2 ms·
> The source was a South Korean periodical. This means basically nothing. If it were fake, would a South Korean periodical publish it? Yes, almost certainly.
by MichaelCollins 4y ago
> The source was a South Korean periodical.
This means basically nothing. If it were fake, would a South Korean periodical publish it? Yes, almost certainly. But if it were real, would a South Korean periodical publish it? Yes, almost certainly.
That sort of 'evidence' washes out. All we're left with is unverifiable claims.
- smcl 4y agoI think you're supposed to take two of them in concert with each other - it originated in South Korea and was published during a particularly politically convenient time in South Korea. I don't know personally how important or suspicious that is, but the fact that it's clearly been marked and acknowledged as "unevaluated" is maybe a stronger reason to take it with a pinch of salt.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]