--- Jimmy Wales <jwales(a)bomis.com> wrote:
Daniel Mayer wrote:
When there is no real controversy on a topic (in
a
global sense)
then facts can be presented as facts.
That's right. And a lot of science at the level of
details does fall
into the category. For example, reasonable
creationists don't claim
that scientists are just *lying* about finding
fossils, about genetic
variation, and so on. All the basic evidence is
uncontroversial, at
least generally speaking, although of course there
are challenges to
specific details here and there.
--Jimbo
Even so, we'd need to report on the 'unreasonable'
creationists, which imho make up the vast majority.
And facts can be contravercial too. UFO sightings are
called 'facts', but they are, of course, disputed.
They are considered evidence for sentient life on
other planets, but the mainstream considers it false
evidence and therefore defenately a false conclusion.
It would be taking a POV to say, conclusively, that
the evidence is true while it is actually disputed. It
makes much more sense to just admit it's DPOV, and
leave out all of the extraneous arguments.
-LDan
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
http://sbc.yahoo.com