What criteria do people use to separate the wheat from the chaff?

Question

Clearly, in the Internet age when anyone with access to a library and a 5th grade education can put up a web-site and post their own opinion, it's necessary to develop some sort of criteria to distinguish between good reliable sources of information and poor or unreliable sources. Clearly there are higher and lower quality sites (as far as information integrity, fact-checking, etc.) out there. So in an area as inundated with amateurs, politically motivated, real scientists (of various specialties) and industry funded hacks as global warming, what criteria have people established to assure that they are digesting valid information?

The saying "garbage in, garbage out" is very true when researching any subject on the Internet.

Answer 1

Science should be objective.  No one can dispute objective science.  When was the last time you had an argument with someone about what the speed of light was, or the distance the Earth was from the Sun?

Only when science isn't objective, when it's subjective to the interpretation of a group, then it will always be argued.  If global warming could stand on facts alone, and not require some consensus to determine if it was real, then people would understand.

Science isn't believed, it just is.

Answer 2

criteria?  you want criteria?

we don't need no stinkin criteria.

we want cheap gas in our truck.

we think we ought to get free oil from iraq, because we did them such a favor.

we need to drill in ANWR -- there's tons of oil there -- we can make the US independent and have as much gas as we need for a long time.

you go do research.

we just want cheap gas.

and that's how limburger says we can have it.

but you want science?

go to CO2science.  that's what the name says.  surely you can trust them.  this is all a rich liberal plot to take away our SUVs.

Answer 3

If its printed in the internet it has to be true, right?  Bwa ha ha ha ha....ok j/k.  I like to use multiple sources and try to find out before hand what sources are reliable. Multiple sources are a good thing so long as it isn't the same exact thing re-posted a hundred times in a cut and paste fashion. So when I have a few sources that agree and make sense to me then I feel I have good source. So yes it takes a lot of separating. I have had to change my thinking many things from what I have found, but I have also confirmed many things from what I find. The internet is for the most  part a horrible source of information, but it is so easy.

Answer 4

Try looking for factual data, studies, etc., and make sure there is accurate science, not mere propaganda-pushing.

When the info. starts sounding shrill, they are reacting, which sometimes can mean impartiality &/or wrong info.  Find a site where there is impartial, level-headed, sound reasoning.

   Too much science today is only sensationalism & hypothesizing, which ASSUMES  way too much with WAY too little use of the "scientific method" & true, accurate science.

Answer 5

It's called a (thrasher),based on a old concept of beating the hello out something.One of two things will happen;people will stop listening or accept it on blind faith.

Answer 6

stay away from political web sites like realclimate.org if you are interested in science.

Answer 7

Actually google is pretty good when you put in emotionally unladen key words eg global warming or climate change rather global warming denial or scepticism climate change.  One finds sources such as Nasa, other prestige organisations and yes Wiki which does source its material.  On a subject which generates thousands of individual scientific papers I would place little credence on an single one unless its focus was very narrow and detailed and its source very reputable indeed.

Answer 8

I think most people pick whatever agrees with their politics (example:  I just saw someone link to a site calling itself "911 University", which didn't even list authors for its "evidence").

I look for links to peer-reviewed papers.  Searching for the subject in Google Scholar is another way to check things.