Essay On Website Credibility

Among the many hoax websites present in the internet this website (http://www.buydehydratedwater.com/) dealing with dehydrated water has been classified as a hoax website for two main points. First, it does not have a clear definition of dehydrated water. And second of all, it does not present a clear argument as to why their product should be patronized. The article has no scientific basis or whatsoever that will persuade people to stop drinking tap water, water from desalination plants or even water coming from the stream and the headwater (upstream). An emotional appeal was just used to persuade the people from stopping to consume water from the aforementioned sources. To quote, “Stop drinking tap water. Stop drinking well water. Refuse to touch water from desalination plants. And remember that mountain spring water is a disaster waiting to happen. Do you know how many people and animals urinated in your spring water, upstream? Yes, it's disgusting to think about (perhaps even humorous), but it happens. So stop drinking it. Insist on only one natural substance” Dissecting further this statement, the writer failed to realized that it is illogical for people who solely depend on spring water such as indigenous groups to pollute their main source knowing how scarce freshwater resources are. By asking how many people and animals urinate in headwaters the writer make it seems like they were able to see for themselves and made a concrete estimation of people and animals polluting the headwater, when in fact, headwaters are very difficult to access by locals because of slippery rocks and thick forest that purifies the water before it can be used for quenching thirst and other domestic purposes. A credible website such as Nature’s Scitable (http://www.nature.com/scitable/search-scitable?criteria=dehydrated%20water) presents facts and figures objectively. These facts and reports are solely based on scientific studies and not just hearsays. These scientific studies are objective and free from biases because they are subjected to critical peer reviews from respectable and notable scientist.