On 12/12/05, Chris Jenkinson <chris(a)starglade.org> wrote:
Could you give an example of a "scientific point
of view" which is not
neutral point of view?
Pseudoscience is not a POV pejorative term, as pseudoscience has little
or no actual basis in reality. The fact that pseudoscience is 'wrong' is
not a POV opinion, as it is true. Scientific observations have
demonstrated the vast majority of pseudoscientific babble to be exactly
that - babble.
Wikipedia should accurately reflect truth - if people say something
wrong, it is not POV for us to point out that it is wrong, and to show
why it is wrong.
Pseudoscientific ideas deserve a page (for historical value), but they
don't deserve a voice in what is said in it, and the fact it's all wrong
should be made crystal clear.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Scientific_point_of_view
--
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Flockmeal