Wikipedia talk:Requests for arbitration/Fringe science/Proposed decision: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 02:02, 12 January 2009

Revision as of 02:04, 12 January 2009

Line 528:

::::: As I've already remarked, the notion is ridiculous on its face. I'm sure there are plenty of reliable skeptical sources who have had a bit of fun with evoip. --[[User talk:Tony Sidaway|TS]] 02:01, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

:::::Like I have said, there is no reason not to use debunking sources. There never were too few sources for debunking on that article. The attempt to exclude sources was all on the debunker side. Also, tryingthey tried to act like Randi necessarily speaks for the opinion of all scientists- scientists who don't even know what evoip is. If we'd been simply allowed to say "Randi and Carroll say this, Baruss says this, the advocates say this, the history is this, and science in general doesn't even know the thing exists, that would have been fine. Instead, people wanted to do OR to debunk. ——'''[[User:Martinphi|<span style="color:#6c4408;border:1px dashed #6c4408;padding:1px;background:#ffffff;">Martin^phi]]'''</span> [[User talk:Martinphi|Ψ]]~[[Special:Contributions/Martinphi|Φ]]<span style="color:#ffffff;">——</span> 02:02, 12 January 2009 (UTC)