The author of this article raises a great question with their first sentence: "Does a personal perspective devoid of scientific foundation carry much weight in court?" It's a valid question. Why is the court allowing testimony that is purely anecdotal from a witness that, by his own admission, does not have a background in science. While this witness does have a long history in the area, how much weight should his testimony carry? What exactly is his expertise and how should it be accounted for. Will the court allow the Sierra Club, or the Center for Biological Diversity, to testify? If the court does, will their testimony be given equal weight?