Dana Ullman attacks James Randi on Huffpo

[Acleron]

He has some libertarian friends in the skeptic movement. These people do tend to have a higher than normal quotient of climate denialism. Randi was bullied by them when he initially said he was a believer in Global Warming, wondered what was going on with the 'evidence' they presented him, then came to the conclusion that he would defer to the experts, which is the rational course of action for a skeptic when they do not understand the details of the science, which would be most of us.

That is exactly as I would have expected.

 

[catsmate]

Was this an offhand remark, or did Pauling really devote effort to a crusade (never cheap or easy) against Schechtman? I favour the former.

Pauling is known to have had a vindictive streak; he was narcissistic, very sensitive to criticism and was reluctant to admit that be was, or could be, wrong or that others could succeed where he had failed.

 

[Mojo]

I see Dana Ullman, promoter of self and of quackery in every form, particularly homeopathy, has attacked Randi in an ad hom fashion

Nuh uh. It says right in the article that it's not ad hom.

Dana addresses that here:

“Several of the medical fundamentalists below assert that my article above is an ad hominen attack on James Randi and Tracey Brown. I disagree. If I choose to call them fat, ugly, or other silly names, THAT would be a personal attack. Instead, I choose to reference information about their history and about statements they have made and positions they have taken. The fact that some people have interpreted these embarrassing parts of their history as a personal attack is simply evidence of the weakness of their own argument. They are unable to defend Randi or Brown in substantative ways, and so, they (incorrectly) assert that I am attacking them personally. Get real...most of us see through this thinly veiled weak defense.

My apologies to readers who have to wade through the ongoing disinformation that the denialists provide...and isn't it interesting that the vast majority of these denalists hide behind fake names. Who do they really really represent...and why won't they come out and say who they really are?”