Comment by epgui
14 hours ago
Have you considered the possibility that your opinion is just not representative of the scientific consensus?
14 hours ago
Have you considered the possibility that your opinion is just not representative of the scientific consensus?
I asked ChatGPT on whether or not it was the "scientific consensus."
"Anonymous surveys of intelligence experts reveal division: a 2016 survey found that about 49% attributed 50% or more of the Black-White gap to genetics, while over 80% attributed at least 20%; an earlier 1980s survey showed similar splits. These views are more common in private or anonymous contexts, contrasting with public statements from bodies like the APA that find no support for genetic explanations."
Hm, sure seems like Wikipedia should probably have a more balanced, nuanced discussion considering the experts are split at least 50/50.
Wikipedia does not care about scientific consensus. It just summarizes "reliable" secondary sources.
Wrong in two different ways:
- this tends to approximate consensus.
- Wikipedia does care, and has a policy on this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Scientific_consensus
>and has a policy on this
Look at the top of that page.
>This is an essay. It contains the advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors. This page is not an encyclopedia article or a Wikipedia policy, as it has not been reviewed by the community.