You read my posts that closely that something I wrote years ago you remember? Not likely, but in any case, you remember wrong. I have never said that I refused to read things that didn't "a priori" agree with me. I have said that I don't bother reading spurious unsupported materials - i.e., I stick with good journalism and well-stated arguments. There is a difference.
So why the Jekyll and Hyde behavior? Why is "nasty as you want to be" your method online?