Quote:
Originally Posted by ERCougar
Regarding Stott, even if he has never published in this field, he makes some very good points and raises some very good questions. To point out that he hasn't published in the area seems a fairly weak response--why not just answer his points?
From my view, this is the mistake the anti-resolution folks made in the debate--they continued to ignore the arguments made, repeating the idea that the consensus of scientist agree with global warming. As one of the speakers put it, relying on "consensus" is the sign of a weak argument.
|
I wouldn't too much weight into one debate.
Actually, concensus among the top scientists in a given field is a sign of strength, not weakness. It's not a guarantee, but it indicates a preponderance of evidence.