Here is the article I referenced...<quoted text>
A blogging website, skepticalscience is sort of like topix.
"Skeptical Science is a climate alarmist website created by a self-employed cartoonist, John Cook. It is moderated by zealots who ruthlessly censor any and all form of dissent from their alarmist position. This way they can pretend to win arguments, when in reality they have all been refuted. The abuse and censorship does not pertain to simply any dissenting commentator there but to highly credentialed and respected climate scientists as well; Dr. Pielke Sr. has unsuccessfully attempted to engage in discussions there only to be childishly taunted and censored while Dr. Michaels has been dishonestly quoted and smeared. The irony of the site's oxymoronic name "Skeptical Science" is that the site is not skeptical of even the most extreme alarmist positions."
Lessons from Past Climate Predictions: Syun-Ichi Akasofu
Posted on 7 July 2011 by dana198
This article is not written by John Cook, there are over 60 comments to the article, one of the controversies mentioned in your reference does not pertain to the this article, but does invovle the author of this article. Your reference involves a number of different situations and I don't have the time to track down every aspect of each situation to determine who was wronged and why and to what degree.
After looking at the internal links in your reference I see charges and counter-charges, some overblown hyperbole and indignation on both sides of each controversy. If all of this is enough for you to discount my reference then there is little I can do or show to change your position.