He drags down discussion, but generally it's only bad when he encounters you, socks or sometimes Chipit. I've seen him provide helpful links, but I'm not paying attention for the most part unless he's talking to me or says something that piques my interest.

I can't tell if you keep referring to him as an "it" in an attempt to dehumanize and insult him or what. Blocking is definitely the easiest route to save yourself some irritation either way.

Your arguments aren't based in facts, your arguments are based on information that you've read, processed, and regurgitated and framed in an abrasive format-- like the writing equivalent of resting bitchface. The reliability of that information is as questionable as the information that you refute. I disregard most of the videos out, because I don't give a shit what some scientist or medical professional says during a 15 minutes of fame interview, I want to see their studies and hold them up next to previously performed studies about similar diseases/disease responses/etc.. Perusing studies brings up a separate issue in that peer review isn't necessarily reliable anymore either and can easily just be signed off on, which is disheartening but ya know. The only real way to genuinely verify data is to perform experimentation on your own. Cognitive dissonance goes both ways though, and you're clearly not impervious to it so why act self righteous?