Do you honestly believe that this book was the only new product approved in 2003? No. And the piece did not claim that it was. No lie there.

Every link on this claim on the Internet leads back to this one paragraph on this one PEER site. I'd like to see those records myself. What records? Either the book is on the shelf and the promised review of it was not done, or there *is* a falsehood here. If I had evidence of falsehood, then of course I would agree with your position immediately.

"In order to avoid offending religious fundamentalists, our National Park Service is under orders to suspend its belief in geology," stated PEER Executive Director Jeff Ruch. "It is disconcerting that the official position of a national park as to the geologic age of the Grand Canyon is 'no comment.'" This was a lie. How much of the rest is? That was a hyperbolic, partisan spinning of the rest of the piece. When you do it, I tend to ignore you rather than scream "liar!".