AZCat wrote that Petgoat "has made claims about its contents that were easily checked (and refuted, once someone did so)."

That, right there, is a far more substantive criticism of Petgoat's approach than anything Boloboffin said in the entire preceding sub-thread. It is precisely the sort of additional point that I said Boloboffin needed to complete his argument. The only thing still lacking, in what you said above, is a mention of the specific issues on which you claim that Petgoat has misrepresented the NIST report.

But it would seem that Boloboffin is "too fucking lazy" (borrowing a phrase from AZCat's post) to make substantive criticisms, preferring instead just to hurl, and repeat, logically incomplete insults.