You don't respect the views, fine. You look down on anyone who can hold such views, reasonable. But regardless of that, in my view, there is a duty to behave towards the person, as reflected in any communication with them, respectfully, which overides such feelings. Feelings just don't come into it.

I recognise that this is not how we are likely to behave, but I believe it is the standard towards which we should aim.

The trouble is, online abuse, however justified it can sometimes feel, is something which can easily build into something pretty damaging. I think there are rare occasions when it can indeed have a place, but they are as rare as the situations when a blow to the face is the right response.

But the views expressed by the man I was referring to are extremely abusive in themselves. He gets away with it, ironically, because his abuse is aimed at the millions of people he would, presumably, like to see following his delusion (why else does he declare such derision of science and, especially, scientists, in such evangelical terms?) rather than at named individuals. If his ilk ever fulfilled all their goals we would be back in the dark ages of magic, superstition and fear. They have already had some success in that regard. He may be a gentle and soft-spoken fellow down the pub or when he's patting his dog but his views are a threat to the advance of civilisation. Four in ten Americans not believing in evolution, so please don't tell me I'm overstating the case! He demonstrates his disrespect for people here by churning out the same nonsense again and again in spite of all the reasoned arguments ever put to him. We might as well have said nothing at all. Peddling dangerous and regressive nonsense to a lot of people is far more damaging than his being called a well-deserved name or two!