Actually, what I was mainly saying was that if you make extraordinary claims you have to provide extraordinary evidence - or you'll be dismissed as just another crackpot denier.
Hanrahan, you were the one who tried to provide a reason for him denying mainstream science, saying that maybe he was too dumb to read it. I simply said that I don't think he's too dumb because the evidence from his bio suggests otherwise.
It might be money or it might be ideology or maybe he just likes to be contrary. Who knows.
Whatever - if he wants to dispute mainstream science the best way to do that is to do research and prove it's wrong. He hasn't come close.
