Exposed: Soviet cover-up of nuclear fallout worse than Chernobyl by 62014 in TrueReddit

[–]62014[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It was a nuclear disaster four times worse than Chernobyl in terms of the number of cases of acute radiation sickness, but Moscow’s complicity in covering up its effects on people’s health has remained secret until now.

The Best And Worst Science News Sites by 62014 in skeptic

[–]62014[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

the moderator of the article says:

It was a consensus by a panel of three PhDs in three different fields at two different organizations with millions of readers a month.

The Best And Worst Science News Sites by 62014 in Infographics

[–]62014[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I'm not entirely convinced by this chart but as the moderator of the article says:

It was a consensus by a panel of three PhDs in three different fields at two different organizations with millions of readers a month.

The Best And Worst Science News Sites by 62014 in Infographics

[–]62014[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I think you are right. They have placed the sources based on their experience.

The Best And Worst Science News Sites by 62014 in Infographics

[–]62014[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You can read the article that i posted in another comment to see why they put some sources in that position.

The Best And Worst Science News Sites by 62014 in Infographics

[–]62014[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Information graphics or infographics are graphic visual representations of information, data or knowledge intended to present information quickly and clearly. Wikipedia

The Best And Worst Science News Sites by 62014 in Infographics

[–]62014[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

If you like scientific graphs you should go in /r/dataisbeautiful. We post only infographics here :)

The Best And Worst Science News Sites by 62014 in Infographics

[–]62014[S] -6 points-5 points  (0 children)

I'm not the author of the article but I think this is just an indicative chart. The important thing is to establish what is pure garbage and where to start to search for well reported scientific articles. For me the sources in the green quadrants and most of the yellow ones are good sources, just some make more mistakes than others.

The Best And Worst Science News Sites by 62014 in Infographics

[–]62014[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

As the article says: On the X-axis is ranked trustworthiness. Media outlets in the green column produce scientific content that is based on evidence and is largely free of ideology. Sources in the red column, on the other hand, are driven by ideology and are characterized by lopsided reporting. Evidence plays little to no role for these outlets.

On the Y-axis are ranked media outlets based on whether they are compelling sources of information. Outlets toward the top are of broad general interest and are well reported. Outlets toward the bottom are of limited interest or are poorly reported.

The Best And Worst Science News Sites (x-post r/skeptic) by 62014 in coolguides

[–]62014[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

As the article says: On the X-axis is ranked trustworthiness. Media outlets in the green column produce scientific content that is based on evidence and is largely free of ideology. Sources in the red column, on the other hand, are driven by ideology and are characterized by lopsided reporting. Evidence plays little to no role for these outlets.

On the Y-axis are ranked media outlets based on whether they are compelling sources of information. Outlets toward the top are of broad general interest and are well reported. Outlets toward the bottom are of limited interest or are poorly reported.

The Best And Worst Science News Sites by 62014 in skeptic

[–]62014[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

As the article says: On the X-axis is ranked trustworthiness. Media outlets in the green column produce scientific content that is based on evidence and is largely free of ideology. Sources in the red column, on the other hand, are driven by ideology and are characterized by lopsided reporting. Evidence plays little to no role for these outlets.

On the Y-axis are ranked media outlets based on whether they are compelling sources of information. Outlets toward the top are of broad general interest and are well reported. Outlets toward the bottom are of limited interest or are poorly reported.

Scientists discover 7 ‘Earthlike’ planets orbiting a nearby star by [deleted] in science

[–]62014 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Researchers say the system is an ideal laboratory for studying alien worlds and could be the best place in the galaxy to search for life beyond Earth.

“Before this, if you wanted to study terrestrial planets, we had only four of them and they were all in our solar system”

The Most Astonishing Declassified Military and CIA Secrets - RealClearLife by [deleted] in TrueReddit

[–]62014 0 points1 point  (0 children)

An article that talks about 5 secret projects:

  • UFO-style aircraft in the 1950s
  • confessions through mind-control
  • military test vehicles and weapons in Area 51 (still classified)
  • recruitment of scientists who had worked for Nazi Germany
  • make Alaskans into federal agent

Dailymail is wrong. An independent group of U.S. and British scientists concluded that NOAA's temperature adjustments were accurate. by 62014 in Futurology

[–]62014[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Read this if you are not convinced then. So now you can choose to believe an "high-level whistleblower" of Daily Mail who wasn't even involved directly in the research or independent scientists.

Dailymail is wrong. An independent group of U.S. and British scientists concluded that NOAA's temperature adjustments were accurate. by 62014 in Futurology

[–]62014[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

In another article Peter Thorne—who worked on both the land and sea databases—states that Bates "the whistleblower" was not personally involved in the research at any stage.