Sergey Dryga wrote:

> Looking at the page I became utterly confused.  It is either (1) I got
> chemistry seriously wrong, or (2) person who wrote the "facts" on this
> page got it wrong.

> It is sometimes funny, and sometimes scarry when people who have no idea
> what they are talking about get on the bandwagon and try to "protect"
> everybody.

I'm not really good at chemistry (I could research the issues but I'm not
/that/ interested), but I can't get rid of the nagging feeling that the
"facts" presented in the messages in this thread trying to discredit that
page (whatever its credits may be) are not much better presented or better
researched or are carried by a much better idea of the real facts than the
criticized page.

IMO the most efficient way to criticize lack of facts or wrong facts is to
present the missing or the correct facts. Anything else just feels odd. And
that doesn't seem to have happened so far... 

Gerhard

-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist