Originally posted by Halitose
Uh huh. Still doesn't prove anything. Without any substance this line of reasoning it's merely argumentum ad populum. I question your [b]most it[sic] not all scientists statement; do you have a conclusive statistical analysis for me to peruse?[/b]
Hal, allow me to correct you on this. Trevor33's point was not
argumentum ad populum. Argumentum ad populum is when you appeal to the majority opinion of a general population. It basically assumes that the majority of people in general probably know than your opponent and so their opinioin should be taken as more correct.
Citing the majority opinion of experts in a field is NOT ad populum fallacy. In this case it is the overwhelming majority opinion of natural scientists.
This site goes over
argumentum ad populum.
http://philosophy.lander.edu/logic/popular.html
Pay careful attention to the section V at the bottom. This example is quite illuminating.
"If an elite group of people are in a position to know of what they speak, their authority is relevant and should not automatically be discounted. E.g., to remark that most physicians believe that a high fat diet is unhealthy, so that it follows that persons who have a high fat diet should change their eating habits, is to make a legitimate appeal"