Talk:Science journalism
Our encyclopedia covers science better than Wikipedia in some ways. We have - or have begun - articles on:
We have a much better article on
Wikipedia's article series on the history of science was found to have numerous exaggerations of the role of Islamic scientists during Europe's dark ages and renaissance - no confession of error, just quietly cleaned up.
The problem with Wikipedia is that it has never made getting at the truth a priority. Its stated aim of neutrality, rather than helping readers to find the truth for themselves, has been corrupted with dismaying ease by POV-pushers. And of course, the most effective way to hide one's own crime is to blame someone else.
Eventually, the world will see through this deception, as more Climategate-type scandals come to light. --Ed Poor Talk 07:46, 31 January 2010 (EST)