<HTML>Sandy,
If I called you a "liar", it's because you knowingly said something that was untrue. I can not retract a factual statement simply because you ask me to, or because you are using it as blackmail against answering future questions. That is extortion.
Secondly, I believe I have CLEARLY stated that the "bad things" you said about geopolymerists were YOUR attempts to put words into MY mouth. I took YOUR phrases that you used to try and tell the world what I was saying about geopolymerists and the geopolymer theory. YOU were the one who was attempting to make ME look closed-minded and nasty by claiming that I stated those things... not the other way around. Hence, the apology is ACTUALLY due FROM you, not TO you.
Now, if this entire scientific, polite, courteous and respectful discussion is going to be derailed and ignored because you have chosen to look back at a conversation from a month ago and use that as your "current" justification for not answering simple objections to the geopolymer theory, then I am going to be forced to assume one of three things:
1. There IS no answer to these simple questions in the realm of the geopolymer theory, and this is simply a ruse to explain why you can't explain it. Hence, the geopolymer theory is thrown out.
2. There is an answer to these objections, but you do not know it, so you are creating this ruse to justify your ignorance. Hence, the geopolymer theory is stagnated at its current state of "non-plausible".
3. You actually do know the answers, yet you are attempting to use this polite, courteous and respectful request to coerce me into giving an apology for something I did not do, and to correct a statement that was, in itself, correct to begin with. Since I will neither lie nor apologize for something YOU did, then I am afraid the world will sit in ignorance of these answers to the above-stated objections, and the theory will remain stagnated at its current state of "non-plausible".
The third option is obviously the LEAST flattering for you, Sandy. I thought you would have had more integrity than that. At least let it be the second one... I can appreciate and understand you trying to save face.
The ball is in your court. You are the one facing polite questions, and inventing reasons to avoid them.
Sincerely,
Anthony</HTML>
