your "more realistic" simulations are far beyond the past funding levels of the MS which strained to pay for the habs. The fidelity of the habs are also a function of cost. The MS tried to do as much as it was fiscally able. Regardless of the cost effectiveness of those habs the publicity generated has allowed the MS to pursue the transhab mission which is far more valuable, expensive and addresses a key issue NASA has long ignored. Acting as a stepping stone to more advanced missions was part of the purpose of the habs as well and oin that it appears to have succeeded. http://www.marsgravity.org/index.php

Regards,
Mark