“Specific Page Title or Article Title” | Ghost Hunting |
Primary Contributor to the Website (if given) (author, editor, producer, etc) Ex: POV | Author-- Trant Brandon |
Title of the Entire Website (not www. ) Ex: CBC News | Zerotime Paranormal |
Publisher or Sponsoring Organization of the website (if given) Ex: CBC | N/A |
Date Page was Last Revised Ex: 10 September 2010 | N/A |
Date You Read It Ex: 21 January 2012 | February 8, 2012 |
<URL address> (ALL of it) | http://www.zerotime.com/ghosts/myths.htm |
FIVE FACTS FROM THE SOURCE (Embedded): EX: The article cites Maria Nikolajeva, a professor of at Cambridge, as saying that Bella does not "in any way promote independent thinking or personal development" in women, instead portraying a woman "meek and willing to do anything for her vampire boyfriend" (POV). |
1. One myth of ghosts is that if you "enter a haunted location" you will encounter a ghost, but people who spend the night and don't see a spirit "label the case debunked. Ghosts are not put here to put on a show for the living" (Brandon). |
2. "There are hoaxers and frauds" in the filed of ghost hunting", however true ghost hunters do not commit deception (Brandon). |
3. Many believe ghost hunting cannot be a science because "it cannot produce a repeatable experiment", but if that were true then astronomy, geology, paleontology, etc. are not credible sciences (Brandon). |
4. One myth claims that "psychic powers are needed to be a ghost hunter". False! True ghost hunters "should demonstrate how to think logically and reasonably" (Brandon). |
5. When people say ghosts do not exist, that is their personal opinion. Brandon argues, "the primary function of science" is to "study extraordinary claims." |
Summary of Source (Three-Four Sentences of the Who, What, Where, Why, and How in your own words. NO OPINION):
The article is composed of myths and reality of ghosts. The myths are rumors believed by society while Brandon argues with logic. He covers myths from their existence to the science of it.
Credibility of Source:
Author or Site: Who is the author? What training have they had? If there is no author, examine the site. What is the purpose of the site? Who funds the site?
I believe the author is credible because he does not base his answers and responses on his opinions, but instead he answers the myths in a more logical approach.
Attachment: Does the author or site have anything to gain from writing this, or is it simply informative? For example, is it a cigarette business posting an article about the benefit of cigarettes, or is it a scientific community unaffiliated with the cigarette business?
He does not receive a monetary profit but instead he allows readers to read two sides of the argument.
Bias: Do you detect a bias (a favoring of either side) in the author's writing?
No bias detected.
References: Does the author cite references in the writing? If so, do these add or take away from the credibility?
No. All is based on his own personal knowledge.
Use of Source: How will you use this source in your project?
This source can be used to see two sides of my research topic: myths and the reality of it.