Medical quack or not (and he seems to be), Maher is not even a freaking atheist!!! Check out the Wikipedia bio of Bill Maher, on his views of religion. Several times, in different venues, Maher denies being an atheist, and says that he believes in some sort of vague higher power.

The problem is that atheist organizations will seemingly take any opportunity to promote themselves, damn the facts. Since Maher has publicity, we won’t check the facts or let his non-atheism get in the way of giving him an atheist award. Unbelievable!

I also think his issue with immunizations are to do more with the additives than the actual virus injections. On that I might have to agree.

You’d need someone who thinks emitting greenhouse gases and cutting down forests *helps* the environment and is thus *good*.

There actually are well-funded people who literally campaign for us to “Contact your Senator and Congressman today, and remind them that CO2 is not pollution—and more CO2 results in a greener Earth.”

(Only time will tell the full human cost of climate change denial or the promotion of quackery. In my opinion, climate change is likely to come with a higher toll.)

If you want to compare this situation to climatology, a mere global warming skeptic doesn’t cut it. You’d need someone who thinks emitting greenhouse gases and cutting down forests *helps* the environment and is thus *good*. You’re selling Maher’s nonsense short.

So, to answer your question: yes, if the skeptical community encounters a villain from the Captain Planet cartoon, we ought to denounce him.

Yeah man, without a global viral outbreak, we’ll have problems like a global viral outbreak.

As if there is any choice in the matter. It will happen at some point, else, history has never repeated.

Those who can’t sustain will fall, it is merely a matter of percentages of gene expression.

Choice is not an option, and population reduction is a positive occurrence.