• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

We can't trust wikipedia.

Pin dÁr

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 23, 2014
Messages
3,185
Reaction score
112
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed

zgoldsmith23

Antichrist
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 2, 2011
Messages
7,692
Reaction score
3,368
Location
TN
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
A lot of people here who are against conspiracy link a lot to wikipedia.

However:

Why am I not surprised?! Simple, I never trusted wikipedia in the first place! way too mainstream for me!

544.png
 

NeverTrump

Exposing GOP since 2015
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 21, 2013
Messages
25,357
Reaction score
11,557
Location
Post-Trump America
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
A lot of people here who are against conspiracy link a lot to wikipedia.

However:




Why am I not surprised?! Simple, I never trusted wikipedia in the first place! way too mainstream for me!

You should not trust naturalnews.
 

Pin dÁr

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 23, 2014
Messages
3,185
Reaction score
112
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
You should not trust naturalnews.

I do trust it much more then mainstream ****.

AND I have seen other sources finding these same things

wikipedia is, among others, controlled by the c.i.a
 

Chomsky

Social Democrat
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 28, 2015
Messages
76,641
Reaction score
62,621
Location
Third Coast
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
A lot of people here who are against conspiracy link a lot to wikipedia.

However:




Why am I not surprised?! Simple, I never trusted wikipedia in the first place! way too mainstream for me!
Despite the article, and your & the article's intentions and partisanship, you finally may have posted something (accidentally!) correct, in that Wikipedia is not a trusted source - as can seen by it not being allowed as citation in academic works or for formal debate.

Which I suppose reflects the adage: "Even a broken clock is right twice a day"! :lamo
 

NeverTrump

Exposing GOP since 2015
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 21, 2013
Messages
25,357
Reaction score
11,557
Location
Post-Trump America
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
I do trust it much more then mainstream ****.

AND I have seen other sources finding these same things

wikipedia is, among others, controlled by the c.i.a

Just because it's not mainstream doesn't mean it's right. This is becoming a serious problem in our culture.
 

mike2810

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 26, 2010
Messages
34,768
Reaction score
17,601
Location
arizona
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
I do trust it much more then mainstream ****.

AND I have seen other sources finding these same things

wikipedia is, among others, controlled by the c.i.a

your source for the "controlled by the c.i.a. is?

I rarely use Wikipedia. There are far better sources than that.

That said. check and verify everything is a better way to go.
 
Last edited:

joG

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 27, 2013
Messages
43,839
Reaction score
9,653
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
A lot of people here who are against conspiracy link a lot to wikipedia.

However:




Why am I not surprised?! Simple, I never trusted wikipedia in the first place! way too mainstream for me!

Oh! It is much worse! Wikipedia is almost always very good and catches you, when they make a mistake and don't check, because you are so used to them being right.
 

Kobie

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 17, 2013
Messages
48,281
Reaction score
25,273
Location
Western NY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
I do trust it much more then mainstream ****.

AND I have seen other sources finding these same things

wikipedia is, among others, controlled by the c.i.a

Is there anything you DON'T think is controlled by the CIA?
 

radioman

feckless bon vivant
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 26, 2013
Messages
5,479
Reaction score
4,427
Location
lotusland
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
I do trust it much more then mainstream ****.

AND I have seen other sources finding these same things

wikipedia is, among others, controlled by the c.i.a

Are you katsung47?
 

Thoreau72

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 26, 2012
Messages
29,638
Reaction score
7,639
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Wikipedia is very useful, BUT it is so easily used as a propaganda tool to write history to advance an agenda.
 

Pin dÁr

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 23, 2014
Messages
3,185
Reaction score
112
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Wikipedia is very useful, BUT it is so easily used as a propaganda tool to write history to advance an agenda.

Not only that, but it lies a lot also when it comes to parapsychology, science and other things. The bias towards mainstream nonsense is huge.

Personally I don't trust wkikpedia one bit.
 

sanman

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 22, 2015
Messages
9,900
Reaction score
3,385
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
You can generally trust Wikipedia on non-controversial technical topics. But topics which are in contention is where Wikipedia may be unreliable.
 

psikeyhackr

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 29, 2012
Messages
2,537
Reaction score
506
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
We can't trust anything or anybody. LOL

psik
 

Manc Skipper

Wrinkly member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 25, 2008
Messages
39,327
Reaction score
28,563
Location
Southern England
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
Wiki is as reliable as most textbooks, which can date quickly, so long as you follow through onto the references it supplies. Consider the source!
 

shanners

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 28, 2010
Messages
1,402
Reaction score
405
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
"My experience on Wikipedia showed me clearly that there is some sort of a Jewish Cabal running amok on there unobstructed, and they have seriously damaged most articles dealing with Judaica and Israel – Palestine. I got run out of Wikipedia on faked charges after I blew the whistle on em."

https://robertlindsay.wordpress.com/2010/08/27/the-wikipedia-jews/

He's right. Just take a look at their USS Liberty page which is full of Israeli propaganda. Or check their pages on the "Holocaust", which last time I looked claimed that up to 20,000 Jews were cremated daily at Auschwitz. Never mind the fact that it takes two to three hours to properly cremate a body with modern technology. I went to one a few months ago and after the staff had pressed the "ignite" button they told the distraught widow to come back in a few hours to collect the ashes. Or call one in your area and see how long they say it takes.
 

Lafayette

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 13, 2015
Messages
9,594
Reaction score
2,071
Location
France
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
KEY ARTIFACTS

A lot of people here who are against conspiracy link a lot to wikipedia.

However: Why am I not surprised?! Simple, I never trusted wikipedia in the first place! way too mainstream for me!

Yeah, right. And a road-map is also too "mainstream" for you too?

As a professor of Economics, I wholeheartedly recommend WikiP for factual explanations of basic elements. For instance, the multiple variations in the practice of "democracy". Notably one that has attained some prominence in the US from Bernie Sanders, called Social Democracy. Whyzzat?

Because my fellow Americans are losing some basic instincts of learning, foremost of which is the dictionary of words, their meanings and proper usages. On this web-site, for instance, people keep railing about "socialism", when, in fact (that is, according to its definition), it exists functionally in damn few countries on earth.

Were it ever to have the slightest recognition in the US (which it did not pre-Sanders), people would perhaps understand that the distinction between "socialism" and "social democracy" is that the latter is perfectly comfortable with capitalism and private ownership of the means of production (of goods/services) in a market-economy.

It is in this sense that WikiPedia assumes its primary importance. That of edification of some basic principles, both contemporary and historical that are crucial to good debate of ideas, notions and principles (the key artifacts of a functional society).

The world is a better place for WikiP, one of the better (if not yet the best) evolutions in the matter of Basic Education ...
_______________
 

TheGoverness

Little Miss Sunshine
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 29, 2016
Messages
39,089
Reaction score
47,604
Location
Houston Area, TX
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
"My experience on Wikipedia showed me clearly that there is some sort of a Jewish Cabal running amok on there unobstructed, and they have seriously damaged most articles dealing with Judaica and Israel – Palestine. I got run out of Wikipedia on faked charges after I blew the whistle on em."

https://robertlindsay.wordpress.com/2010/08/27/the-wikipedia-jews/

He's right. Just take a look at their USS Liberty page which is full of Israeli propaganda. Or check their pages on the "Holocaust", which last time I looked claimed that up to 20,000 Jews were cremated daily at Auschwitz. Never mind the fact that it takes two to three hours to properly cremate a body with modern technology. I went to one a few months ago and after the staff had pressed the "ignite" button they told the distraught widow to come back in a few hours to collect the ashes. Or call one in your area and see how long they say it takes.

Da Joos! Da Joos!
 

Pin dÁr

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 23, 2014
Messages
3,185
Reaction score
112
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
As a professor of Economics,

wow, you made my day! You just proved you have no clue at all at what is going in the world.
Democracy? where? There is none.


But also on logic. Referring to yourself as a 'professor' is the logical fallacy of "appeal to authority"

And you must be clueless on money as well.

Otherwise you wouldn't have that position at all.

if you have it, that is. Being a 'professor' You can't proof you do here.
Everyone can write they are this or that, so that even doesn't interest me.

But I do see you are way off.




And. you probably won't understand in your life time what I mean, that is if you really are a professor, because of this:

quote-it-is-difficult-to-get-a-man-to-understand-something-when-his-salary-depends-upon-his-not-.jpg
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom