The author suggests that bioleaching is a viable means of conducting precious-metals extraction that is effective and more environmentally friendly than traditional industrial processes used for that purpose.
4. Does this evidence provide adequate justification for the position? (Is it credible?)
In general, the evidence provided by the author does justify the position. While it is difficult to determine how credible that information is without references to external data for confirmation, if one presumes only that the objective information presented is factually accurate and true, it does seem to justify the author's position. Additional sources of precious metals would extend the life of natural resources, reduce the production...
Is it worthy of your belief? (Did the author convince you?)
Based only on the objective information provided by the author, the argument in favor of increasing the use of bioleaching is convincing. Beyond relying on the information in the article, I would want to know what (if any) are the risks and potential problems associated with bioleaching to conduct a risk-to-benefit analysis by weighing those concerns against the comparable risks and potential problems identified by the author in connection with traditional precious-metals extraction techniques.
