[codex]

It is not my intent to invalidate the author's thesis. I attempted to point out that skepticism is not enough; one must also apply skepticism consistently to all sources in order to free oneself from unconscious cognitive bias. As evidence, I use the author's treatment of global warming, where the evidence supplied is far too poor to support the conclusion. It's not a matter of quantity--it's just a blog post, after all, and I would have been tolerant of zero support for his claims. But if the author does supply support, it shouldn't be so crappy to as to suggest that does not apply a skeptical viewpoint to his own sources.

[anamax]

> I attempted to point out that skepticism is not enough; one must also apply skepticism consistently to all sources in order to free oneself from unconscious cognitive bias. As evidence, I use the author's treatment of global warming

Likewise, I use your treatment of his examples. As I pointed out, he provided better support for his global warming skepticism, which you rejected, than he did for his other skepticism, which you accepted.