+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 21

Thread: Wikipedia and the Abuse of Truth

  1. Link to Post #1
    Avalon Member Kryztian's Avatar
    Join Date
    16th September 2012
    Location
    New Jersey USA
    Language
    English
    Posts
    1,302
    Thanks
    7,509
    Thanked 8,614 times in 1,250 posts

    Default Wikipedia and the Abuse of Truth

    I am starting this thread to document examples of abuse on Wikipedia by fundamentalist “skeptical” zealots. Since Wikipedia only shows account names for the people who edit, it is impossible to know exactly who is doing this work, and one can only speculate about what their mind-set is and what intentions they have. I am assuming that most of these people are well intentioned but have such strong biases about what truth is and what disregard what is “encyclopedic” and put their dogmatic agenda first behind reason and fairness first.

    Some examples of this type of abuse.
    • Overuse of the word “pseudo”, “so-called” and other inappropriate and derogatory terms applied to topics and people only because it offends their “science” based belief-system and their inability to reconcile evidence and information from their fundamentalist beliefs.

    • Automatic deletion of researched information because it does not come from “reliable” authorities. (Meanwhile anything stated by magician James Randi is treated as gospel truth. There are approximately 900 links to his page as of this writing.)

    • Character assassination of researchers that have nothing to do with the topic at hand or factual reality.

    • An unwillingness to accept information that is ambiguous or contradicts official and academic explanations.
    Wikipedia is “the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit” and I do not doubt that there are frequent incidents of people erasing well researched information and replacing it with their own personal epiphany they may have had after ingested mind altering substances, or that there are those who views are absolutist and narrow and feel entitled to broadcast there unique ideas and delete those they disagree with, when in fact an encyclopedia is supposed to be a reflection of the entire intellectual work of humanity.

    The problem on Wikipedia is that one school of thought has been given the power to proclaim their superiority over the other, and proclaim their disdain for many hard working researchers in fields such as parapsychology, archeology, ufology, conspiracy, alternative healing, etc.

  2. The Following 24 Users Say Thank You to Kryztian For This Post:

    Baby Steps (20th March 2019), Bill Ryan (20th March 2019), boja (20th March 2019), christian (21st March 2019), ExomatrixTV (20th March 2019), Fellow Aspirant (20th March 2019), Gaia (21st March 2019), happyuk (20th March 2019), Iancorgi (20th March 2019), Intranuclear (20th March 2019), Ioneo (21st March 2019), jcking (20th March 2019), JRS (22nd March 2019), justntime2learn (21st March 2019), Kristin (20th March 2019), Nasu (20th March 2019), Olaf (20th March 2019), peterpam (22nd March 2019), Rawhide68 (24th March 2019), skogvokter (20th March 2019), Slorri (22nd March 2019), Tintin (20th March 2019), Valerie Villars (20th March 2019), Wmel (20th March 2019)

  3. Link to Post #2
    Avalon Member Kryztian's Avatar
    Join Date
    16th September 2012
    Location
    New Jersey USA
    Language
    English
    Posts
    1,302
    Thanks
    7,509
    Thanked 8,614 times in 1,250 posts

    Default Re: Wikipedia and the Abuse of Truth

    Wikipedia article on Sam Osmanagich (article titled Semir Osmanagich)

    Quote Semir Osmanagić ... also known as Sam Osmanagich, is a Bosnian businessman... He is best known for promoting his pseudo-archaeological project in central Bosnia (near the town of Visoko) related to the so-called "Bosnian pyramids". Osmanagić claims that a cluster of natural hills in central Bosnia and Herzegovina are the largest human-made ancient pyramids on Earth. He has conducted extensive marketing about the site and promoted tourism there.
    • It’s amazing how many times people can insert “pseudo” and “so called” into a sentence. Is there any clear distinction as to what constitutes the difference between a “pseudo-archeologist” and a real one? If you want a list of all the archeologists on Wikipedia, you can locate them starting at this page. You will find in here many archeologists who 1) didn’t get a university degree, 2) proposed ideas that were controversial in their own time or discarded by future generations. Osmanagic is involved in study and excavating a site. Why can he not be called an “archeologist”?

    • In a nutshell, the first paragraph describes Osmanagic as a businessman engaged in promoting tourism to Bosnia. The author(s) is/are saying: he’s just in this for the money folks so he can sell pyramid tchotchkes at his store (not that he has one).. And yet there is absolutely no evidence (at least not in this page) to support this insinuation. Skeptics will tell you they are out to fight unsubstantiated claims, and yet that is exactly what they are trying to convey in this one short paragraph.

    • Wikipedia almost always lists people by the name that they are commonly known by (e.g. the article is titled “Lady Gaga” and not “Stefani Germanotta”.) Almost all the English speaking world knows him as Sam Osmanagic. Why do Wikipedians insist on listing him as “Semir”?


      Quote the hills are common natural formations known as flatirons with no signs of human construction
    • The above is the simple quick refutation of Osmanagic’s idea. Yes, flatirons are a common geological formation. What they neglect to mention is that this Bosnian formation is four flatirons, all sloping at about the same rate, all at 90 degree angles from each other. Also, the article neglects to mention what has been the focus of Osmanagic’s work - the discovery and excavation of a tunnel system found under the pyramid.


    Personally, I am not convinced by Osmanagic’s theory on the pyramid, but I have no reason to believe that he is nothing but completely sincere, honest, hard working and dedicated to uncovering the truth. Just the first paragraph alone is evidence that the powers that be at Wikipedia have given reign to a group of people who have no interest in a fair and balanced representation of the truth and harmfully attack and personally insult people whose work they disagree with.

  4. The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to Kryztian For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (20th March 2019), christian (21st March 2019), Intranuclear (20th March 2019), justntime2learn (21st March 2019), Nasu (20th March 2019), Rawhide68 (24th March 2019), Rosemarie (20th March 2019), Tintin (20th March 2019), Valerie Villars (20th March 2019)

  5. Link to Post #3
    UK Avalon Founder Bill Ryan's Avatar
    Join Date
    7th February 2010
    Location
    Ecuador
    Posts
    21,332
    Thanks
    73,728
    Thanked 268,560 times in 19,816 posts

    Default Re: Wikipedia and the Abuse of Truth

    In Richard Dolan's recent interview with Russell Targ, a well-established mainstream physicist who's done important work with lasers, Targ describes his dispute with Wikipedia.

    The problem was that Targ also worked with Hal Puthoff on the famous SRI Remote Viewing research project in the 1970s, which Wiki trashed (of course). That was all that was on Targ's Wiki page.

    They would NOT mention his laser work, which was well-known and well-acknowledged. He was published in his field, and had done a bunch of important stuff. They just wanted to make Targ look like a kook.

    In the end, Targ asked his friend and colleague, Nobel Prizewinning physicist Brian Josephson, to please step in to intervene. Only then did Wiki appear to concede the point and give Russell Targ at least a partially honest page.
    Last edited by Bill Ryan; 20th March 2019 at 00:38.

  6. The Following 19 Users Say Thank You to Bill Ryan For This Post:

    Baby Steps (20th March 2019), christian (21st March 2019), ExomatrixTV (20th March 2019), Fellow Aspirant (20th March 2019), Gaia (21st March 2019), Iancorgi (20th March 2019), Intranuclear (20th March 2019), jcking (20th March 2019), JRS (22nd March 2019), justntime2learn (21st March 2019), Kristin (20th March 2019), Kryztian (20th March 2019), muxfolder (20th March 2019), Nasu (20th March 2019), Rawhide68 (24th March 2019), Rosemarie (20th March 2019), Tintin (20th March 2019), Valerie Villars (20th March 2019), Yoda (20th March 2019)

  7. Link to Post #4
    Scotland Unsubscribed
    Join Date
    16th February 2012
    Posts
    2,036
    Thanks
    2,282
    Thanked 9,311 times in 1,801 posts

    Default Re: Wikipedia and the Abuse of Truth

    I noticed overuse of pseudo and so-called. They are also kind of scathing and patronizing towards Linus Pauling + Iodine therapy.

    And this on St Germain:

    In order to deflect inquiries as to his origins, he would invent fantasies, such as his being 500 years old,[6] leading Voltaire to sarcastically dub him "The Wonderman".[7]

    It doesn't matter if you think St Germain is for real or not. The use of "fantasy" is biased editorializing. "Claimed to be" is more neutral. Even far-fetched claim would be better. "Fantasy" is downright bad writing.

    EDIT: I just changed the St Germain article. Made the following comment:

    Changed "invent fantasies"" to "far-fetched claims" -- Invent fantasies is biased editorializing.

    New article here. Lets see if they roll it back:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Count_of_St._Germain

    *

    Here they are BSing over Linus Pauling.

    In his later years he promoted nuclear disarmament, as well as orthomolecular medicine, megavitamin therapy,[11] and dietary supplements. None of the latter have gained much acceptance in the mainstream scientific community.[7][12]

    A re-evaluation of the claims in 1982 found that the patient groups were not actually comparable, with the vitamin C group being less sick on entry to the study, and judged to be "terminal" much earlier than the comparison group.[153] Later clinical trials conducted by the Mayo Clinic also concluded that high-dose (10,000 mg) vitamin C was no better than placebo at treating cancer and that there was no benefit to high-dose vitamin C.[154][155][156] The failure of the clinical trials to demonstrate any benefit resulted in the conclusion that vitamin C was not effective in treating cancer; the medical establishment concluded that his claims that vitamin C could prevent colds or treat cancer were quackery

    *

    Quakery. Wow.


    Someone could set up a better wiki.

  8. Link to Post #5
    United States Avalon Member onawah's Avatar
    Join Date
    28th March 2010
    Posts
    10,996
    Thanks
    26,863
    Thanked 47,083 times in 9,580 posts

    Default Re: Wikipedia and the Abuse of Truth

    This just shows how effectively Wikipedia convinces people of the half-truths they post. He is hardly just a businessman. Here is Dr. Semir Osmangich's bio:
    "Semir Osmanagich was born on June 1st, 1960 in Zenica.

    His father Professor Muris Osmanagic obtained first PhD in mining exploration in former Yugoslavia, was holder of highest scientific award “Nagrada AVNOJ-a”, member of Yugoslav Parliament, minister in Government, and author of number of books and scientific articles. His grandfather Munib Osmanagic moved from Visegrad to Sarajevo between two World Wars and became a director of “Merhamet Bank” in Sarajevo and a member of Parliament of Kingdom of Yugoslavia.

    Semir Osmanagich completed elementary school in Sarajevo, graduated high school (“Druga gimnazija”) in Sarajevo as a top student in his class in City of Sarajevo (“student of generation”) and completed college diplomas, Masters and PhD at the University of Sarajevo.

    His business career started in mid-1980s at UNIS (United Metal Industry of Sarajevo), a huge 55.000-employees corporation where he was working as a research fellow in UNIS-Institute on strategic planning. In 1989 he started his own export-import and construction business in Sarajevo (Bosnia) and Split (Croatia) as the owner of the “Meteorit, Inc.” and “Meteorit 2, Inc.”.

    After he moved in Houston, Texas he was working for the manufacturing company “Houston Protectors, Inc.” as a general manager. He started his own business “Met Company, Inc.” (est. 1995.), a manufacturing company with the customers in Oil&Gas, Construction and other industries. He’s presently President of the Met Company, Inc. which employs over 120 employees and owner of “Met Holding Group, LLC”. He was a long-time member of the Board of Directors of non-profit “Alliance for Multicultural Activities” in Houston." "
    http://semirosmanagic.com/en/biography.html

    Quote Posted by Kryztian (here)
    Personally, I am not convinced by Osmanagic’s theory on the pyramid, but I have no reason to believe that he is nothing but completely sincere, honest, hard working and dedicated to uncovering the truth. Just the first paragraph alone is evidence that the powers that be at Wikipedia have given reign to a group of people who have no interest in a fair and balanced representation of the truth and harmfully attack and personally insult people whose work they disagree with.
    I think if you read the posts from Truthseeker512 (who was there in Bosnia for quite awhile as part of the excavation team) and me (who was following the whole development and posting about it frequently, including my accounts of Dr. O's presentations at several Conferences that I attended) on the thread about Dr. Osmanagich and the Bosnian Pyramid, you may change your mind about the authenticity of the scientific evidence that has been presented by Dr. O. and other reputable scientists. Though that thread is rather jumbled now, you can use the advanced search engine to find those posts.

    And here is a list of books he has authored :"PUBLISHED BOOKS:

    Dr. Sam Osmanagich, ‘Energy Points of the Planet’, publisher: Fondacija ‘Arheološki park: Bosanska piramida Sunca’, Sarajevo, Bosnia (language: English), 2017., ISBN 978-9958-674-07-5
    Dr. Semir Osmanagić, ‘Energetske tačke Planete’, publisher: Fondacija ‘Arheološki park: Bosanska piramida Sunca’, Sarajevo, Bosnia (language: Bosnian), 2017., ISBN 978-9958-674-07-5
    Sam Osmanagich, ‘Piramidi Perdute in Bosnia e Piramidi Nel Mondo’, publisher: Uno Editori, Torino, Italy (language: Italian), 2017., ISBN 978-88-99912-27-7
    Sam Osmanagich, ‘Das Geheimnis Der Anasazi’, izdavač: Amra Verlag, Hanau, Germany (language: German), 2016., ISBN 978-3-95447-158-4
    dr.sci. Semir Osmanagich, ‘Sve piramide svijeta i Bosanska dolina piramida’, (Sixth Edition), publisher: Fondacija ‘Arheološki park: BOsanska piramida Sunca’, Sarajevo, Bosnia, (language: Bosnian), 2016., ISBN 978-9958-674-00-6
    Dr. Sam Semir Osmanagić, ‘Pyramidy Sveta A Bosenske Udoli Pyramid’, publisher: Fondacija ‘Arheološki park: Bosanska piramida Sunca’, Sarajevo, Bosnia, (language: Czech), 2016., ISBN 978-80-260-9489-0
    Dr. Sam Osmanagich, Ph.D., ‘A Boszniai Piramisok’, publisher: Angyali Menedek Kiado, Budapest, Hungary, (language: Hungarian), 2016., ISBN 9786155647055
    Dr. Sam Osmanagich, Ph.D., ‘Unexpected Archaeological Locations of Israel and Palestine’, publisher: Fondacija ‘Arheološki park: Bosanska piramida Sunca’, Sarajevo, Bosnia, (language: English), 2016., ISBN 978-9958-674-06-8
    Dr. Semir Osmanagić, ‘Neočekivane arheološke lokacije Izraela i Palestine’, publisher: Fondacija ‘Arheološki park: Bosanska piramida Sunca’, Sarajevo, Bosnia, (language: Bosnian), 2016., ISBN 978-9958-674-06-8
    Sam Osmanagich, ‘Die Pyramiden Von Bosnien & Auf Der Ganzen Welt’, publisher: Fondacija ‘Arheološki park: Bosanska piramida Sunca’, Sarajevo, Bosnia, (language: German), 2015., ISBN 978-9958-674-04-4
    Sam Osmanagich, Ph.D. & Peggy Sue Skipper, ‘Ancient History from Behind the Veil’, (second edition), publisher: Fondacija ‘Arheološki park: Bosanska piramida Sunca’, Sarajevo, Bosnia, (language: English), 2015., ISBN 978-9958-674-05-1
    Dr. Sam Osmanagich, Ph.D., ‘New Archaeology, Megaliths and Energy of the Planet’, publisher: Fondacija ‘Arheološki park: Bosanska piramida Sunca’, Sarajevo, Bosnia (language: English), 2015., ISBN 978-9958-674-03-7
    Dr. Semir Osmanagich, ‘Nova arheologija, Megaliti i energija Planete’, publisher: Fondacija ‘Arheološki park; Bosanska piramida Sunca’, Sarajevo, Bosnia, (language: Bosniani), 2015., ISBN 978-9958-674-03-7
    Sam Osmanagich, ‘Bosna’Nin Kayip Piramitleri’, publisher: Arkeopera, Istanbul, Turkey (language: Turkish), 2015., ISBN 978-605-396-354-7
    Dr. Sam Osmanagich, Ph.D., ‘Les Pyramides A Travers Le Monde & Les Pyramides Perdues De Bosnie’, publisher: Fondacija ‘Arheološki park: Bosanska piramdia Sunca’, Sarajevo, Bosnia, (language: French), 2014., ISBN 978-9958-674-01-3
    Dr. Sam Osmanagich, Ph.D. ‘Pyramids Around the World & Lost Pyramids of Bosnia’, (Fourth Edition), publisher. Fondacija ‘Arheološki park: Bosanska piramida Sunca’, Sarajevo, Bosnia, 2014., (language: English), ISBN 978-9958-674-01-3
    S. Osmanagič: ‘Vse Piramidi Mira’, izdavač: Veče, Moscow, Russia, 2014., (language: Russia), ISBN 978-5-4444-2030-0
    Sam Osmanagich, ‘Die Pyramiden von Bosnien & Auf der Ganzen Welt (Buch)’, publisher: Amra Verlag, Hanau, Germany, (language: German), 2014., ISBN 978-3-95447-160-7
    Dr. Semir Osmanagich, Ph.D., Armando Mei, Monica Benedetti, ‘Visoko: La Scienza Occulta Delle Piramidi’, publisher: Amando Mei & Monica Benedetti, Italy, 2013 (language: Italian), ISBN 978-1493606221
    Sam Osmanagich, Ph.D., ‘The Mystery of the Anasazi Civilization’, publisher: Fondacija ‘Arheološki park: Bosanska piramida Sunca’, Sarajevo, Bosnia, (language: English), 2013, ISBN 978-9958-674-02-0
    Sam Osmanagich ‘Las Piramides Del Mundo Y Las Piramides Perdidas de Bosnia’, publisher: Obelisco, Barcelona, Spain (language: Spanish), 2013., ISBN 978-84-9777-993-7
    Dr. Sam Osmanagich, Ph.D. ‘Pyramids Around the World & Lost Pyramids of Bosnia’, publisher: Al-Rashed Center, Kuwait City, Kuwait, (language: Arabian), 2012., ISBN 978-99906-622-3-8
    Dr. Sam Osmanagich, Ph.D., "Pyramids Around the World & Lost Pyramids of Bosnia", (Third Edition), publisher: Fondacija ‘Arheološki park: Bosanska piramida Sunca’, Sarajevo, Bosnia, 2012., (language: English), ISBN 978-9958-674-01-3
    Sam Osmanagich & Peggy Sue Skipper, "Ancient History from Behind the Veil", The New Era Times, Houston, USA, 2011., (language: English), ISBN 978-0-980061-3-1
    dr.sci. Semir Osmanagić, ‘Sve piramide svijeta’, publisher: Omega Lan, Zagreb, Croatia, 2011., (language: Croatian), ISBN 978-953-7764-03-6
    dr.sci. Semir Sam Osmanagich, ‘Sve piramide svijeta’, (Third Edition), publisher. Fondacija ‘Arheološki park: Bosanska piramida Sunca’, Sarajevo, Bosnia, 2011., (language: Bosnian), ISBN 978-9958-674-00-6
    Semir Osmanagić, ‘Sve piramide sveta’, publisher: Ezotheria, Beograd, Serbia, 2011., (language: Serbian), ISBN 978-86-7348-393-1
    dr. sci. Semir Osmanagich, “Pyramids Around the World”, publisher: “Archaeological Park: Bosnian Pyramid of the Sun” Foundation, www.bosnianpyramidofthesun.com, 2010, Sarajevo, Bosnia-Herzegovina (language: Bosnian), ISBN 978-9958-674-00-6
    dr. sci. Semir Osmanagich, “Pyramids from Five Continents Will Forever Change the View of Our Past… And Future”, publisher: “Archaeological Park: Bosnian Pyramid of the Sun” Foundation, www.bosnianpyramidofthesun.com, 2010, Sarajevo, Bosnia-Herzegovina (language: Bosnian), ), ISBN 978-9958-674-00-6
    Sam Osmanagich, “Mayalarin Dunasi”, publisher: Arkadas Yayinevi, www.Arkadas.com.tr, 2008, Ankara, Turkey (language: Turkish), ISBN 978-975-509-563-9
    Semir Sam Osmanagich, “A Boszniai Piramisok Volgve Bosanska piramida Sunca, publisher: Mauna-Fe Publishing, www.maunagic.ba, 2007, Sarajevo, Bosnia-Herzegovina (language: Hungarian)
    Semir Sam Osmanagich, “Die Bosniche Pyramide Der Sonne“, publisher: Mauna-Fe Publishing, www.maunagic.ba, 2007, Sarajevo, Bosnia-Herzegovina (language: German)
    Semir Sam Osmanagich, “Bosnian Valley of the Pyramids“, publisher: Mauna-Fe Publishing, www.maunagic.ba, 2006, Sarajevo, Bosnia-Herzegovina (language: English)
    Semir Osmanagic, “Bosanska dolina piramida”, Mauna-Fe Publishing, www.maunagic.ba, 2006, Sarajevo, Bosnia-Herzegovina (language: Bosnian), ISBN 9958-9252-1-4
    Semir Osmanagić, ‘Otkriće prve europske piramide – Bosanska piramida Sunca’, publisher: Klepsidra, 2005., (language: Bosnian), ISBN 9958-9372-0-4
    Sam Osmanagich,”Maiade maailm”, Olion, www.eestikirjstused.com, 2005, Tallin, Estonia (language: Estonian), ISBN 9985-66-438-8
    Semir Osmanagic, “Misterija Anasazija”, TKD Sahinpasic”, www.btcsahinpasic.com, 2005, Sarajevo, Bosnia-Herzegovina (language: Bosnian), ISBN 9958.41-116-4
    Semir Osmanagic, “Civilizacije prije pocetka zvanicne historije”, TKD “Sahinpasic”, www.btcsahinpasic.com, 2005, Sarajevo, Bosnia-Herzegovina (language: Bosnian), ISBN 9958.41-117-2
    Semir Osmanagic, “Kosmicka misija Maja”, TKD “Sahinpasic”, www.btcsahinpasic.com, 2005, Sarajevo, Bosnia-Herzegvoina (language: Bosnian), ISBN 9958.41-115-6
    Sam Osmanagich, “The Mayan World”, Gorgias Press, www.gorgiaspress.com, 2005, Piscataway, New Jersey, USA (language: English), ISBN 1-59333-274-2
    Semir Osmanagic, “Alternativna historija”, TKD “Sahinpasic”, www.btcsahinpasic.com, 2004, Sarajevo, Bosnia-Herzegovina (language: Bosnian), ISBN 1-59333-274-2
    Sam Osmanagich, “The World of Maya”, Svjetlost, www.svjetlost.ba, 2004, Sarajevo, Bosnia-Herzegovina (language: English), ISBN 9958-10-654-X
    Semir Osmanagic, publisher: “Svijet Maja”, Svjetlost, www.svjetlost.ba, 2004, Sarajevo, Bosnia-Herzegovina (language: Bosnian), ISBN 9958-10-654-X
    Sam Osmanagich, “Alternativna povijest”, publisher: Indrija, 2003, Zagreb, Croatia (language: Croatian), ISBN 953-6906906-10-4
    Semir Osmanagić, ˝Meki val’, publisher: Svjetlost, 1987., Sarajevo, Bosnian, (jezik. Srpsko-hrvatski)
    Osmanagich has authored many books about pyramids, megalithic sites and ancient civilizations around the World. They were published in the United States, Turkey, Estonia, Croatia, Germany, France, Slovenia, Serbia, Hungary, Italy, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Czech Republic, Spain, Kuwait."
    http://www.semirosmanagic.com/en/books.html
    Last edited by onawah; 20th March 2019 at 01:16.
    Each breath a gift...
    _____________

  9. The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to onawah For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (20th March 2019), Fellow Aspirant (20th March 2019), Intranuclear (20th March 2019), justntime2learn (21st March 2019), Kryztian (20th March 2019), Nasu (20th March 2019), peterpam (22nd March 2019), Tintin (20th March 2019), Valerie Villars (20th March 2019)

  10. Link to Post #6
    Avalon Member
    Join Date
    21st July 2010
    Age
    33
    Posts
    594
    Thanks
    286
    Thanked 2,686 times in 501 posts

    Default Re: Wikipedia and the Abuse of Truth

    If you are looking to Wikipedia to find the real truth for almost anything, then I would suggest you are using a Knife to try and observe the stars: It is just not the right tool for that.

    I approach Wikipedia as the consensus reality image. If you want to know what most humans think on a subject, then wiki is great. It gives you the straight mainstream view on those topics. This is useful for some things, but if you want to actually understand what is happening then it is only useful for some subject. Most math wikis( not the fringe topics like QED or such topics but rather Geometry or algebra or Chemistry) are actually very informative and you can learn alot, if you can understand the lexical convention of that field which are employed heavily throughout all wikis,


    Why are you mad at Instragram for letting people photoshop their selfies and pretend they arent? It is the same thing.

  11. The Following 10 Users Say Thank You to Praxis For This Post:

    avid (20th March 2019), Bill Ryan (20th March 2019), Fellow Aspirant (20th March 2019), Intranuclear (20th March 2019), justntime2learn (21st March 2019), Kryztian (20th March 2019), Nasu (20th March 2019), onawah (20th March 2019), Tintin (22nd March 2019), Valerie Villars (20th March 2019)

  12. Link to Post #7
    Switzerland Avalon Guide: Here to help
     
    Nasu's Avatar
    Join Date
    6th April 2011
    Location
    Lost in the woods
    Age
    48
    Posts
    1,246
    Thanks
    45,972
    Thanked 5,705 times in 970 posts

    Default Re: Wikipedia and the Abuse of Truth

    As Praxis rightly mentioned, Wikipedia is nothing more than a reflection of the status quo in current thought. As time passes fewer and fewer people are relying on it for serious research. Rather it reflects what the unwashed masses SHOULD think. It is a pseudo encyclopedia, so called, that supposedly anyone can edit, but in reality is a tool to steer opinion and thought.

    My own belief is that it is a social experiment in propaganda and is used as a reference point for the masses to re orientate their given opinions within the matrix and hive mind..... N

  13. The Following 10 Users Say Thank You to Nasu For This Post:

    avid (20th March 2019), Baby Steps (20th March 2019), Bill Ryan (20th March 2019), Gaia (21st March 2019), Intranuclear (20th March 2019), justntime2learn (21st March 2019), Kryztian (20th March 2019), onawah (20th March 2019), peterpam (22nd March 2019), Tintin (22nd March 2019)

  14. Link to Post #8
    Netherlands Avalon Member ExomatrixTV's Avatar
    Join Date
    23rd September 2011
    Location
    Netherlands
    Language
    Dutch
    Age
    53
    Posts
    3,093
    Thanks
    2,725
    Thanked 16,259 times in 2,617 posts

    Exclamation Re: Wikipedia and the Abuse of Truth

    Wikipedia does NOT tolerate ANY discussion about Health Risks & Health Concerns dealing with mass rollout of 5G Cell Towers Everywhere 2019-2020+ ... They just delete all of them even with proper scientific citations ... (see their edit history). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/5G Really Creepy!


    PURE CENSORSHIP!

    Research Stop5G.net ... Join: Fb.com/groups/Stop5G ... Support: Fb.me/Stop5G
    Last edited by ExomatrixTV; 20th March 2019 at 22:45.
    ~no need2follow anyone only consider to broaden (y)our horizon of possibilities
    ~new: Stop5G.net & FB Groups/Stop5G

  15. The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to ExomatrixTV For This Post:

    avid (20th March 2019), Baby Steps (20th March 2019), Bill Ryan (20th March 2019), justntime2learn (21st March 2019), Kryztian (20th March 2019), Nasu (21st March 2019), peterpam (22nd March 2019), Tintin (22nd March 2019), Valerie Villars (20th March 2019)

  16. Link to Post #9
    Avalon Member Kryztian's Avatar
    Join Date
    16th September 2012
    Location
    New Jersey USA
    Language
    English
    Posts
    1,302
    Thanks
    7,509
    Thanked 8,614 times in 1,250 posts

    Default Re: Wikipedia and the Abuse of Truth

    Quote Posted by Nasu (here)
    Wikipedia is nothing more than a reflection of the status quo in current thought.
    Yes, that is what I expect Wikipedia to be, a reflection of human thought, not just academic and institutional, but also what grass roots researchers are doing to, especially when universities and the main stream media are silent on subjects . It is an Encyclopedia, which is a reference book, an outline of human knowledge. It's job isn't to definitively answer complex and controversial questions, it is just a starting place to begin one's inquiry.

    The problem is that on certain fringe topics, topics largely ignored by the academics and media, the powers that be at Wikipedia are not just biased, but they employ techniques that are dishonest, slanderous, manipulative and have nothing to do with the real intellectual truth being forged out there, either in Universities or at place like the "Conscious Life Expo". Wikipedia claims that it is the encyclopedia that "anyone can edit", but in fact it has allowed a small band of dishonest, mean spirited zealots to dominate the writing process on certain topics and produce writing that is not worthy of an encyclopedia. This is way beyond bias. This is about reason and honesty. While Wikipedia has done an amazingly job on some topics, on others it has failed and shows a lack of integrity.

    I only have one example to support that statement so far in this thread, and I am working on another one (this takes a lot of time and one has to track down hard to find references). I also hope others might start analyzing Wikipedia articles and doing a comprehensive analysis of them.

  17. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Kryztian For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (20th March 2019), justntime2learn (21st March 2019), Kristin (21st March 2019), Nasu (21st March 2019), peterpam (22nd March 2019), Tintin (22nd March 2019)

  18. Link to Post #10
    Switzerland Avalon Guide: Here to help
     
    Nasu's Avatar
    Join Date
    6th April 2011
    Location
    Lost in the woods
    Age
    48
    Posts
    1,246
    Thanks
    45,972
    Thanked 5,705 times in 970 posts

    Default Re: Wikipedia and the Abuse of Truth

    It is only a wiki after all. Wiki just denotes it is an editable website / database, editable by the viewer / user. Surely it will only be time before an alternative emerges. Wikiworld, wikiweard, wikiki, etc! If it is not being conceived right now as we type....x... N

  19. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Nasu For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (21st March 2019), justntime2learn (21st March 2019), Kryztian (21st March 2019), peterpam (22nd March 2019), Tintin (22nd March 2019)

  20. Link to Post #11
    Avalon Member Kryztian's Avatar
    Join Date
    16th September 2012
    Location
    New Jersey USA
    Language
    English
    Posts
    1,302
    Thanks
    7,509
    Thanked 8,614 times in 1,250 posts

    Default Re: Wikipedia and the Abuse of Truth

    Quote Posted by Nasu (here)
    It is only a wiki after all.
    Yes, it is only a wiki. It is only the fifth most trafficked website on the internet. It is only the most comprehensive collection of articles (over 5 million in English) that people would turn to when beginning a search on a subject they know little about. It is only a popular resource people would turn to when trying to understand illness and treatment options, both medical and alternative. It is only an essential reference for those who want to understand the institutions and personalities that are making world events happen, like war, economic policies, and human rights. It is only the number one most popular place on this planet where someone would turn to for information when they want an explanation longer than the two or three sentence answer given out by Alexa. It is only a major repository of information that human beings would refer to as they try to create a world that is more healthy, just, peaceful and joyful.

    Why would we here at Project Avalon NOT care about passionately and deeply about Wikipedia? They are numerous posts on our forum documenting how the six companies that control most news media are disinforming us to bring about war, financial enslavement, sickness, degradation to this planet, injustice. If we are outraged about the mental pollution that humans passively absorb from Television News and Newspapers, why would we not care about the pollution that people actively engaged in researching subjects would encounter in a place like Wikipedia?

    And actually, Wikipedia isn't really a Wiki, even though it claims that is is "the encyclopedia that anyone can edit." If it were a true wiki, it would reflect only the average strengths and weaknesses of the many who participate in constructing this massive wiki. But Wikipedia has administrators. They are gatekeepers, people who have extra pull in shaping and crafting the overall structure of an article, people who get to remove information if they wish. I think many of these people are well intentioned and make a good effort to be fair minded. However, many of these gatekeepers are not and we tend to find them managing the same topics we are interested in here at Project Avalon. I am not sure who these people are, but I imagine that many of them are part of the same "brain trust" that edits the "Skeptical Inquirer" and goes to events of "CSICOP" and see James Randi as the arbiter of truth on these matters, and are following in the footsteps of people like Philip Klass.

    Yes, I don't think it is a stretch for us to say on this forum that Wikipedia has some serious flaws when it comes to reporting on issues that are dear to us here, and we need to work at trying to understand and explain what they are .
    Last edited by Kryztian; 21st March 2019 at 02:29.

  21. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Kryztian For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (21st March 2019), justntime2learn (21st March 2019), Nasu (22nd March 2019), onawah (21st March 2019), peterpam (22nd March 2019), Tintin (22nd March 2019)

  22. Link to Post #12
    Netherlands Avalon Member ExomatrixTV's Avatar
    Join Date
    23rd September 2011
    Location
    Netherlands
    Language
    Dutch
    Age
    53
    Posts
    3,093
    Thanks
    2,725
    Thanked 16,259 times in 2,617 posts

    Exclamation Re: Wikipedia and the Abuse of Truth

    How Wikipedia Lies


    Published By Eric Zuesse


    The Flight 93 National Memorial near Shanksville, Pennsylvania Did you know that Vice President Dick Cheney admitted that on 11 September 2001 he, as President George W. Bush’s brief stand-in during the 9/11 attacks that hit the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, issued an order (and it was carried out) to shoot down United Airlines Flight 93 while it was in the air near Pittsburgh? If what he said at the time was true, then the standard ‘historical’ account of the plane’s having been brought down as a result of action by the passengers, would be concocted, not history at all.
    Here is the video-clip of V.P. Cheney on 9/11, making this claim and explaining why he gave that order:

    The Wikipedia article on Flight 93 provides the standard account, and fails even so much as just to mention the Vice President’a assertion and explanation that he provided on national TV at the time of the 9/11 events.
    So: I edited the Wikipedia article by adding a sentence at the end of its opening paragraph, and by following that sentence with a brief second paragraph, and here is that entire two-sentence addition:


    Vice President Dick Cheney alleged that he gave the order to shoot down Flight 93, and explained why when asked about it by Chris Wallace of Fox News as shown in this film-clip

    Consequently, the account given below of what brought the plane down — an account inconsistent with what Cheney said — could be entirely false.

    On the web browser that I was using, the addition showed as having been successfully made in the Wikipedia article. However, to be sure, I opened the URL in a different browser, and this time my addition was absent. I then went back to the “Edit” page” and this time to the “View history” page, and clicked there on “(talk)” and found this message, which I saw virtually immediately after I had thought that I had inserted the new information:

    Hello, I’m Shellwood. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —specifically this edit to United Airlines Flight 93— because it did not appear constructive.

    No other explanation for blocking my addition was provided. “Shellwood” was there saying that mentioning, and linking to the video of Cheney saying, that allegation, which Cheney made on 9/11 about how Flight 93 came down, is not “constructive” to Wikipedia-readers who want information about Flight 93.

    Previously, even the BBC published the fact that Wikipedia is edited by the CIA.

    Anyone who reads the present article is hereby welcomed to try making the same addition to that Wikipedia article, and I hope that one of the readers here will be able to get it accepted by the editors of that site, so that Wikipedia can be made at least moderately trustworthy, on at least that one article. Perhaps if enough people try, then Wikipedia will come to recognize that Wikipedia’s modus operandum isn’t merely a very successful system of propaganda, but that it’s also something of a PR problem for Wikipedia, which they’ll need to do something about, if they’re to be able to survive (or at least retain their credibility) at all. Blocking inclusion in an article, of a fact that disproves part of the ‘history’ (and here the most important part) which is told in that article, is unacceptable in anyone’s eyes.

    As of today, April 20th, the Wikipedia article on Flight 93 does make one, and only one, mention of Cheney:

    Vice PresidentDick Cheney, in the Presidential Emergency Operations Center deep under the White House, upon learning of the premature crash, is reported to have said, “I think an act of heroism just took place on that plane.”[2]

    The link there, [2], goes to a CNN article, likewise published on 11 September 2001, which likewise presents Cheney as saying that he ordered the shoot-down of Flight 93:
    After the planes struck the twin towers, a third took a chunk out of the Pentagon. Cheney then heard a report that a plane over Pennsylvania was heading for Washington. A military assistant asked Cheney twice for authority to shoot it down.
    “The vice president said yes again,” remembered Josh Bolton, deputy White House chief of staff. “And the aide then asked a third time. He said, ‘Just confirming, sir, authority to engage?’ And the vice president — his voice got a little annoyed then — said, ‘I said yes.'”

    The phrase that Wikipedia is quoting from Cheney, “I think an act of heroism just took place on that plane,” appears later in that CNN article, out of context, when one of Cheney’s aides attributes the statement to Cheney, but, since CNN provided no context for it, no reader can intelligently interpret what it had been referring to, if, in fact, the aide did say that Cheney did say it.

    Wikipedia grabbed that out-of-context, possibly apocryphal, Cheney-statement, and constructed their ‘history’ of the plane’s crash, upon it, despite the fact that Cheney, on 9/11, clearly stated that he had ordered Flight 93 to be shot down, and that the order was executed — in other words: despite the fact that Wikipedia’s account of what brought that plane down is incontrovertibly false, even on the basis of the most reliable evidence that Wikipedia itself links to on that matter. Such a ‘history’ is fiction.
    So: any reader at the Wikipedia article who clicks onto its sources, can easily know that though the Wikipedia article presents a ‘history’ in which actions by passengers onboard Flight 93 caused the plane to crash there, that ‘history’ is fake, not at all real (though some allegations in that Wikipedia article might happen to be true).
    This means that only readers who click through to sources can even possibly come anywhere near to knowing anything that’s at all reliable about the history of our time. And, of course, the longer that any event recedes into history, the more immovably fixed the lies become as being ‘history’. We live actually in a world of lies. If modern ‘history’ is fake, then ancient ‘history’ is even more so. What about the Bible? What about even recently written ‘history’ books?

    If Wikipedia is the best that ‘the market’ can come up with for ‘a free press’ in a ‘democracy’, then democracy isn’t at all possible. Something vastly better than this is definitely needed. What’s displayed here isn’t democracy at all: it’s merely ‘democracy’. This means that all of the military invasions by ‘democratic’ countries (such as America), against other countries, are the actions by dictatorships, not actions against dictatorships (as is always claimed).

    So, it’s actually rather easy to document that 1984 — the reality, and not merely the novel — has, indeed, arrived, in our time.

    However, at least in our time, we possess — for the very first time in all of history — the ability to access, merely a click away, an allegation’s actual source, at least in articles such as the present one (since all sources here are linked). The people living in ancient times who were not themselves aristocrats (the people making the key governmental decisions) were unalterably 100% vulnerable to being deceived by aristocrats’ and clergies’ lies, deceived into doing whatever those decision-makers wanted to manipulate them into doing — such as “fighting for God and country!” Unfortunately, the percentage of today’s people who care enough to be skeptical of whatever other people are trying to sell, and to dig deeper than the mere assertions, even just to click onto a link, is too tiny for democracy to be able to function. Unless they become the majority, “democracy” will remain merely a word, not yet even near to being the reality, anywhere.



    That, for example, explains why, despite common realities such as this, “74% [of Americans] view Israel favorably, vs. 21% for Palestinian Authority”. In order for the national aristocracy to control its mass of voters, it must first deceive its mass of voters; and, in America, they’re deceived, and have been so, for decades, at least.
    Last edited by ExomatrixTV; 21st March 2019 at 21:55.
    ~no need2follow anyone only consider to broaden (y)our horizon of possibilities
    ~new: Stop5G.net & FB Groups/Stop5G

  23. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to ExomatrixTV For This Post:

    justntime2learn (21st March 2019), Nasu (22nd March 2019), onawah (21st March 2019), peterpam (22nd March 2019), Slorri (22nd March 2019)

  24. Link to Post #13
    Netherlands Avalon Member ExomatrixTV's Avatar
    Join Date
    23rd September 2011
    Location
    Netherlands
    Language
    Dutch
    Age
    53
    Posts
    3,093
    Thanks
    2,725
    Thanked 16,259 times in 2,617 posts

    Default Re: Wikipedia and the Abuse of Truth

    The 50 Craziest Lies in Wikipedia History:

    https://www.complex.com/pop-culture/...pedia-history/
    ~no need2follow anyone only consider to broaden (y)our horizon of possibilities
    ~new: Stop5G.net & FB Groups/Stop5G

  25. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to ExomatrixTV For This Post:

    Kristin (21st March 2019), Nasu (22nd March 2019), onawah (21st March 2019)

  26. Link to Post #14
    Netherlands Avalon Member ExomatrixTV's Avatar
    Join Date
    23rd September 2011
    Location
    Netherlands
    Language
    Dutch
    Age
    53
    Posts
    3,093
    Thanks
    2,725
    Thanked 16,259 times in 2,617 posts

    Default Re: Wikipedia and the Abuse of Truth

    ~no need2follow anyone only consider to broaden (y)our horizon of possibilities
    ~new: Stop5G.net & FB Groups/Stop5G

  27. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to ExomatrixTV For This Post:

    Kristin (21st March 2019), Nasu (22nd March 2019), onawah (21st March 2019)

  28. Link to Post #15
    Scotland Unsubscribed
    Join Date
    16th February 2012
    Posts
    2,036
    Thanks
    2,282
    Thanked 9,311 times in 1,801 posts

    Default Re: Wikipedia and the Abuse of Truth

    My edit has stayed for two days, maybe there is some good in this world:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Count_of_St._Germain

    In order to deflect inquiries as to his origins, he would make far-fetched claims, such as being 500 years old,[6] leading Voltaire to sarcastically dub him "The Wonderman".[7]

    I changed "ďnvent fantasies" to "far-fetched claims."

  29. Link to Post #16
    Avalon Member Kryztian's Avatar
    Join Date
    16th September 2012
    Location
    New Jersey USA
    Language
    English
    Posts
    1,302
    Thanks
    7,509
    Thanked 8,614 times in 1,250 posts

    Default Re: Wikipedia and the Abuse of Truth

    Ufology

    Most Wikipedia articles that are more than a few paragraphs long begin with a brief definition or outline of the subject, no more than a few sentences long. The “skeptics” always need to work their thoughts into the essential definition, to brand the topic and the people who work in that world as fundamentally deranged or corrupt, and that they should go else where if they don’t want to end up being a tin-foil hatted woo-woo .

    Here’s the three sentence intro on Ufology:

    Quote Ufology is the study of reports, visual records, physical evidence, and other phenomena related to unidentified flying objects (UFO). UFO reports have been subject to various investigations over the years by governments, independent groups, and scientists. However, ufology, as a field, has been rejected by modern academia and is considered a pseudoscience.
    I’m sure you read the first two sentences without a problem and then did a double take on the third because there are exactly two complete fabrications and misrepresentation about ufology:
    1. As any ufologist knows, academia has been utterly silent on the matter of ufology, ignoring the history, the events, the questions that ufologist asks. If there are any remarks at all, the are either vague or are failed attempts to reduce ufologists and UFO witness and experiencers to delusional simpletons motivated by a need for recognition. The article also failed to note that some significant ufologist have found positions in academia including John Mack (Harvard), David Jacobs (Temple University), David Halperin (UNC Chapel Hill), Andrew Hartley (UNC Charlotte) and Diane Walsh Pasulka (UNC Wilmington) .

    2. The easy way for “skeptics” to defame and demean a formidable and serious topic is to apply the term “pseudoscience”. There is no clear litmus test of what is and isn’t a pseudoscience, never the less and the label is frequently applied without any analysis and consideration of the subject matter and where rational, factual or procedural error lie. The problem with applying the label to “ufology” is that it is not a science, let alone a “pseudoscience.” If universities did embrace ufology, it would be under the umbrella of history. Ufology is about understanding past events and making sense of them. Just as historians might utilize botany to understand crop failure and famine, or nuclear physics to understand the atomic blast at Hiroshima, some ufologists are assisted by a background in subjects like propulsion, radar, material science . Ufologists and historians utilize science to understand events, but their subject matter is not science. Science makes predictions and suggest ways of change outcomes (experiments) which can be measured quantitatively, qualitatively and statistically. Ufology and History are not making predictions, and it is an absurd use of language to construe them as a field of science.

    Of course, if you make bold claims in the first three sentences of the subject matter, you have to elaborate on them, with footnotes and documentation. So let us look a bit further down in the article to see how this claim is substantiated.

    Quote Ufology is characterized by scientific criticism as a partial[22] or total[23][24] pseudoscience
    The numbers are footnotes that reference:
    • #22 is the book “Science, Action, and Reality”.by Finish philosopher Raimo Tuomela. This book is a work of philosophy and not science. Footnotes frequently refer to texts that are out of print and not easy to obtain, and I have not been able to do so, yet.

    • #23 is “The psychology of science and the origins of the scientific mind” by Gregory Feist, a psychologist. Again, a text not yet obtained.

    • #24 is “Science, technology, and society: an encyclopedia”, Oxford University Press (2005) by Sal Restivo, a professor of sociology. On pages 175 and 176 (the latter being referenced in the footnotes), the author talks about the distinction between grassroots science (done by non academics, mostly unpaid) versus academic science (done at universities), and how the boundary between them is often quite blurry. Often the relationship is friendly, however, in the case of “ufology”, academics often stigmatize ufology as “pseudoscience” to put a boundary between themselves and the grassroots people. The author is talking about semi-conscious bias on the part an academic community, not any thoughtful, academic, analysis of what ufologist actually do. This references does not back up the idea that ufology is characterized by pseudoscience, but rather, that academia is characterized elitism.

    • Also, footnote #27 used to establish the pseudoscience claim, is Brenda Denzler’s “The Lure of the Edge Scientific Passions, Religious Beliefs, and the Pursuit of UFOs”. Ms. Denler has her degree in Religious Studies and the book seems to lie in that field
    * * * * *

    The Wikipedia article then continues with a long section on UFO classification, including the Hynek System and the Vallée System. These are long technical, tedious sections, not terribly important to current ufologists and rather obscure (although both J. Allen Hynek and Jacques Vallée have made huge important contributions to the field.) I can only speculate that 8% of the article is devoted to this matter because:
    • It makes it look like ufology is a science, which our mysterious authors need to establish before applying the “pseudoscience” label.

    • It is a long, tedious and technical section that would discourage the reader who wasn’t already frightened away by the “seriously unacademic” and “pseudoscience” labels from concluding that ufology is a boring and incomprehensible subject.

    * * * * *

    What is missing from this article is a history of the events, especially from 1947 onward, that have shaped the popular conscious. Almost nothing about Roswell, Washington D.C. (1952), Barney and Betty Hill, Dexter, Michigan (1966), Travis Walton. Fortunately Hessdalen is mentioned, because academics were present, but no mention that they were ultimately perplexed and unable to explain these phenomena.

    Also missing is evidence of any academic debunking of ufology, especially from someone in the hard sciences. While there are passing generalized and not necessarily negative comments from philosophy, sociology, religious studies and psychology, there is no academics work from any scientist (especially physicists, astronomers, engineers) demonstrating any kind of serious intellectual work and researching that would substantiate the absurd claim of “academic rejection” or “pseudoscience” at the head of the article that is supposed to crystallize the perception of ufology.

    What if Wikipedia prevented African Americans from participating in writing the introductory summary of the article on “Malcolm X” article, or encouraged atheists to take editorial control on all articles pertaining to religion and theology, or made Tom Cruise the administrator for the article on “Psychology”? It would be an outrage and would cause people to seriously question the validity of their articles and the ethics of creating them. Yet it is obvious that serious ufologists have no part on crafting this introductory sentence on ufology, and the task has been delegated to a small band of “experts” who have spent little time or energy investigating this subject matter. Wikipedia does not tolerate bigotry on other subjects, and they should not tolerate it here in this article or other articles about alternative healing, paranormal research, grassroots archeology and other forms of extra academic research. Until Wikipedia addresses these issues, we should regard it as a project flawed not by it’s democratic policy of allowing anyone to edit it, but by it’s practice of harboring anti-intellectual bigots and giving them priority and power to control the content on certain serious subjects.




    .
    Last edited by Kryztian; 23rd March 2019 at 01:40. Reason: formatting

  30. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Kryztian For This Post:

    Nasu (22nd March 2019), Sandy123 (24th March 2019)

  31. Link to Post #17
    Avalon Member Kryztian's Avatar
    Join Date
    16th September 2012
    Location
    New Jersey USA
    Language
    English
    Posts
    1,302
    Thanks
    7,509
    Thanked 8,614 times in 1,250 posts

    Default Re: Wikipedia and the Abuse of Truth

    Extrasensory perception

    On November 16th, 2018 at 12:41 pm, a user added a one sentence paragraph to the article on Extrasensory perception:

    Quote In the 1990's, social psychologist and professor emeritus at Cornell University Daryl Bem began research that would culminate in the controversial "Feeling the Future"[21] article that described his results, which indicated proof of precognition in test subjects.[22][23]
    The user included three very legitimate references to prove their point in the footnotes:

    Quote
    • [21] Bem, Daryl J. (2011-3). "Feeling the future: experimental evidence for anomalous retroactive influences on cognition and affect". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 100 (3): 407–425. doi:10.1037/a0021524. ISSN 1939-1315. PMID 21280961.
    • [22]"Daryl Bem Proved ESP Is Real. Which Means Science Is Broken". Slate Magazine. Retrieved 2018-11-16.
    • [23]"Study showing that humans have some psychic powers caps Daryl Bem's career | Cornell Chronicle". Cornell Chronicle. Retrieved 2018-11-16
    That's one reference from Slate Magazine, one from a peer reviewed science journal, and one from the newspaper of a famous Ivy League University.

    While this entry averages about 6 edits per month, it took all of 8 minutes from someone to completely removed this information from the article. That person who uses the user name "Roxy the dog" cited as a reason: "Results were hotly disputed."

    These experiments by Bem are famous, are methodologically sound, and are a landmark event in the history of Parapsychology. But you can't mention them in Wikipedia.

    = = = = =

    Here's another sourced and sound paragraph that appeared briefly, twice in 2016 in the article. After is was was scrubbed and then someone restored it, only for it to be deleted again.

    Quote Proponents of the ESP phenomenon point to numerous studies that cite evidence of the phenomenon's existence: Russell Targ and Harold E. Puthoff, who were physicists at SRI International in the 1970s, as well as J. B. Rhine at Duke University and many others, are often cited in arguments that ESP exists. . In regards to Dr. Rhine's studies, American Institute of Mathematical Statistics examined Rhine's methodology and declared it to be sound[25]. Dr. Rhine challenged one of his critics, psychologist and fellow at Barnard College Bernard Frank Riess, to participate in an ESP experiment for himself. Riess accepted the challenge and was present during the testing of a female participant who scored an abnormally high success rate on the testing. The 70% success rate was well above the statistical average of chance. The results changed Riess from a skeptic to a supporter of studies into parapsychological phenomena[26]. In 1965, two ophthalmologists at Jefferson Medical College in Philadelphia (Duane and Behrendt) used brain-wave patterns on an electroencephalogram to show a psychic link between two identical twins[27].
    One doesn't need clairvoyance to know there are bad people on Wikipedia. Just look on the history tab and you will see who is up to no good.
    Last edited by Kryztian; 23rd March 2019 at 01:45.

  32. The Following User Says Thank You to Kryztian For This Post:

    Sandy123 (24th March 2019)

  33. Link to Post #18
    United States Avalon Member Sandy123's Avatar
    Join Date
    17th January 2019
    Location
    U.S.
    Age
    66
    Posts
    50
    Thanks
    1,009
    Thanked 225 times in 45 posts

    Default Re: Wikipedia and the Abuse of Truth

    It seems there are guard dogs just waiting and alert. If you look up vaccines and 2nd hand smoke you will get zero results on any research against their HUGE money makers. Their own research is paid for by Grant money and will find only what "they" want as results. In 1998 when the whole 2nd hand smoke debate started, a Judge Osteen ruled against the 16 study's saying; that "agency researchers, rather than rigorously proving their case, frequently shifted theories and selected the data they wanted in order to reach a preordained conclusion". They cherry picked data, they changed the confidence levels that science uses as parameters.
    And one more issue that gets my goat is in 2017 they took away hundreds of millions of dollars in tax money from CHIP; a program that insured poor children for the past 30 years. Wonder where that money is going now?
    We are the creators of our reality, what story are you creating?

  34. The Following User Says Thank You to Sandy123 For This Post:

    Kryztian (5th April 2019)

  35. Link to Post #19
    Japan Unsubscribed
    Join Date
    21st March 2019
    Posts
    315
    Thanks
    218
    Thanked 609 times in 227 posts

    Default Re: Wikipedia and the Abuse of Truth

    Manipulating Wikipedia Content: Israeli Program to Train Editors
    https://www.globalresearch.ca/manipu...nature/5321059

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t52LB2fYhoY

  36. Link to Post #20
    Sweden Avalon Member Rawhide68's Avatar
    Join Date
    25th May 2017
    Age
    51
    Posts
    308
    Thanks
    865
    Thanked 1,450 times in 284 posts

    Default Re: Wikipedia and the Abuse of Truth

    Its sad to see brilliant scientists in any in the of academia that stand out & have a true sensation to tell the world. . I'm seeing the big foot from Monty Python's Flying cirus PRRFFF! estinguished, and life goes on as usual.

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts