ksnake wrote:
But things like death tolls in wars are subjective: 1) the true numbers of dead are not known, and 2) how to apportion those numbers is open to interpretation (e.g. Italy, which switched sides, and even after switching sides still had troops fighting for the Axis). Things like scientific subjects -- especially those dealing with hard science (e.g. math, physics, chemistry) as opposed to those which are open to interpretation due to not being able to necessarily reproduce results (e.g. evolution) -- it is much harder to fudge the facts.
I guess I'm not making my point here. The fact that death tolls are subjective is fine. But Wiki was arguing with itself. I would expect to look at different sources and get different results. To look in a different heading in the same spot should not yeild a different result. That's my opening problem. If they say a fact is 20K then where ever you look for that fact it should say 20K. Even if that fact is subjective and countermanded by other source it should be held that if it's good enough to publish as a fact in one location that it should in all locations.
Hard science is even open to interpretation. Most mathematical givens are called theroms and not proofs. As such they are open to argument as well. Physics only hold true at this speed. As gravity (planetary scale) or speed (relitive to light increase) the laws of physics fall apart. |
Donate
Leagues
Gonzaga
Blue Max
Cartagena
Wooden Ships...
King Me!
VampiRing
