Instead of correcting my scewball science mistakes here Ed, why don’t you publish your theories in a peer-reviewed science journal?
And, you never know, some day in the future some scientist might be willing to tell you that van der Waals forces don’t make anthrax spores adhere - and he might even be willing to let you use his name on your website. If, that is, he wants to end his career.
I'd rather correct your screwball mistakes here.
Besides, I don't really have any "peers." :-)
When I get my detailed analysis of spore interaction onto my web page, I'll be asking every scientist I encounter to comment on it. You, too. My web site may not be "a peer-reviewed science journal," but, as we've seen, there is no end to the scientific nonsense that gets "peer reviewed" and printed in scientific journals. It appears to be a I'll-review-yours-if-you review-mine process where criticizing a report is not polite. Instead, criticism is done in letters to the editor and on the Internet AFTER the report is printed.
On my web site I welcome criticism, and I specifically request that people write me if they can PROVE that something I've written is wrong. When they do, I correct my web site.