(I've omitted the lengthy quotes.)
Delirium wrote:
I don't think these read like NPOV. I'm completely unfamiliar to the debate, but they read to me like they were written by someone who is trying to discredit Singer.
I agree completely. That's one of the worst examples of non-neutral writing that I've seen on Wikipedia in a long time.
It also shouldn't be phrased as *Wikipedia* making the claim that Singer's objections are "beyond reasonable skepticism"--we are not in a position to judge what skepticism is reasonable and what isn't. If it is a widely accepted viewpoint that Singer's skepticism is unreasonable, we should say "However, most scientists find Singer's objections to go beyond reasonable skepticism...", preferably with a source.
I think you said this very very well.
--Jimbo