Why @SkeptInquiry can’t have nice things.

by Moe Lane on September 7, 2013

If the Skeptical Inquirer is seriously publishing articles like this winner, well, you may want to reconsider that. “This winner” being a remarkably obtuse review of Ken Hite’s The Nazi Occult; apparently the fellow is worried that people might take this book seriously.

IMG_1342IMG_1343

Yeah, I know. It’s the Internet: you must expect somebody to miss the point, I suppose.

The good news is that he’s soundly mocked; the bad news is that the reputation of… do they still call themselves “Brights?” …for being humorless toads with an abysmal opinion of their fellow-man remains firmly intact. Seriously: reviewing a non-crunchy roleplaying game supplement* as if it were even pretending to be rigorous scholarship is firmly in Jack Chick territory. And I gotta say: I’m not really impressed that a magazine apparently thinks that it’s smart to try to rip apart a fiction book that blatantly references HP Lovecraft, Robert Howard, and Indiana Jones. It’s like something out of a Ray Bradbury story.

That was not a compliment, by the way.

Moe Lane (crosspost)

*Come, I will conceal nothing from you: the reviewer – no doubt feeling besieged, but unwilling to admit that he was being wrong on the Internet – made at least one snide comment about geeks and their hobbies in his response. A comment that offended. I was going to respond there, but then it occurred to me that more people will read it if I put it here.

Previous post:

Next post: