[Donald Rumsfeld Fan]

Meyer's paper is just a hackneyed warming over of creationist arguments. It contains no new data and no original thought. The flap was over how an apparently creationist editor abused his position to publish something that doesn't conform to the generally accepted standards for reporting of scientific results.

So you decided on the Ad Hominem. Good way to debate. Keep up the good work.

[Right Wing Professor]

So you decided on the Ad Hominem. Good way to debate. Keep up the good work

No, this was a criticism of a paper, not a person. Possibly if you had some exposure to the scientific literature*, you'd realize that we criticize people's work all the time, and in no sense is that a criticism of them personally.

*see, now that's an ad hominem