"It has always been the Australian Skeptics’ position that people should make up their minds based on the evidence. This position becomes even more important when what should be a completely scientific issue is used by politically-motivated groups to further their causes, often in the face of contradictory evidence. People who are not experts in fields related to climate science should seek the best available evidence, as judged by those who are experts in relevant fields."
That is what they say. Yet, if you look at their position on homeopathy, they don't look at any evidence. It is based purely on the opinions of the NHMRC, who are not experts in the field of homeopathy, and who are a politically motivated group. Why, as ordained in the last sentence of the quote, do they not seek the best available evidence from expert homeopaths?
