G'day dehammer,
Any argument that becomes so circular that it disappears up itself probably isn't worth continuing. Logic has little to do with it in the end.
Apparently a graduate student has access to publications just so they can shoot down their professors and this is a normal part of science. When it gets to this extreme in the argument you know you have lost, not because you are wrong but because it matters not what the argument is, how absurd it gets, there will be a counter to it. It will not include any real science, of course, just protests that to the other extreme, such as any organisation that does not agree with the stated position is not worthy of consideration, that only peer reviewed published research has any value, unless of course there is none in support of a particular position, then the argument is simply ignored.
With global warming, the whole basis comes down to data sets that my views on its validity is rather well known on this forum. Yet this is the one topic that actually never gets addressed, because there isn't even news arcticles to use to counter the arguments and even pro global warming research using mentions serious problems with the data, before it suggests the author's brilliant methods of data manipulation that have somehow fixed the problem or brought it down to some fictitious margin, usually expressed to a ridiculously small number such as 0.03405%.
Face it, this argument has long been lost. You cannot win an argument or even have an debate that is of value where those that oppose your position play be a completely different set of rules.
Regards
Richard
