Originally posted by cdrn
I agree fully that there are some members who know what they are saying. The problem, however, is this: how do you know how to discriminate between
useful and useless (or flat out incorrect) information if you don't know much about the material in the first place?
To put it in another way: who is more likely to believe John Lear, a planetary scientist or someone without a good science background?

I have to state beforehand that i dislike to talk about people who's not discussing in the thread, so i talk about the topic in general:
you have made an EXCELLENT point IMHO.
For example: how many people gets CRAZY after reading certain books written by pseudo-researchers? Take a look at the shape-shifting craze...
..i mean ... it started from somewhere...and of course NOT from an university
And yes, not only useless/incorrect: it could be DANGEROUS to take as truth whatever we read. And sadly, not all have the ability to distinguish what
is knowledge and what is garbage: but fortunately i've seen that here on ATS, at least frequently, when someone makes otrageous claimings, there's
always someone who points it out: asking evidences supporting his/her claimings etcetera.
This is the ideal behaviour in order to deny ignorance IMHO.
I've appreciated your last comment: a star for you.