(I've omitted the lengthy quotes.)
Delirium wrote:
I don't think these read like NPOV. I'm
completely unfamiliar to the
debate, but they read to me like they were written by someone who is
trying to discredit Singer.
I agree completely. That's one of the worst examples of non-neutral
writing that I've seen on Wikipedia in a long time.
It also shouldn't be phrased as *Wikipedia* making
the claim that
Singer's objections are "beyond reasonable skepticism"--we are not
in a position to judge what skepticism is reasonable and what isn't.
If it is a widely accepted viewpoint that Singer's skepticism is
unreasonable, we should say "However, most scientists find Singer's
objections to go beyond reasonable skepticism...", preferably with a
source.
I think you said this very very well.
--Jimbo