Appeal to incredulity (aka Scopie's Law or Clutching at straws)
[back] Ad hominem

"Only the small secrets need to be protected. The large ones are kept secret by public incredulity."---Marshall McLuha

[Welcome to Pseudo-Skeptic land. The ploy here is unbelievable = untrue, so the more unbelievable items you can find the better, and easy to sell to Pyjama people or people with an investment in the status quo.  It is an ad hominem variant, a classic example of a Rationalization, and you can see they are just about building a Temple to it.  You get this one from pharma people (just shows the weakness in academic intelligence) who just can't argue their corner when faced with the truth (eg Brain Deer uses this).  They round up all the most unbelievable (to them) pages on whale, hold them up and hope that frightens people from  looking at all the medical pages that shred vaccination very easily. Shouting the popular buzzword CONSPIRACY or 'conspiracy theory' is standard fare.  Orac has coined a new name for it--Scopie's Law after a gang member. Some examples below, the homeopathic one being a common one with Allopaths like Ben Goldacre.  No doubt this will work in a big group of pharma people--the Pharma gang.
    This is
David Aaronovitch's main argument.]

See: Shills

Examples:
Voodoo Histories by David Aaronovitch
[
Neurodiversity] A Whale of an Expert
[Orac] The nuttiness that is Whale.to: Save Scopie's Law!

[Kevin Leitch] How urban legends get started
Scopie's Law

Richard Lindley said: (source)
So... a bunch of parents who were worried that vaccines damaged their children got together and did a study that confirmed their suspicions...
...but they have failed to get it published in a scientifc journal because
(a) they are the victims of the great BIG PHARMA CONSPIRACY
or (b) they are not trained scientists and the study is flawed
Forgive me for being somewhat skeptical.
Bryan, you have a habit of not linking to the studies you quote.  This is either lazyness, forgetfulness or a deliberate attempt to hide the truth.  Why are you afraid to let people see the study for themselves?  
Is it because option (b) is actually correct?

Right John, the coverup….tell me again – is it the Lizards or the Black Helicopters? Or is it the Lizards flying the Black Helicopters?--Kevin Leach  http://leftbrainrightbrain.co.uk/?p=998#comment-52111

How about the flying dolphins, John?

Kind regards,

Becky http://jabs.org.uk/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=2437&whichpage=2

John - no-one is ever going to take you seriously on any medical matter when the same site that purports to "prove" vaccine / autism links etc also purports to prove the authenticity of The Protocols Of The Elders Of Zion, the flying dolphins, the Royal Familybeing lizards and the burning ley lines. (The fact that most of your "scientific" information is also utter nonsense doesn't help your cause either).

So once again, I claim Scopie's Law.

Kind regards


[This from a Wikipedia  Allopath editor, which was their only argument there--they used that to block all links to whale.to.]
"I agree with 86.128.165.240 that information about vaccines and their side effects should not be suppressed. However, the whale.to link is not an appropriate source for this information because of the competing extremist information and conspiracy theories as outlined on the RFC on Talk:MMR vaccine. As already reviewed by InvictaHOG, the commentary on Illuminati mind control, Jewish conspiracy, genocide via vaccination, Roman Catholics, psychic assassins, Mormons, Walter Cronkite, demons sacrificing girls for growth hormone, or links to alien implant removers distracts from the criticisms of vaccines and decreases the value of whale.to link." Andrew73 13:12, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Recently she wrote a rather stunning post illustrating the ties between an anti-vaccine “expert” and anti-vaccine lawyer and a web site that can only be described as a freakish hive of prejudice and nutjobbery. The web site is Whale.to, a clearinghouse not only for — to put it extremely charitably — less mainstream scientific ideas, but also for copies of the infamous anti-Semitic tract the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, anti-Catholic tracts, and writings tying vaccines to Illuminati plots http://www.popehat.com/2008/06/18/the-fiendish-flouridators-are-nothing-compared-to-the-vicious-vaccinators/

"Whale.to is one of the biggest repositories of altie woo, pseudoscience, conspiracy mongering, and New Age nonsense you'll ever be able to find anywhere. Anyone who uncritically cites anything from Whale.to as evidence to bolster his position clearly has a problem with critical thinking skills."--Orac


    Many people confuse homeopathy with herbalism and do not realise just how far homeopathic remedies are diluted. The typical dilution is called "30C": this means that the original substance has been diluted by 1 drop in 100, 30 times. On the Society of Homeopaths site, in their "What is homeopathy?" section, they say that "30C contains less than 1 part per million of the original substance."
This is an understatement: a 30C homeopathic preparation is a dilution of 1 in 10030, or rather 1 in 1060, which means a 1 followed by 60 zeroes, or - let's be absolutely clear - a dilution of 1 in 1,000,000,000,000,000,000, 000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000, 000,000,000,000,000.
    To phrase that in the Society of Homeopaths' terms, we should say: "30C contains less than one part per million million million million million million million million million million of the original substance."
At a homeopathic dilution of 100C, which they sell routinely, and which homeopaths claim is even more powerful than 30C, the treating substance is diluted by more than the total number of atoms in the universe. Homeopathy was invented before we knew what atoms were, or how many there are, or how big they are. It has not changed its belief system in light of this information.
    How can an almost infinitely dilute solution cure anything? Most homeopaths claim that water has "a memory". They are unclear what this would look like, and homeopaths' experiments claiming to demonstrate it are frequently bizarre. As a brief illustration, American magician and debunker James Randi has for many years had a $1m prize on offer for anyone who can demonstrate paranormal abilities. He has made it clear that this cheque would go to someone who can reliably distinguish a homeopathic dilution from water. His money remains unclaimed. Ben Goldacre