While I personally am not let out of the house with mismatched shoes and plaid pants, scientists are not all so superficial as me. We keep track of who claimed what, and when, much more closely than whether we mumble, look funny, and write with bad grammar.

This may partly explain why Jim Berkland speaks well, is earnest, shows his compassion repeatedly, and garners a large following of believers, but doesn't earn the respect of scientists simply because his version of "facts" does not jive with our careful study.

Who do you prefer - a snappy dresser with a good speaking style, or someone who can tell you whether an earthquake prediction method worked?