Week Two: Wikipedia Analysis (Step Two)

Step Two:

Continue reading the Wikipedia article and chose a claim to verify (i.e since 1979, land temperatures have increased about twice as fast as ocean temperatures). Using Google find two websites. One that supports the claim and one that disputes it. Post the information from the check list in a blog posting along with links to the sites.

 

·         Claim:

·         Naturally occurring amounts of greenhouse gases have a mean warming effect of about 33 °C (59 °F). Without the earth's atmosphere the temperature across almost the entire surface of the earth would be below freezing.

·         Support:

·         “Scientists know that the “greenhouse effect” is a reality: without the naturally occurring heat-trapping gases in the earth’s atmosphere, the planet would be about 30ᵒ C cooler on average—an ice ball rather than a life-support system” (Speth, Looking into the Abyss, 2008, p. 21).

·         Web Page Evaluation Checklist

·         Information

1.       Name of page: Google Books
Address/URL: http://books.google.com/books?id=BaL1ADsc7f4C&printsec=frontcover&dq=J.G+Speth+The+Bridge+at+the+Edge+of+the+World+pdf&hl=en&sa=X&ei=KcyoUbvADMKZiQLy2IDoCg&ved=0CC0Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=J.G%20Speth%20The%20Bridge%20at%20the%20Edge%20of%20the%20World%20pdf&f=false
Date Accessed: May 31, 2013
How did you find the page?
Google Search Engine
The book was my textbook in an undergraduate class at Fairmont State University

·         DOMAIN

1.       What is the domain of the page?

§   .com

2.       Do you feel that the domain type helps add to or lessen the page’s credibility?

§  I believe that if the domain type is a .org, .edu, or .gov it helps add to the page’s credibility. This is because those are educational/informational websites. However, there is no such thing as an error free website. At least, that’s what I’m finding out through this module. My domain type that is listed above does not make me feel secure in the accuracy of its information; however, the website is a list of published books, so therefore I believe that my book is accurate in its claims.

·         AUTHOR/AUTHORITY

1.       Is the author of the page identified?

§  Yes

2.       If no individual author is identified, is the corporation, institution, organization or group responsible for the web site clearly identified?

§  Google

3.       If the author is a corporation/institution/organization or other group:

§  Does the organization have a reputation for credibility?

·         Yes; however, I don’t believe that Google is responsible for the credibility of the information and texts placed on its site.

§  Does the organization explain its purpose, mission, goals, or guiding principles?

·         No

§  Does the organization provide the names of its officers, editors, staff or other major participants?

·         No

§  Does the organization provide contact information (phone, address, or at least an e-mail address)?

·         No

§  Does the organization appear to filter the information appearing under its name? 

·         It filters certain things that would might induce a lawsuit, but none in regards to the listed link. 

§  Does the organization display any obvious signs of bias?

·         No

§  In conclusion, do you think that this organization is qualified to present the information found on its web page?

·         I don’t think that Google is qualified to present the information; however, I believe the author of the information in the book is qualified.

·         AUTHOR/AUTHORITY, cont.

1.       Does the author provide his/her contact information (usually an e-mail address)?

§  No

2.       In conclusion, do you feel that the author is qualified to present the information found on his/her web page?

§  I don’t feel that Google is qualified to present the information; however, I believe that the author of the text is highly qualified. He has won many awards for his research.

·         INTENT

1.       Is the purpose of the page clearly stated?

§  Yes.

2.       What is or appears to be the purpose of the page?

§  Inform the reader about the book and the author. As well as, inform the reader about global warming.

§  Persuade you to buy/download the book

3.       Does the page contain advertisements? 

§  No

4.       Do the ads distract from the page’s content, affect the page’s reliability, or appear to be the main focus of the page? 

§  No

5.       Might they be necessary to support the organization responsible for the page?

§  Google does a lot of advertising outside of the webpage I visited, and those advertisements support the continuation of Google.

·         INTENDED AUDIENCE

1.       Who appears to be the intended audience for this information/page?

§  Environmental Researchers/Activists

§  Shoppers

2.       Does the level or complexity of information provided, the vocabulary used, and the overall tone of the information/page match your needs?

§  Yes.

·         CURRENTNESS

1.       When was the information on the page created or last updated?

§  2008

2.       Are the dates of articles, news stories, newsletters, reports and other publications given?

§  Yes, within the book’s citations.

3.       Is the page properly maintained or does it have broken links, outdated events calendars or other signs of neglect?

§  Yes, it is properly maintained.

·         NOTES:  Website about the author and the book is: http://www.thebridgeattheedgeoftheworld.com/  

·         RELIABILITY

1.       Is the content peer-reviewed, authenticated by experts, or subject to some sort of editorial scrutiny?

§  It has several accolades from various political and media people in fields such as science, environmental, political, academic, and the like. It has been peer-reviewed and is a published work.

2.       Does the page display any awards given by reliable sources, or link to favorable site reviews by reliable sources?

§  No

3.       Considering your answers to the previous questions, other observations you’ve made, and your overall sense of the page, how reliable does this source seem?

§  The book seems very reliable with all the awards and accolades given to it and the author.

·         CONCLUSIONS

1.       Do you feel that this source is appropriate for your current assignment or information need?

§  Yes.

2.       Would you recommend this source to a friend doing similar research?

§  Yes.

3.       What reservations, if any, do you have about the source?

§  That some of the information may be out of date.

 

Speth, J. G. (2008). Looking into the Abyss. Retrieved May 31, 2013, from Google: http://books.google.com/books?id=BaL1ADsc7f4C&printsec=frontcover&dq=J.G+Speth+The+Bridge+at+the+Edge+of+the+World+pdf&hl=en&sa=X&ei=KcyoUbvADMKZiQLy2IDoCg&ved=0CC0Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=J.G%20Speth%20The%20Bridge%20at%20the%20Edge%20of%20the%20World%20pdf&f

 

·         Dispute:

·         “The effect of having no infra-red active gases in the atmosphere is then a surface temperature which is 30.76 K higher than the observed average surface temperature of 287.65 K! In other words, the so-called greenhouse gases have a very strong cooling effect upon the Earth’s surface temperature, which is of nearly the same strength as the commonly claimed warming effect on the Earth system as a whole is” (Anderson, 2013).

·         Web Page Evaluation

1.      Information

§  Name of page: An Objectivist Individualist
Address/URL: http://objectivistindividualist.blogspot.com/2013/04/the-earth-surface-temperature-without.html
Date Accessed: May 30, 2013
How did you find the page?
Google Search

2.      DOMAIN

§  What is the domain of the page?

·          .com

§  Do you feel that the domain type helps add to or lessen the page’s credibility?

·         I believe that if the domain type is a .org, .edu, or .gov it helps add to the page’s credibility. This is because those are educational/informational websites. However, there is no such thing as an error free website. At least, that’s what I’m finding out through this module. My domain type that is listed above does not make me feel secure in the accuracy of its information; however, the website is a list of published books, so therefore I believe that my book is accurate in its claims.

3.      AUTHOR/AUTHORITY

§  Is the author of the page identified? Is the author of the page an individual?

·         Charles R. Anderson as the author of his own blog

§  If the author is an individual: Is the author clearly affiliated with a corporation, institution, organization or group?

·         No

§  Are the author’s educational, occupational or other credentials identified?

·         Yes, but vaguely. It states that he is a materials physicist and owner of a materials characterization laboratory.

§  Is the author a professional in the field or a layperson interested in the subject?

·         The webpage leads me to believe that Mr. Anderson is a layperson interested in the subject.

§  Does the author present any other evidence that supports his/her ability to accurately present the information that he/she is presenting?

·         The only two resources that the information lists is a picture of greenhouse gases from NASA’s website and the Unsettled Earth Energy Budget article.

§  Does the author display any obvious bias (religious, political, commercial or other)?

·         I believe that the author could be biased in his attempt to go against the crowd and be an “individualist”.

§  Is the author the original creator of the information presented?

·         Yes

4.      AUTHOR/AUTHORITY, cont.

§  Does the author provide his/her contact information (usually an e-mail address)?

·         No, but you are able to comment on the information presented on the blog.

§  In conclusion, do you feel that the author is qualified to present the information found on his/her web page?

·         Based on what I’ve read, I don’t believe that the author is qualified to present the information found on his web page. However, I did find on another link that he has a Ph.D. in physics, which makes me feel a little better; but the lack of other resources/research makes it look unqualified.

5.      INTENT

§  Is the purpose of the page clearly stated?

·         Yes. “The critical battle of our day is the conflict between the individual and the state. We must be ever vigilant and constant defenders of the equal sovereign rights of the individual to life, liberty, property, and the personal pursuit of happiness.”

§  What is or appears to be the purpose of the page?

·         To promote “individualistic” views and prove that the common “misperception” of the  effects of the greenhouse gases on the earth’s surface.

§  Does the page contain advertisements? 

·         Yes

§  Do the ads distract from the page’s content, affect the page’s reliability, or appear to be the main focus of the page? 

·         The advertisements do distract from the page’s content, because they take up almost half of the screen.

§  Might they be necessary to support the organization responsible for the page?

·         Blogger does have ads to support the website; however, I don’t believe that they have to be that big. I think that, with the combination of the layout and design of the page, it is very hard to concentrate on the information presented.

6.      INTENDED AUDIENCE

§  Who appears to be the intended audience for this information/page?

·         “My posts are aimed at thinking, intelligent individuals, whose comments are very welcome.”

§  Does the level or complexity of information provided, the vocabulary used, and the overall tone of the information/page match your needs?

·         No. I don’t think he writes very well. The text is hard to understand, because I believe he structures sentences and uses words above his ability.

7.      CURRENTNESS

§  When was the information on the page created or last updated?

·         April 10, 2013

§  Are the dates of articles, news stories, newsletters, reports and other publications given?

·         No

§  Is the page properly maintained or does it have broken links, outdated events calendars or other signs of neglect?

·         All the links work, and it isn’t out-of-date.

8.      RELIABILITY

§  Is the content peer-reviewed, authenticated by experts, or subject to some sort of editorial scrutiny?

·         No, there aren’t any comments or proof of revision by experts or other professionals.

§  Does the page display any awards given by reliable sources, or link to favorable site reviews by reliable sources?

·         No

§  Considering your answers to the previous questions, other observations you’ve made, and your overall sense of the page, how reliable does this source seem?

·         This source does not seem reliable because of its lack of resources and research to back his claims. Any links to support his claims are other posts he has created.

9.      CONCLUSIONS

§  Do you feel that this source is appropriate for your current assignment or information need?

·         No

§  Would you recommend this source to a friend doing similar research?

·         No

§  What reservations, if any, do you have about the source?

 

 

·         Lack of validity in its claims

 

Anderson, C. R. (2013, April 10). An Objectivist Individualist. Retrieved May 30, 2013, from Blogger: http://objectivistindividualist.blogspot.com/2013/04/the-earth-surface-temperature-without.html