Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-04-13 15:32:47 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: DA93FFF3755EE564FB27ACD82B5441E8104175E5F866EF182CED6BF16BB92E78
Participant Details

Original Note:

This has been answered over and over -here it is (point 6) in 2002. Some might have further doubts, but anyone who just didn't bother to Google it at all is not looking for the truth, but lazily farming engagement, and it's not good for anyone to indulge them. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/15-answers-to-creationist/

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1779154232303652925
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - DA93FFF3755EE564FB27ACD82B5441E8104175E5F866EF182CED6BF16BB92E78
  • createdAtMillis - 1713022367924
  • version - 2
  • agree - 0
  • disagree - 0
  • helpful - 0
  • notHelpful - 0
  • helpfulnessLevel - NOT_HELPFUL
  • helpfulOther - 0
  • helpfulInformative - 0
  • helpfulClear - 0
  • helpfulEmpathetic - 0
  • helpfulGoodSources - 0
  • helpfulUniqueContext - 0
  • helpfulAddressesClaim - 0
  • helpfulImportantContext - 0
  • helpfulUnbiasedLanguage - 0
  • notHelpfulOther - 0
  • notHelpfulIncorrect - 0
  • notHelpfulSourcesMissingOrUnreliable - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculationOrBias - 0
  • notHelpfulMissingKeyPoints - 0
  • notHelpfulOutdated - 0
  • notHelpfulHardToUnderstand - 0
  • notHelpfulArgumentativeOrBiased - 1
  • notHelpfulOffTopic - 0
  • notHelpfulSpamHarassmentOrAbuse - 0
  • notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 0
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 0
  • ratingsId - 1779154232303652925DA93FFF3755EE564FB27ACD82B5441E8104175E5F866EF182CED6BF16BB92E78