What red herring are you trying to tout. You piss and moan that no one knows who the reviewers were including NCSE, even going so far as to accuse Sternberg of not having had it reviewed at all. Then when I demonstrate from your own citation mind you, that you are wrong, you try to say that it is meaningless. Well, go piss up a rope. Until you give evidence instead of your unsubstantiated opinions, you are wrong.
No, it's not coincidental after Sternberg's actions became known.
Precisely my point. NCSE stuck its nose into relationship between SI and Sternberg.
Guilty as heck of what, trying to keep his religion out of it?
You don't seem to understand English. NCSE HAD NO BUSINESS CONTACTING THE SMITHSONIAN CONCERNING STERNBERG FOR ANY REASON. There did you see that?
The question is why the NCSE was mad, and that's well established. He let a substandard paper by one of his friends into the journal by circumventing the normal peer review process. Falsely claiming anonymous review doesn't help. This made the scientists in the society, many of them SI members and associates themselves, quite mad, because what's in the journal reflects upon them and their reputations. And there's your connection between the journal and the SI too.
Still waiting for any action SI took that could give him this persecuted status. Without it there isn't any case in the first place, nothing really to discuss.