[skphc08]

The naysayers, especially Archie Teck, rely almost exclusively on speculation and take a worst-case scenario approach.

Most of the details of the domed stadium, such as how it will be heated or cooled, are not available yet. How can you criticize unreleased details?

More importantly, how can anyone criticize the studying of an issue that has caught provincial and national attention? Some people criticize the cost of the study (0.28% of the potential estimated cost of the full realization of a domed facility) and others criticize the objectivity of the researchers. They have not even released any data or reports. The distinct possibility exists that they will conclude that the domed facility is not the best option from a feasibility standpoint.

How can you evaluate the objectivity of researchers when they have barely commenced their study?

So much pre-emptive nonsense from so many narrow-minded individuals.