I like the way that you choose to begin in the latter third of the issue, and use the pranks that the authoritarians directed toward Sternberg in punishment for being honest and scientific, as evidence against him.
And the allegations that you present are typical of complaints that are directed at editors by whiners. Everyone thinks that their manuscript is being dissed.
You've essentially proven the allegations through your own effort.
It's telling that your rebuttal is so insubstantitive and paper thin, with no actual substantive points against my arguments. It's obvious what's going on here. Sternberg's case against the Smithsonian is so paper thin that the Discovery Institute has to feed its work through its pet Congressmen in an effort to try to rehab its image as a group that has to lie and cheat instead of doing legitimate science. This work is meaningless.Don't you think that if this was a real investigation with real teeth, this report would be up in front of Congress for a vote? Instead, its a bone to the religious right to make it look like "your guys" are doing work on your behalf, when instead they are wasting government money on meaningless propoganda. Nice try.
Next time have a real rebuttal at hand, will you?