Consider the following situation and explain what might be a problem with the credibility of the source or the thinking involved: You go to a web blog and find an article that says there is archeological proof that Erik the Red actually built a community in Massachusetts before the Mayflower pilgrims. The author, however, must remain anonymous until his dissertation is published that explains his proof. Pitfalls in credibility?
Stacey Warren - Expert brainly.com
Hey! We 've verified this expert answer for you, click below to unlock the details :)
At vero eos et accusamus et iusto odio dignissimos ducimus qui blanditiis praesentium voluptatum deleniti atque corrupti quos dolores et quas molestias excepturi sint occaecati cupiditate non provident, similique sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollitia animi, id est laborum et dolorum fuga.
Et harum quidem rerum facilis est et expedita distinctio. Nam libero tempore, cum soluta nobis est eligendi optio cumque nihil impedit quo minus id quod maxime placeat facere possimus, omnis voluptas assumenda est, omnis dolor repellendus.
Itaque earum rerum hic tenetur a sapiente delectus, ut aut reiciendis voluptatibus maiores alias consequatur aut perferendis doloribus asperiores repellat.
I got my questions answered at brainly.com in under 10 minutes. Go to brainly.com now for free help!
You showed in your last analysis that you can think problems like this through. What have you considered so far, and where are you stuck?
i concluded that he didnt go to any other websites for proof i don't know if thats right?
The issue is with the credibility of the person who is making the claim. Is an anonymous blogger really credible? Does the blogger provide any support for the claim about Eric the Red?