[Textbook-l] Textbooks (response to Jimbo's WikiEN-l post)

[Daniel Ehrenberg]

--- Jimmy Wales <jwales at 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