- Top Features:
- War Room
- Glenn Greenwald
- Broadsheet
- Joan Walsh
- Camille Paglia
- Since You Asked
- Follow Salon:
Read other letters about this article
I said: "The NAS was set up with extremely elaborate protections to avoid having a political agenda"
You say >You can't possibly believe or expect me to believe this.
On the evidence of what you post, you will believe almost anything.
>Why is it that conspiracy theorists like yourself beleive government info when it suits your kooky world view?
Conspiracy theory?? What planet are you posting from?? The NAS, for the third time, is not "government info." I posted links to what it is; its history and organization. You won't read the links, you won't evaluate the evidence, but just keep repeating the same tired crank talking points. You bring nothing to the discussion but the word "kooky." Please look in the mirror to see what "kooky" means.
>(...And using hyperbolic qualifiers like "extremely" and "elaborate" does nothing to strengthen your case.)
I posted links which provide abundant back-up my claims regarding the NAS. You refuse to read them.
>Do I have to point out how silly it is for you to post such a statement on a board?
"Silly" is a perfect self-desription for someone who insists that he knows science better than the National Academy. even though he doesn't even know what the National Academy is. Adjust your big red nose and put another layer of white on your face.
>Listen, if you're against an open, invective free exchange of opinions, ideas and facts, maybe you should no longer be "an anonymous clown with a keyboard and an internet account."
I'm not the one who doesn't know what the NAS is or does who is telling people I know science better than the National Academy. The big fluffy buttons down the front of your outfit are very becoming. Don't change; you're perfect.
