Replies

But what about all the other experts who said the silica was a key component? That's what they said - and the only way silica can be of any use is as a coating. Are you saying silica can be a key component and NOT be a coating?

Do you, once again, know lots more about this than all the experts? You've already said the CDC doctors made an error - and that they are all wrong and you are right on the letter that infected Stevens and Blanco.

Are you also saying that all the analytical experts at AFIP and Detrick have got it all wrong, and that Ed Lake, internet porn detective, has it right?

So Ed Lake knows more about this than all the doctors at the CDC, all the scientists at AFIP and Detrick, all the scientists who peer-reviwed the Science article and the all the layers of editors who are professional scientists at Science magazine?

Does that just about sum it up?

But what about all the other experts who said the silica was a key component?

The term "key component" is open to interpretation. The true experts say the anthrax was not coated. So, what "key component" means is anyone's guess.

You've already said the CDC doctors made an error

If they believe there were two anthrax letters sent to AMI, then yes, they made an error. The evidence says there was only one anthrax letter sent to AMI. The J-Lo letter clearly did not contain anthrax.

The CDC only has testimony that there were two letters which contained powder. Any conclusion that both contained anthrax is a false conclusion. Beyond any doubt.

I'm only saying what the evidence says. If I'm wrong, show me evidence that I'm wrong and I'll apologize and make corrections. Don't show me opinions. Opinions are worthless. The anthrax case shows we can find "experts" with opinions on all sides of every issue.