well, i guess it's not that simple. my reasoning was that if a scientist is saying we can dump as many CFCs into the air as we like, and no harm will come of it, but another scientist says it would cause harm, then the former scientist has to be able to prove his statement.
but after thinking about it, i'd say both sides need to offer evidence to support their theories. i'm just being partial to the environmentalists because we've only got one planet.
