"

 Kahan recentism 

I just reverted an edit by Vgy7ujm for two reasons. First, the relevant article was only published 4 days ago, and so it is too recent for the rest of the academic community to have chewed it over and responded in any way. The articles in Wikipedia are not random newsfeeds of the latest events in each topic, but are encyclopedic summaries based mainly on secondary sources, that give a balanced overview of their subject. Primary research sources published in the last few days rarely make an article, and should never be used at the end of a section implying that they may represent the 'last word' on a subtopic. Secondly, the abstract of the referenced paper actually says that, by setting experimental subjects ""“science comprehension” tests"", that it has detected ""the contamination of the science-communication environment with forms of cultural status competition"". This is a long way from the much more even-handed coverage that Vgy7ujm gave it, by saying ""that global warming skeptics are as familiar with the relevant science as their opponents. They simply arrive at different conclusions."" - as if this gives their antiscience views equal validity. I think we need to give things time, and if necessary, add a more balanced view of this research if, in time, it turns out to be notable.   "