For all the years of experience how can one ever make the statement that because an opinion it is based on science it must be correct? If one means by correct that it is a known truth, then the question is can it be considered a truth at the same time there is a possibility of it being wrong. All one needs to do is look at medicine. Remember that witchdoctor that use leeches in there effort to cure people. Science came along and it was shown the use of leeches had no ability to assist in curing persons. Now we are back to using leeches.

The accuracy of our knowledge is based on what is known at any one point in time. As time moves so does our knowledge. Sometimes in going forward we find ourselves were we started. Will what we know as a fact today become wrong tomorrow? If we look at our past one would need to agree this appears to be the direction. Will any of the old myths come back in some form with a different meaning, who is to know for sure. Maybe we need not to be so judgmental of the other person’s motive or opinion. Demeaning an individual for his or her opinion on a subject only leads to strengthening that person’s resolve to resist. Look at yourself and ask am I always completely right in my opinion or is there room for accepting some part of another’s opinion on the subject.

If we take the time to evaluate all the discussion on the standard of care for fire investigation I believe it will be found there is good information from all sides of the issue that should be considered. No one opinion should be totally accepted or discounted. Based on the comments here and the inferences made by the courts one can see this point is so important that every individual needs really conduct their own research and reach their own conclusion how these words “Standard of Care” can affect them personally for the rest of their lives. I believe this may be the best way to leave this topic.