podfish
01-03-2011, 02:50 PM
I bet you recognize this format - it's used all the time. It should highlight why a lot of the back&forth posting of links that purportedly make a case for some scientific premise are pretty darn near totally bogus. If you really care, you need to follow up to the real sources <click below="" link="" to="" the="" source="" article="">: (Click anywhere below to jump to the article)
(https://www.guardian.co.uk/science/the-lay-scientist/2010/sep/24/1) This is a news website article about a scientific paper (https://www.guardian.co.uk/science/the-lay-scientist/2010/sep/24/1)
In the standfirst I will make a fairly obvious pun about the subject matter before posing an inane question I have no intention of really answering: is this an important scientific finding? (https://www.guardian.co.uk/science/the-lay-scientist/2010/sep/24/1)
In this paragraph I will state the main claim that the research makes, making appropriate use of "scare quotes" to ensure that it's clear that I have no opinion about this research whatsoever. (https://www.guardian.co.uk/science/the-lay-scientist/2010/sep/24/1)
(https://www.guardian.co.uk/science/the-lay-scientist/2010/sep/24/1)
In this paragraph I will briefly (because no paragraph should be more than one line) state which existing scientific ideas this new research "challenges".
(https://www.guardian.co.uk/science/the-lay-scientist/2010/sep/24/1)
(https://www.guardian.co.uk/science/the-lay-scientist/2010/sep/24/1)
If the research is about a potential cure, or a solution to a problem, this paragraph will describe how it will raise hopes for a group of sufferers or victims. (https://www.guardian.co.uk/science/the-lay-scientist/2010/sep/24/1)
(https://www.guardian.co.uk/science/the-lay-scientist/2010/sep/24/1)
This paragraph elaborates on the claim, adding weasel-words like "the scientists say" to shift responsibility for establishing the likely truth or accuracy of the research findings on to absolutely anybody else but me, the journalist. (https://www.guardian.co.uk/science/the-lay-scientist/2010/sep/24/1)
(https://www.guardian.co.uk/science/the-lay-scientist/2010/sep/24/1)</click>
(https://www.guardian.co.uk/science/the-lay-scientist/2010/sep/24/1) This is a news website article about a scientific paper (https://www.guardian.co.uk/science/the-lay-scientist/2010/sep/24/1)
In the standfirst I will make a fairly obvious pun about the subject matter before posing an inane question I have no intention of really answering: is this an important scientific finding? (https://www.guardian.co.uk/science/the-lay-scientist/2010/sep/24/1)
In this paragraph I will state the main claim that the research makes, making appropriate use of "scare quotes" to ensure that it's clear that I have no opinion about this research whatsoever. (https://www.guardian.co.uk/science/the-lay-scientist/2010/sep/24/1)
(https://www.guardian.co.uk/science/the-lay-scientist/2010/sep/24/1)
In this paragraph I will briefly (because no paragraph should be more than one line) state which existing scientific ideas this new research "challenges".
(https://www.guardian.co.uk/science/the-lay-scientist/2010/sep/24/1)
(https://www.guardian.co.uk/science/the-lay-scientist/2010/sep/24/1)
If the research is about a potential cure, or a solution to a problem, this paragraph will describe how it will raise hopes for a group of sufferers or victims. (https://www.guardian.co.uk/science/the-lay-scientist/2010/sep/24/1)
(https://www.guardian.co.uk/science/the-lay-scientist/2010/sep/24/1)
This paragraph elaborates on the claim, adding weasel-words like "the scientists say" to shift responsibility for establishing the likely truth or accuracy of the research findings on to absolutely anybody else but me, the journalist. (https://www.guardian.co.uk/science/the-lay-scientist/2010/sep/24/1)
(https://www.guardian.co.uk/science/the-lay-scientist/2010/sep/24/1)</click>