from Halplm
SF, things that are obvious, and common knowledge, don't have to be backed up like a PHD thesis, especially on a message board.
Truth is truth.
Facts are facts.
Opinions are opinions.
This is true in a PhD. thesis and true on message boards. If you present something as a fact, it is your obligation to lay that foundation, especially if someone then asks you to calling into question your original statement. This has been explained to you many timeswith authoritative citations in previous discussions.
Here is one such citation explaining how to properly use common knowledge in furthering any argument:
http://library.csusm.edu/plagiarism/how ... common.htm" target="_blank" target="_blank" target="_blank
Common Knowledge
There is no clear boundary on what is considered common knowledge. Even experts on plagiarism disagree on what counts as common knowledge. For instance, many sources only consider facts — current and historical events, famous people, geographic areas, etc. — to be potentially common knowledge. Others also include nonfactual material such as folklore and common sayings. Some sources limit common knowledge to only information known by others in your class, other sources look at what is common knowledge for the broader subject area.
The two criteria that are most commonly used in deciding whether or not something is common knowledge relate to quantity: the fact can be found in numerous places and ubiquity: it is likely to be known by a lot of people. Ideally both conditions are true. A third criteria that is sometimes used is whether the information can be easily found in a general reference source.
How do you tell if you have met the quantity criteria? Some experts say that a fact is common knowledge if it can be found in three independent sources. Purdue’s Online Writing Lab recommends finding five independent sources before considering a fact common knowledge. The point is that common knowledge can be found in a variety of sources. As you do more research on a topic, you are likely to discover which facts count as common knowledge because you will encounter these facts in many places.
How do you tell if a fact is ubiquitous? Some facts may be well known within one discipline and papers written within that group may assume the information is commonly known. That same piece of information used in other situations or by ‘non-experts’ may require attribution. A good rule of thumb is to acknowledge ideas which are not common knowledge among your peers such as the other students in the course for which you are writing the paper.
How do you know if it is a general reference source? Reference sources collect together facts for easy look-up. Dictionaries, encyclopedias, almanacs, and gazetteers are typical examples. Reference sources that focus on a specific area are not considered ‘general.’ The definition of Marfan syndrome mentioned previously came from a medical dictionary, a specialized reference source, that may not be readily available to most people. Therefore, you would probably want to cite this source if you were writing for people not familiar with medical information.
Yet again, we come back to your repeated assertion - the foundation of all your posts and the central problem I have with you - that something you observe is a fact to you. If it is obvious to you, then its a fact to you. This would be true if you were the All Powerful God of the Universe, but you are not. What is obvious to you is not at all obvious to the rest of the world.
Halplm, my problem with you is NOT
*** your political views
*** your social views
*** your opinions
*** your constant disagreeing with me
*** your snide remarks
*** your sarcasm
That is not the problem.
The problem I have with you is the way you present your points and arguments. You act as if you were Moses coming down from the Mount and you have the Truth as revealed by God in your hands to dispense to the flock. Problem is, all you are willing to do is to tell us what God gave to you and you want to hide the tablets under your robe. We are suppose to take your word as the Gospel Truth. We are suppose to take your personal observations of what is obvious to you as fact. We are suppose to take your understanding of common knowledge as documented evidence.
And I cannot and will not do that because you are not an authority. If we were having a discussion about playing professional basketball and you had played professionally for eight years and I never did - I would defer to your superior knowledge and experience making you an authority in that area. If the roles were reversed, and you were trying to tell a pro player about his own game, you would be
'talking through your ass' as Evenstar once very accurately described that situation.
You and I can end any problems we have, at least on my part, if you only document your views with supporting evidence. That is all that is asked of anyone alleging facts which are subject to dispute.