Mt Rainier Elevation Survey
countryhighpoints.com
Mt Rainier Elevation Survey
1–10 of 20 posts
Re: Mt Rainier Elevation Survey
#2[flagged]
Re: Mt Rainier Elevation Survey
#3[flagged]
Re: Mt Rainier Elevation Survey
#4"Editors of the [Wikipedia] page appear to be non-experts in the field and biased against me personally for unknown reasons... It is unfortunate that Wikipedia cannot be trusted as a reliable source of information."
No, you cannot be trusted over the USGS (US Geological Survey). This is an important thing to understand when editing Wikipedia. It's not enough to be an expert in the field (other editors have no idea what your experience is). Peer-reviewed, published data from an official source is always going to be more trusted than data in a blog post.
Re: Mt Rainier Elevation Survey
#5"Editors of the [Wikipedia] page appear to be non-experts in the field and biased against me personally for unknown reasons... It is unfortunate that Wikipedia cannot be trusted as a reliable source of information." No, you cannot be trusted over the USGS (US Geological Survey). This is an important thing to understand when editing Wikipedia. It's not enough to be an expert in the field (other editors have no idea wh…
[deleted]
Re: Mt Rainier Elevation Survey
#6"Editors of the [Wikipedia] page appear to be non-experts in the field and biased against me personally for unknown reasons... It is unfortunate that Wikipedia cannot be trusted as a reliable source of information." No, you cannot be trusted over the USGS (US Geological Survey). This is an important thing to understand when editing Wikipedia. It's not enough to be an expert in the field (other editors have no idea wh…
Actually in this case he can be trusted more than the USGS, as he took a more recent measurement.
This is a known shortcoming of Wikipedia’s model, which is optimized to manage conflicts between editors rather than optimized for accuracy.
Re: Mt Rainier Elevation Survey
#7"Editors of the [Wikipedia] page appear to be non-experts in the field and biased against me personally for unknown reasons... It is unfortunate that Wikipedia cannot be trusted as a reliable source of information." No, you cannot be trusted over the USGS (US Geological Survey). This is an important thing to understand when editing Wikipedia. It's not enough to be an expert in the field (other editors have no idea wh…
Actually in this case he can be trusted more than the USGS, as he took a more recent measurement. This is a known shortcoming of Wikipedia’s model, which is optimized to manage conflicts between editors rather than optimized for accuracy.
[deleted]
Re: Mt Rainier Elevation Survey
#8"Editors of the [Wikipedia] page appear to be non-experts in the field and biased against me personally for unknown reasons... It is unfortunate that Wikipedia cannot be trusted as a reliable source of information." No, you cannot be trusted over the USGS (US Geological Survey). This is an important thing to understand when editing Wikipedia. It's not enough to be an expert in the field (other editors have no idea wh…
The data in this blog post is peer reviewed by an expert.
Re: Mt Rainier Elevation Survey
#9"Editors of the [Wikipedia] page appear to be non-experts in the field and biased against me personally for unknown reasons... It is unfortunate that Wikipedia cannot be trusted as a reliable source of information." No, you cannot be trusted over the USGS (US Geological Survey). This is an important thing to understand when editing Wikipedia. It's not enough to be an expert in the field (other editors have no idea wh…
Isn’t that just an appeal to authority?
Re: Mt Rainier Elevation Survey
#10[flagged]