My Photo


follow us in feedly

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Best Of KC Dog Blog

Become a Fan

« More deceit from Merritt Clifton attacking shelter pets, Information Availability - & how Time magazine got it wrong (again) | Main | The Changing Narrative of America's Dog -- Esquire Mag article on pit bulls »

July 02, 2014


Jen Brighton

That's just too much logic for the 'other' crowd to understand, Brent.


So simple but many especially in Media don`t seem to get that.
They just don`t want to admit that this issue doesn`t have 2 sides.


I loved that piece when I read it - hits the nail on the head. This refers to a legal decision but it would certainly cut down on the incoherent ramblings of believers who pretend to be experts:

Expert Opinion

In the final decisions, the PTAB took particular notice of the expert reports and testimony that were used by the opposing parties to develop their arguments. The PTAB was skeptical of statements made by experts if such statements were found to be unsupported by underlying data. This was especially true where experts “repeated, verbatim, attorney argument from the parties’ submissions” that did not identify objective supporting evidence.

The PTAB noted that expert assertions must be substantiated by evidence, explaining that even if it had no specific reason to question the soundness of an expert’s assertion, without citation of supporting evidence for an assertion, the PTAB can assign little or no weight to the expert’s opinions and testimony. As the PTAB explained, “an expert’s opinion is only as good as the facts on which it is based.”

The comments to this entry are closed.