Luboš, in today's post John Baez, octonions, and string theory finds fault with the piece. He says of Baez and Huerta that they are
two people who manifestly and demonstrably don't understand string theory - not even at the undergraduate level - [who] are writing articles for widely read journals pretending to be scientific magazines...
He says they're trying to promote their "idiosyncratic bullshit". And
he is nothing else than an irrational numerologist who can never distinguish real insights from superficial distractions... John Baez's knowledge of string theory is an infinitesimal fraction of the knowledge of a good graduate student... the article hyping a set of a few simple mathematical observations is just pathetic... from authors who don't have a clue about string theory... Scientific American shouldn't be publishing stuff written by people who don't know what they're talking about.
John Baez, of course, got El Naschie's dander up by accusing him of being a numerologist.
In This Week's Hype, string theory skeptic Peter Woit (whom Luboš calls an "enemy of science") also writes about the Baez-Huerta piece. Baez himself pipes up in the comments.
Other posts about Luboš Motl:
- LHC black holes don't worry Luboš Motl
- Luboš Motl on Lisi and Weatherall
- Luboš Motl calls Sabine Hossenfelder a crackpot
- Luboš Motl on crackpottery in physics