The dishonesty of Guy Chapman, “The Skeptics” shill

The dishonesty of Guy Chapman,
“The Skeptics” shill
(@SceptiGuy @vGuyUK)

Dianthus Medical (@dianthusmed) tweeted at 4:53am – 12 Apr 13:

“The dishonesty of Eric Merola, Burzynski shill”

“The fundamental characteristic of science is honest discourse”

“Dissenting opinion is encouraged, engaging with dissenting views is pretty much mandatory, at least if they are well founded”

“Skeptics usually follow the same principle with blog comments and the like”

“Obvious trolls do not usually get shut down unless their agitation becomes a significant burden on the site”

Obviously, “TROLLS” is a term that “The Skeptics” label anyone who questions their “infallibility” with, in order to supposedly buttress their questionable “reasoning” for not dealing with the questions they do not want to deal with, before they quickly change the subject

“This is by stark contrast with the world of quackery where nasty reality is not often not allowed to intrude”

As opposed to the stark contrast with the world of “The Skeptics” where nasty “rational reasoning” is not often allowed to intrude

“A new worst offender has come up in the shape of Burzynski shill and conspiracy whacknut Eric Merola”

As opposed to Guy Chapman who believes that a steel building like WTC7 collapsing is perfectly rational when hundreds and hundreds of architects and engineers disagree with him and he is unable to offer any example of any other steel building collapsing under such similar circumstances, or whether he is an architect or engineer more qualified that the aforementioned ones

Be that as it may,
maybe that’s how people think in the UK

“Merola ran a Q&A session around a screening of his propaganda movie”

“Some skeptics attended”

Like the “Skeptic Mule” who could not bother taking a minute out of their life to find out how the first movie was funded though it was clearly disclosed on the movie web-site
A blog which I awarded the first ever “PigASSus award for their adolescent voting option which allows viewers to vote on comments so that they are minimized and have to be maximized to view

If your viewers are so insecure that they need a voting option so they can “see no evil,” maybe you are too insecure to be running a blog:
“When they challenged on the provable absence of any randomised controlled trials, or any published outcomes from the sixty Phase II trials registered by Burzynski, there was an immediate cut to sinister music and obfuscatory web links that have already been addressed, content that does not address the issue f RCTs or failure to publish”

This is because individuals like Guy Chapman make a conscious decision to NOT do Internet searches in order to “Fact Check” before they “Insert Foot in Mouth”

3/28/3013 I had already addressed the Randomized question on my blog:
3/26/2013 I had already addressed the Phase II clinical trials on my blog:
“This Gish Gallop is a standard tactic of Burzynski shills – every time they are challenged on the lack of published evidence they come up with the same list of conference abstracts, junk journals and so on, and every time they get the same response: that is not proper published evidence, where is the trial data?”

Not “proper published evidence” per WHO?


YOU-WHO, you do NOT get to decide what is “proper published evidence”

“To find Merola editing a video to blatantly misrepresent the position of the reality-based community is hardly a surprise”

I am NOT quite certain what “reality” YOU are living in

“Needless to say, people asked questions in the Comments section of the YouTube video”

“And needless to say the comments were deleted”

If it was “needless to say,” why did you “say” it?

“Not just deleted, the commenters were immediately and summarily blocked from making any comment whatsoever on that video”

Reminds me of Orac’s YouTube video:
David H. Gorski – Quackademic Medicine, which had a video stream, and now does NOT have a video stream

“Hilariously, he then claimed that “skeptics don’t want to argue” – despite the fact that we have been arguing with him constantly on Twitter over these self-same misrepresentations!”

“Prize for best exposure of this idiocy goes to Adam Jacobs:”

THIS is the same Adam Jacobs who “creates” excuses for censoring comments, using “misinformation” and “disinformation” (MisDisInformation) and “misdirection,” as he did when I commented on Guy Chapman’s comments on his blog

Adam Jacobs March 16, 2013 at 8:40 am

“In the interests of transparency, I should point out that Didymus has left another comment which I’ve not approved

This is not something I do lightly:

I hate to censor comments, and believe firmly that everyone should have their say

However, the comment I consigned to the spam bin was another long, pointless, rambling one, with many irrelevant links

It doesn’t say anything of importance that Didymus hasn’t already said in his previous comments

I fear that Didymus is simply trying to make these comments unreadable by posting large quantities of irrelevance, and that’s something I really don’t think I can allow

Any future comments from Didymus with similar quantities of distraction material will be treated similarly”

Quidama (@IamBreastCancer) tweeted at 7:00pm – 9 Apr 13:




Post #199 – Orac – 2/13/2013

“BTW, a certain commenter has been flooding the threads over the last 12 hours

His most recent comments are all in the moderation queue, but with more than 40 over the last 12 hours I probably won’t be releasing the vast majority of them, given how repetitive and inane they are

That would be a lot of annoying and obnoxious idiocy to release in such a short period of time, and if you look further upstream in this comment thread you’ll see that there’s already plenty of that from him there

Enough’s enough. I’m more tolerant of trolls and just plain obnoxious commenters than almost any blogger you’ll come across, but this is getting ridiculous”
“It’s astounding that Merola thinks he can get away with this kind of nonsense”

Yet “The Skeptics” have no qualms about trying to “get away with this kind of nonsense”

“Pretending that the ruthless suppression of any awkward questions like “where are the randomised controlled trials” and “where are the published results of the clinical trials conducted on humans, per the Helsinki Protocol” somehow equates to us not wanting to debate”

And yet curiously, Guy does NOT point out that the Declaration of Helsinki does NOT require a certain timetable be followed
“I think this is going to get really ugly when BBC’s Panorama runs an actual documentary (rather than a propaganda film) that is apparently in the works”

One man’s “propaganda” is another man’s “propergenda”

“This was expected soon but seems to be delayed, possibly because of the FDA raid about which Burzynski’s shills have made dark mumblings, and which was immediately followed by the removal of all reference to antineoplastons and trials from the content of the Burzynski clinic website”

THAT sure explains THIS:
Which is another item I had already addressed on my blog:
“Tijuana beckons”

Or, probably in your case, Mad Dog 20/20


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s