Re: scientists are going to bluesky

On Fri, 29 Nov 2024 22:42:54 +0100, D <nospam@example.net> wrote:

So paradoxically I'd argue that they actually do
more to obfuscate, than to help.

A professional fact-checker,

1. Reviews articles, etc...in good faith
2. Cites sources
3. And says, based upon these sources, the facts or whatever is/are

When examining scientific literature, one can say current findings
support this/that, which may or may not represent a fact based in
physical reality...depending upon the topic under review.

A professional fact-checker is making an assessment on current
understanding(s), and supports their assertions via cites.

more to obfuscate

A fact-checker is not....their finding(s) is/are based upon the "here
and now"  What any person could deduce if they went down that rabbit
hole.