Difference between revisions of "789 - 11. Statement"
| [checked revision] | [checked revision] |
(Created page with "'''back to Index''' 11. WIKIPEDIA IS BIASED AND IGNORES THE FACTS ABOUT HOMEOPATHY Sadly Wikipedia is no longer the unbiased internet site that you...") |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | + | =11. WIKIPEDIA IS BIASED AND IGNORES THE FACTS ABOUT HOMEOPATHY = | |
| − | |||
| − | Sadly Wikipedia is no longer the unbiased internet site that you can trust. | + | Sadly Wikipedia is no longer the unbiased internet site that you can trust. Their article on homeopathy is pure propaganda and an attack on the integrity of real science. They have refused to allow to be included on their site. This is in direct violation of their stated principles of equanimity and fair reporting. They refuse to allow experts in the field to describe and define their own profession – they only allow biased detractors to write the definition. While it may be a controversial field, there are other controversial fields as well and there are ways to note the controversy and remain objective. Can you imagine if they allowed Atheists to write the definition of Christianity? Good addtions, but please edit this down to 3 or four sentences. Click here to read the whole story about Wikipedia and how it has become corrupted and biased. |
| − | propaganda and an attack on the integrity of real science. | + | For critical information on Wikipedia see: |
| − | They have refused to allow to be included on their site. This is in direct violation of their stated principles of | ||
| − | equanimity and fair reporting. | ||
| − | They refuse to allow experts in the field to describe and define their own profession – they only allow biased | ||
| − | detractors to write the definition. While it may be a controversial field, there are other controversial fields as well and | ||
| − | there are ways to note the controversy and remain objective. | ||
| − | Can you imagine if they allowed Atheists to write the definition of Christianity? | ||
| − | Good addtions, but please edit this down to 3 or four sentences. | ||
| − | Click here to read the whole story about Wikipedia and how it has become corrupted and biased. | ||
| − | + | [http://www.truthwiki.org/wikipedia Truthwiki] | |
| + | |||
| + | https://www.huffpost.com/entry/dysfunction-at-wikipedia_b_5924226 | ||
| + | |||
| + | | ||
| + | |||
| + | On the Philipp Cross story: | ||
| + | https://off-guardian.org/2018/05/15/wikipedia-takes-down-article-on-philip-cross-life-bans-author/ | ||
| + | |||
| + | https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2018/05/the-philip-cross-affair/ | ||
| + | |||
| + | https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2018/05/23/more-about-wikipedia-corruption.html | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | This is an empty page to create content. Please write your article here. | ||
| + | |||
| + | For advice how to edit, please use the Help in the menu or see here: [http://www.freewiki.eu/en/index.php?title=Processing_aids http://www.freewiki.eu/en/index.php?title=Processing_aids] | ||
Revision as of 00:06, 11 November 2018
11. WIKIPEDIA IS BIASED AND IGNORES THE FACTS ABOUT HOMEOPATHY
Sadly Wikipedia is no longer the unbiased internet site that you can trust. Their article on homeopathy is pure propaganda and an attack on the integrity of real science. They have refused to allow to be included on their site. This is in direct violation of their stated principles of equanimity and fair reporting. They refuse to allow experts in the field to describe and define their own profession – they only allow biased detractors to write the definition. While it may be a controversial field, there are other controversial fields as well and there are ways to note the controversy and remain objective. Can you imagine if they allowed Atheists to write the definition of Christianity? Good addtions, but please edit this down to 3 or four sentences. Click here to read the whole story about Wikipedia and how it has become corrupted and biased. For critical information on Wikipedia see:
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/dysfunction-at-wikipedia_b_5924226
On the Philipp Cross story: https://off-guardian.org/2018/05/15/wikipedia-takes-down-article-on-philip-cross-life-bans-author/
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2018/05/the-philip-cross-affair/
https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2018/05/23/more-about-wikipedia-corruption.html
This is an empty page to create content. Please write your article here.
For advice how to edit, please use the Help in the menu or see here: http://www.freewiki.eu/en/index.php?title=Processing_aids
