Changes

:Since you've taken the liberty of deciding what is substantive or not in deleting posts like my last one, then I have a serious, respectful question to ask;  What exactly do you mean by "substantive"?  I didn't attack you or your letter; I was attempting to state that the PNAS response did, in fact, address the points of your letter.  Whether one considers the PNAS response to be ''correct'' or not is a separate matter - they read your objections and responded to them instead of ignoring them, that's all.

:Since you've taken the liberty of deciding what is substantive or not in deleting posts like my last one, then I have a serious, respectful question to ask;  What exactly do you mean by "substantive"?  I didn't attack you or your letter; I was attempting to state that the PNAS response did, in fact, address the points of your letter.  Whether one considers the PNAS response to be ''correct'' or not is a separate matter - they read your objections and responded to them instead of ignoring them, that's all.

:My last post would therefore seem to have met Webster's definition of ''substantive'' - "having or expressing substance", but apparently the measure of "substance" for a comment on this page appears to be whether it agrees with your view or not.  That's your prerogative, but if you intended to allow comments on this page other than endorsements of your view, then please let me know what I did wrong.  --[[User:DinsdaleP|DinsdaleP]] 21:00, 14 September 2008 (EDT)

:My last post would therefore seem to have met Webster's definition of ''substantive'' - "having or expressing substance", but apparently the measure of "substantive" for a comment on this page appears to be whether it agrees with your view or not.  That's your prerogative, but if you intended to allow comments on this page other than endorsements of your view, then please let me know what I did wrong.  --[[User:DinsdaleP|DinsdaleP]] 21:00, 14 September 2008 (EDT)