Mark Richards wrote:
This becomes more and more difficult in
controversial subjects, like
water floridization (sp?) for example, or ESP.
Who
are the 'experts'
on the subject?
I don't really see what the difficulty is. I'm not
trying to be dense
here, but to me this is quite simple.
Our current article on Extra-Sensory Perception, for
example, is quite
bad. And the reason is precisely the lack of
_credible_ sources.
These exist, but the current article appears to be
written by people
who would prefer for these not to be named.
--Jimbo
I think we may be at cross purposes. I think the
difficulty is in identifying who the credible sources
are, and with whom they are credible when you are
dealing with things that some people think are
pseudoscience and others think are suppressed truth.
The only way to go I suppose is the 'he said / she
said' model of article like 'Moon hoax'.
Mark
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around