I have no problem with anyone having an opinion different to mine.
What I have a problem is when a set of stated facts are claimed to be pseudo science but then there is no attempt to explain why? To make any kind of claim like that, you should be in a position to explain your reasoning at a appropriate level.
If you dispute the science, then you must be prepared to explain in scientific terms why the "stated fact" is actually incorrect.
[quote user="gpi"]If my anti-foo cable views are not welcome, as they clearly are not, no one can fairly debate any subject, let alone cables, and this is not a balanced FORUM.[/quote]
A debate is more the one side "saying yes it is" and the other side saying "no it isn't". Both sides need to put together reasons for point of view, which means a lot more then stating "pseudo-science claptrap". In the examples you latter gave, you never explained why in scientific terms why you thought they were suspect. Without this input there is no means of any of us to continuing a debate.
I think its a bit unfair to call this FORUM unbalanced (for lack of fair debate) when YOU are not actually debating, just simply stating in blanket terms what are very general and unreasoned statements.