1
edit
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
mLine 390:
Line 390: + + + + + + + + + + +
Talk:Examples of Bias in Wikipedia (view source)
Revision as of 10:32, March 24, 2007
, 10:32, March 24, 2007This is hilarious.
::Bias against... elementary proofs, right?--[[User:LutherBifteck|LutherBifteck]] 00:59, 24 March 2007 (EDT)
::Bias against... elementary proofs, right?--[[User:LutherBifteck|LutherBifteck]] 00:59, 24 March 2007 (EDT)
== This is hilarious. ==
:'Polls show that about twice as many Americans identify themselves as "conservative" compared with "liberal"'.
:'About 60% of Americans accept the account of the Great Flood in the Bible.'
:'Wikipedia editors are about 4 times as atheistic or non-religious as the American public.'
:'Wikipedia often uses foreign spelling of words, even though most English-speaking users are American.'
:'even though most Americans reject the theory of evolution,[33] Wikipedia editors commenting on the topic are nearly 100% pro-evolution.'
All very true. However, it's rather weird then to go on to quote - apparently as a further attack on Wikipedia - the fact that
:''One simple fact that must be accepted as the basis for any intellectual work is that truth - whatever definition of that word you may subscribe to - is not democratically determined.
Since, ''as Conservapedia acknowledges here'', truth is not democratically determined, how is it relevant what percentage of Americans believe in evolution or Noah's Ark?