Home Forums Gamescan Chat42 About
* Login   * Register * FAQ    * Search
It is currently Thu 03-28-2024 2:03PM

All times are UTC - 6 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 11 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: "Slight" factual error from Reuters
PostPosted: Wed 05-02-2007 11:06PM 
Offline
Brigadier General
User avatar

Joined: Tue 08-17-2004 3:04PM
Posts: 1671
Location: GBH

Source: Fidelity
And by slight, I mean not even not even remotely right

_________________
The solution of this problem is trivial and is left as an exercise for the reader.


Top
 Profile  
    
 Post subject: Re: "Slight" factual error from Reuters
PostPosted: Thu 05-03-2007 8:30AM 
Offline
Colonel

Joined: Wed 08-20-2003 9:47AM
Posts: 570

Source: Off Campus
I love how his "source" for all things fact and fiction is wikipedia. Don't get me wrong, I'm a big wikipedia fan, but you can't take everything you read there (or on any internet web page for that matter) at face value. I think it's more appropriate to use wikipedia as a starting point, and branch out from there in one's research efforts and especially take a look at the sources that the wiki article is based on.

Of course, that goes for other news sources as well (ie. Reuters :-P)...


Top
 Profile  
    
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu 05-03-2007 8:57AM 
Offline
Lieutenant
User avatar

Joined: Wed 01-26-2005 6:02PM
Posts: 99
Location: Somewhere Out There

Source: MST Wireless
I didn't get that that was his source, but that he was saying even Wikipedia got it straight.

Cheers

_________________
"The hardest part is letting go of your dreams ."


Top
 Profile  
    
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu 05-03-2007 9:04AM 
Offline
Colonel

Joined: Wed 08-20-2003 9:47AM
Posts: 570

Source: Off Campus
Then perhaps I'm missing where he provided his source to support his viewpoint, if not wikipedia? If he's going to refute Reuter's facts, I think he would need some of his own to back it up. Surely he doesn't consider himself an expert and authoritarian on the matter.


Top
 Profile  
    
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu 05-03-2007 9:06AM 
Offline
Lieutenant
User avatar

Joined: Wed 01-26-2005 6:02PM
Posts: 99
Location: Somewhere Out There

Source: MST Wireless
I agree that he should site his own sources.

_________________
"The hardest part is letting go of your dreams ."


Top
 Profile  
    
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu 05-03-2007 10:30AM 
Offline
Brigadier General
User avatar

Joined: Tue 08-17-2004 3:04PM
Posts: 1671
Location: GBH

Source: Fidelity
The relevant facts from wikipedia are correctly cited, (citations 40 and 41 in the Kyoto article).

_________________
The solution of this problem is trivial and is left as an exercise for the reader.


Top
 Profile  
    
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu 05-03-2007 10:48AM 
Offline
Colonel

Joined: Wed 08-20-2003 9:47AM
Posts: 570

Source: Off Campus
I didn't say they weren't. I would just never quote or cite wikipedia as a source. I would go directly to the original source. First-hand accounts are always better than second-hand.


Top
 Profile  
    
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu 05-03-2007 11:22AM 
Offline
Brigadier General
User avatar

Joined: Tue 08-17-2004 3:04PM
Posts: 1671
Location: GBH

Source: Fidelity
Altaica wrote:
I didn't say they weren't. I would just never quote or cite wikipedia as a source. I would go directly to the original source. First-hand accounts are always better than second-hand.


Agreed. I try to do the same. He's a law professor, so I'm guessing he just doesn't have the time to track down primary sources all the time. Also, this is such a basic fact that it almost doesn't need citing. I don't cite the source for the acceleration of gravity or the number of members in the US Congress. These are just well-known, or can be found with the slightest of effort. The fact that the US Senate voted against Kyoto 95-0 is a fact like that. Very simple, can be found in mere minutes, and an error that a high school reporter would get fired for.

_________________
The solution of this problem is trivial and is left as an exercise for the reader.


Top
 Profile  
    
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu 05-03-2007 1:37PM 
Offline
Colonel

Joined: Wed 08-20-2003 9:47AM
Posts: 570

Source: Off Campus
atm314 wrote:
Agreed. I try to do the same. He's a law professor, so I'm guessing he just doesn't have the time to track down primary sources all the time. Also, this is such a basic fact that it almost doesn't need citing. I don't cite the source for the acceleration of gravity or the number of members in the US Congress. These are just well-known, or can be found with the slightest of effort. The fact that the US Senate voted against Kyoto 95-0 is a fact like that. Very simple, can be found in mere minutes, and an error that a high school reporter would get fired for.


Ah, perhaps he is an authoritarian then. :P I could see how such information would be common knowledge to a law professor. Common knowledge for your average internet reader? Not so sure, but eh well... I was just going off on a tangent based on his apparent use of wiki as a source. :lol:


Top
 Profile  
    
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu 05-03-2007 2:29PM 
Offline
Colonel

Joined: Sun 05-01-2005 4:29PM
Posts: 501

Source: Off Campus
Regardless how George Bush feels about the Kyoto Protocol, is it not the Senate that decides the laws? The President only puts his rubber stamp on the bill, or he does not (veto). Also, the US didn't "pull out" of Kyoto, they refused to ratify it until developing nations (China) fall under its restrictions as well. I think I go along with Bush on this issue- why should we penalize ourselves if China gets to do whatever they want?


Top
 Profile  
    
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu 05-03-2007 2:48PM 
Offline
Brigadier General

Joined: Tue 01-22-2002 12:35PM
Posts: 1057
Location: Shawnee Mission, KS

Source: Off Campus
A President (or a designee) may sign a treaty, but it carries no force unless ratified by the Senate, which requires a 2/3rds majority vote. Once ratified, a treaty carries the same force as the Constitution itself ("...the supreme law of the land...").


Top
 Profile E-mail  
    
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 11 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 6 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group