You are incorrect. Let's take the fracking case for example.
Judge A is a geologist.
Judge B is a lawyer.
I am not talking about an oilfield worker but someone educated in the field. Without at least some significant knowledge on the subject it becomes nothing more than who is the better speaker.
Think of all the idiots on slashdot that will still repeat the BS that low level EM causes health issues or that the many supposed causes of autism.
Or lets take the more cynical view. A Judge that didn't understand geology might just be less accepting of positive data and and will want to take the route of "better safe than sorry". Of course that is also the cause of so many other rulings involving science and technology that drives people on Slashdot crazy. Like "People use proxies for kiddie porn" which is true but they use it for other reasons as well but we should ban them just to be sure. Or Torrents are used for piracy.....
Bet you want a judge that might have actually used torrents to download an ISO then don't you?