The argument of whether or not wind turbines produce ailments seems to be quite controversial in claiming who is right and wrong between Dr. David Colby and Dr. Bob McMurtry. Its hard to judge who should be named correct and accurate based on the information given, but with the support of assessing someone’s credibility, I would have to lean more towards Colby’s theory. There is sufficient reasoning behind selecting either one of these doctors, as they are in fact, both licensed doctors. However, the evidence and information that Colby has provided to the reader seems to be slightly more convincing than that of McMurtry’s.
Dr. Colby is a legitimate expert in this case. He possesses credentials which fit the description of expertise in an area. He is an associate professor as well as a medical officer which also fits the same credentials that Dr. McMurtry possesses: dean of the medical school for nine years at the University of Western. Although it may seem as if McMurtry has more expertise in a medical field because he is a dean, the fact that Colby is named a medical officer by his peers can be just as significant. Also, there is no further information as to suggest how long Colby has been a medical officer, but to name someone such a title, it is implied that they are expert, therefore their credentials even out. This is not to suggest that one of them is not an expert and one is because they are both qualified to be providing expertise. However, reading further on, Colby is backed by the Ontario College of Physicians and Surgeons, a group that holds great significance in his support.
McMurtry attempts to slander Colby’s knowledge in the particular area of study by claiming that his credentials do not suggest he is an expert in such a specific topic. McMurtry says that Colby’s medical study relies heavily on infectious diseases and science. McMurtry’s field of expertise is never called into question. The reader still relies on McMurtry’s...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document