Does "that" refer to "scientific merit"?

Quote:

And where the negative impact derives from criticisms of questionable scientific merit, that can only be considered good science — and common sense.

I think "that" here should refers to "where the negative impact derives from criticisms of questionable scientific merit."

That is: "that" here serves as the equivalent of "which."

4 (plural that) [relative pronoun] used to introduce a defining or restrictive clause, especially one essential to identification.

instead of “which,” “who,” or “whom”:
the book that I’ve just written

instead of “when” after an expression of time:
the year that Anna was born

2 referring to a specific thing previously mentioned, known, or understood:

that’s a good idea

what are we going to do about that?

Well, it seems that the "that" refers to "the European biotech industry’s handling."

And where the negative impact derives from criticisms of questionable scientific merit, that can only be considered good science — and common sense.

oristarA wrote:

Quote:

And where the negative impact derives from criticisms of questionable scientific merit, that can only be considered good science — and common sense.

I think "that" here should refers to "where the negative impact derives from criticisms of questionable scientific merit."

I agree.

oristarA wrote:

That is: "that" here serves as the equivalent of "which."

It doesn't sound right:

"And where the negative impact derives from criticisms of questionable scientific merit, which can only be considered good science — and common sense."


However, if you swap "it" for "that", the sentence will still make sense.

"And where the negative impact derives from criticisms of questionable scientific merit, it can only be considered good science — and common sense."



Using "that" as a substitute for "which" would be "definition 4" in the pronoun section here:

http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/american_english/that

Quote:

4 (plural that) [relative pronoun] used to introduce a defining or restrictive clause, especially one essential to identification.

instead of “which,” “who,” or “whom”:
the book that I’ve just written

instead of “when” after an expression of time:
the year that Anna was born

However, I think they are using "definition 2" in the pronoun section.

Quote:

2 referring to a specific thing previously mentioned, known, or understood:

that’s a good idea

what are we going to do about that?

Well, it seems that the "that" refers to "the European biotech industry’s handling."

But what is the grammatical role of the clause "where"?

Have you guys been all out for holiday?

And where the negative impact derives from criticisms of questionable scientific merit, that can only be considered good science — and common sense.

But I've changed the idea:

oristarA wrote:

Well, it seems that the "that" refers to "the European biotech industry’s handling."

Is English your native language, Oralloy?

Quote:

And where the negative impact derives from criticisms of questionable scientific merit, that can only be considered good science — and common sense.

And when these negative impacts are actually criticisms of questionable scientific merit, then they can and should be seen not as negatives but as those very things that make for good science; this is only common sense.

oristarA wrote:

Have you guys been all out for holiday?

In the western hemisphere, we were likely sleeping.

Quote:

And where the negative impact derives from criticisms of questionable scientific merit, that can only be considered good science — and common sense.

I think this is a very confusing sentence. My first response was to link "of questionable scientific merit" to "criticisms" so I was wondering if the criticism was so questionable why is the negative impact considered good? From context, it seems the author is saying "criticism of bad science is a normal part of the process." That makes more sense.

oristarA wrote:

But I've changed the idea:

oristarA wrote:

Well, it seems that the "that" refers to "the European biotech industry’s handling."

I can see how that construction can work logically. But my instincts say the first version is the way it is intended.

If they used "that" to refer to something in a previous sentence, when there is also something in the current sentence it could be referring to, their writing would be confusing and likely to be misunderstood, as most people would take it to refer to what was in the current sentence.

oristarA wrote:

Is English your native language, Oralloy?

Yes, but I do not have any special expertise, like a college degree in English. I'm not a qualified English teacher or anything like that.