Actually, the attitude you are expressing here is just as “smug” as anything you are accusing me of. In any case, accusing me of smugness (which is name-calling, rather than argument, but I’ve pretty well come to expect that around here) hardly addresses the point of my reply to Rumraket. He wrote unclearly, in a way that could easily have suggested that Neil Rickert was motivated by religion or ideology for doubting standard cosmology. I pointed out the misleading character of his statement. You point out the misleading character of statements of people here every day, so I guess, if I am “smug” for doing do here, you are “smug” pretty much on a daily basis. But enough of this off-topic discussion of who is smug and who isn’t. I would suggest that if you have no substantive response to my remark to Rumraket, that you simply remain silent, and let him answer for himself. He doesn’t need your help, and your gratuitous characterization of the motives and attitudes of others add nothing constructive to this or any other discussion here.