Determine the factual content of a statement

The most amazing thing I always find is that people would rather go to a second, third, or fourth hand source than actually look for the actual words of the actual person/people.

I was having an argument on climate change on another board with an idiot who kept insisting that the Royal Academy of Sciences had rejected human impact of climate change. This person posted numerous media and opinion pieces but failed to read the actual statement from the RAS which, of course, said nothing of the sort.

The_Amber_Spyglass wrote:

The most amazing thing I always find is that people would rather go to a second, third, or fourth hand source than actually look for the actual words of the actual person/people.

I was having an argument on climate change on another board with an idiot who kept insisting that the Royal Academy of Sciences had rejected human impact of climate change. This person posted numerous media and opinion pieces but failed to read the actual statement from the RAS which, of course, said nothing of the sort.

I hope that wasn't me... I don't recall this RAS statment...

Naw, it was probably whats-his-face.... Grubber.

It wasn't anybody on SP. I would hope that even the most ardent climate change denier with more than half a brain would have enough common sense to check the original source if such a claim was made the the RAS no longer accepted climate change.

For the record though, the RAS has said only that they are reviewing their own research and hope to define their position by the end of the year.