Flash Science
Editorial methodology
How Flash Science researches, writes, sources and corrects every explainer — the five-step process behind each article, and what happens when we get one wrong.
Flash Science exists to make the biggest questions in science clear, accurate and genuinely trustworthy. This page explains exactly how we produce our explainers, so you can judge our work for yourself.
Our five-step process
Research from primary sources
Every explainer begins with desk research drawing on reputable, authoritative sources — space agencies such as NASA and ESA; government science bodies such as NOAA, NIST, the FDA and the U.S. Department of Energy; peer-reviewed journals; national museums and observatories; and university educational resources. We prioritise primary and official sources over secondary reporting.
Write in plain language
We rewrite complex science into everyday English without dumbing it down. Each article opens with a direct "Flash Answer" for readers in a hurry, then builds the full explanation step by step with analogies, worked examples and clearly labelled key facts.
Separate fact from estimate
We are explicit about certainty. Established, well-measured facts are stated plainly; estimates, models and open questions are flagged as such in the text. Where a popular explanation is a myth — and in science many famous ones are — we present the myth alongside the actual evidence rather than repeating it.
Cite everything
Every explainer ends with a "Sources & further reading" list so you can verify our claims and go deeper. If a figure or claim matters, we want you to be able to check it at its source.
Review and date
Each article carries its publication date and an editorial update date. We update that date when the wording, sources or presentation changes. An update date does not imply an independent specialist review of every claim.
How we use AI and original visuals
Flash Science uses AI tools as part of its research, drafting and illustration process, always under human editorial direction and review. Facts are checked against the authoritative sources listed in each article — not taken from a model's unaided output. No explainer is published without human review for accuracy and clarity.
Our covers are AI-created editorial illustrations. Inside articles, we use a mix of disclosed AI illustrations and licensed photographs. Captions identify generated images and credit photographs; images are not offered as scientific evidence. Read our image policy.
Authorship
Every explainer is published under the byline of a named human editor, Sok Heng Oeun, who is responsible for its research, writing and final check. He is not a scientist and the about page says so plainly; the site’s credibility is meant to rest on the linked sources at the foot of every article, not on a credential. We do not fabricate author biographies, credentials, expert quotes, statistics, reviews or testimonials anywhere on this site.
Corrections policy
Accuracy matters more to us than speed. If you spot an error anywhere on Flash Science, please email contact@flashscience.org. We review every report, correct verified mistakes promptly, and update the article's editorial update date when we make a substantive change.
Flash Science is a general-education resource. It is not a substitute for professional medical, legal, financial or engineering advice.