"""But if it be a sin to covet honour,   I am the most offending soul alive.""==

1) ""It is simply a fact that many critics of Sarfatti are very negative about his theories and speculations.""

False. You have not given even ONE valid example of that. I doubt you would be able to understand what the physics is about anyway.
You cannot produce even ONE objective valid refutation of any of my physics ideas by anyone. CH saying ""it's nonsense"" is not objective. It's not valid. It is not rationally argued. No reasons are given. Also I retracted my FTL Communication Idea 15 years ago. Furthermore, making a mistake in physics does not make one into a crackpot! Also, you have suppressed the fact that I predicted the SUPERSOLID decades before it was discovered and before Tony Leggett, who gets the credit published his paper. George Chapline and David Finkelstein confirm that in writing and you have consistently deleted that important factual information from the article. That is hardly fair is it?

2) ""It is also a fact that Usenet is not the usual venue for publishing even highly unconventional ideas in physics.""

Sez who? That is exactly what Usenet SHOULD be for! INSTANT WORLD WIDE COMMUNICATION OF IMPORTANT IDEAS NOT THE CRAP THAT MOST IDIOTS PUT ON IT. Peer review is a joke in physics today. Everyone in the field knows it. The free market place of ideas is supposed to be the Wiki idea, or am I wrong? Mainstream journals DO NOT PUBLISH UNCONVENTIONAL IDEAS! What planet are you on?

3) Sarfatti has been considered negatively by many since his involvment with paraphysics dating back to ths 1970s, long before the existince of Usenet, for which I have proveided reputable sources (and can provide more). 

STOP RIGHT THERE! You just committed a HATE CRIME! Are you ABOVE THE LAW? So working on paranormal stuff automatically makes one a crackpot? Is that your position? That's like saying it's OK to lynch niggers because they are less than human. Same idea. Think about it. Sarfatti thinking outside the box means he is not entitled to the same respect as someone taking the safe boring path through life. Who are your reputable sources? Show them. Martin Gardner? Show where his exact text justifies your false extrapolation. Also, I do not in 2005 hold to the same ideas I did in 1975! Why focus on 1975 and exclude 2005? 

4) It is also a fact that were it not for his provocative statements and the largely negative reaction to them, Sarfatti would not be in any way notable.

False. I would be notable for several ideas in physics. The quotations by David Finkelstein, Lenny Susskind, George Chapline and Tony Smith prove that. It's OK to say ""negative reaction"", but it's not OK to LYNCH ME and DEFAME ME with putting ""crank"" and ""crackpot"" on a very scant article in such a way that that is the KEY MESSAGE the casual reader will go away from. Now ANY LAWYER will tell you you are treading on shaky ground if you do that and cannot prove your case should it ever go to court. This is NOT a threat. I am on several TV shows and I am in Paramount Pictures Star Trek. That does not make me notable. I am cited in several popular books. That also makes me notable. For example, Herbert Gold's book Bohemia, not to mention The Dancing Wu Li Master that I ghost wrote most of  for Gary Zukavand that sold a jillion copies and is still selling after 25 years. My original Space-Time and Beyond sold fairly well also. So look David E. Siegel from Two Independence Way Suite 100, Princeton NJ 08540, your research on me is pure shlock. It's fragmentary and it gives a completely distorted image of who I really am and what I really think and WHY I AM NOTABLE!

5)"" Now, none of that means that his critics are correct. It is true that many well-known people are strogly attacked, and it is also true that many eventually widely acccepted scientific ideas are considered absurd and crankish early in their history.  (Continental drift comes to mind and there are many other examples.) It is possible (although I belive unlikely) that Sarfatti's ideas will be similarly respected in the future. (Of course that fact that many respected theories were once thought crankish does not alter the fact that most ideas thought crankish are always so regarded  the crank thory that proves correct is a rare beast.)""

OK, THAT'S ENOUGH you SOB! I have several MAINSTREAM PAPERS of importance that are recognized. Details were systematically vandalized from the article. Prediction of the SUPERSOLID is a KEY ONE. That ALONE makes me NOTABLE as a physicist. You DEFAME ME here and you maliciously SUPPRESS the facts. You owe me a BIG PUBLIC APOLOGY! So what you SYSOP geeks are above the law here? You can defame me, but I can't defend myself? This is still American not the Soviet Gulag!

6) ""But the fact is that his reputation as