Being an undergraduate, it's difficult to simply read a paper or book and be able to label it as crackpottery, as I'm attempting to learn what's in the paper or book itself. I read a bunch of physics blogs, which makes it even harder, as they're usually radically opinionated. I just finished reading this hitpiece on Smolin and Woit written by Lumo at "The Reference Frame." Woit seems pretty coherent in http://bigthink.com/peterwoit" [Broken], and is a mathematical physicist at Columbia. Apparently he's a complete joke in the physics community. I was just about to read Lightness of Being, but what's to stop me from finding out Wilzchek isn't off his rocker. How do I avoid crackpots in modern physics discussions?