Long, but compelling, conclusion to the Rathergate scandal

Joseph Newcomer, who provided irrefutable scientific proof showing that the supposed Air National Guard documents that Rather touted were forgeries, does a scathing indictment of the article in the Columbia Journalism Review (an article that that purports to resuscitate the anti-Bush documents. The first paragraph of Prof. Newcomer's rebuttal gives you an idea of the tone:

I was both amused and dismayed at the recent article published in the Columbia Journalism Review. I was amused because it is, like most of the attempts to justify the 'validity' of the CBS memos, completely ridiculous, and like most such articles, written by someone without the slightest qualification to actually make such an assessment. I was dismayed because it was published in what appears to be a legitimate publication, and as such reflects the 'best thinking' that should be represented by such a journal. This is very sad. If we think Dan Rather's being hoaxed by an inept forgery is bad, just wait until the people with the apparent quality of journalistic training this article represents get out there. Apparently, critical thinking is not held in high esteem. The School of Journalism should find this article embarrassing. (If they do not, then the University should be deeply embarrassed to have such a school).

Read the whole article if you want the convincing details (as well as some timely lessons in good, old-fashioned logical thinking).