i can tell you what the argument is about here newseventsguy it's about your retroactive reversion of a simple edit trying to include secondary independent verification of sedimentary nanodiamonds in younger dryas sediments by bement and madden et al without discussion a reference that i notice has not yet been included in the reference list still after all this time this is after you admit that you are ignorant of the peer review literature and the controversy any attempt to do simple reference list edits on this page have been stomped by no less that five admittedly biased and ignorant editors the honorable thing to do here would be to recuse yourself from editing the page as i have but i haven't seen that happening until now good luck with it you've already made complete fools of yourselves