Real issues with information sources, probable hyperbole

Post Reply New Topic

I don't know if we can come to any agreement about what constitutes a good source of news or information. Maybe we can go on the record with what sources we will accept as accurate, anyway.

Bickering back and forth about it derails so many threads that I've started to stick to big news stories whenever possible and let people find a source that they will trust.

Scientific research has problems, and science news reporting has even more problems, but they tend to be the same problems over and over. If you expect them, and look out for them, you can get rid of the fluff and evaluate the legitimate conclusions. Some of these problems result from taking a "survival of the fittest" attitude toward funding research, and the fact that most scientists are human beings (probable hyperbole).

What sources will you accept when they disagree with your deeply held falsifiable beliefs?

The fact that MSM has issues doesn't necessarily indicate a conspiracy. I'm watching KTLA, and they just put up the wrong Twitter handles for their morning hosts. This type of mistake happens when people think something will be easy and fail to instruct a subordinate, or else the subordinate is incompetent and their work doesn't get checked. I can see it now, they typed the names into Twitter and picked the wrong handles. Obviously, they didn't even click on the profiles.

Also, prominent notice of a possible coming retraction on Democracy Now! this morning. An imam has stated that the grandmother died in Iraq 5 days before the travel ban went into effect. They are investigating.