Talk:Plant rights/Archive1

From RationalWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

This is an archive page, last updated 10 July 2023. Please do not make edits to this page.
Archives for this talk page:  , (new)(back)

"Studies"[edit]

The four "studies" listed in Central Arguments are not studies. The first one (Michigan State Uni) is a joke article. It may have once been an actual study, but a link to the published study is required if there ever was one. The second one (Helvetica Institute) is attributed to a person that doesn't seem to exist, and is not a study but rather a one liner from a maybe-existant person from an organization that doesn't seem to exist. Baylor medical center has never published a study about plants feeling pain and the link goes to a music sales website. The last one - Malcolm Wilkins - "said" some things, but has no study listed to back it up. The link is to a scanned article that suggests that Wilkins had a theory...


"Fun"[edit]

I am surprised to see this page is labeled as "fun". The article is not a parody article, Plant Liberation Front is a real organization. You may have confusion because it is a less heard concept than animal rights, but still it does exist and form a social movement. If you don't like the concept, you are free to criticize it, but the word "Fun" at the beginning of the title is not funny. --PLF (talk) 18:54, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

But it's loony and therefore is Fun. If, as would seem, they take themselves seriously then they're also loony and therefore fun. This is a personal opinion and not necessarily that of RationalWiki. 19:00, 7 September 2010 (UTC) SusanG Toast
So what are your saying? A full coverage in the Weekly Standard is not enough? A government declaring plant rights is not enough? Right now it is a fringe concept (in the sense it is held by a minority people), but tomorrow it may grow larger, but dismissing it as fun will only weaken your counter-argumentation. --PLF (talk) 19:05, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
Quite honestly, I couldn't give a damn. if loonies want to be in our mainspace then they can be, but it's so ludicrous that it simply has to be a wind up. Publicity does not a product make. 19:12, 7 September 2010 (UTC) SusanG Toast
However crackpot it may sound, when a government has declared plants have rights [1], then this concept should be taken seriously. If you want to criticize it, criticize it seriously and provide valid and logical counter-arguments. --PLF (talk) 19:17, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
Drive-by has a bit of a point... maybe reconvert it to mainspace and add the batshit insane template? Blue (pester) 19:18, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
this concept should be taken seriously Coffee spray.gif Blue (pester) 19:19, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
<Pedantry Corner> A site that has a mis-spelling in the second para on it's front page loses any credibility. 19:22, 7 September 2010 (UTC) SusanG Toast
Anyway, just for the sake of your knowledge, Wikipedia recently added an article about Plant rights. So you guys decide. --PLF (talk) 19:30, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
I'm inclined to agree with PLF. A lot of woo is weird to the point of being laughable - but we don't put it in fun for that reason. We could always add a note saying that it could be a Poe.--BobSpring is sprung! 19:35, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
This article seems like a joke to me, if this is going to be a mainspace article it needs to be more critical. Much, much more critical.. --Onion Hi! :) 21:00, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
Definitely a Poe. And yes, it does. Blue (pester) 21:07, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
Parts are parody. But the subject itself is not. Blue (pester) 22:12, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Ok nice, I will try to add some information. It will be your job guys to add criticism. --PLF (talk) 03:25, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

Actually we are more likely to add to the article. But thanks for telling us our job. --BobSpring is sprung! 08:02, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

Ho Ho! Just found out that the Discovery Institute was behind the Weekly Standard article! The plot thickens. I've added it to the intro.--BobSpring is sprung! 06:36, 8 September 2010 (UTC)