As a more coherent and less philosophical argument:
Not all disagreements are created equal. Someone who admits having failed a maths GCSE (which when I did it did not contain ANY statistics - it may have done before 2005) questioning an absolutely fundamental principle of modern science is not quite the same as a nobel laureate questioning the priciples of homeopathy, for example.
( MatJ LOOK, Mon 26 Sep 2011, 1:34, 1 reply)

Technically
and 'E' is a pass mark. Your post sounds somewhat like an ad hominem attack, if I may say so, which weakens any argument you may put forward.
(dchurch bah, Mon 26 Sep 2011, 19:36, closed)

It's not ad hominem if it's relevant to the issue
If I'd claimed you were too short to talk about maths, that would be ad hominem. Stating that the issue involved is one you come to realise and understand more easily if you've studied maths to a fairly high level, then pointing out that you have not, is an entirely relevant point (in the same way that I could not advise you on how to change the flow of a computer program).

I'm not claiming that you don't have a right to talk about mathematics in general (that WOULD be ad hominem) but that this is a very specific point therein.

Although it strikes me that this entire argument is somewhat pointless...
( MatJ LOOK, Tue 27 Sep 2011, 16:16, closed)