John Wilkins at Evolving Thoughts has published his crackpot index.

Here's a sample:

24. 30 points for suggesting that a famous figure secretly disbelieved in a theory which he or she publicly supported (e.g., that Darwin recanted on his deathbed).

25. 30 points for suggesting that some major scientist, in his later years, was groping his way towards the ideas you now advocate.

26. 30 points for claiming that your theories were developed by a pre-industrial culture (without good evidence).

27. 40 points for comparing those who argue against your ideas to Nazis, eugenicists, stormtroopers, or brownshirts.

28. 40 points for claiming that the "scientific establishment" is engaged in a "conspiracy" to prevent your work from gaining its well-deserved fame, or suchlike.

29. 40 points for comparing yourself to Galileo, suggesting that a modern-day Inquisition is hard at work on your case, and so on.

30. 40 points for claiming that when your theory is finally appreciated, present-day science will be seen for the sham it truly is. (30 more points for fantasizing about show trials in which scientists who mocked your theories will be forced to recant, especially after their death, or for announcing the "death of Darwinism".)

31. 50 points for claiming you have a revolutionary theory but giving no concrete testable predictions, formal models, or exact hypotheses.

Now, I realize that I'm biased towards my own Denialism definition of using arguments of conspiracy, selectivity, fake experts, impossible expectations, and logical fallacy (usually argument from analogy/red herrings/ad hominem), but I really think lists like this, while funny, aren't that helpful.

The point of my coming up with the denialism criteria is that it's just 5 things, much easier to remember and use each time. It's like prosecuting fraud. The legal system doesn't come up with a new law to deal with every possible permutation that fraudsters might develop to take money away from people. Instead you have simple general rules that help identify dishonesty in business practices, like if you lie to sell something to someone, that's fraud. Denialism and fraud are very similar in this respect. There are infinite permutations of just being full of shit, but there are about 5 commonalities that will help you identify 95% of the BS arguments.