All patent applications are signed under penalty of perjury. However, the US Patent and Trademark office disbanded its enforcement department in 1974. So, you can perjure yourself on a patent application with impunity.
Unless it's testimony in a criminal case, or the perjury trap in front of a grand jury, or something they want to prosecute like lying on your tax form, the Federal government is in general lassiez faire about perjury, or even encouraging of it with their reluctance to prosecute, especially perjury committed by a so-called intellectual property holder.
Whether we like it or not, it comes to chains of trust.
There are some social systems out there that clearly work better than others, e.g. Science.
The $69 (x 10 to the 12) question is: can you come up with social structures in other realms (e.g. politics, public policy) that work as well as science.
Outside of rigidly defined formal logic like math or restructuring into syllogism, there are no formal fallacies.
Yup, that's pretty much it.
If you look around at the way we actually evaluate information, I think you can see that we use multiple stages; there are at least two levels of engagement with two different standards of evidence: the quick look and the close focus. A rule of thumb like "trust the experts" is excellent in the early stages, but the logical fallacies become important in the later stages.
I see three things that are properly called "press releases" in the headlines of Slashdot this morning. It's a typical beginner mistake. Please stop.
Except, you know, all the people who HAVE actually looked for voter fraud and have found nothing that would affect a result.
Really earlier than that, Fermi expected it and had equipment shielded and double-shielded when testing the first nuclear bomb. But we should not confuse cosmic rays and EMP.
If A = B and B = C, then A = C, except where void or prohibited by law. -- Roy Santoro