1. Richard Carrier has a long history of accusing his critics of being liars.
2. Tim O'Neill wrote a detailed critique of Carrier's argument that Josephus does not refer to Jesus of Nazareth in Antiquities XX.200, which Carrier has now responded to with confused, inaccurate and hysterical claims.
3. Carrier's response is flawed and shows why he avoided responding for so long.
This article is written from a biased perspective, as the author clearly has an opinion on Richard Carrier and his work that is negative and dismissive. The author makes unsupported claims about Carrier's character and motivations, such as his "weird narcissism" and "arrogance". He also implies that Carrier's fans are gullible for asking him why he had not replied to the criticisms earlier, which could be seen as an attempt to discredit them as well.
The article also fails to present both sides equally; while it does provide some details on Carrier's argument, it does not explore any counterarguments or evidence that might support his position. Furthermore, the author does not provide any evidence for his own claims or arguments, instead relying solely on personal opinion and criticism of Carrier's work. Additionally, there is no mention of potential risks associated with the author's position or any discussion of alternative interpretations or points of view. As such, this article should be read with caution due to its lack of objectivity and one-sided reporting.