A SCIENTIFIC consensus, which is not your average consensus.
Well, we don't know if there is consensus among the entire community of geneticists with regard to this particular issue. The equivalent of a petition with 139 signatures doesn't make scientific consensus. This is a consensus of 139 scientists, not scientific consensus.
Their argument is supported, at least in their view, by the research. Why do they need to spell out everything?
Because clearly it isn't, if their research is used in this book to support the opposing argument. If the book author has misinterpreted their results, but they don't bother to actually address his mistakes, then their letter amounts to no more than a big, "nuh-uh!"
Public debate needs to be held to a higher standard than it currently is. Would you expect to win a debate by having your entire team sign a letter saying no more than, "The other team is wrong"?
By what criteria is that an incorrect response? They are responding to a BOOK, which by definition does not need to go through rigorous peer review. They don't have to waste their time writing a paper just to appease the likes of you because there are already papers out there.
Why do you care if I think their letter is stupid? Why are you so upset that I'm arguing against their approach on a backwater site like this?
What does YOUR being offended by this advance science and human knowledge?
I'm practicing what I preach by specifically pointing out how their argument fails to be as convincing as it could be. That you're so emotionally invested in this that you only see me as getting offended doesn't change my argument.
I don't know what planet you're living on, but to point out that people are misusing your own research to make claims that the research itself doesn't support DOES advance science. Science is just as much about getting it right as it is about pointing out where others have it wrong.
I've bolded the important part above. Pointing out where, or how, others have it wrong is exactly what I'm advocating. Pointing out that others have it wrong, without any supporting evidence as in the letter we are discussing, does nothing to advance science.