The "Prove It" Problem

[ChristyACB]

I'd really like to address this and get some consensus because the problem is getting out of hand.

Asking for a link when one reports a news item or an interesting article is one thing, but it has gotten to the point that every discussion requires massive research to provide the entire development of concepts now.

I think we need to, as a group, establish some ground rules.

My view is that a link for a simple concept, or the first stage of a concept is enough when talking about scientific developments or other complicated issues. Asking for "a link" that somehow encompasses years of education is impossible and ridiculous but it is becoming the norm here.

How far down the research road do you think it is reasonable to expect people to go before the person pestering is just asking too much.

Keep in mind, it could be you trying to explain capillary restriction, cavitation and the development of secondary vascular and support structures in plants just to explain why uneven watering is bad for tomatoes!

[Oggie]

I don't water my tomatoes because they put that fluoride stuff in there and I don't need tomatoes with teeth.

[beccachow]

Hmmm...

I have definitely seen this as a stalling tactic at times. To me, if someone makes a claim that is WAAAAAAY out there I might ask for a link. Usually, when a topic interests me and someone makes some claim, I run to my buddy Google to see what I can find out. If I find something that contradicts what is said, I come back and provide a link as a debate tactic.

Now I might not be able to find anything on what some one claims, then I might ask for a link. Or, one person claims something so many times that I believe is untrue, I might ask for proof of their claims.

I do agree, both my Conservative buddies and my Liberal buddies go way overboard sometimes.

I think it is fair to request that if someone is posting something to debate what was in the OP, a link is necessary as well as helpful. If you are discussing something that is wildly off the mark, like a UFO landing in someone's yard or Obama's birth Certificate found in a pyramid in Peru, then it is only logical you need to back yourself with some links. But to request a link for "Grass is green," like so many here have begun to do, is OVERKILL, I agree!

[beccachow]

Originally Posted by Oggie

I don't water my tomatoes because they put that floride stuff in there and I don't need tomatoes with teeth.

Oh my gosh....The ATTACK...of the killer TOMA...Toes... Am I the only one who saw that movie? Whoops..., sorry.

[QoTL]

I think requiring links for data is reasonable.

If I want to say that dogs are becoming aggressive due to GMOs (I don't... just an example , then I should have SOMETHING to back it up.

However- I tend to doubt internet links, since so many go to pages that are questionable. I will never believe something in the Wiki, for example, without 3 other more scientific sources to back it up. Same for yahoo news, fox news... etc.

If people are going to make points in an honest effort to refute other points, and want to use statistics, I DO think it's important to provide a link. If you don't have a link (or a page# from a book) then you have no evidence.

When I was a kid, we used to tell people, "Did you know Michael Jackson has a wooden leg?" Or, "Did you know the president has a glass eye?" And if you said it with a straight face, people BELIEVED. It taught me the value of sources.

That said, there are people on HT who refuse to believe the facts, no matter HOW MANY sources you provide. They will choose to poke pinholes in your sources, or say those are the exception rather than the rule, EVEN when faced with the evidence.

At the end of the day, you can only let the facts speak for themselves. Some people won't read the links, and some people will say they are flawed even when you know they aren't. Not much you can do about that.

[MoonRiver]

I think to a large degree, it is the same as footnoting. If I quote something from an article, I need to provide a link. If the idea or "fact" I'm using was taken from another source, I should provide a link. If the idea or fact is considered general knowledge, no link required.

I think some of the requests for links are fine. For example, someone presents someone else's idea or opinion, but doesn't provide a link. Or someone quotes a poll, but doesn't include a link to the poll. I sent someone a pm the other day because I wanted to learn more about a topic they had posted about. So there are some good reasons for asking for a link.

But, IMO, most of the requests for links are silly. Instead of debating the facts, someone tries to obfuscate the issue by demanding a link.

But all of us as posters, also need to try to be as clear as possible and to provide links when necessary. Plus it's the legal thing to do.

From ChristyACB

it could be you trying to explain capillary restriction, cavitation and the development of secondary vascular and support structures in plants just to explain why uneven watering is bad for tomatoes!

If it was me, I would either try to come with a simple analogy or I would drop out of the discussion. If the other person(s) in the discussion don't have the knowledge needed to understand my explanation, I either figure out an explanation they will understand or I just don't respond. No sense supplying references if the person asking for them probably won't understand them (or even read them).

[Bearfootfarm]

Asking for "a link" that somehow encompasses years of education is impossible and ridiculous but it is becoming the norm here.

How far down the research road do you think it is reasonable to expect people to go before the person pestering is just asking too much.

provide the entire development of concepts now

No one asked for what you're saying. Not even close

It was about one specific part of what you said

You see it as a "problem" because you feel "pestered" if someone questions you at all.

By the same token, you won't like this response, even though you asked for opinions.

[ChristyACB]

Originally Posted by Oggie

I don't water my tomatoes because they put that fluoride stuff in there and I don't need tomatoes with teeth.

OMG...I just had a flash of that doggie dentures commercial...but with tomatoes!

[Tiempo]

but it has gotten to the point that every discussion requires massive research to provide the entire development of concepts now.

Prove it.

[ChristyACB]

Tiempo - Please tell me you're kidding.

And for the other...I thank the person that suggested this...Ignore works! It's just not there! Just a little line to let me know it's ignored. ::sigh:: That feels better. Like taking off shoes after a long day.

[Bearfootfarm]

Quote:
but it has gotten to the point that every discussion requires massive research to provide the entire development of concepts now.

Prove it.

That doesn't require proof since no FACTS were offered

[Bearfootfarm]

Ignore works!

LOL
Now you can just listen to those who agree with you

Quite often, people post "facts" that you know are untrue. For instance, many people still believe that you get warts from handling toads. If someone posts that for a fact, I feel like you are well within reason to ask for proof. As opposed to just calling them ignorant, or a liar.

[QoTL]

I also think it's reasonable for the person asking for evidence to get a link that directly SUPPORTS that evidence.

For example, in my earlier example about aggressive dogs and GMOs, it wouldn't be enough to provide a link that says dogs are getting more aggressive. That proves nothing. Likewise, another link saying that GMOs are now in dog food (which I'm sure they are... no arguing needed), would be interesting, but it's not specific evidence.

There is a huge difference between causation and correlation. 2 studies on dogs/dog food say do not necessarily MEAN that the results are a given.

dogs are more aggressive
dog food contains more gmos
aggression = gmos.... this is a totally false statement because it fails to provide evidence that there aren't other factors as well.

Hope that all makes sense

A direct link supporting a statement is proof. 700 links supporting pieces of the evidence are not.

[ChristyACB]

Originally Posted by zong

Quite often, people post "facts" that you know are untrue. For instance, many people still believe that you get warts from handling toads. If someone posts that for a fact, I feel like you are well within reason to ask for proof. As opposed to just calling them ignorant, or a liar.

LOL...I got you. For sure I agree too.

This is more like what I'm talking about:

Person A) Watering tomatoes unevenly isn't good for them.

Person B) I don't see a link..I can't see why. In nature it doesn't rain every day so why would it be bad.

Person A) Here is a link to the extension office. Tomatoes are originally from x environment and probably performed like Y and this is your heavily producing backyard tomato. Must be handled differently.

Person B)That is just the opinion of an extension office. PROVE IT. Give me a link.

Person A) Too much a time and then too little causes too little fruit, splitting fruit and all kinds of things. Too much for too long can even cause the stems to explode out. Uneven can cause cavitation and other bad things.

Person B) I saw Hunt for Red October and my tomatoes aren't cavitating. PROVE IT.

Person A) ::sigh::

That's more the situation I'm talking about.

[Wayne02]

Ahh yes, the 'Link People'. They are great entertainment.

I'm here for discussion about various subjects, not highschool peeing contests with 'sources', 'cites' etc. I've done the whole 'cites' thing in highschool and college with more reports, presentations, and papers than I care to remember. And I'm not doing that again except when called for in my Professional life. If someone wants to know more information on a particular subject being discussed then They can go look it up themselves and play the link game.

When I'm in the local cafe discussing current events or any subject with my group of friends I don't run up to them and demand they give a source or a link. This whole 'link' thing has come about because the anonymity of internet has emboldened keyboard commandos who would not act this way in a civil, adult, face-to-face discussion.

[Sawmill Jim]

Most of that i get but what makes em grow teeth The floride to much to little or gmo in the water

[QoTL]

Originally Posted by Sawmill Jim

Most of that i get but what makes em grow teeth The floride to much to little or gmo in the water

ROTFL!


Hmm... no teeth on my tomatoes this year. I'm voting for pesticides.

[watcher]

Unless someone is making a statement about stats or their statement doesn't seem logical or if I can't find anything to back them up with a quick google search I don't worry about demanding proof.

After all this isn't a debating society where we get points for how well we can support our argument with data or research.

[Bearfootfarm]

That's more the situation I'm talking about.

LOL

Fantasy scenarios always turn out the way you want, even though the example given didn't remotely depict anything real