Ron, I am likely to regret engaging you, but once in a while you post something with a certain degree of thoughtfulness. Your last post, though polluted with assertions I disagree with, is a case in point.

But however thoughtful your post may be, it is not relevant to the issue at hand. Let’s stop the misdirection and come back to the thread’s subject. You attempted to provide evidence that peroxides could be detected by waving test paper over a liquid. Two individuals with content expertise asserted this was impossible and refuted what you had to say. Did you retract your claim or marshal additional evidence?

No. Rather, you went on the attack, calling BubbaLoop’s statements “outlandish and unsupported.” Indeed, your “evidence” (and I use that term loosely (well, facetiously)) showed your statements to be outlandish and unsupported. You then launched a borderline personal attack, questioning BubbaLoop’s credentials. You know this argument is a red herring; you can use it any time on an anonymous internet forum such as this. I believe his posts lend credibility to who he says he is; he has posted nothing that leads me believe otherwise.

Your mindset, which seems to run rampant in the TSA, infuriates me. Address the issues haphazardly. Proven wrong? Just employ some misdirection. Or spin. Or attack the messenger. Or not address anything at all. If I wanted such a heaping helping of baloney, I’d go read Blogger Bob.

You might get away with it when you do it under the color of government authority. But it’s a level playing field here, my friend.