"Evaluating Internet Resources"
"I keep six honest serving men
(They taught me all I knew);
Their names are What and Why and When
And How and Where and Who." Rudyard Kipling
So often when I come back to USMB or other politics sites, I get the sense that there is nothing new under the sun. The same certainties are repeated with the same certainty. Global warming is just a myth made up by the lefties - does anyone ever ask why the lefties made this up and from where? Or someone out there is going to sabotage us or kill us and we better get to them first. This fear of the other is probably embedded deep in our primitive brain section and may never leave - watch a baby around a stranger.
The person who knows GW is a myth usually knows as much about climate as they do about particle physics and yet they are certain it is a myth. Why is that? The person who sees threat and conspiracy everywhere needs no explanation nor questions contrary information because soon the contrary information becomes part of the conspiracy. Why is that?
Often I try to cite a source or an article that in some fashion contributes to my point or at least discusses the issue in a slightly varied form. It is doubtful anyone reads these links as they already know everything there is to know, and when you cite other sources the criticism is you are not an independent thinker. It is as if thought came to us in magnetic waves in which we selected the most relevant ones. Gotta wonder the source of those waves!
Anyway, this piece is interesting and worth a read.
"Evaluating Internet Resources" By Rajesh Singh, Library Professional
'Indicators of Scholarship'
1. Describes limits of research or data.
2. Presents accurate description of alternate viewpoints.
3. Encourages debate, discussion, and criticism.
4. Settles disputes by use of generally accepted criteria for evaluating data.
5. Looks for counter-examples.
6. Updates information.
7. Admits own ignorance.
8. Relies on critical thinking skills.
'Indicators of Propaganda'
1. Excessive claims of certainty, i.e. one "right" way of thinking.
2. Relies on personal attacks and ridicule.
3. Emotional appeals. Use of inflammatory language.
4. Suppresses contradictory views.
5. Appeals to popular prejudices.
6. Devalues critical appraisal.
7. Transforms words and statistics to suit purpose.
8. Presents information and views out of context."
Evaluating Internet Resources - a knol by Rajesh Singh
Other relevant sites.
Alerting Services on Bad Information
Quackwatch
Hoax Busters - the BIG LIST of Internet Hoaxes
"It is in the admission of ignorance and the admission of uncertainty that there is a hope for the continuous motion of human beings in some direction that doesn't get confined, permanently blocked, as it has so many times before in various periods in the history of man." Richard Feynman
"I don't know what's the matter with people: they don't learn by understanding; they learn by some other way -- by rote, or something. Their knowledge is so fragile!" Richard Feynman
"I keep six honest serving men
(They taught me all I knew);
Their names are What and Why and When
And How and Where and Who." Rudyard Kipling
So often when I come back to USMB or other politics sites, I get the sense that there is nothing new under the sun. The same certainties are repeated with the same certainty. Global warming is just a myth made up by the lefties - does anyone ever ask why the lefties made this up and from where? Or someone out there is going to sabotage us or kill us and we better get to them first. This fear of the other is probably embedded deep in our primitive brain section and may never leave - watch a baby around a stranger.
The person who knows GW is a myth usually knows as much about climate as they do about particle physics and yet they are certain it is a myth. Why is that? The person who sees threat and conspiracy everywhere needs no explanation nor questions contrary information because soon the contrary information becomes part of the conspiracy. Why is that?
Often I try to cite a source or an article that in some fashion contributes to my point or at least discusses the issue in a slightly varied form. It is doubtful anyone reads these links as they already know everything there is to know, and when you cite other sources the criticism is you are not an independent thinker. It is as if thought came to us in magnetic waves in which we selected the most relevant ones. Gotta wonder the source of those waves!
Anyway, this piece is interesting and worth a read.
"Evaluating Internet Resources" By Rajesh Singh, Library Professional
'Indicators of Scholarship'
1. Describes limits of research or data.
2. Presents accurate description of alternate viewpoints.
3. Encourages debate, discussion, and criticism.
4. Settles disputes by use of generally accepted criteria for evaluating data.
5. Looks for counter-examples.
6. Updates information.
7. Admits own ignorance.
8. Relies on critical thinking skills.
'Indicators of Propaganda'
1. Excessive claims of certainty, i.e. one "right" way of thinking.
2. Relies on personal attacks and ridicule.
3. Emotional appeals. Use of inflammatory language.
4. Suppresses contradictory views.
5. Appeals to popular prejudices.
6. Devalues critical appraisal.
7. Transforms words and statistics to suit purpose.
8. Presents information and views out of context."
Evaluating Internet Resources - a knol by Rajesh Singh
Other relevant sites.
Alerting Services on Bad Information
Quackwatch
Hoax Busters - the BIG LIST of Internet Hoaxes
"It is in the admission of ignorance and the admission of uncertainty that there is a hope for the continuous motion of human beings in some direction that doesn't get confined, permanently blocked, as it has so many times before in various periods in the history of man." Richard Feynman
"I don't know what's the matter with people: they don't learn by understanding; they learn by some other way -- by rote, or something. Their knowledge is so fragile!" Richard Feynman
