"I offer proof of nothing, and answers to no questions. I draw no conclusions." http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-kirby/notes-from-the-big-anti-v_b_209506.html
The closest to truth Kirby has come is contained in the first part of his first sentence. Big admission on his part, don't you think?
"I believe that the study of environmental triggers - other than vaccines - can provide some sorely needed middle ground in what has turned out to be one of the most contentious and vitriolic issues of our day. That doesn't mean that research into genes - or vaccines - should or would stop. But it might provide for a way forward from here."
Kirby helped to ensure it would be with his book and his posts on Huff and AoA. And now he want to dial it down some without admitting his role in the whole affair.
"I am just a journalist, I'm a layperson, so I view things in a slightly different way than scientists. And I have the luxury of doing that because I get to, you know, play around with theories a little bit, ask different kinds of questions and try to see connections between different things."
Yes, scientists never play around with ideas, testing out all sorts of hypothesis. Oh, wait, they do, and then they actually conduct scientific research to validate or reject their findings. They don't have the luxury of opening their mouths and spouting their "ideas" without backing it up with actual FACTS.
I'm sure I could find more to pick apart, but will let it stand with these points for now. It's certainly sufficient to show his true colors.