| View previous topic | View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
D B Sweeney
Joined: 27 Aug 2010
Posts: 2842
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland
|
 Posted: Tue Mar 22, 2011 2:59 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| flossy wrote: | is wikipedia a reliable sorce to get imformation
im just woundering because it looks like you can edit whats there and if thats the case isnt it a little like youtube
you could put anything up there and say it was fact  |
In general it's fairly accurate on basic stuff. They do have checks and balances in place so that people can't go in and post any old rubbish - unlike YouTube 
It's fairly well policed.
DB |
|
|
... |
|
 Back to top |
D B Sweeney
Joined: 27 Aug 2010
Posts: 2842
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 22, 2011 3:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
Cactus, I'm very close to ignoring all your posts now, particularly now that your frustration has manifested in personal attacks, insults and you not fully understanding the nature of logic and the burden of proof in relation to your YouTube video links and faith in anecdotal evidence.
You're making the claim that this case is unexplained not me therefore I don't have to prove anything - BECAUSE I DIDN'T MAKE THE CLAIM.
DB |
|
|
... |
|
| Back to top |
thecactus
Joined: 07 Mar 2011
Posts: 3196
Location: Northern Ireland
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 22, 2011 3:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
yeah like the other day i looked at princess dianas page and it said she now lives in antarctica with a 7ft black man and is considering joining the royal marines in the future  |
|
|
... |
|
| Back to top |
flossy
Moderator
Joined: 17 Oct 2006
Posts: 4921
Location: UK tyne/wear (geordie land)
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 22, 2011 3:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
| D B Sweeney wrote: | | flossy wrote: | is wikipedia a reliable sorce to get imformation
im just woundering because it looks like you can edit whats there and if thats the case isnt it a little like youtube
you could put anything up there and say it was fact |
In general it's fairly accurate on basic stuff. They do have checks and balances in place so that people can't go in and post any old rubbish - unlike YouTube
It's fairly well policed.
DB |
so everything that goes up there is checked and researched, but who is to say the research they do is fact
you could have the same arguement with anything that gives information |
|
|
... |
|
| Back to top |
thecactus
Joined: 07 Mar 2011
Posts: 3196
Location: Northern Ireland
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 22, 2011 3:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
Cactus, I'm very close to ignoring all your posts now
|
dont worry ill not lose any sleep over it |
|
|
... |
|
| Back to top |
D B Sweeney
Joined: 27 Aug 2010
Posts: 2842
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 22, 2011 3:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
so everything that goes up there is checked and researched, but who is to say the research they do is fact
you could have the same arguement with anything that gives information
The more obscure the subject - the more likely that it's not going to be checked properly due - so, yes, some of the facts will be debatable.
However when posting general links such as 'the burden of proof' it's pretty much text book and accurate. I tend to keep my Wiki links to the general facts.
DB |
|
|
... |
|
| Back to top |
thecactus
Joined: 07 Mar 2011
Posts: 3196
Location: Northern Ireland
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 22, 2011 3:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
so everything that goes up there is checked and researched, but who is to say the research they do is fact
you could have the same arguement with anything that gives information
|
i agree
its well known that world renowned scientists from leading universities such as oxford, cambridge and harvard are paid massive amounts to make conclusions on 'products' so they can be produced
such as mobile phones dont cause brain tumors - they claim there is no'evidence' to support these claims, despite others claiming there is mountains
cigarettes were 'proven' not to be hazardous to health in any way
etc... |
|
|
... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Worldofghosts 24 hour chat room
