<< Before you answer, please do due diligence and post a reference either supporting or negating the question. If you don’t we will all laugh because you are posting hearsay and innuendo. >>
I agree totally with the first sentence – statements of “fact” should be supported by evidence, preferably scientific research or authoritative opinion based on such research. Inferences based on limited observation should be qualified as such.
But I disagree with the second sentence. We shouldn’t “laugh” at the offender. Challenge, yes. Laugh, no. And consequently I don’t think you can have it both ways – asking me to “read with empathy” while you threaten to laugh at exactly the same behavior.
<< Read with a bit of empathy jrd51. Barkslip is doing his best to express what he knows about persimmon reproduction. >>
I tried. When I moved the issue to this thread, I attempted to depersonalize the discussion. I used the passive voice (“it is asserted”) or used the active voice with a nameless subject (“the commentator”), both trying to focus on the facts not the person. But Dax insisted that I name him. Fine, I can respect him for that. He wants to own his opinion.
I also suggested two ways in which he might have misinterpreted his observations: (1) that he was seeing fruit on hermaphrodite rather than male flowers, and (2) that he was describing the male tree (with some female flowers) rather than the male flower. But he rolled right over those suggestions.
But then, you agree with me that Dax is mistaken. As you state, “Male flowers don’t produce fruit as we all know.” You weren’t gonna tell him yourself publicly, out of empathy? You might just laugh privately? Sorry, I’m more in the camp that promotes radical honesty.
Please understand – I really don’t mind mistakes, mine or somebody else’s. We’re all here to learn, and mistakes are part of that process. HOWEVER, our collective learning will be undermined if people who don’t really know something speak with an air of authority as if they do know. Instead, all of us should approach topics where we are inexpert with a healthy dose of humility.
On the other thread, when Dax challenged my comment that male flowers don’t bear fruit), he could have taken a humbler approach. He might have asked me or other forum members for clarification. “Are we sure that . . . . because my friend has observed . . . ?”
In the end, I just could not let a categorical statement that “we all know” is false stand unchallenged.