Simons last reply and the previous messages unedited:

I read the section you didn't like. So what if you don't agree with him. In
fact I'm sick of you all. He whines. You whine. You all whine. Stuff Mars.
It's a waste of money. Achieves little of value to people starving in
Africa. Why don't we spend the money on something useful - like fixing the
water supply, fixing our schools. fixing our hospitals. Look up in the sky
it's mars, it's jupiter. It's all there it see. We were born to be of Earth
not of the stars. Sorry but I'm so utterly bored of the space community and
its endless whines.

Have a nice day.
simon

At 02:02 AM 11/20/03, you wrote:
>Sorry,
>
>I was under the impression your site was interested in publishing
>scientifically valid work. I didn't realize you were just interested in
>freedom of speech. By the way I did not request that you ignore their
>opinions, but rather that you included second opinions because their work is
>not well regarded in the scientific community. I was asking for some
>balance not censorship.
>
>Regards,
>Mark
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Simon Mansfield" <simon@spacedaily.com>
>To: "Mark Eby" <meby101@mchsi.com>
>Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2003 2:27 PM
>Subject: Re: Latest Bad Science From Barry Digregorio and Gil Levin
>
>
>Wow Mark, I'll make sure you are on our list of people to please first
>before publishing in the future.
>
>I will continue to publish Barry and Gil's reports as I consider them a
>valid contribution to debate. If you don't like them then don't read them.
>But please don't tell me not to publish someone's material because you
>don't agree with it.
>
>Debate the material but not our right to publish what I choose when I
>choose.
>
>Sorry but I'm tired of the ongoing attempts to censor people because
>someone doesn't agree with it.
>
>Personally I don't agree with much of what I publish, but is that reason
>not to publish?
>
>regards
>Simon
>
>At 12:34 AM 11/19/03, you wrote:
> >Why do you continue to publish work from Barry Digregorio and Gil Levin
> >whose combined body of work has been ridiculed in scientific circles
>without
> >allowing scientists who work through the peer reviewed process to rebut
> >their often scientifically sloppy claims? I really like your site, but
>that
> >enjoyment is tempered by a wariness of potential inaccuracy caused by
> >articles such as this http://www.spacedaily.com/news/mars-life-03l.html.
> >
> >I posted comments on this article at the space related BBS "Habitablezone"
> >here http://www.habitablezone.com/space/messages/302435.html.
> >
> >I am very interested in the possibility of life on Mars and hope it exists
> >in underground reservoirs of water, but it really bothers me to see the
>good
> >scientists working in this field being denigrated by the likes of Levin and
> >DiGregorio who use open forums and claims of cover ups to ignore the real
> >reasons the LR results are considered to be "most likely due to chemistry
> >rather than biology".
> >
> >Regards,
> >Mark Eby

I wasn't impressed Nick. I sent him back a further comment noting that Africa's biggest problem was AIDS due in part to a lack of using scientific data on how to combat it and pointing out that scientific ignorance kills which is exactly why I dislike people like Barry and Levin who promote junk science. This exchange was as disheartening as one with the owner of another favorite space site when I found out he was a raving anomalist. At least KC is technically competent regardless of what you think of his personality.

Regards,
Mark