Talkorigins.org is a newsgroup created by Usenet. It is devoted to the discussion and debate of physical and biological origins. A large percentage of the articles and discussions on the website is focused around the evolution/creation controversy. Some of the other topics discussed on the site include; theology and cosmology, catastrophism, biology, geology, and the origin of life.
The archive of the talkorigins.org contains arrays of essays and articles many of which have been published on the site at some particular point in time in the future. The main reason behind the creation of the archive is to provide mainstream scientific responses to most of the frequently asked questions, which has surfaced at one point in time or another, and the frequently rebutted assertions of the advocates of intelligent design and all other creationist pseudo-sciences.
The website consists of a welcome page which gives incite of what talkorigins.org is all about. It is stated on this page that the authors of almost all the articles on this website are those that accept the prevailing scientific view that the earth’s present biodiversity is as a result of evolution, that there wasn’t any global flood, and that the earth itself is ancient.
The website also contains a user feedback page, local search engine, “post of the month” feature, and an extensive lists of links to similar websites in which evolution/creation controversy are discussed.
- Is it clear what organization is responsible for the contents of the page?
Answer: The organization responsible for the website contents are the Usenet newsgroup.
- Is there a link to a page describing the goals of the organization?
Answer: There are links to pages that describes the goals of the organization.
- Is there a way of verifying the legitimacy of this organization? That is, is there a phone number or postal address to contact for more information? (Simply an email address is not enough.)
Answer: Yes, there is. The website contains a contact page on which the emails for the organization are displayed.
- Is there a statement that the content of the page has the official approval of the organization?
Answer: Yes, there is a statement that claims that the content of the page has the official approval of the organization. This statement is located on the welcome page under the subtitle “How do I know the contents of this archive are reliable?”
- Is it clear whether this is a page from the national or local chapter of the organization?
Answer: No, there is no page from the local or national chapter of the organization.
- Is there a statement giving the organization's name as copyright holder?
Answer: No, there are no such statements.
Criterion #2: ACCURACY
- Are the sources for any factual information clearly listed so they can be verified in another source?
Answer: No, most of the sources for factual information are not clearly listed.
- Is the information free of grammatical, spelling, and typographical errors?
Answer: Yes, the information provided on the website is free of typographical, spelling, and grammatical errors.
Criterion #3: OBJECTIVITY
- Does the website give an unbiased, objective, fact-based presentation of the topic?
Answer: Not really, the website is biased towards a particular side of the theory of evolution.
- If the information presented is not objective, are the organization's biases clearly stated?
Answer: Yes, the biases of the organization are clearly stated.
- Is the website free of unstated bias?
Answer: Yes, the website is free of unstated bias.
- If there is any advertising on the page, is it clearly differentiated from the informational content?
Answer: There are no adverts on the website.
Criterion #4: CURRENCY
- Are there dates on the page to indicate:
- When the page was written?
- When the page was first placed on the Web?
- When the page was last revised?
Answer: Yes, there are dates of the website that indicates the dates of publication, for every article, and when last they are revised.
- Are there any other indications that the material is kept current?
Answer: Not really, most of the materials are not updated.
Criterion #5: COVERAGE
- Is it clear what topics the page intends to address?
Answer: The topics each page intends to address are usually well stated.
- Does the page succeed in addressing these topics, or has something significant been left out?
Answer: Most of the pages succeed in addressing their topics of intent.
- Is the point of view of the organization presented in a clear manner with its arguments well supported?
Answer: The organization’s point of view is presented in a very lucid manner with its arguments supported by proofs from authoritative sources.
Is there an indication that the page has been completed, and is not still under construction?
Answer: Yes, there are indications that the web page has been completed.
Reference
Exploring the Creation/Evolution Controversy. The TalkOrigins Archive. 1997
<http://www.talkorigins.org/>
Frequently Asked Questions and Their Answers. The TalkOrigins Archive. 1997.
<http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/faqs-qa.html>
Contacting the Talk.Origins Archive. The TalkOrigins Archive. 1997.
<http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/contact.html>
