phrogpilot73
Well-Known Member
If you're not happy with Wikipedia, try this: http://www.conservapedia.com/Main_Page
-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
Alternative to Wikipedia
- Thread starter phrogpilot73
- Start date
chiefwhitehorse
New Member
Whats so different about it? Its based off the same concept as WIKI...
plus it takes it a while to load(LAME)
plus it takes it a while to load(LAME)
phrogpilot73
Well-Known Member
I didn't notice the long time to load, and I blamed it on NMCI. Yes, it is based on the same concept of Wiki, but I liked the requirement for sources, etc... It just seemed a little more professional/less biased than Wiki...
Dunno if I'd call this "unbiased." Yes, Wikipedia has some liberal-slanted entries, but for more uncontroversial stuff, it's really not too bad.
Yet "Conservapedia" comes up with this gem in an article on "Wikipedia bias:"
Yet "Conservapedia" comes up with this gem in an article on "Wikipedia bias:"
Most Americans reject evolution? Riiiiight. Methinks either someone is drinking their own Kool-Aid over there or this nation is heading down the tubes faster than I thought.
And the point is no matter what people believe, the facts are the facts and should not be skewed. Out of curiosity, I took a look around and many of the articles had grammar/spelling/structure mistakes. The page for "judaism" was 3 sentences long and many pages I read included what Jesus had to say about the subject and I'm not even joking.
The answer to liberal bias (perceived or actual) isn't an equal and opposite conservative bias. I know the idea of critical thinking is anathema to most Americans, but telling people what they want to hear doesn't constitute knowledge. In the absence of completely objective facts, why not present multiple opinions on a subject, then let people hash it out in their own minds instead of telling people that nobody believes in evolution. 
Brett
Brett
Eh?! A couple observations on their page "Examples of Bias in Wikipedia"......
http://www.conservapedia.com/Examples_of_Bias_in_Wikipedia
"The entry for the Renaissance in Wikipedia refuses to give enough credit to Christianity."
No source and not exactly unbiased.......
"Wikipedia often uses foreign spelling of words, even though most English speaking users are American. Look up "Most Favored Nation" on Wikipedia and it automatically converts the spelling to the British spelling "Most Favoured Nation", even there there are far more American than British users. Look up "Division of labor" on Wikipedia and it automatically converts to the British spelling "Division of labour," then insists on the British spelling for "specialization" also."
Uhhhhhh......Isn't England the mother country of English, what's the problem?
Then there is this in their entry on the Scopes trial:
http://www.conservapedia.com/Scopes_trial
"The trial in 1925 of John Scopes, for teaching evolution in Tennessee, was a defeat of Darwinism, and Tennessee has remained conservative ever since."
"The Hollywood version heaped mockery on any argument that teaching evolution could be socially harmful."
"Bryan won the trial and kept Tennessee mostly free from the evolution indoctrination that has plagued the United States and Europe. To this day Tennessee is among the least intrusive states in requiring evolution."
"Thanks to Bryan's victory in the Scopes trial, Tennessee voters have been educated without oppressive evolution theory for 75 years."
Biased....naaahhhhhhh, doesn't look like it to me! :icon_roll
110% agree...but why have an absence of "completely objective facts" & scientific observation? Otherwise it is just another discussion board for people to push an agenda.The answer to liberal bias (perceived or actual) isn't an equal and opposite conservative bias. I know the idea of critical thinking is anathema to most Americans, but telling people what they want to hear doesn't constitute knowledge. In the absence of completely objective facts, why not present multiple opinions on a subject, then let people hash it out in their own minds instead of telling people that nobody believes in evolution.
Brett
skidz
adrenaline junky
They're actually quite friendly and have been known to enjoy a good PB&J from time to time.
Brett
