The point of science is to argue against itself before concluding it's results, that's how the scientific method works. Meaning the results were already challenged by the scientists themselves.

You can still challenge Obama's opinion though, it's just not a logical fallacy, it's a disagreement.

The point of science is to argue against itself before concluding it's results, that's how the scientific method works. Meaning the results were already challenged by the scientists themselves.

You can still challenge Obama's opinion though, it's just not a logical fallacy, it's a disagreement.

The point of science is to argue against itself before concluding it's results, that's how the scientific method works. Meaning the results were already challenged by the scientists themselves.

You can still challenge Obama's opinion though, it's just not an example of a logical fallacy. It's an example of a disagreement.

The point of science is to argue against itself before concluding it's results, that's how the scientific method works. Meaning the results were already challenged by the scientists themselves.

Unless your reasoning is about challenging Obama's opinion, which is valid.