Hmm.
I should add something else here. Not sure if it's an apology or not, but something.
Reading
this one (the original I quoted as full of it), I think the author is in a debate with someone else. I've read several of the correspondences, and most use italics or ">>" to seperate what is the "claim" made by someone pushing an agenda, and what is a "refutation", "correction", or "explanation" from someone more educated.
It seems as though the author of article of interest (EP Grondine) may be the one correcting, and "Sterling" the pusher. In others Sterling is almost debating from a scientific side. Someone named "Jason" is also involved. It is clear he is viewed as an antagonist, but I'm not certain what parts are his. It's almost enough to give me a headache :P.
Here is one exchange I read. The others are accesible if you're willing to poke around a bit.
The problem I've run into is, I'm not sure if the article in question about the C14 is a claim being made by Grondine or one he is simply commenting on. As I said, most of the other exchange pages I can figure out who is talking about what. Well, most of the time anyway. The one of interest to this thread I am not sure about, so to be completely honest I may have called the wrong guy an idiot. It is really not well sorted who and what and so on. If anyone can figure it out conclusively, my hat's off to you!
I apologise to the author should he read this thread, and please feel free to contact me if you are concerned. Methods of contact are available from every post, just click on the author's user name.