Tendentious editing I can t believe it In his revert of 16 05 16 December 2013 Mann Jess states It s not what our sources say referring to the preceding edit which he reverted the exact text of which was The concept is not consistent with the law of mass action This is an astonishing statement for a supposedly experienced editor to make given that the article by Ball cited in the article concerned states and I quote they the claims defied conventional scientific understanding specifically the law of mass action