Butcherboy - I, too, am glad that Struggler posted that link. It confirms that Jo Nova's partner is a Ph.D, having 6 post-graduate degrees to his name, and importantly, was for years Lead programmer and modeller for the Dept. of Climate Change.
Hardly a fringe dweller or wannabe. But that doesn't explain why I don't accept the "experts".
To illustrate with one example: You, me, and most others on Hot Copper will at times have become recipients of "expert" reports when the company in which we hold shares is under a takeover bid, merger, scheme of arrangement etc.
I would estimate that over my 30-year investing career, 2/3rds of the reports I have received are the investment equivalent of a wheelbarrow full of horse manure, the stink from which would curl a thinking person's eyelashes.
It's not that the "experts" are ignorant or incompetent, and they don't lie by commission. What they do is prepare their report in a way - sometimes borderline legally - that satisfies the agenda of the entity or persons who are paying them. I could roll-off half a dozen names since the GFC which have participated in sophistry, misleading of shareholders, deliberate omissions, and valuations derived by tweaking certain parameters unrealistically in order to support "their" fair valuation.
What I DO accept, however, is information - no matter from what source - that is factual, and which can be evaluated against reality. Given that, after 23 years of observations, even the lowest of the projections from the whole host of "experts" has yet to equate to field measurements (i.e. the facts), the only rational course to take is to remain open-minded and sceptical.
