Well, it's nice to see all of the replies here. Thank you everyone. I will just point out – and this will be the last thing I say – that most of the posts I've seen here exemplify speculative non-Buddhism's concern for what it sees as the need to "devitalize Buddhism's postulates." Obviously, Buddhism's claims have a strong hold on many people. If I understand correctly, the blog is advocating for an approach to Buddhism from the stance of a simple non-committed human being, and not from that of a "Buddhist." If you think about it, that's how we evaluate other forms of supposed knowledge, such as science, art, and philosophy. So why not Buddhism? Why is such a commitment required? Whether there is value in such an approach can, of course, only be decided by the individual doing the investigation.
I just got a notice: the blog was updated. There is now a fascinating post called Buddhists of Oz? http://speculativenonbuddhism.wordpress.com/
Oh well, to each his own. Peace to you.