[cgranade]

I have. The decisions of the respective bloggers to, instead of relying on facts, rely on misleading half-truths, misquotes and outright fabrications makes it difficult for me to find any reason to associate either site with skepticism. Rather, I find that both Climate Audit and WUWT are perfect examples of a sort of knee-jerk denialism that I find to be such a perversion of the word "skepticism."

The parent article, on the other hand, lists several examples of honest skeptics as well as of dishonest denialists. I would encourage people to evaluate the arguments of those skeptics, and not the pseudo-skeptics at CA and WUWT.

[azgolfer]

I wasn't talking to you. You're the guy who pulled his thread when valid arguments were brought up that didn't support your point. I'm sure that's why you feel right at home at Real Climate.

[cgranade]

I did no such thing. If I know which thread you mean, it was downvoted and closed so that I couldn't even comment on it.

[azgolfer]

Sorry about that,then. I assumed it disappeared becuase you deleted it. I thought it would stay around in threads even if it was downvoted.