Talk:Sound science

This article has been copied from Sourcewatch (former Disinfopedia). This article can be found under http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Sound_science and is copyrighted under the GFDL. The history as of 23 April 2024 was:

18:42,  7 Mar 2005 Neoconned M    (add to Category:Doublespeak)
19:32, 21 Oct 2004 Bob Burton M   (add links)
19:31, 21 Oct 2004 Bob Burton M
23:17, 13 May 2004 Bob Burton M   (minor formatting)
22:39, 13 May 2004 Laura Miller   (added article)
21:24,  1 Mar 2004 Laura Miller
21:13,  1 Mar 2004 Laura Miller
02:07,  1 Mar 2004 Sheldon Rampton
20:05, 20 Jan 2004 Laura Miller M (typo )
20:04, 20 Jan 2004 Laura Miller

Cacycle 11:45, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

NPOV[edit]

The links cited as references in this article are either (a) from a biased source all supporting the same viewpoint or (b) lacking in factual correctness. In addition, as noted above, the original source of the article's text was derived from SourceWatch, a site whose neutrality is also debated. The references make a stab at George W. Bush without linking to any primary source of Bush using the phrase, and the article does not make an effort to neutrally define the term "sound science" without immediately casting aspersions as to nefariousness in government or industry. --Dachannien 16:00, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I added International gov't agencies and environmental groups. Should be neutral now.

But bear in mind that liberals consider their side to be neutral, and that "presenting both sides" in disputes on environmental issues is "biased". --Uncle Ed 14:44, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think this article is NPOV righ now. No merging with "junk science".Biophys 17:51, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]