![]() Some activity on RationalWiki is used for critiquing and "monitor Conservapedia". Many RationalWiki articles mockingly describe beliefs that RationalWiki opposes, especially when covering topics such as alternative medicine or fundamentalist Christians. It is written from a self-described "snarky point of view" and "scientific point of view" (both abbreviated as SPOV) rather than a " neutral point of view" (NPOV), and publishes opinion, speculation, and original research. RationalWiki differs in several ways from the philosophy of Wikipedia and some other informational wikis. RationalWiki provides information about pseudoscientific theories and to educate "individuals with unorthodox views". The humor in the article is a running gag in the wiki and is not the result of vandalism. Screenshot of RationalWiki's article on goats. After being reverted and blocked, "Lipson and several other contributors quit trying to moderate the articles and instead started their own website, RationalWiki". He and Conservapedia administrators "questioned credentials and shut down debate". Conservapedia is an encyclopedia established by Andy Schlafly as an alternative to Wikipedia, which Schlafly perceived as suffering from a liberal and atheist bias. In April 2007, Peter Lipson, a doctor of internal medicine, attempted to edit Conservapedia's article on breast cancer to include evidence against Conservapedia's claim that abortion was linked to the disease. RationalWiki has been described as liberal. Its stated goals are to "analyze and refute pseudoscience and the anti-science movement, document ' crank' ideas, explore conspiracy theories, authoritarianism, and fundamentalism, and analyze how these subjects are handled in the media." It was created in 2007 as a counterpoint to Conservapedia after an incident in which some editors of Conservapedia were banned. ![]() As a result, the global flood and the supposed geological facts to back it up are an integral part of young earth creationism and " creation science".RationalWiki is an online wiki which is written from a skeptical, secular, and progressivist perspective. From this assertion, the entire " science" of flood geology has evolved. Fundamentalists, on the other hand, insist on the literal historicity of the flood account - because if this was made up, then the historicity of the rest of the Bible is in doubt. The majority of intelligent modern biblical scholars interpret the flood story allegorically for example, they see it as a lesson of God's mercy toward the faithful. ![]() The narrative does not specify if very young children, babies (or even the unborn!), and almost all the world's animals were killed because they were wicked or if they were just collateral damage ( Genesis 6:8). The type of wickedness is left unclear so believers are free to develop imaginative ideas. The flood, according to the Bible, was brought on because every person in the whole world - except eight people God chose - was wicked and needed to be killed. ![]() The narrative in the scripture tells the story of a great flooding of the entire antediluvian (pre-Flood) world, in which every last human and animal died, except for the ones saved on the Ark, a vessel constructed at God's command by Noah. The global flood is a (fairly self-descriptive) catastrophic mythical event recounted in the book of Genesis. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |