I think he's not a lost cause.
He is willing to accept some evidence, unlike the creationists. And, as he says, he accepts the evidence but disagrees with (IMO strawman) policy arguments that he thinks the IPCC and others are pushing. I appreciate the challenge he offers.
Why? Well I see some of myself in some of his arguments. I was briefly taken in by McI & McK and their criticism of the "hockey stick" graph; and I remember being a fan of Neal Bortz as a kid. For a while. :-/
It's good to be forced to support propositions. Sites that only have similar posters are boring. :-)
But, yeah, he needs better sources. ;-)
Cheers,
Scott.
