Quote:
Some questions anyone reading this article should ask are, who are these people mentioned in the article? What are their qualifications, and what is their agenda? What do we know about their accuracy, integrity and professionalism? How did they obtain their data, and how did they arrive at their conclusions? Did they do independent research, or just quote someone else? Were their conclusions independently verified? Has anyone duplicated their efforts and arrived at the same conclusions? What information can be gathered from those who disagree with these theories? Or, should we blindly and stupidly assume that everyone who disagrees with these theories is wrong?



These are certainly the important questions to ask when evaluating any information. I think that in the case of the information presented in the articles it is pretty evident that many of these questions can be summarily answered by saying that they are respected academics who have spent years studying and are attempting to come to an objective answer to a puzzle that they have studied.

If you have evidence that contradicts that statement please present it. If there is some underlying motivation that you can document that casts doubt on their integrity or skills please enlighten us so that we may be as wise as you in our evaluation of their prognostications.

[RANT ON]
If your claim that they are misleading us is based on the authority of your own study, skills and knowledge then please answer all of the above questions for us so that we may evaluate your prognostications adequately and wisely. I have heard from more than one source, funded by differing and competing sources, come to similar conclusions, we are indeed depleting our natural resources. Everything from fish to oil to breathable air. There seems to be great debate as to how fast and how bad it is but you are the only one I have heard to claim that "It just ain't so!". Please tell me how you know and what your level of study and skills are so that I may judge for myself whether you know what you are talking about and whether you have an underlying motivation that casts aspersions on the integrity of your findings.

[RANT OFF]