When people write articles containing wrong statements and statements without evidence or source, you can use your knowledge of the wrong statements to update the probability that the statements without evidence or source are true.
Kind of the reverse of Gell-Mann Amnesia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Crichton#GellMannAmnesiaEffect). Arguably, it should be applied to editorial units (sites, publications, etc.), not just to individual authors.
Yes. I hope certain forums and sites I regularly read don’t continue developing into a direction of not demanding evidence and sources for claims.
By the way, there is also the danger that someone at some point just exploits his/her own reputation to push an agenda.
When people write articles containing wrong statements and statements without evidence or source, you can use your knowledge of the wrong statements to update the probability that the statements without evidence or source are true.
Kind of the reverse of Gell-Mann Amnesia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Crichton#GellMannAmnesiaEffect). Arguably, it should be applied to editorial units (sites, publications, etc.), not just to individual authors.
Yes. I hope certain forums and sites I regularly read don’t continue developing into a direction of not demanding evidence and sources for claims.
By the way, there is also the danger that someone at some point just exploits his/her own reputation to push an agenda.