Birdwatch Note
2025-01-05 17:55:23 UTC - MISINFORMED_OR_POTENTIALLY_MISLEADING
Science relies on evidence, not consensus, but consensus reflects findings rigorously tested. Peer review, while imperfect, filters quality, with results continuously scrutinized. Research funding bias is possible, but conclusions stand only if validated by global evidence. https://phys.org/news/2023-09-science-editor-defends-peer-review-climate.html
Written by B832B23F17B5B40E297D0D58A98987318689BFD905D34CD782EBFD950338666C
Participant Details
Original Tweet
Tweet embedding is no longer reliably available, due to the platform's instability (in terms of both technology and policy). If the Tweet still exists, you can view it here: https://twitter.com/foo_bar/status/1875908675443069158
Please note, though, that you may need to have your own Twitter account to access that page. I am currently exploring options for archiving Tweet data in a post-API context.
All Information
- ID - 1875964326823288844
- noteId - 1875964326823288844
- participantId -
- noteAuthorParticipantId - B832B23F17B5B40E297D0D58A98987318689BFD905D34CD782EBFD950338666C Participant Details
- createdAtMillis - 1736099723903
- tweetId - 1875908675443069158
- classification - MISINFORMED_OR_POTENTIALLY_MISLEADING
- believable -
- harmful -
- validationDifficulty -
- misleadingOther - 0
- misleadingFactualError - 1
- misleadingManipulatedMedia - 0
- misleadingOutdatedInformation - 0
- misleadingMissingImportantContext - 1
- misleadingUnverifiedClaimAsFact - 1
- misleadingSatire - 0
- notMisleadingOther - 0
- notMisleadingFactuallyCorrect - 0
- notMisleadingOutdatedButNotWhenWritten - 0
- notMisleadingClearlySatire - 0
- notMisleadingPersonalOpinion - 0
- trustworthySources - 1
- summary
- Science relies on evidence, not consensus, but consensus reflects findings rigorously tested. Peer review, while imperfect, filters quality, with results continuously scrutinized. Research funding bias is possible, but conclusions stand only if validated by global evidence. https://phys.org/news/2023-09-science-editor-defends-peer-review-climate.html
Note Ratings
| rated at | rated by | |
| 2025-01-05 21:46:04 -0600 | Rating Details | |
| 2025-01-05 19:06:17 -0600 | Rating Details | |
| 2025-01-05 12:40:49 -0600 | Rating Details | |
| 2025-01-05 16:40:32 -0600 | Rating Details | |
| 2025-01-05 15:22:08 -0600 | Rating Details | |
| 2025-01-05 12:52:25 -0600 | Rating Details | |
| 2025-01-05 19:01:44 -0600 | Rating Details | |
| 2025-01-06 04:45:26 -0600 | Rating Details | |
| 2025-01-05 20:00:44 -0600 | Rating Details |