They are just examples, but they were ones that I had read on the site within the past hour.
Some of these are so far out that it probably wouldn't make sense to dignify them with a response.
The "two people have already died" though seems like a fairly serious charge and one we've seen raised several times.
Perhaps a broader approach makes sense though.
ITEM Zamboni is a flake. (Zamboni is wrong.)
RESPONSE Dr. Zamboni has published 8 papers in major, international, peer-reviewed medical journals and made presentations at a number of major international medical conferences. Other researchers including Stanford, Georgetown, Jacobson Neurological Institute, Jena, Frankfurt, et cetera have begun the process of testing his results. His critics just whine.
(Or: We are waiting for his critics to publish their comments in peer-reviewed journals and to present their own research.)
ITEM Almost all neurologists agree that MS is an auto-immune disease. It couldn't have anything to do with cerebrospinal veins
RESPONSE Science is not about consensus. It is about constantly challenging theories and replacing them with new ones. The CCSVI thesis does not preclude an auto-immune explanation for MS. It may in fact be an insight into the trigger for an auto-immune response which is not currently known.
Again, these are just possible examples. Nothing sacred about any thing I ever write.