“"argument by argument" (tm)”?  If you have to invent a fallacy then even you have to know that you’re grasping for straws.

Collect, we do not have to say “the world is regarded as being round by some members of the scientific community” any more than we have to say “water has never definitively been proven to be wet”.  While I would personally prefer that we said something like “Ham’s claims have been disproven by modern science” (because I think it sounds more authoritative), if it’s between “incorrect” or nothing then “incorrect” is clearly the superior choice because it is factually true.

And please don’t try that “all the intelligent readers already know he’s wrong so there’s no need to point out that he’s wrong” argument.  Every fringe-pusher and their uncle has already tried that tactic and it’s bullshit.  We can’t just allow Wikipedia to be full of rubbish and assume that the smart readers will filter the fact from the fiction.  76.107.171.90  



Toxicity label: obscene