As you are neither a scientist nor a lawyer, your analysis must be taken in context of your education and experience.
Besides atacking his experience, why don't we attack his arguement? After all, with his lack of skooling all his arguements must be easily brushed aside, right?
By your logic, because I'm a sophmore Environmental Studies major, I can't argue with "Dr." Dino. I have arguements that are more than valid with him. Most of which are carefully researched by people much smarter than I am.
™ Version 4.2
