> But I don't know whether he has the level of expertise (or general
> scientific knowledge, which can be considered expertise) that's
> required to find and understand as being relevant what you can find
> in 10 minutes

I think we'll have to agree to disagree about that particular page. It
says to me "Fireworks are pointless pollutants, ban them all now".
Yes, it's his opinion, but it's not a balanced page. If I were to take
the trouble (which I won't), I daresay I could produce either a
completely opposite argument or a point-by-point pros and cons

People (New Agers specifically) I've run into in the last couple of
weeks have obviously made me biased against what are loosely
termed "crackpots". As I've tried to explain to one lady, who has
the "Science is bad" attitude, lobbyists for any cause use selected
information to promote their own agendas. In many cases you can
follow the money to see what they're really hoping to achieve (eg
selling crystals, crop circle calendars, all those "wonderful cancer-
curing gizmos, Browns Gas generators etc)

I just get annoyed by hypocrites and quacks. Thankfully the PIClist
is a fairly balanced group. Maybe we balance each other ? I know
my deductive and investigative powers and patience have been
improved no end by being here

-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist