How is this “deliberate nastiness”? It would seem to be a reasonable perspective given:
-
your and Dr Hancock’s relative expertise in population genetics; and
-
the respective depth to which GE and mainstream population genetics have developed their theories.
This could better be attributed to the mental wear and tear of defending the indefensible to a well-educated and skeptical audience on an ongoing basis.
Only the most masochistic of apologists attempt the task.
Most apologists quickly return to apologetics’ forte – preaching to the choir – still “a one-sided echo chamber” – but a more salubrious one.