Shocks for neuroscientists: Doubts About Quantal Analysis

My attention was drawn when I saw this title"Long-held theory is in danger of losing its nerve:
Doubts raised over influential work on neurotransmitter release." What? Doubt about quantal release?

I went to this paper directly "Doubts About Quantal Analysis". Who dare to say this? And it's only one Author called Ninio. This will definitely be an interesting discussion. It'll be more intereting if our famous and brilliant Paul Adams is here. David came to talk to me, but he stopped just when he is about to leave, because he kind of saw the title: "What? Doubts About Quantal Analysis?" He took over my mouse and read the whole article briefly. When leaving, he said: "Paul Adams will be'd like to discuss that with you very much." "Do you believe that theory?" I asked. "Oh, the quantal release is definitely correct. But ..." I forgot the words. But what he mean is that there's no doubt about the theory, but anyone can easily come up to doubt about the data.

But you know what? Paul Adams not only knew this before us, he is even involved in the discussion!

See here:
But that rebuttal is "unconvincing, though artful", claims Paul Adams, a neurobiologist at Stony Brook University in New York. "Ninio did the best he could in view of the fact that he did not have access to the original data." Adams describes the Ninio paper as "very useful", saying that published discussions of this issue have not been as sceptical as they should have been. "The 'sheep' mentality is alive and well even at the summits of neuroscience," he says.
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v449/n7159/full/449124b.html