mad-trader + 25 TT April 13, 2020 (edited) 30 minutes ago, mad-trader said: BIG Deflection news - this is a better thread with conspiracy theories -- will delete from quiet thread. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8211257/Wuhan-lab-performing-experiments-bats-coronavirus-caves.html I hate these guys for sabotage articles on (alt) Right journalists.. So dug and from wikipedia -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daily_Mail The Daily Mail has been widely criticised for its unreliability, as well as printing of sensationalist and inaccurate scare stories of science and medical research,[13][14][15][16][17] and for copyright violations.[18] It is treated as unreliable as a source for articles in Wikipedia 13 Jackson, Jasper (9 February 2017). "Wikipedia bans Daily Mail as 'unreliable' source". The Guardian. Retrieved 11 February 2017. 14 Collins, Lauren (April 2012). "Mail Supremacy". The New Yorker. Retrieved 12 January 2016. 15 Goldacre, Ben. "The Daily Mail cancer story that torpedoes itself in paragraph 19". The Guardian. Retrieved 1 August 2015. 16 Trevor Butterworth (21 February 2012). "Will Drinking Diet Soda Increase Your Risk for a Heart Attack?". Forbes. Retrieved 12 March 2012. "Research" has also revealed the risk of the Daily Mail misreporting a study's findings, especially when there's an opportunity to write an alarming headline. As Dorothy Bishop, a Professor of Neurodevelopmental Psychology at Oxford University, noted in giving the paper her "Orwellian Award for Journalistic Misrepresentation" the Mail sets the standards for inaccurate reporting of academic research. 17 Goldacre, Ben (2008). Bad science. London: Fourth Estate. ISBN 9780007240197. IDK .. the more I read it's a dirty little tabloid for bored housewives of UK Edited April 13, 2020 by mad-trader added wikipedia link for paper Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Most Active Members
Recently Online
Popular Members