skeptictank goes into woo-woo land

[corplinx]

I am sad to say that www.skeptictank.org has gone off into wide-eyed woo-woo land in its anti-war rhetoric. Sad, I like to visit that site every two months or so and read up.

[LuxFerum]

Skepticism demands classifying Bush's claims and justifications as lies.

This sounds pretty reasonable to me.

[iain]

Just taken a look and it does seem way over the top. The opening paragraphs compare Bush to Hitler - never a good sign of a reasoned argument.

[jj]

Originally posted by iain
Just taken a look and it does seem way over the top. The opening paragraphs compare Bush to Hitler - never a good sign of a reasoned argument.

Let's see. They both started wars that appear to be based on lies. The both got "elected" with the big lie. Bush both in campaigning and in the actual election process. Both of them are somewhere to the right of Jedi Knight.

Well?

Did you ever read "Handmaid's Tale"?

But, perhaps they are over the top. Page won't load for me right now.

[PygmyPlaidGiraffe]

Originally posted by jj




Did you ever read "Handmaid's Tale"?



Yes. It is a work of fiction. Why did you reference it?

Originally posted by corplinx
I am sad to say that www.skeptictank.org has gone off into wide-eyed woo-woo land in its anti-war rhetoric. Sad, I like to visit that site every two months or so and read up.

Dear Mr. corplinx,

I looked at that site, and I must say, it was incredible.

The section where he had photos of people in and around the Scientology building area and he kept calling them robots, cult members, monsters, criminals, this and that. The levels of rhetoric were the highest I've seen in a long time, and this is what he accuses Bush of, among other things.

The majority of the anti-war text appeared to be the ramblings of a webmaster.

I agree with the overall message of war bad, peace good, but I feel this person(s) is going about it in a far from constructive way.

I believe that if he wrote up clearly and logically his issues, without being reduced to rhetoric and name-calling, then the page would be informative.

Sincerely,

S. Holmes

[jj]

Originally posted by PygmyPlaidGiraffe


Yes. It is a work of fiction. Why did you reference it?

So is 1984. I just referenced that, too.

Perhaps you should compare the fact to the fiction, oh blue-tongued one.

[corplinx]

Originally posted by Sherlock Holmes

I believe that if he wrote up clearly and logically his issues, without being reduced to rhetoric and name-calling, then the page would be informative.


My feelings exactly. "Look, Bush Murders Children!" is a bad way to start a cry for peace.

However, the site's forums include one about "the fascist" George Bush. I just never payed attention to the forum areas.