I don't venture into ATM--or, come to that, mainstream science--discussions much, simply because I don't have the requisite grounding in science to even understand most of the debate, much less make an objective decision about who's right. However, even I have been in the position of explaining mainstream science to people. What I believe in mainstreamers providing evidence is simple.

If a high school textbook on the subject, any high school textbook, would provide the answer, saying so is acceptable. You don't need to provide a link to a high school textbook. Likewise college. Such basic information should be understood before a mainstream argument is challenged; if you don't, what business do you have thinking you understand the theory enough to challenge it?

In fact, come to that, I can name several discussions where even a high school-level understanding of the science at hand isn't really necessary, because I learned things in elementary school that certain people don't seem to have. (Note: this is not aimed at anyone in this discussion, and is in fact largely referring to people who aren't here anymore.)

__________________
Gillian

"Now everyone was giving her that kind of look UFOlogists get when they suddenly say, 'Hey, if you shade your eyes you can see it is just a flock of geese after all.'"

"You can't erase icing."

"I can't believe it doesn't work! I found it on the internet, man!"