I'd love to hear from people who disagree with [insert name of controversial figure here] just why they disagree with that person, not just their party label for that person. It is perfectly possible for a person who has wrong ideas to have other, correct ideas.
>>It is perfectly possible for a person who has wrong ideas to have other, correct ideas.
Agreed. But here we have an author that researchers in two fields argue are intellectually dishonest in his public writing.
Only experts in the field (or maybe amateurs which read the discussion carefully) can have an opinion.
So do you really want to use your time by reading books about subject X which you know might be have 5-50 percent slanted content to agree with e.g. the Mormon church?
It is not just that you get real information, it is that some of the information you get will be twisted...
Edit: And since it is relevant to your comment, note that someone voted me down but lacked counter arguments... :-)
As I have asked people to do before,
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=555734
I'd love to hear from people who disagree with [insert name of controversial figure here] just why they disagree with that person, not just their party label for that person. It is perfectly possible for a person who has wrong ideas to have other, correct ideas.