Difference between revisions of "Talk:Montreal Protocol"
m (→Replacing a sourced claim with an unsourced one?: Argh, not a typo, just had been an odd linebreak in my browser. Rephrasing a bit so that the "y" isn't the last word of the quote) |
(Yes, I know quite a bit about it) |
||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
I'm sorry if I'm trampling on conservative truisms here, but could I pretty please have a source there so we can see who claims what? Or a link to an article that explains it? Right now, it looks like pure opinion, sorry. | I'm sorry if I'm trampling on conservative truisms here, but could I pretty please have a source there so we can see who claims what? Or a link to an article that explains it? Right now, it looks like pure opinion, sorry. | ||
| − | This isn't just about this article (and I have nothing against Ed, it just happened to be this article that made me post this), but I think I fairly often saw "Liberals claim that x, but in reality, we all know that | + | This isn't just about this article (and I have nothing against Ed, it just happened to be this article that made me post this), but I think I fairly often saw "Liberals claim that x, but in reality, we all know that ''truth-because-it's-not-liberal'' statements here on CP. It's just now that I notice the pattern (although I'm sure it's not a deliberate act, just conservatives forgetting to mention sources for something they learned long ago and now take for granted). |
Any opinions? Am I just seeing things? --[[User:Jenkins|Jenkins]] 19:43, 25 September 2007 (EDT) | Any opinions? Am I just seeing things? --[[User:Jenkins|Jenkins]] 19:43, 25 September 2007 (EDT) | ||
| Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
::Well, global warming is way out of my league right now, and time is not on my side these days (at least not in large chunks). So I limit myself to drive-by observing and filling in the occasional Most Wanted page until I get a proper window to edit in. If the article stays this way until I do, I'll try to look into it (I like to learn new things), but I assume you have a head-start in terms of knowledge, especially when it comes to sorting out who made what claim. :) --[[User:Jenkins|Jenkins]] 20:16, 25 September 2007 (EDT) | ::Well, global warming is way out of my league right now, and time is not on my side these days (at least not in large chunks). So I limit myself to drive-by observing and filling in the occasional Most Wanted page until I get a proper window to edit in. If the article stays this way until I do, I'll try to look into it (I like to learn new things), but I assume you have a head-start in terms of knowledge, especially when it comes to sorting out who made what claim. :) --[[User:Jenkins|Jenkins]] 20:16, 25 September 2007 (EDT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | :(bows modestly) I am the Internet encyclopedia community's leading expert on environmentalist junk science. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] <sup>[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]</sup> 20:19, 25 September 2007 (EDT) | ||
Revision as of 00:19, September 26, 2007
Replacing a sourced claim with an unsourced one?
I cringe at the removal of the "protection" bit (it's right there in the source - if you don't like what it says, don't use it) and the immediate insertion of the "scientifically unsound" bit without ANY source. This isn't driven by ideology, but rather by my natural curiosity. I sit here, going all "Why? Who? How? When?"
I'm sorry if I'm trampling on conservative truisms here, but could I pretty please have a source there so we can see who claims what? Or a link to an article that explains it? Right now, it looks like pure opinion, sorry.
This isn't just about this article (and I have nothing against Ed, it just happened to be this article that made me post this), but I think I fairly often saw "Liberals claim that x, but in reality, we all know that truth-because-it's-not-liberal statements here on CP. It's just now that I notice the pattern (although I'm sure it's not a deliberate act, just conservatives forgetting to mention sources for something they learned long ago and now take for granted).
Any opinions? Am I just seeing things? --Jenkins 19:43, 25 September 2007 (EDT)
- Your observations are helpful. I need to flesh out my contention that this protocol is junk science. You can help me google Fred Singer and other scientists who disagree with the politicized, biased, liberal & environmentalist view.
- Well, global warming is way out of my league right now, and time is not on my side these days (at least not in large chunks). So I limit myself to drive-by observing and filling in the occasional Most Wanted page until I get a proper window to edit in. If the article stays this way until I do, I'll try to look into it (I like to learn new things), but I assume you have a head-start in terms of knowledge, especially when it comes to sorting out who made what claim. :) --Jenkins 20:16, 25 September 2007 (EDT)