` ::No it doesn't. It misrepresents the source material on multiple levels. ``Some of those colleagues take issue``? It says it infuruates his former collegeages. ``Heated``? Now, here's your POV exposed.  You're going to characterize the tone of Lopez's comments? And what's with the use of legalese? ``Testimony?`` ``Attested``. What courtroom are we talking about here? ``not acceepted by the majority of his colleagues`` It says that his theories are ``absolutely ludicrous``. This is a perfect example of trying to ``neutralize`` the source rather than being neutral.  The current text neutrally presents the actual source material in an accurate manner. Your version does not.  `