The First Argument, Not the Last

See the Climate Skeptic post here.

Excerpt (see the post for emphasis and links):

Here is my thought on this subject. There is nothing wrong with mentioning potential biases in your opponent as part of your argument. For example, it is OK to argue "My opponent has X and Y biases, which should make us suspicious of his study. Let's remember these as we look into the details of his argument to see his errors..." In this case, pointing to potential biases is an acceptable first argument before taking on issues with the opponent's arguments. Unfortunately, climate catastrophists use such charges as their last and only argument. The believe they can stick the "QED" in right after the mention of Exxon funding, and then not bother to actually deal with the details.