> What will decide my stance is good, solid, open, scientific results, based on sound input, conducted by a neutral party, with sufficient data to draw conclusi

> What will decide my stance is good, solid, open, scientific results, based on sound input, conducted by a neutral party, with sufficient data to draw conclusions, and done in a manner that any interested party can reproduce the results from their own, independently collected data. If only one dataset is available, then the data collection itself must be open and scrutinized. Ans since when those points are not met? What is a neutral party for you? Why do you thinkg that data is not open and cannot be scrutinized > There's too much 'religion' surrounding the issue to trust anyone not to manipulate anything(not necessarily intentionally). Any example of this manipulation?