What happens when you, like Parker, base your life's work on one kind of wine, ignoring a whole subculture that has found a huge audience? What you do, especially if you're incapable of saying something like, "I didn't know that," you go on attack, because you perceive danger.
If you can't get hold of the Gambero Rosso where Michel Bettane goes on a rant about the horrors of natural wines (mothers! hide your daughters!) follow this link to intravino. This is the speech Bettane gave warning that the danger of natural wine is nipping at the Italian toes. (Where has he been? It's been going on for a decade.)
Pauvre Michel Bettane. His very core beliefs are so shaken that he needs to witness against those terrible people who dare to make wine without or with little sulfur. A few years back at VinExpo I attended a tasting of his best wines. Nothing there was drinkable to me. I too was scratching my head about those wines. Really? Chateau Pavie? Really? That overipe crap? I don't get it. Those wines are as undrinkable to me as those with 'natural wine stink' are to him. I understand if he wants to rant about how bad they are but to witness about the dangers seems a little excessive.
I do wish though, being a man of the press, being a journalist and a public figure he could be a little more responsible. He could try to undestand. He could meet the people who work in that way. Talk to the men and women who work in a natural way, find out why they do what they do. Watch the way the wines evolve and understand them. They talk a new language. He might not get fluent in the language and he might never like them, but at least he will understand and reject them out of knowledge.
Don't worry, M. Bettane. There will be plenty of Ornellaia and the rest for you, undrinkable to me, but vive la différence: n'est ce pas?