I think one of the key aspects of the pseudoskeptical mindset is being missed here. Alex has stated over and over that the name Skeptiko is taken from the literal Greek meaning of the word skeptomai, which means "to look about and consider." In this context, a true skeptic is NOT someone who aggressively debunks and considers everything and anything to be delusion unless it meets his standards for evidence. A true skeptic is someone who withholds judgment and remains open minded to all the evidence, even if some of that evidence appears on the surface to be flimsy, contradictory to "accepted" theory or a violation of his cherished beliefs. Only after sufficient evidence has been collected does the true skeptic say, "This is what I believe to be the case," with two caveats: he never takes a position 100% in favor of or against something, and he is always aware that new information may come along that will upend his conclusion. In this sense, the true skeptic is the best scientist.
What we have with the people who are slamming Skeptiko, to me, is the classic pseudo-skeptic, who cannot tolerate that anyone even gives a public forum to any person who speaks of the paranormal as a possibility, much less a certainty. I have encountered this many times: open debate and discussion is not what pseudo-skeptics are about. They get angry when someone like Alex treats the topic of psi with even the slightest respect. Even though he has hosted the likes of Susan Blackmore and Tom Clark on his podcast, that doesn't matter; in the minds of the skeptical stormtroopers, he's a "woo-woo" because he has the nerve to allow even a single psi or NDE researcher the same neutral public platform as the debunkers and skeptical scientists. Alex, how do you sleep at night?
We see this mindset quite commonly. Recently James Randi ripped atheist author Sam Harris a new <ahem> orifice because Harris admits in his writing that some of the paranormal may be possible. That's as far as he goes, but judging by Randi's reaction, you'd think Harris donned a tinfoil fedora and went out to make crop circles with Sylvia Browne. That and other reactions just show that most of today's self-appointed skeptics are nothing more than dogmatic defenders of orthodox thinking. Pseudo-skepticism is an orthodoxy, and when you diverge from the orthodox position, you become a pariah. When someone like Alex, who has created an exceptional open forum for ideas from across the spectrum (which is what discovery is about!) can be taken to task for not adhering to a narrow "debunking" definition of skepticism, that's not science; it's fundamentalist fanaticism. Or as Orwell said so well, "Orthodoxy is unconsciousness."
Keep the faith, Alex. Keep asking.