alt Hacker NewsYou choose to trust Encyclopedia Brittanica, and someone else chooses to trust CNN or some guy on X with 100m followers.
This is an appeal to authority, you’re still not checking any facts by yourself, and that’s exactly how people get manipulated.
You choose to trust Encyclopedia Brittanica, and someone else chooses to trust CNN or some guy on X with 100m followers.
This is an appeal to authority, you’re still not checking any facts by yourself, and that’s exactly how people get manipulated.
Why even bother responding to comments if you don't read them?
> because in the course of my education I was taught to conduct experiments and confirm reality for myself. I have never once found what is written about hard science in Britannica to not be in accord with my observed reality,
It's in the same sentence I mentioned Britannica!
> you’re still not checking any facts by yourself
Did you perhaps read it but not understand what my sentence meant because you don't know what an experiment is? Were you not taught to do scientific experiments in your schooling? Literally the entire point of my entire post is that I do not trust blindly, but choose who I trust based on their ability to accurately report the facts I observe for myself without fail. CNN, as with every media outlet I've ever encountered in my entire life, publishes things I can verify to be false. So too does some guy on Twitter with 100 million followers. Britannica does not, at least as it pertains to hard science.