Deletion of Rutherford Institute

Comment: per the previous keep rationales. The weakness of my conviction reflects only my lack of previous knowledge of this organisation, but from what I can see it is (a) notable due to its prominence in a number of well reported cases, and (b) very controversial. This controversy is not really reflected in the article about it; I don't think it would be a violation of  to include discussion of the controversy so long as it is suitably backed up with references
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Neutral point of view (WP:NPOV)

Comment: per Carrite. The sources in the article are already an indication of notability per 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N)