By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Mazty on 20 December 2012
Edit Thread
dsgrue3 said:
Mazty said:
Okay, I get it now. It was silly of me to suggest that a source which can be modified by anyone, including 5 year olds, babies, mentally-handicapped, etc was credible. Furthermore, I realize that I had no idea what I was talking about with autism and anthropogenic climate change.

Awesome. glad you agree that wikipedia isn't credible for the reason mentioned: ANYONE can edit it.

I suppose you aren't mentally defunct afterall. The other issues aren't really pertinent, but glad you admit you were wrong.


But you can't edit the peer reviewed papers...If you want to check the validity of a claim, go check the paper. 

I cannot make this simpler for you. You are just being pedantic & lazy. If you want to check the statement that "bats shoot lazer beams (source)" then go read that source. The issue was that your education was so grossly lacking on the topic that the easiest way for you to learn the necessary information would have been to read the correctly referenced wiki page. It would have taken you months to read through all the papers from cover to cover if you insist on just papers.