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?

Question

anonymous · Answer

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?

anonymous · Answer

i concluded that he didnt go to any other websites for proof i don't know if thats right?

anonymous · Answer

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?

anonymous · Answer

@O_Ojereisha Yes, that is certainly a factor.  What @moses004 said is a major concern.

anonymous · Answer

and noo it didnt say it  gave him any info that Erik the Red actually built a community in Massachusetts before the Mayflower pilgrims. is just said that there was.

anonymous · Answer

Right, the author hasn't cited the archaeological evidence.

anonymous · Answer

So, if a blogger doesn't support a claim or identify him/herself or explain in any way why the claim is valid, does that that blogger have very much credibility?

anonymous · Answer

No