Content deleted Content added
The adverb "falsely" is biased language. |
|||
Line 84:
:I agree. There is no mention in [[David Icke]]'s article that his claim the world is run by shape-shifting lizard people is false. This article is no different. When you say an obviously false claim is false you ironically give it more credibility. [[User:The Four Deuces|TFD]] ([[User talk:The Four Deuces|talk]]) 05:36, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
::Icke is different because very few people would even consider his ideas to be true. For climate change, that is not the case: the disinformation campaign of people like Moore has been successful. The IP who started this thread obviously agrees with Moore's false claim and thinks that removing the "false" would be desireable because it would give his claims more credibility. Indeed, the word "false" makes it more clear that it is false. You say the opposite, so you actually do not "agree". --[[User:Hob Gadling|Hob Gadling]] ([[User talk:Hob Gadling|talk]]) 06:05, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
:::Reasonably informed rational people do not doubt the reality of climate change. OTOH they don't appreciate being lectured to and told what to believe. While the polemical style is unlikely to make them doubt the reality of global warming, it will make them doubt the veracity of claims made about Moore, sensing that the authors have a clear bias against him.
:::The relevant policy is [[Wikipedia:TONE]]: "BLPs should be written responsibly, cautiously, and in a dispassionate tone, avoiding both understatement and overstatement. Articles should document in a non-partisan manner what reliable [[Wikipedia:No original research#Primary, secondary and tertiary sources|secondary sources]] have published." I don't think that most reputable sources would use the current phrasing. [[User:The Four Deuces|TFD]] ([[User talk:The Four Deuces|talk]]) 15:00, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
:That wording was mentioned in an earlier [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Patrick_Moore_(consultant)#The_statement_that_increased_CO2_is_beneficial thread] but was not the main subject. It's worse than that. The cite is of [https://climatefeedback.org/claimreview/scientific-studies-established-clear-links-between-human-caused-increased-in-atmospheric-co2-and-global-warming-patrick-moore/ Climate Feedback]. That group-blog post starts with a quote of Mr Moore's statement and a link to Instagram but when I followed the link I didn't see that statement, so context if any is unknown. And don't be misled by the site's list of reviewers -- its "scientists' feedback" sections are prefaced by "[Comment from a previous evaluation of a similar claim.]" i.e.those are not responses to Mr Moore's statement -- only the editor's comments are a response. In any case the quote, if valid, is about lack of proof that CO2 causes, not lack of evidence that CO2 contributes. So better to remove the whole sentence. [[User:Peter Gulutzan|Peter Gulutzan]] ([[User talk:Peter Gulutzan|talk]]) 14:22, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
| |||