Zimriel:

True, your book was second in a series which had yet to "evolve" into the obscurantist nonsense it stands for today. But unlike, say, John Derbyshire (who castigated Bethell's book) I have not seen you complain about the anti-"Darwinist" books in the series; and endorsing the "P.I.G. to the Bible" puts you firmly on that book's side, which in turn puts you on the side of the other books on that theme. Until, that is, you repudiate them.

I was unaware that John Derbyshire wrote a book in the series. In fact, he did not.

Your argument is ridiculous. I have neither the time nor the inclination to repudiate every book with which any individual decides I am associated. Dinesh D'Souza and I share a publisher; yet Dinesh D'Souza has said that two other books I wrote for different publishers should not have been written. Would you assume then that Dinesh D'Souza endorses my other books because he has not specifically repudiated them?

A better way would be to criticize what I have actually said and written, rather than indulge in fantastic conspiracies theories about what I must secretly believe based on things I haven't said. But your method here is reminiscent of medaura's malicious and slanderous hit piece.

At any rate, the main focus of my post wasn't about you specifically, but about the company you keep.

The very definition of guilt-by-association. But that seems to be the order of the day here.