24 Dec
2015
24 Dec
'15
12:58 a.m.
Noel Chiappa scripsit:
You're mistaking Wikipedia for an information
source you can rely on. It's
not.
There are no such information sources. People forget; researchers make
mistakes; mathematical proofs have bugs. The only alternative to eventualism
is infallible dogmatism.
Don't get me wrong, Wikipedia is quite useful as
a place for an
_introduction_ to any topic, but anyone who really wants to _reliably_ know
anything about a topic needs to look at the references, not the articles.
But in the case to hand, it's precisely the references that are at fault.
--
John Cowan http://www.ccil.org/~cowan cowan(a)ccil.org
"You need a change: try Canada" "You need a change: try
China"
--fortune cookies opened by a couple that I know