> Brian is definately a genuine skeptic, as are Penn & Teller
Surely you jest. At least Penn & Teller openly admit they are libertarians who are advocating their personal opinions. Brian is not as bad as them, but his modus operandi is still 1) form a knee-jerk opinion based on his libertarian ideology, then 2) Google for an hour or two to cherry-pick evidence to back up this opinion. Like I said, he's an amateur (an amateur who I agree with 80% of the time, by the way).
> I'd like to see a rationale for organic foods that doesn't
> resort to the appeal to nature fallacy.
I suggest doing the research yourself instead of buying everything spoon fed to you by amateur "skeptics." Use PubMed, Agricola, or AGRIS/CARIS. You'll see reams of peer-reviewed evidence about the positive impacts of organic practices on soil quality and the reduction of harmful pesticide residues on food and in the ecosystem. (Note that there is no scientific consensus yet on the nutritional superiority of organic foods compared with conventionally grown food.) Trotting out the "naturalistic fallacy" shows the typical skeptical groupthink.
By the way, here's a fun exchange between another "skeptic" and a critic: