I can't speak for sloreck obviously but I think, and this was the point I was trying to make too, that even if we can look back in retrospect and see that Sea Lion was a fool's errand, no sane leader is going to deliberately entice a foreign power to invade his country just because he's reasonably confident he can defeat them. Maybe sucker them into invading some colony somewhere, but a the home islands? This would be grossly irresponsible, and if word of the motives leaked, probably the end of the career and quite possibly the neck of any statesman.
As for a "sea Hitler," yeah, I agree, that's not on. Fallacy #1 of Sea Lion is that the Germans just change course radically and the British sit there and do nothing in response. Since Britain can build more battleships at a time than Germany and build them faster than Germany, I do not see how Germany can "win" a naval race against Britain no matter who is in charge. If your enemy is faster than you and has a head start already, it's time to pick a different race.
Edit: I'm having a hard time finding a source to support that last statement even though I'm sure it is true. Perhaps someone can tell me whether I'm right or wrong -- I'd like to know either way. However I do note that Wikipedia says only four German shipyards could build battleships, and I am pretty sure that the British built all of the KGV-class ships simultaneously, so that's at least a 5:4 ratio.