You don't have to do so. It's just easier dealing with a real person. Anonymity encourages improper behavior. I don't hide my identity. 

 The difference between our opinions is that I subordinate my opinions to top experts like Keating. You discount them and press on in your ignorance, as if your opinions were of as much worth as his. Sorry to pop your balloon, but his are informed opinions, while yours seem to be the product of reading too much chiropractic educational (brainwashing and indoctrination) literature. 

 While many chiropractors of the type you seem to believe are upset with his opinions, no leaders can refute his analysis of chiropractic when he uses the following words to describe aspects of the profession: 

 *a continuing enigma 
 *science 
 *antiscience 
 *pseudoscience 
 *quackery 
 *anti-intellectual traditions 
 *unscientific 
 *irrational 
 *confusion 
 *antiscientific mindset 
 *cult 
 *chiropractic's foibles  
 *religious overtones 
 *humbug 
 *uncritical dogma 
 *circus 
 *showmanship 
 *marketing 
 *unsubstantiated claims 
 *pseudoscience journals 
 *uncritical rationalism 
 *uncritical empiricism 
 *fuzzy thinkers 
 *health fraud 
 *student loan defaults 
 *paranoia 
 *xenophobia 
 *nonskeptical attitudes 

 He continues: 

 :"After thirteen years of teaching and research at several chiropractic colleges, I can say with confidence that chiropractic is both science and antiscience. Yes, there is a meaningful science of chiropractic, but just as surely there is an antiscientific mindset and even a cult within chiropractic (for example, the cult of B. J. Palmer, son of the founder of chiropractic). Moreover, if University of Connecticut sociologist Walter Wardwell is correct (Wardwell 1992), the belief systems of a majority of DCs lie somewhere between these two poles: chiropractic as science versus chiropractic as unscientific, uncritical dogma and circus. Perhaps a consideration of the nature of science will aid in understanding how the chiropractic profession does and does not approximate the rigors of science." 

 :"In recent years this combination of uncritical rationalism and uncritical empiricism has been bolstered by the proliferation of pseudoscience journals of chiropractic wherein poor quality research and exuberant overinterpretation of results masquerade as science and provide false confidence about the value of various chiropractic techniques. These periodicals expand on the uncritical attitudes and unproven claims for chiropractic that have long been made in the magazines published by the national membership societies of chiropractors in the United States. It is practically impossible to read any of the trade publications within chiropractic without encountering unsubstantiated claims." 

 :"Coexisting with the obvious and ubiquitous antiscientific and pseudoscientific reasoning and rhetoric in chiropractic (Skrabanek 1988) are the genuinely critical, skeptical attitudes of the still quite embryonic research community in this profession." 

 :"The conflict between medical doctors and DCs has also produced a penchant for marketing slogans in lieu of scientifically testable propositions. The classic example of this is the mindless reiteration that "chiropractic works," a vacuous claim which lacks specificity and is not amenable to experimental testing. However, confronted by charges that chiropractic is quackery, chiropractors have responded by insisting that "Chiropractic Works!" and have rallied satisfied patients to convince legislators and policy makers of the validity of their methods and the justness of their cause. Slogans like this are endlessly repeated not only to the public, but among DCs themselves (and to chiropractic students). To challenge the notion that "chiropractic works" is considered heresy in most corners of the profession. Rather than skepticism and critical thinking, traditional chiropractic education has sought to instill strong belief in chiropractic (Quigley 1981) among successive generations of students. In so doing the schools have strengthened the "anti-intellectual" (Coulter 1990) traditions in the profession." 
 : J. C. Keating, Jr., Ph.D.  

 You simply need to learn more about chiropractic. There is another side that you are ignoring and denying. If you knew more, you'd stop denying that these are serious problems to this very day.