Ken,

Why do you have to personalize this like EP? We disagree. There is no need for so much hostility. I'm blunt and call ideas I think stupid stupid. Doesn't mean I think you are stupid or that nothing you have to say is of value. Chill out.

I have no strong issue with broad strokes. They are generally inaccurate, but are often needed in big picture discussions. What I strongly disapprove of is all the comments you've made that are flat out wrong ot highly misleading such as:

Comments implying Mars supporters are in it for reasons of vanity (having things named after them). I must give you credit for withdrawing those comments, but they rather clearly show a predisposition on your part to making misleading and unsupported claims about the Mars supporters.

Comments implying Mars supporters do not want to build consensus when you are the one trying to build a case for a single purpose (NEA Detection) not a multipronged one as most Mars supporters have backed. Mars supporters want a human program focus on Mars, but do not demand the robotic program focus solely on Mars nore that the manned program can't do other things as add ons to to a manned program with the technology developed for a Mars mission. Since part of their rationale is protecting humanities future it is inconceivable that those with that motive would not also support NEA detection. It's a matter of finding the path of least resistance not lack of concern for all other space projects. Now you can argue like an adult about if that is truely the path of least resistance or you can try childish tactics like BD and EP that involve unsupported motives and personal problems. It's your choice.

Comments complaining about Mars supporters misrepresenting you as wanting to do NEO detection on the Moon. I don't think anyone has meant to claim that and any appearence of that is probably either from replying to comments on views you seem to share with Grondine or comments on your own comments which seem to imply Mars supporters have proposed Mars as a NEA detection point.

Comments about fossils in comets being more likely than on Mars. Wild conjecture with little support. I just don't think much of using wild conjecture in technical counter arguements. You can call me anything you want, but I've plenty of experiense in making theories and hypothesis testing and your approach there is just totally technically incompetant. Again I don't mean to imply that you are not competant in other areas.

Comments regarding EP such as "and some of his conduct here in the past (which at this point I can empathize with) makes me hesitant to associate with him in any formal way." So you believe it is OK whenever someone shoots poorly worded or supported claims down or just strongly disagrees with you to attack them personally and misrepresent their motives? If that is the way you think Ken, I will loose the respect for you built on the technically well supported comments you have contributed.

In short Ken I'm not impressed with a lot of the comments you've made nore the hostility you evidence towards vigorous rebuttal of them.

Do these comments constitute bad behavior in your view or justification for misrepresentation and personal attacks? Do you see nothing in your own behavior or comments that you regret or wish to withdraw in light of other's comments?

Regards,
Mark