I think you will find his skeptical approach very balanced, one issue that's popping it's head up of late is people making claims there are not "absolutes" while the following statement just contradicted itself (The claim "there are not absolutes" is a absolute :).
Watching the video where the bullies attacked the poor JW trolley or cart pusher bugged me because he turned someone's hypothosis in to a theory without any backing. Find the video where the man said "Dr. Lawerence Krausse has proved the Universe came from nothing", when pushed on what "nothing is", Krausse getting blasted by several scientist of his caliber said he was being dishonest with the term "nothing". How was the JW kid suppose to know and if this kid decides, "I am going to look up what the apostate said" discovers the apostate does not know what he's talking about because he blindly used Dr. Krausses(Quantum Vacuum Model) hypothosis to impress a JW Kid, how does that help our efforts to get kids outside the Cult while their still kids, read the following if you don't mind from the website "Why Evolution Is True":
I also read other scientist from other Us blasting him because he used "something" as "nothing", if that JW Kid read this, what's he going to think of the proud attack of his faith making outlandish claims in his quest for truth?
" I have a confession. I was not keen on Lawrence Krauss’s new book on the origin of the universe, A Universe from Nothing: Why there is Something Rather Than Nothing. I couldn’t share the chorus of approbation and acclaim for the book, and wondered if I, as opposed to everyone else, was blind to its merits. (Let me hasten to add that I am a big fan of Krauss’s public lectures, and also that I haven’t read any of his other books.)
I found A Universe from Nothing awkwardly written and poorly explained; indeed, in places I felt completely at sea, and had to reread bits of it several times to figure out what he was trying to say. Even then some of it baffled me, and since I have a Ph.D. and have read a fair amount of popular physics literature, I figured this must have been a case of unclear writing rather than simple ignorance on my part..."
"Further, I felt to some degree cheated: much of the book was not about the origin of the universe, but dealt with other matters, like dark energy and the like, that had already been covered in other popular works on physics. Indeed, much of Krauss’s book felt like a bait-and-switch. It also seemed to me that Krauss came to grips with the real problem—how do you get matter from an initial condition of nothing?—only in the last 40 pages of the book. The whole argument could have been written more concisely, and clearly, in a smallish book the size of Sam Harris’s Free Will.
https://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2012/04/02/david-albert-pans-lawrence-krausss-new-book/