Conservapedia - User contributions [en]

Talk:Recession

2022-08-08T16:30:24Z

Dave Wilcox: /* Added "Better reference" section */ new section

== Added "Better reference" section ==

This article should use a few of the ''oldest'' references available for the definition of the term recession, preferably hard-copy textbooks on economics that cannot be electronically altered on a whim. I don't currently have access to such old books, but I've heard talk show commentators state that the definition of two successive quarters of declining GDP/GNP has been in use for at least half a century, ''i.e.'', since the 1970s, or earlier, well before the World Wide Web and eBooks. The attempt by the Biden mob in late July 2022 to redefine the term should not be respected, although it should be noted for what it is — an Orwellian redefinition to avoid objective evaluation of their poor performance. — [[User:Dave Wilcox|Dave Wilcox]] ([[User talk:Dave Wilcox|talk]]) 12:30, August 8, 2022 (EDT)

Brave (web browser)

2021-07-23T08:11:15Z

Dave Wilcox: fix link

[[File:Brave lion.svg|thumbnail|Official Brave logo]]
'''Brave''' is an internet browser developed by Brave Software, Inc. based on the [[Chromium (web browser)|Chromium]] browser. Brave blocks known advertisements and trackers by default, as well as known phishing and malware-serving websites. It also offers a system through which its users can give monetary tips to websites or social media account owners.<ref>https://brave.com/tips/</ref> Brave supports [[Windows (operating system)|Windows]], [[macOS]], [[Linux]], [[Android]], and [[iOS]]. The current version features five default search engines: [[Bing]], [[DuckDuckGo]], [[Google]], Startpage and [[Yahoo]].<ref>In-browser list, found here using the Brave browser: chrome://settings/searchEngines</ref> They also use [[Tor]] in their private browsing mode.<ref>https://support.brave.com/hc/en-us/articles/360018121491</ref>

Brave was founded on May 28, 2015, by the [[conservative]] CEO [[Brendan Eich]]<ref>https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2016/01/20/copy-new-internet-browser-brave-announced/</ref>, the co-founder of [[Mozilla]]<ref>https://www.foxnews.com/politics/mozilla-ceo-out-for-opposing-gay-marriage</ref> and creator of the [[javascript]] programming language.<ref>https://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/news/10744011/Who-is-Brendan-Eich.html</ref> It was originally situated in [[Delaware]], where it was known as Hyperware Labs, Inc. They later moved to [[California]] where they were renamed as Brave Software, Inc.

On February 14, 2019, the social media network [[Gab]] developed a web browser named [[Dissenter (web browser)|Dissenter]], an open source web browser based on Brave,<ref>https://apps.gab.com/application/5d3f93a29dd49a5b1d9fc27f</ref> that allows conversations around individual URLs and creates a public square on them where anyone can leave a comment.<ref>https://dissenter.com/help/faq</ref>


== References ==
{{reflist}}

[[Category:Web Browsers]]
[[Category:Free Software]]
[[Category:Conservative Organizations]]

Mojeek

2021-07-23T08:09:25Z

Dave Wilcox: fix link

Mojeek is a UK-based search engine that intends to give unbiased search results, unlike Google which gives liberally biased search results.. Like [[DuckDuckGo]], it doesn't track users. It uses a proprietary page ranking engine different from that of other search engines.

==External links==
*[https://www.mojeek.co.uk| Mojeek]

Bill Whittle

2021-07-23T08:07:40Z

Dave Wilcox: fix link

'''Bill Whittle''' (born April 7, 1959) is a maverick American [[conservative]] commentator who often criticizes [[liberals]] on his popular [[PJTV]]. In addition to his conservative blogger, political commentator and podcast work on [https://www.youtube.com/user/Pajamasmedia YouTube], Bill is a screenwriter, director, editor, pilot, and author.<ref>He is an "editor and director, known for Shootout (2003), Virtual President of the United States (2013) and The Arroyo (2014)." [https://www.imdb.com/name/nm1013687/bio?ref_=nm_ov_bio_sm IMDB.com]</ref>

According to his PJTV webpage, "With history on his side, Bill Whittle challenges widely held misconceptions about politics and society. Frequently asking the difficult ethical questions, Whittle attempts to underscore [[conservative values]] and philosophy through logical reasoning. Whether on Afterburner, Trifecta, Hot Seat or his one-on-one with Andrew Klavan, you can count on Bill for the type of incisive commentary PJTV is known for."<ref>[http://www.pjtv.com/series/afterburner-with-bill-whittle-56/ PJTV AfterBurner with Bill Whittle]</ref>

According to his official website, "Starting in February 2013, Bill has begun a new format for his video commentary by speaking as the ‘Virtual President of the United States,’ providing the direct, common-sense answers to today’s toughest issues in a manner that a conservative President, such as [[Ronald Reagan]], would employ. His Virtual State of the Union on “[[Firearms|GUNS]]” has been called by many [[NRA]] members “the best defense of the [[Second Amendment]] I have ever heard.” GUNS, alone, has been seen by over 500,000 people on YouTube with a 98% approval rating from viewers. And his new series, YOUR GOVERNMENT, is an 11-part instruction manual on how to recover the country, spoken from the Oval Office."<ref>[https://www.billwhittle.com/content/about-bill About Bill], Accessed January 23, 2016</ref>

==Published Works==
* [https://www.amazon.com/Silent-America-Essays-Democracy-War/dp/0976405903/ Silent America: Essays from a Democracy at War], November 11, 2004<ref>[https://www.amazon.com/s?ie=UTF8&page=1&rh=n:283155,p_27:Bill%20Whittle&tag=duckduckgo-d-20 Amazon.com]</ref>

==See also==
* [[Alfonzo Rachel]] of [[ZoNation]], [[John Phillips]], on PJTV
* [[Stefan Molyneux]]
* [[ReasonTV]]

==External links==
* [https://www.billwhittle.com Official Blog-Podcast]
* [http://www.pjtv.com/series/afterburner-with-bill-whittle-56/ PJTV broadcasts with Bill Whittle]
* [https://www.facebook.com/Bill-Whittle-155840847453/ Facebook]
* [https://twitter.com/BillWhittle Twitter: BillWhittle]
* [https://www.amazon.com/Silent-America-Essays-Democracy-War/dp/0976405903/ Silent America: Essays from a Democracy at War]
* [https://www.imdb.com/name/nm1013687/ IMDB.com Bill Whittle]
* [https://www.c-span.org/person/?williamwhittle CSPAN appearances]
* [https://duckduckgo.com/?q=Bill+Whittle Search for Bill Whittle on [[DuckDuckGo]] [[Privacy]] search engine]

==References==
<references/>

{{Conservatism}}

{{DEFAULTSORT:Whittle, Bill}}

[[Category:Conservative Commentators]]
[[Category:Conservatives]]
[[Category:Conservative Authors]]
[[Category:Conservative Podcasters]]
[[Category:Conservative Bloggers]]
[[Category:Libertarians]]
[[Category:Libertarian Authors]]
[[Category:Libertarian Bloggers]]
[[Category:Libertarian Podcasters]]
[[Category:Libertarian Media]]
[[Category:American Authors]]
[[Category:Bloggers]]
[[Category:Republicans]]
[[Category:Christians]]
[[Category:Christian Podcasters]]
[[Category:Christian Bloggers]]
[[Category:Pro Second Amendment]]
[[Category:Fiscal Conservatives]]
[[Category:Anti-Communism]]
[[Category:American Gun Rights Advocates]]
[[Category:Patriots]]
[[Category:Veterans]]

Alternatives to Google

2021-07-23T08:04:24Z

Dave Wilcox: fix link

'''[[Google]]''' has fallen out of favor with many web users, due to their tracking and sale of user data,<ref>https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2020/03/google-says-it-doesnt-sell-your-data-heres-how-company-shares-monetizes-and</ref> and liberal activism and polices.<ref>https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2020/10/31/five-times-google-was-caught-red-handed-on-bias-and-censorship/</ref> This article gives some alternatives to their services. In June 2021, several [[bipartisan]] bills were introduced into the [[117th Congress]] to break-up the Google [[monopoly]].<ref>https://www.businessinsider.com/congress-big-tech-bills-facebook-google-apple-amazon-antitrust-2021-6?amp</ref>

== Search engines ==
*[[DuckDuckGo]] - a privacy-focused search engine that says it does to not track users. They also offer "Privacy Essentials" on Firefox and Chrome, and "Privacy browser" on mobile.
*[https://www.startpage.com/ StartPage] - another privacy focused search option
*[[Result Hunter]] - a search engine that favors conservative results, as opposed to Google which favors liberal results.
*[[Mojeek]] - a search engine that doesn't track people and uses a proprietary page ranking engine as opposed to PageRank, and is intended to give unbiased search results.
*[https://www.seekfind.org/ Seek Find] - a Christian search engine. Cannot be used for a general search, but a search over the Internet for information from Christian sites.
*[https://www.worthyseek.com/ Worthy Christian Search] - A similar Christian search engine.

== Email ==
*[https://tutanota.com/ Tutanota.com] - A robust service with paid and free tiers, which offers end-to-end encryption for sending messages, and encrypted mailboxes.
*ProtonMail - another service which offers "trust no one" encryption.
*Fastmail - a paid, but good service. Friends with DuckDuckGo.

== Alternative browsers to Chrome ==
*[[Mozilla Firefox]] - uses its own ("Quantum") engine instead of Chromium's Blink engine. (additionally, a well-rounded derivative is [[Comodo IceDragon]], which also comes with a security scanner that scans Windows PC).
*[[Microsoft Edge]] - better on power usage than Chrome, and arguably more secure. Although it is basically Google chrome under Microsoft labeling, some Google trackers seem to have been removed, or replaced with Microsoft trackers. Also includes some UI changes from Microsoft, intended to be a value-add.

*[https://www.brave.com Brave] - friends with DuckDuckGo. Great for privacy, but enables tracking for Facebook and Twitter by default. Uses Google's Blink engine.
*Slimbrowser, Slimboat (discontinued in 2016), and [[Slimjet]] - have built-in ad blockers and don't report back to Google and Chrome. They are versatile and customizable. Slimbrowser originally used the Trident engine (but may have switched to the Firefox engine), Slimboat used QtWebKit, and Slimjet uses the blink engine.
*[[SRWare Iron]] - uses the Blink engine of Chrome. Doesn't report activity history to the publisher or anyone else.
*[[Internet Explorer]] was a feature-rich browser. Many sites used to work well with this browser, including Yahoo! and Bing. However, it suffered from many security issues over the years, and tended to run slower than the alternatives. Microsoft ended support for IE11 (the last version) in 2020. Many sites no longer support Internet Explorer, especially graphics-intensive sites, and services which require modern DRM support.

== Alternatives to Android ==
*iPhone and iPad - the most popular alternative.
*Windows Phone (dead) - arguably more powerful than either Android or iOS, many think it was a superior option, but Microsoft killed it off in 2017 due to failure to penetrate the market. The latest is Windows 10 Mobile.
*Ubuntu Touch - open-source, many think it was awesome too, but it discontinued by Canonical.
*Symbian OS - discontinued some time ago, but some think it was good, and it featured Opera.
*Blackberry 10 - uses a microkernel for better reliability, and also allows direct filesystem access (unlike Android and iOS), but restricted (unlike Windows and MacOS). Newer blackberry devices now use Android.

== Alternatives to Google Drive ==
*Sync.com - Functions similarly to dropbox, but offers end-to-end encryption (and thus far superior privacy)
*Resilio Sync
*Box.com - good collaborative tools for working with others online
*Mega.nz - offers end-to-end encryption

*[[Dropbox (cloud service)|Dropbox]] - Although not very private, this is at least not known to sell user data to commercial entities
*OwnCloud or NextCloud, hosted on a private or leased server - somewhat complex to set up, but feature rich and very simple to use.

== Alternatives to YouTube ==
*Rumble
*Vimeo
*[[BitChute]]
*Daily Motion
*[https://tv.gab.com GabTV]
*[https://d.tube DTube]

== Alternatives to Google Play Music ==
*Spotify - available for Windows, Mac, Linux, Android, iOS, and the discontinued Windows Phone.
*Amazon Music - you can listen to that on an Echo or Fire. It's also available for Android, iOS, Windows, and Mac.
*iTunes and Apple Music - the latter has grown in popularity. The former is buggy, especially on Windows, and all songs released before circa 2010 are protected by M4P (MPEG-4 Protected)and cannot be played on any media player other than iTunes or iPod and cannot be legally transferred to other music platforms such as Amazon or Groove Music.

== Alternatives to Google Meet and Hangouts ==
*Zoom
*Appear.in
== Alternatives to Google Duo ==
*Facetime - only available on iOS.
*Skype - paid.
*Signal

== Alternatives to Chromebooks ==
Chrome OS is marketed as being just a browser on bare-metal, although it did recently add Google Drive and a Debian subsystem so one could install Android and Linux apps. But given Google's interest in harvesting private data, it still causes some people concern that it may be engaging in unwanted behavior. Some lightweight alternatives are:
*GNU/Linux (such as Mint or Ubuntu) on a "thin-and-light" laptop. Chrome, Firefox, and Opera all work well on Ubuntu. The thin client edition is Ubuntu Core.
*Windows 10 Core
*Windows Lite (upcoming, rumored) - Windows with the Linux kernel.

==See also==
*[[Alternatives to Facebook]]

==References==
{{reflist}}

[[Category:Internet]]
[[Category:Search Engines]]

Search engine

2021-07-23T08:03:16Z

Dave Wilcox: fix link

A '''search engine''' retrieves information on the [[Internet]] for users. Typically a user types in key words and the search engine will display a list of links containing those terms. The search engine may list links based on [[algorithm]]s designed to give priority to relevancy, or popularity, or fees paid by sites to the search engine company. Generally the methods used by search engines are proprietary and not completely known.

==Search Engines==
[[AltaVista]] was a popular early search engine in 1995, but its slow speed caused it to lose out to [[Google]], which would retrieve information almost instantaneously based on presorted techniques. In the December 2008 Nielsen Online rankings, Google had over 62% of the search traffic on the Internet, and [[Yahoo!]] is a distant second. Google, Yahoo and AOL all showed good year-on-year growth, with [[Microsoft]]'s MSN/Live Search being the biggest loser.<ref>http://searchenginewatch.com/3632382</ref> Other new search engines have been developed as well, such as Microsoft's [[Bing]] (the alternative to MSN/Live Search), and another [[Web site]] called [[DuckDuckGo]]. Each search engines aims to compete against the more commonly used information retrieval sites, and in doing so, they each typically have their own unique driver or capability that others do not offer.

==Technical requirements==
It is estimated that at least a million lines of code is needed for a working search engine. Two open source search engines are Elasticsearch and Solr.<ref>https://www.searchtechnologies.com/blog/solr-vs-elasticsearch-top-open-source-search</ref> Search engines for the public internet also require an enormous amount of information on crawled Web sites, and "spiders" which continuously crawl the Web to update this information are also required. This means that significant computing and data storage resources are needed.

==References==
{{Reflist}}

[[Category:Technology]]
[[Category:Search Engines‏‎]]

YouTube

2021-07-23T08:01:01Z

Dave Wilcox: copy-edit

[[File:Commie youtube.png|right|300px|thumb|]]
'''YouTube''' is an [[Internet]] site that allows [[liberal]]s, [[communist]]s, and [[leftwing]] [[fascist]]s upload [[video]]s for the general public to watch. Youtube came under increasing criticism for its [[fascist]] terms of service, [[censorship]], and anti-[[democracy|democratic]] election interference in the [[2020 Presidential election]]. A major point of issue many take is that while conservative veiws are often removed, left wing, including sometimes extremely left wing, views are allowed.

==History==
[[File:Youtube-saves-biden.jpg|right|300px|thumb|Youtube manipulation of likes/dislikes on the Biden White House channel.<ref>https://81m.org/</ref>]]
YouTube was founded by Steve Chen, Chad Hurley and Jawed Karim in February 2005.

The "YouTube Generation" was named ''[[Time magazine|Time]]'' magazine's ''Person of the Year'' for 2006.<ref>Grossman, Lev. [You — Yes, You — Are TIME's Person of the Year
http://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1570810,00.html] December 25, 2006.</ref>
In October 2006, YouTube was purchased by [[Google|Google Inc.]] Google's monitoring over YouTube has resulted in a distinct suppression of videos with conservative themes, along with direct promotion and over-saturation of liberal content.

The site has gained recognition as the best video sharing site on the web. A major flaw of the site is its poorly worded terms of conditions, which can warrant the deletion of almost any video that takes a stance against any religion or social agenda, deeming it as "hate speech". An example would be showing surgical operations but preventing showing abortion videos. YouTube is consistent when removing undercover videos that exposes dishonest counseling practices at [[Planned Parenthood]] centers.<ref>[https://www.lifenews.com/nat5165.html YouTube Removes New Undercover Video Exposing Planned Parenthood on Abortion] LifeNews.com, June 25, 2009</ref> They are known for censoring videos critical of Barack Obama or ones that show children singing praises of Obama by indoctrination. In addition, videos were censored if they were deemed anti-Islamic.<ref>[http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=22835_Jawa_Report_Video_Censored_by_YouTube&only "Little Green Footballs"]. ''littlegreenfootballs.com''.</ref> Also, YouTube's community guidelines claim that material depicting shocking or disgusting (gore) content is prohibited, however countless videos get past the radar as long as they don't accumulate a large amount of attention—and videos which do get attention exist in which there is sadistic pornography.<ref>YouTube videos found by searching "Lisa Nazi" or "Lisa Loba," for example.</ref> A large amount of YouTube content is also dedicated to video game channels, which go largely unrestricted despite exceedingly violent content. They create a social tolerance towards brutality, and persuade youth audiences in committing felonies that are demonstrated in these videos. YouTube also promotes individual introversion and internet dependency, especially within the millennial generation. In December 2019, YouTube announced it would demonetize certain videos even if they don't violate any of the company's policies.<ref>Bokhari, Allum (December 11, 2019). [https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2019/12/11/youtube-to-demonetize-channels-even-if-videos-dont-cross-policy-line/ YouTube to Demonetize Channels Even if Videos ‘Don’t Cross Policy Line’]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved December 11, 2019.</ref>

On July 23, 2007, YouTube hosted an interactive debate between the [[Democratic]] candidates in the [[2008 Presidential Election]], in which YouTube users submitted videos of themselves asking questions. A similar debate involving the [[Republican]] candidates occurred on November 28. This led to controversy, as they used a question submitted by Keith Kerr, who has ties to [[Hillary Clinton]]'s campaign.<ref>[http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=23698 "There's More to the Keith Kerr Story | Human Events"]. ''Human Events''.</ref>

Slate states that YouTube may be operating at a loss of nearly half a billion dollars a year.<ref>[http://www.slate.com/id/2216162/ "The high costs of running YouTube."]. ''Slate Magazine''.</ref> Suggesting that it may be a loss leader for parent company Google or perhaps an investment in changing the landscape of information flow in the public. Attempts to reduce the costs and increase profitable content have been met with hostility.

The most popular video on YouTube is Despacito by Puerto Rican author Luis Fonsi and has surpassed 5 billion views.<ref>{{Citation|last=LuisFonsiVEVO|title=Luis Fonsi - Despacito ft. Daddy Yankee (Official Music Video)|date=2017-01-12|url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kJQP7kiw5Fk|access-date=2018-11-26}}</ref><ref>YouTube's [https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLirAqAtl_h2r5g8xGajEwdXd3x1sZh8hC "Most Viewed Videos of All Time"] (videos surpassing 100 million views)</ref> The most liberal person on YouTube is Marxist propagandist, [[Reich-Wing Watch]].

==Censorship==
Controversy arose in conservative circles after people such as [[Michelle Malkin]] claimed that YouTube censored [[conservative]] content.<ref>[http://michellemalkin.com/2006/10/04/banned-on-youtube-3/ "Michelle Malkin | » Banned on YouTube"]. ''MichelleMalkin.com''.</ref> This led the creation of a pair of video-sharing websites: [[QubeTV]], an alternative site whose origins are reminiscent of the creation of [[Conservapedia]] by people who believed [[Wikipedia®]] to be [[liberal]], and the Christian alternative, [[GodTube]], which has been renamed "[http://www.tangle.com/ Tangle]".<ref>[http://mashable.com/2009/03/10/tangle/ GodTube is Born Again as MySpace-Like Tangle] Mashable</ref>

On August 6, 2007, a group of music publishing companies announced a [[lawsuit]] against YouTube for its hosting of [[copyright]]ed content without providing proper compensation to the copyright holders when the videos containing the content were viewed.<ref>http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070806/ap_on_hi_te/youtube_music_publishers;_ylt=AmjdpxJDZVebD_Qp.hhWImKs0NUE</ref>

In May 2009, in response to the suspension of the account of young Star Wars fan, Lukeywes1234, for being under the age of 13, a group of users from the sites ebaumsworld and 4chan, among others, launched an "International Porn Day" raid on YouTube. They managed to upload thousands of explicit videos which were often tagged to show up in searches containing words such as Jonas Brothers, Twilight, Hanna Montana, High School Musical and John McCain. It could take a couple of days for all porn to be removed from the search results, said parent company Google.<ref>[http://news.cnet.com/8301-1009_3-10245847-83.html?tag=newsFeaturedBlogArea.0 YouTube battling 'Porn Day' campaign] CNet News, May 20, 2009</ref> The delay was in part due to the raiders sowing confusion amongst YouTube users by purposely flagging non pornographic videos as containing inappropriate material.

As of August, 2016, YouTube has made it possible (unreliably) to filter out sexually explicit material, but after that filter is set, one may not participate in the comments sections. As of this time, it is quite easy to find pornography on YouTube, as for example by searching for "Lisa Nazi."

YouTube was recently listed as one of numerous leftist-controlled companies that have gone "[[woke]]" and now support the criminal rioters of [[Antifa]] and [[Black Lives Matter]] in the wake of the [[2020 leftist riots]].<ref>[https://gab.com/a/posts/104311289660016704 Here Are The Companies That Support Antifa, Black Lives Matter, and Want You Dead] at Gab.com</ref>

As [[White House]] videos of the [[Biden regime]] continued to show Dislikes outnumbering Likes by a factor of 6-1, 8-1 and even 15-1,<ref>[https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/03/4300-tune-watch-joe-biden-speak-2-25-trillion-infrastructure-bill-spends-157-billion-roads-bridges-airports/ Only 4,300 Tune in to Watch Joe Biden Speak on His $2.25 Trillion Infrastructure Bill That Spends Only $157 Billion on Roads, Bridges, Airports] at the Gateway Pundit</ref> YouTube actively got involved to tamper with and remove high numbers of dislikes,<ref>[https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/01/youtube-caught-red-handed-removing-dislikes-biden-white-house-page-anything-fool-proletariat/ YOUTUBE CAUGHT RED-HANDED Removing Dislikes from Biden White House Page — Anything to Fool the Proletariat] at the Gateway Pundit</ref> then eliminated the Dislike feature on videos on the White House YouTube channel to deceptively hide the high level of Biden's unpopularity.<ref>Two references:
*[https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/03/youtube-removing-public-dislikes-count-totals-biden-terribly-disliked/ It Appears YouTube Is Removing ‘Dislikes’ on Videos Because Biden Is Terribly Disliked] at the Gateway Pundit
*[https://thenationalpulse.com/breaking/youtube-to-remove-dislike-count/ YouTube To Remove ‘Dislike’ Feature As Biden WH Content Continues To See Likes Massively Trail Dislikes], Natalie Winters, ''National Pulse'', MARCH 30, 2021.</ref> Comments are also currently turned off on all videos released by the White House because the Biden regime does not want to hear any negative comments about its unpopular policies, or any criticism of regime officials, from the public.

Youtube has identified the popular [[World War II]] song, ''[[The Sacred War]]'', rallying the defeat of the "fascist vermin hordes" as "inappropriate or offensive for some audiences."<ref>*[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C2N366xn6V4&t=132s The Sacred War! (English Lyrics)]. youtube (Viewer discretion is advised}.</ref>

==Democrat collusion==

A website that tracks that tracks the YouTube page of the Biden White House confirmed that YouTube suppressed the dislikes on every single one of [[Joe Biden]] White House video. YouTube suppressed dislikes of Biden by as much as 600% on some videos.<ref>https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/06/amazing-new-website-confirms-youtube-suppressing-dislikes-joe-biden-videos-much-600/</ref>

== Christian/Creationist YouTube video evangelism ==
Many YouTube users are vehemently anti-[[conservative]], and pro-conservative videos are censored within hours. However videos directed at conservatives will usually garner high ratings, as with videos directed at liberals. Christian comments on some videos frequently attract insults by atheists.<ref>[http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=52405 "YouTube blocked video mocking Clinton administration"]. ''WND''.</ref> In order to combat this vicious slander, Conservapedia has started [https://www.youtube.com/user/conservapediavideos its own YouTube channel].
[[Campus Crusade for Christ]] International (CCCI) is one of the world's largest evangelism organizations within Christendom and has over 25,000 full-time missionaries. In 2006, Alan Beeber of CCCI predicted that [[internet evangelism]] will result in more conversion than all other forms of evangelism for CCCI combined.<ref>http://www.lausanneworldpulse.com/pdf/issues/LWP0206.pdf</ref>

YouTube is a popular online video sharing site that provides a method distributing [[Christian]]/[[creationist]] videos across the world. The YouTube search engine is the second largest search engine in the world.<ref>[http://www.tgdaily.com/trendwatch-features/39777-youtube-surpasses-yahoo-as-world%E2%80%99s-2-search-engine "YouTube surpasses Yahoo as world’s #2 search engine | TG Daily"]. ''TG Daily''.</ref> There is a widespread problem with [[Atheistic bullying|atheist cyberbullying]] on YouTube toward [[Christian]] and [[creationism|creationist]] YouTube channels. [[CreationWiki]] has developed a web page entitled [http://creationwiki.org/YouTube_participant_advice YouTube participant advice] designed to show creationists how to thwart [[atheist bullying|atheist cyberbullies]]. Also, one popular Christian YouTube channel, [[shockofgod]], was shut down several times by atheist [[cyberbullying]] through false reports but [http://creationwiki.org/YouTube_participant_advice he was able to thwart their cyberbullying using some effective tactics].<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kax-zAJxi-U "The man that proved the Bible has power"]. ''YouTube''. 28 March 2009.</ref> These false reports are not isolated incidents, many atheists will try this deceitful tactic to block out [[creation science]].

== The few remaining positive aspects of YouTube ==
By searching YouTube one can immediately find the most incredibly sublime Christian praise music. Great Bible teaching is uploaded there, as for example, teaching by the late by J. Vernon McGee.

== See also ==
* [[2008 YouTube presidential debates]]
* [[DuckDuckGo]] — [[Privacy]]-oriented Search Engine
* [[Edward J. Snowden]] — whistleblower of [[unconstitutional]] warrantless mass domestic surveillance by the U.S. [[police state]]
* [[Unalienable rights]] of the [[Bill of Rights]]: [[First Amendment]], [[Fourth Amendment]], [[Fifth Amendment]]
* [[Right to Privacy]] and [[Common law privacy rights]]
* [[America Rising (video)]]
*[[Brainwashing]]
*[[Voter suppression]]

==References==
{{reflist|2}}

{{liberalism}}
{{communism}}
[[Category:Technology]]
[[Category:Internet]]
[[Category:Information Technology]]
[[Category:Communication]]
[[Category:Google]]
[[Category:YouTube]]
[[Category:Websites]]
[[Category:SJWs]]
[[Category:Totalitarianism]]
[[Category:Anti-Free Speech]]
[[Category:Perpetrators of Cancel Culture]]

Google

2021-07-23T07:58:46Z

Dave Wilcox: fix link

{{Infobox organization
| name = Google
| image = Google.png
| established = September 4, 1998
| founder = [[Larry Page]] [[Sergey Brin]]
| founding_location = California
| type =
| status =
| headquarters =
| website =
}}
'''Google''' is an Internet services company whose primary business is the collection and dissemination of information. However, they have become known for their political bias, as they continually slant the information they serve (particularly through their search engine and YouTube platform), in favor of leftist ideology. Their services include a [[monopoly|monopolistic]] [[search engine]] (which promotes something [[liberal]] nearly every day), a [[web browser]], webmaster tools, and [[Android (operating system)|phone operating system]]. Google is associated with liberal causes and has been criticized for manipulating search results,<ref>Nolan, Lucas (September 21, 2018). [https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2018/09/21/5-times-google-manipulated-search-youtube-and-news-results/ 5 Times Google Manipulated Search, YouTube, and News Results]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved September 21, 2018.</ref> along with catering to communist [[China]] in [[censorship|censoring]] information from the people as requested by the [[genocidal]] [[Communist Party of China]] from 2006 to 2010.<ref>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/4647398.stm</ref>

Google opposes diversity of opinion and virtually never features a [[conservative]] theme on its search page, and repeatedly promotes [[liberal]] themes instead. Google espouses [[Leftist]] political policies while underpaying its own workers and even creating a severe housing crisis in its community for low-income workers. Google also exploits [[H-1B visas]] in order to import foreigners to do engineering work, with less risk of the workers leaving for a competitor to Google. Google has been criticized for its election interference, its anti-American views and anti-Semitism.

Major competitors of Google include [[Yahoo!]], [[DuckDuckGo]], and Microsoft's [[Bing]].

== Corporate Information ==
The CEO of Google since 2001 was [[Eric Schmidt]]. He announced that he was stepping down as CEO in 2011. Google is headquartered in Mountain View, [[California]]. Google was founded on September 7, 1998, by [[Larry Page]] and [[Sergey Brin]]. Since then, it has grown to be the largest Internet search engine in the world. According to Alexa Internet, over 25% of all Internet users visit Google monthly.<ref>[http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_details?url=www.google.com Alexa Traffic Results for Google]</ref>

Google also owns [[YouTube]], the homemade [[video clip]] site. [[Viacom]] is suing YouTube, and thus Google, for a reported $1 billion, arguing that the economic model of YouTube is based on copyright infringement.<ref>[http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/6446193.stm Viacom will sue YouTube for $1bn]</ref>

After much debate about their corporate Code of Conduct, Google's founders settled on the all-encompassing "Don't be evil", saying,"It's built around the recognition that everything we do in connection with our work at Google will be, and should be, measured against the highest possible standards".<ref>[http://investor.google.com/conduct.html Google Code of Conduct]</ref> This Code of Conduct has generated much criticism, saying they have missed that mark badly.

==History==
[[Image:Google2.gif|thumb|right|300px| Google's logo on [[Earth Day]], April 22, 2007.]]

===Founding===
Google was originally a research project, started by Larry Page and Sergey Brin in 1996, when the two attended [[Stanford University]]. The two registered the domain name ''google.stanford.edu'', and the small search engine went online for the first time.<ref>[http://www.google.com/intl/en/corporate/history.html Corporate Information:Google Milestones]</ref>

===Growth===
The year Google was created 1998, it had amassed 26 million unique URLs in their database. By 2000, Google had indexed more than 1 billion pages. As of July 2008, Google has indexed over 1 [[trillion]] pages. Its core service is usually referred to as Google Search.<ref>[http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-9999814-93.html Google reveals scope of Web-crawling task] CNET News, July 25, 2008</ref> Google Search was enhanced with a feature called Google Instant in 2010 which quickly displays suggested search works as the user types. This reveals how the search information is organized in a "semantic Web" and the degree to which is it understood beyond just simple string matching. This feature seems to be further enhanced by the semantic information in [[Knowledge Graph]].

===Competition===
[[Microsoft]] has been aggressively competing with Google for a larger share of the search market. Their latest effort, [[Bing]].com, is a "next generation" search service which has generated praise for its user interface and criticism for its speed and performance in comparison to Google and Yahoo.

Other potential competitors, such as [[Apple]], have chosen to keep Google as its default search provider. In return, Apple received $9 billion.<ref>[https://9to5mac.com/2018/09/28/google-paying-apple-9-billion-default-seach-engine/ Google reportedly paying Apple $9 billion to remain default search engine in Safari on iOS]</ref> That amount will increase to $12 billion in 2019.<ref>[http://fortune.com/2018/09/29/google-apple-safari-search-engine/ Google reportedly paying Apple $9 billion to remain default search engine in Safari on iOS]</ref>

==Antitrust lawsuit==
On October 20, 2020, [[Attorney General]] [[William P. Barr]] announced an [[antitrust]] action initiated by the [[Department of Justice]] (DOJ) under the [[Sherman Anti-Trust Act]] for Google's anti-competative practices. In the statement the DOJ said:
{{quotebox-float|As one of the wealthiest companies on the planet with a market value of $1 trillion, Google is the monopoly gatekeeper to the internet for billions of users and countless advertisers worldwide. For years, Google has accounted for almost 90 percent of all search queries in the United States and has used anticompetitive tactics to maintain and extend its monopolies in search and search advertising.

As alleged in the Complaint, Google has entered into a series of exclusionary agreements that collectively lock up the primary avenues through which users access search engines, and thus the Internet, by requiring that Google be set as the preset default general search engine on billions of mobile devices and computers worldwide and, in many cases, prohibiting preinstallation of a competitor. In particular, the Complaint alleges that Google has unlawfully maintained monopolies in search and search advertising by:

*Entering into exclusivity agreements that forbid preinstallation of any competing search service.
*Entering into tying and other arrangements that force preinstallation of its search applications in prime locations on mobile devices and make them undeletable, regardless of consumer preference.
*Entering into long-term agreements with Apple that require Google to be the default – and de facto exclusive – general search engine on Apple’s popular Safari browser and other Apple search tools.
*Generally using monopoly profits to buy preferential treatment for its search engine on devices, web browsers, and other search access points, creating a continuous and self-reinforcing cycle of monopolization.<ref>https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-sues-monopolist-google-violating-antitrust-laws</ref>}}

==Secular Progressive Culture==
Google's West Coast headquarters hires a majority of left-leaning personalities, explicitly in executive decision-making.<ref>See [http://www.google.com/corporate/execs.html] for a list of board members and senior staff.</ref> Google supports causes that are a radical departure from traditional American views, such as their public support of a 'no' vote for [[California]]'s [[Proposition 8]], which defined marriage as being between a husband and wife. Also in a subtle way, they favor politically-correct global liberalism, championed by secular progressives. They select certain ''days of importance'' for tribute, some of which are controversial. As such, ''Merry Christmas'' is replaced by ''Happy Holidays''. Even though, poll <ref>[http://www.prweb.com/releases/2008/11/prweb1670824.htm Wish Me A Merry Christmas Campaign Crusades to Change Retail Culture] PRWeb, November 26, 2008</ref> after poll <ref>[http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/lifestyle/general_lifestyle/68_prefer_merry_christmas_to_happy_holidays 68% Prefer “Merry Christmas” to “Happy Holidays”] Rasmussen, November 27, 2008</ref> after poll <ref>[https://www.cnn.com/2005/US/12/20/poll.season/ Poll: More Americans prefer 'Merry Christmas' greeting] CNN, December 20, 2005</ref> shows the public prefers 'Merry Christmas'. The problem may be that Google doesn't respect traditional [[Christian]] holidays, in favor of a 'culturally-correct' approach. In addition, Google accepts the [[Theory of Evolution]] by [[Charles Darwin]] as fact, promotes Darwin on their homepage with a Google Doodle logo.<ref>[Scientists unveil fossil of Darwinius masillae]</ref>

Google often honors Russia with their logo of Sputnik and for composer Igor Stravinsky. Google based their [[United States Independence Day]] logo on ‘This Land Is Your Land’ as an ode to leftism. Woody Guthrie wrote the lyrics and also wrote for ''[[The Daily Worker]],'' a [[Marxist]] newspaper.<ref>[https://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/07/04/Google-chooses-this-land-is-your-land Google Chooses Communist-Oriented ‘This Land Is Your Land’ July 4th Theme, Breitbart.com, July 4, 2012]</ref>

=== Google versus Conservatives ===
Google has also been accused of delisting [[conservative]] news sites from its search engine. As one of many examples, "In February 2005, [[Michelle Malkin]] wrote of the difficulties she was having becoming part of Google News."<ref>http://newsbusters.org/node/5477</ref> Google has made it harder to find websites promoting conservative content.<ref>Multiple references:
*Svab, Petr (May 3, 2019). [https://www.theepochtimes.com/google-doubles-down-making-trump-reddit-fan-club-even-harder-to-find_2905658.html Google Doubles Down, Making Trump Reddit Fan Club Even Harder to Find]. ''The Epoch Times''. Retrieved May 4, 2019.
*Grind, Kirsten; Schechner, Sam; McMillan, Robert; West, John (November 15, 2019). [https://www.wsj.com/articles/how-google-interferes-with-its-search-algorithms-and-changes-your-results-11573823753 How Google Interferes With Its Search Algorithms and Changes Your Results]. ''The Wall Street Journal''. Retrieved November 17, 2019.
*Bokhari, Allum (November 18, 2019). [https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2019/11/18/wsj-investigation-further-debunks-googles-claim-of-no-manual-intervention-in-searches/ WSJ Investigation Further Debunks Google’s Claim of No Manual Intervention in Searches]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved November 18, 2019.
*Bokhari, Allum (November 19, 2019). [https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2019/11/19/wall-street-journal-google-manipulation-report-corroborates-years-of-breitbart-reporting/ Wall Street Journal Google Manipulation Report Corroborates Years of Breitbart Reporting]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved November 19, 2019.</ref>

* Many instances whereby [[information]] is comprised ideologically and displayed for the masses. Watchdog Web site NewsBusters.org published that Google had in fact labeled [[conservative]] [[American Spectator]] as "This site may harm your computer."<ref>[http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2007/12/28/google-claims-american-spectator-site-may-harm-your-computer Google Claims Conservative Website ‘May Harm Your Computer’] December 28, 2007</ref>
* Google once blocked pro-family Web site [http://www.massresistance.org/ MassResistance]. Some people complained his organization promotes hatred towards homosexuals. Google gave the standard legal trash as an excuse "'Users may not publish material that promotes hate towards groups based on race, ethnic origin, religion, disability, gender, age, veteran status, and sexual orientation/gender identity.'" MassResistance replied "Of course we are not promoting hate against anybody."<ref>[https://www.onenewsnow.com/Culture/Default.aspx?id=603372 Accusation: Google targets, blocks pro-family Web site again OneNewsNow.com, July 15, 2009]</ref>
* [[YouTube]] owner, Google continues to protect [[Planned Parenthood]] by removing undercover videos exposing abortion clinic law-breaking.<ref>[http://www.christiannewswire.com/news/7416111014.html YouTube Bans Student Group's Video Showing Abuse at Planned Parenthood Christian News Wire, July 21, 2009]</ref>
* Without any prior explanation or notice, Google had been terminating its News relationships with conservative e-zines and Web journals.<ref>[http://newsbusters.org/node/5477 Is Google Purging Conservative News Sites? NewsBusters, May 22, 2006]</ref>
* Google attempted to minimize global awareness of the [[ClimateGate]] emails and the truth about the [[anthropogenic global warming theory]], whence the term "[[Climategate#Googlegate|Googlegate]]" gained recognition across the [[Web]]. Non-coincidentally, [[Al Gore]] is on the Google advisory board.
* Curiously, leading up to [[Restoring Honor 8-28|Restoring Honor 8-28-10]]—on Google Maps—the [[Lincoln Memorial]] was being misplaced in favor of the [http://www.pcworld.com/zoom?id=204373&page=1&zoomIdx=1 Franklin D. Roosevelt Memorial], which is a good half a mile south of the more famous memorial.<ref>Sarah Jacobsson Purewal. [http://www.pcworld.com/article/204373/google_maps_misplaces_lincoln_memorial.html Google Maps Misplaces Lincoln Memorial], ''PC World'', Aug 28, 2010.</ref> This may have been an ongoing, known problem or bug in Google Maps that hadn't been fixed yet; or, Google is censoring search results; or, Google is playing with searches for political power and gain.
* As of August 15, 2016, a Google search for "The Murder of Seth Rich" Conservapedia, yields no results, likewise a search by "The Murder of Seth Rich" Site: Conservapedia.com. But a Yahoo search brings up the Conservapedia article. Google Finally added the page to their results, but keeps it ranked lower than numerous liberal articles claiming it was all a hoax.
* During the 2016 Presidential campaign Google filtered emails from [[Donald Trump]] into Gmail users spam boxes.<ref>[https://dailycaller.com/2016/06/23/users-claim-google-is-putting-trump-emails-in-their-spam-box/ Users Claim Google Is Putting Trump Emails In Their Spam Box], Alex Pfeiffer, ''Daily Caller'', 8:19 AM 06/23/2016</ref>
*Many more examples exist of Google [[Censorship|censoring]] conservatives or exhibiting bias against them.<ref>Duke, Selwyn (August 28, 2018). [https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/item/29900-google-is-not-a-search-engine-twitter-and-facebook-aren-t-social-media Google Is Not a Search Engine; Twitter and Facebook Aren’t Social Media]. ''The New American''. Retrieved August 28, 2018.</ref><ref>Bokhari, Allum (August 28, 2018). [https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2018/08/28/10-times-googles-far-left-anti-trump-bias-was-exposed/ 10 Times Google’s Far-Left, Anti-Trump Bias Was Exposed]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved August 28, 2018.</ref>
*Google search results are biased in favor of the [[mainstream media]] and liberal websites.<ref>Freiburger, Calvin (May 15, 2019). [https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/google-prioritizes-left-wing-media-sites-in-search-results-new-study-finds Google prioritizes left-wing media sites in search results, new study finds]. ''LifeSiteNews''. Retrieved May 15, 2019.</ref>

Google is also a major promoter of [[Charles Darwin]] and atheistic science, even to the point of giving special recognition to the anniversary of Darwin's birthday ("Darwin Day").

Google's online translator system generally "translates" by predicting from linguistic patterns based on UN documents in various languages.<ref>https://blogs.transparent.com/language-news/2015/09/02/how-google-translate-works-and-why-it-doesnt-measure-up/</ref> This generally results in shoddy translations from languages that don't have the same or similar linguistics as English, such as [[Japanese]].

=== Google versus Anti- Obama Blogs ===
The question immediately raised, "Did Google Silence [[Barack Obama]] critics?" It turns out, no they did not. A group of separate blogs were targeted by their spam filter as a result of manipulating the 'flag' feature. This caused a temporary blockage for five days. Sites affected were Hillary supporters and all anti-Obama. They include http://bluelyon.blogspot.com, http://comealongway.blogspot.com, http://hillaryorbust.blogspot.com and http://mccaindemocrats.blogspot.com and their main associate JustSayNoDeal.com <ref>[http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/06/30/google-and-the-anti-obama-bloggers/ Google and the Anti-Obama Bloggers] NYTimes June 30, 2008</ref>

=== Google sensitive to Islam ===
In 2010, it was noted that Google's search suggestions for the world's various religions would bring up many negative results for [[Christianity]], Judaism, Hinduism and Buddhism. Typing a search for "Christianity is..." the results would be "Christianity is a lie," or "Judaism is..." would be "Judaism is a cult." Google removed negative search suggestions when typing "Islam is...",<ref>[http://thenextweb.com/2010/01/05/google-blocking-negative-search-recommendations-islam/ Google Blocking Negative Search Recommendations On Islam – Why?, The Next Web, May 1, 2010]</ref> however it seems that Google has reverted this, as the current first suggestion when typing "islam is..." is "Islam is evil".

=== Google versus Vladimir Putin ===
On the day of Olympic Winter Games in Russia, Google created a homepage icon, that supports the [[homosexual agenda]]. It shows a rainbow-coloured group of athletes. The background is [[Putin]]'s position on Homosexuality.<ref>https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26080047</ref>

===Google and anti-Semitism===
According to the ''[[Washington Free Beacon]]'',<ref>https://freebeacon.com/latest-news/google-sanctions-use-of-anti-semitic-slogan/</ref> Google’s human resources department allows an employee’s use of the phrase "From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free," the call-to-arms frequently employed by anti-Israel activists. The company's determination came after a Jewish employee raised concerns about the anti-Semitic slogan by a top Google union official on an internal company profile. "The Googler who shared this phrase on his page did so as a show of solidarity with the Palestinian community, which Googlers are permitted to do in the workplace," the human resources employee wrote in an email response to the Jewish employee’s complaint. "While the phrase used is understandably divisive, it was not intended to be anti-Semitic in the way the author used it."
[[File:Driving the Jews into the sea.PNG|thumb|[https://books.google.com/books?id=Jh9CAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA3#v=onepage&q&f=false "Driving the Jews into the sea." Syrian cartoon. (How the phrase has always literally meant in the Arab world)]]]
A political slogan used by Palestinian nationalists and terrorist groups like the [[Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine]], "From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free" describes an aspirational Palestinian state that would extend from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea, eliminating the state of Israel. [[PLO]] chairman [[Ahmad Shukairy]] made sure he really meant his genocidal calls and only realizing the PR disaster and military defeat of '67 is when the following PLO, [[Yasir Arafat]] tried to camouflage its real aims - progressives admitted that ''This once even the Right could be Right'': <ref>[https://books.google.com/books?id=k5eyAAAAIAAJ&q=%22shukairy%22 In Search of Facts, Ideas and Challenges], Vol. 5, Iss. 80. Vol. 8, Iss. 159. ''Institute for the Study of Relevant Progressivism''. 1976.</ref>

<gallery>

Even the Right could be Right.PNG|[https://books.google.com/books?id=k5eyAAAAIAAJ&q=%22the+right%22 Proggressives admit: 'Right cound be right']

Shukairy push the Israelis into the sea.PNG|[https://books.google.com/books?id=k5eyAAAAIAAJ&q=%22shukairy%22 Shukairy meant it when called for the Jews to be 'thrown into the sea']

</gallery>

<blockquote>

The P.L.O. - What Sort of Precedent?

This Once Even the Right Could be Righ

...professing its genocidal ambition openly, without hiding it in any disguise whatever. Its leader, Ahmed Shukairy, kept making a point of it that the Arabs were absolutely literal when speaking of pushing the Israelis into the sea. Following the military disaster Israel that year inflicted on the Arabs, they were internationally overheard discussing the public relations error of their past genocidal candor. Heads of Arab states and Palestinian leaders were voicing this tactical self-criticism in newspaper interviews and articles, in radio and television broadcasts, in speeches before parliaments.

The adjustments made in the aftermath of this self-criticism included the replacement of the undiplomatic Ahmed Shukairy with the highly diplomatic Yassir Arafat as leader of the Palestine Liberation Organization . Also included was a new semantic formula which, incorporated in the Charter of the PLO, for the first time provided however thin and tortuous a camouflage of the genocidal ambition. What used up until that point to be loudly and proudly advertised was now being pro forma denied whenever necessary, accompanied by a meaningful wink of an eyelid.

</blockquote>

Google’s determination comes as the tech giant faces outrage and scrutiny from Jewish employees and Jewish organizations for its silence in the wake of a ''Free Beacon'' report on an anti-Semitic blog post authored by a top member of the Google diversity team.<ref>https://freebeacon.com/latest-news/google-diversity-head-said-jews-have-insatiable-appetite-for-war/</ref> The [[Simon Wiesenthal|Somin Wiesenthal Center]] began an online ad campaign slamming Google for its "failure to address anti-Semitism in its workplace."

== Google bombing ==
Perhaps the most innovative contribution Google has made to Internet searching is its '''PageRank''' algorithm. This system works by counting the number of sites that link to another site; the more links pointing to a page, the higher that page will be ranked. The engine also takes note of how often the page is updated. Due to this, [[Wikipedia®]] is consistently ranked very highly by Google, due to its constant updating and heavy linkage. More recently, Internet-savvy Googlers have discovered ways to game the system; creating massive numbers of pages with links pointing to one page to form what is known as a "Google Bomb". Some examples can be found below.<ref>[http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20040614/news_mz1b14google.html Dropping 'Google-bombs']</ref>

*'''"Miserable Failure"''': For nearly two years, typing "miserable failure" (or even just "miserable", or "failure") and then clicking "I'm Feeling Lucky" in the Google search engine would return the [https://www.whitehouse.gov/president/biography.html White House Biography] of [[George W. Bush]].<ref>[http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3298443.stm 'Miserable failure' links to Bush]</ref> This was orchestrated by [[Democratic]] Party supporters in late 2003,<ref>[http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2004/01/26/BUG3M4GVDS1.DTL In October, Johnson, a Democrat, added the phrase "miserable failure" to his Web site, Old Fashioned Patriot. He then linked the site to the online White House biography of President Bush and asked others to follow his lead]</ref> as part of the 2004 Presidential election. However, at times, [[Conservative]] supporters were able to shift the phrase to [[Jimmy Carter]], [[Hillary Clinton]] and [[Michael Moore]].
*''''"Great President"''': returns the [https://www.whitehouse.gov/president/biography.html White House Biography] of [[George W. Bush]].
*'''"Jew"''': The first result used to be the home page for "Jew Watch", a racist, anti-Semitic hate group. As of September 2012, Jew Watch is the 4th result, although it has now shown even lower in the result list.
*'''"Waffles"''': Also as part of the 2004 Presidential election, Conservative supporters managed to link the term "waffles" to the official Web site of [[John Kerry]].
*'''"French Military Victories"''': Hitting "I'm Feeling Lucky" for this term directs you to a fake Google page (in reality, it is an AlbinoBlackSheep.com page, styled to look exactly like a Google page, [http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/text/victories.html here]) giving no matches, and asking if you meant "French military defeats?".
*'''"Weapons of Mass Destruction"''' would bring up a similar page with the error message 'not found.'
*'''"[Rick] Santorum"''': Homosexual activist [[Dan Savage]] created a Web site with an obscene definition for the word "santorum" because politician [[Rick Santorum]] opposes same-sex marriage. This page was number one on Google for several years when people searched for his last name (and at times, his full name as well). Once Santorum began to campaign for President, his campaign Web site eventually made it up to the top spot, but as of September 2012, the [[Wikipedia]] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Campaign_for_%22santorum%22_neologism page] about Savage's actions is currently the top result, followed by the Wikipedia page for Santorum. Savage's site has fallen to the third spot. Santorum's presidential campaign Web site has fallen to number four, since Santorum is no longer in the race.

On January 25, 2007, Google claimed to have modified their PageRank algorithm to lessen the likelihood of future Google bombs<ref>[http://boingboing.net/2007/01/26/bush_no_longer_miser.html Bush no longer "miserable failure": Google tackles googlebombs]</ref>

== Google News ==

Google provides a news aggregator service named "Google News," which tailors without user consent which articles appear for them. Alternative news aggregator services are freely available.<ref>https://beebom.com/best-google-news-alternatives/</ref>
== Controversy ==
=== Tax Dodging ===
A report by Bloomberg News has Google setting up offshore banks accounts to avoid paying taxes on foreign profits. More than $3.9 billion have made it to [[Bermuda]] bank accounts over the last several years. Google has cut its effective tax rate abroad to just 2.4%. The practice is common and [[George Soros]] has been known to place his billions of dollars in Cayman Island banks. This costs the U.S. government more than $60 billion in revenue.<ref>[https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/After-news-of-Google-tax-dodges-Obama-raises-money-with-Google-execs-105513473.html#ixzz13LE2lg1F After news of Google tax dodges, Obama raises money with Google execs, Washington Examiner, October 22, 2010]</ref>

=== Privacy Concerns===
Google has been criticized by privacy activists and others. Google chief executive Eric Schmidt said, "We cannot even answer the most basic questions because we don’t know enough about you. That is the most important aspect of Google’s expansion." <ref>http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/c3e49548-088e-11dc-b11e-000b5df10621,dwp_uuid=e8477cc4-c820-11db-b0dc-000b5df10621.html</ref> Google has attempted to "remedy" this situation by storing search information, in effect, keeping tabs on people for two years after they search. This has led Google critic [[Daniel Brandt]] to create "Scroogle.org", which runs Google searches that users conduct through his organization's personal servers to prevent Google from being able to connect any personal information to the searchers.<ref>http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55935</ref> 

A number of other privacy concerns have arisen, including the disclosure of Google's Sensorvault database in 2019. This database reportedly contains extensive records of GPS locations on almost all Android devices. This is an extensive record of every precise location almost every individual device has ever been. This wealth of information reveals many aspects of each owner's behavior, interests, and overall lifestyle. Sensorvault has also reportedly been utilized by law enforcement to find behavioral correlations of devices, then acquire the identity information of certain users of special interest. It is unclear exactly to what extend Google (and [[Alphabet Inc.]]) have been selling/sharing access to this data, or analytical conclusion from it.<ref>https://www.eff.org/es/deeplinks/2019/04/googles-sensorvault-can-tell-police-where-youve-been</ref><ref>https://www.cnet.com/news/law-enforcement-taps-googles-sensorvault-for-location-data-report-says/</ref><ref>https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/13/technology/google-sensorvault-location-tracking.html</ref>

Google has sometimes been called the [[Newspeak|Orwellian]] "Ministry of Truth." In many ways, its offerings have evolved into one singular full-scale surveillance platform.<ref>[https://medium.com/@fredbcampbelljr/how-google-made-android-the-worlds-most-ubiquitous-surveillance-platform-987cdae3d08f How Google Made Android The World’s Most Ubiquitous Surveillance Platform]</ref>

''The Wall Street Journal'' reported in November 2019 that Google had been collecting the health data of millions of Americans.<ref>Copeland, Rob (November 11, 2019). [https://www.wsj.com/articles/google-s-secret-project-nightingale-gathers-personal-health-data-on-millions-of-americans-11573496790 Google’s ‘Project Nightingale’ Gathers Personal Health Data on Millions of Americans]. ''The Wall Street Journal''. Retrieved November 17, 2019.</ref>

=== Net neutrality ===
Google has repeatedly demonstrated hypocrisy as it says one thing and does another, tarnishing their reputation in the process. This can can be seen again with their support of net neutrality, while at the same time doing what they want in regards to restricting access.<ref>[https://www.redstate.com/neil_stevens/2009/08/23/google-undermines-the-internet/ Google undermines the Internet, RedState.com, August 23, 2009]</ref>

===Election meddling===
:{{See also|Trump-Russia collusion hoax|Ukrainian collusion}}
Dr. Robert Epstein of the American Institute for Behavioral Research and Technology testified before Congress in 2019 that Google [[bias]] and meddling had shifted "between 2.6 million and up to 10.4 million votes" to Hillary Clinton.<ref>https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2019/08/psychologist-google-generated-at-least-2-6-million-votes-for-hillary.php</ref>

On October 20, 2018, Google, acting in collusion with the liberal media outlets and other mayoral candidates (including incumbent [[Toronto]] mayor and former Ontario Progressive Conservative leader John Tory, who is also a former broadcaster and has connections in the mainstream media), illegally shut down the online advertising campaign of conservative journalist and [[Toronto]] mayoral candidate [[Faith Goldy]], 48 hours before the opening of polls for the Toronto civic election on October 22, with no justifiable explanation for the shutdown against Goldy and in potential violation of Canada's campaign financing and election laws.<ref>[https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2018/10/22/google-shuts-down-advertising-campaign-of-toronto-mayoral-candidate-faith-goldy-before-election/ Google Shuts Down Advertising Campaign of Toronto Mayoral Candidate Faith Goldy Before Election] at Breitbart News Network</ref>

In June 2019, [[Project Veritas]] released an undercover video in which a Google executive admitted that the company was working, through its policies and products, to prevent "the next Trump situation."<ref>Multiple references:
*Svab, Petr (June 24, 2019). [https://www.theepochtimes.com/google-stealthily-infuses-political-agenda-into-products-to-prevent-trump-reelection-insiders-documents-say_2976582.html Google Stealthily Infuses Political Agenda Into Products to Prevent Trump Reelection, Insiders, Documents Say]. ''The Epoch Times''. Retrieved June 24, 2019.
*Richardson, Valerie (June 24, 2019). [https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/jun/24/google-exec-project-veritas-sting-says-only-big-te/ Google exec in Project Veritas sting says only big tech can stop 'the next Trump situation']. ''The Washington Times''. Retrieved June 24, 2019.
*Bokhari, Allum (June 24, 2019). [https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2019/06/24/project-veritas-google-exec-decries-trumps-election-how-do-we-prevent-it-from-happening-again/ Project Veritas – Google Exec Decries Trump’s Election: ‘How Do We Prevent It from Happening Again’]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved June 24, 2019.
*Kirkwood, R. Cort (June 24, 2019). [https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/item/32684-google-is-gearing-up-to-defeat-trump-in-2020 Google Is Gearing Up To Defeat Trump In 2020]. ''The New American''. Retrieved June 24, 2019.
See also:
*Svab, Petr (June 26, 2019). [https://www.theepochtimes.com/google-doubles-down-on-deceiving-customers-about-its-political-manipulation_2980032.html Google Doubles Down on Deceiving Customers About Its Political Manipulation]. ''The Epoch Times''. Retrieved June 26, 2019.</ref> The video had over one million views in the first 24 hours (available in External link section, below). Google subsequently moved to censor the video from its platforms.<ref>Multiple references:
*Bokhari, Allum (June 24, 2019). [https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2019/06/24/google-censors-video-exposing-google/ Google Censors Video Exposing Google]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved June 24, 2019.
*Kirkwood, R. Cort (June 25, 2019). [https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/item/32698-youtube-scraps-veritas-expose-after-privacy-complaints YouTube Scraps Veritas' Exposé After Privacy Complaints]. ''The New American''. Retrieved June 25, 2019.
*Svab, Petr (June 25, 2019). [https://www.theepochtimes.com/youtube-deletes-expose-on-googles-stealthily-pushing-its-politics-on-users_2978328.html YouTube Deletes Exposé on Google’s Stealthily Pushing Its Politics on Users]. ''The Epoch Times''. Retrieved June 26, 2019.</ref>

As noted above, Professor Epstein in his testimony before the Judiciary Senate Committee stated that his research indicated that Google had manipulated the votes for the 2016 presidential elections in Hillary Clinton's favor, and also had been manipulating national elections as early as 2015, and has even insinuated that they had also manipulated the results of the 2018 midterm elections.<ref name="Epstein testimony PDF" /><ref name="Epstein testimony YouTube" />

====FEC disclosure exemptions====
Political advertising regarding federal elections and candidates that is purchased for appearance on radio, television and print generally must adhere to [[Federal Election Commission]] rules requiring clear disclosure of the committee or donor paying for the advertisements. During 2011, Google and [[Facebook]] hired [[Marxist]] operative [[Marc Elias]] to help them obtain an exemption from this requirement for political advertising on their platforms. Elias argued the restrictions were not practical for his clients, with FEC commissioners ultimately voting 4-2 in favor of the exemption for Google and deadlocking 3-3 on the request regarding Facebook.<ref>Vogel, Kenneth P.; and Kang, Cecilia. [https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/19/us/politics/facebook-google-russia-meddling-disclosure.html “Senators Demand Online Ad Disclosures as Tech Lobby Mobilizes.”] New York Times. October 19, 2017.</ref>

Facebook continued to operate as if exempt from disclosure rules. During the 2016 U.S. general election, $100,000 worth of Russian-backed and undisclosed advertisements intended to influence voters were purchased on Facebook with another $4,700 spent by Russian sources on Google political advertisements. In October 2017, following the controversy that ensued regarding Russian interference in the 2016 elections, both Republican and Democratic Senators advocated for legislation to require Facebook and Google to adhere to the same disclosure rules as other media.

====2016 election meddling====
{{See also|Presidential Election 2016|}}
It was discovered Google was manipulating autocomplete [[search engine]] results to favor Hillary Clinton.<ref>[http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-06-10/must-see-video-how-google-manipulates-search-results-favor-hillary-clinton How Google Manipulates Search Results In Favor Of Hillary Clinton], by Tyler Durden, Jun 10, 2016. zerohedge.com</ref> Autocomplete returns the most popular trending search queries.
<ref>[https://freebeacon.com/politics/here-are-10-more-examples-of-google-search-results-favorable-to-hillary/ Here Are 10 More Examples of Google Search Results Favorable to Hillary], Tech giant accused of whitewashing autocomplete results, Brent Scher and Elizabeth Harrington, ''Washington Free Beacon'', June 10, 2016</ref> When a user types in ''Hillary Clinton cri'' to query about the criminal investigation into Mrs. Clinton for example, the Google results do not match at all popular trends on all other major search engines.<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PFxFRqNmXKg Did Google Manipulate Search for Hillary?], Matt Lieberman, SourceFed, Jun 9, 2016. UPDATE: Friday June 10. youtube.com</ref>

Supporters of [[Bernie Sanders]] complained throughout the 2016 primary season Google had inflated Hillary's delegate count by adding unelected [[Superdelegate]]s who, by rule, were to remain unpledged until the convention.<ref>[http://www.snopes.com/sanders-vs-clinton-delegate-count/ Failing Delegate Math], A popular [[meme]] detailing the actual delegate count between Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton in May 2016 is mostly accurate. Kim LaCapria, ''Snopes'', May 10, 2016</ref> Some in late primary states considered this another form of [[voter suppression]].<ref>[http://thebernreport.com/superdelegate-system-has-been-used-as-a-form-of-voter-supression/ Superdelegate System Has Been Used as a Form of Voter Suppression], Posted by G.A. Casebeer, ''The Bern Report'', May 23, 2016</ref>

In an article titled ''How Google Could Rig the 2016 Election'' in August 2015 ''Politico'' warned Google "can easily shift the voting preferences of undecided voters by 20 percent or more—up to 80 percent in some demographic groups—with virtually no one knowing they are being manipulated... In the United States, half of our presidential elections have been won by margins under 7.6 percent".<ref>[https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/08/how-google-could-rig-the-2016-election-121548 How Google Could Rig the 2016 Election], Google has the ability to drive millions of votes to a candidate with no one the wiser, By Robert Epstein, ''Politico'', August 19, 2015</ref>

Billionaire Eric Schmidt, [[CEO]] of Google's parent company Alphabet funded a startup company called The Groundwork to ensure Hillary has the engineering talent needed to win the election.<ref>[http://qz.com/520652/groundwork-eric-schmidt-startup-working-for-hillary-clinton-campaign/ THE GROUNDWORK The stealthy, Eric Schmidt-backed startup that’s working to put Hillary Clinton in the White House], Adam Pasick & Tim Fernholz, ''Quartz'', October 09, 2015. qz.com</ref> Schmidt and Google are both donors to the Clinton Foundation.

When Googling, '''Hillary Clinton's he-''' 
Google yielded,
*Hillary Clinton's headquarters
*Hillary Clinton's health plan
*Hillary Clinton's healthcare plan

Search results on Bing return the suggestions
*Hillary Clinton's health
*Hillary Clinton's health issues
*Hillary Clinton's health and weight

Search results on Yahoo return the suggestions
*Hillary Clinton's health problems
*Hillary Clinton's health
*Hillary Clinton's health issues

On July 19, 2019, Professor Robert Epstein revealed before the Judiciary Senate Committee that Google was responsible for swaying 2.6 million people into voting for Hillary Clinton during the 2016 presidential elections, and had also implied that the amount of people swayed may have been as many as 10.4 million votes, and may have even been trying to influence national elections as early as 2015.<ref name="Epstein testimony PDF">https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Epstein%20Testimony.pdf</ref><ref name="Epstein testimony YouTube">https://youtu.be/IzF7nBmwPso</ref>

====2020 election meddling====
:{{See also|United States presidential election, 2020|Tulsi Gabbard 2020 presidential campaign}}
[[Tulsi Gabbard]] is suing Google for $50 million for [[censorship]] of her campaign ads.<ref>https://thehill.com/policy/technology/454746-tulsi-gabbard-sues-google-over-censorship-claims</ref> Google blocked her ads account shortly after the first Democrat presidential debate, when Gabbard became the most-searched-for candidate in the Democrat field.

Gabbard's complaint accuses Google of censoring the candidate at the very moment when millions of Americans wanted to learn more about her. It also accuses Google of sending Gabbard's campaign emails to people's Gmail spam folders at a “disproportionately high rate.” The campaign seeks a legal injunction against Google to prevent further election meddling, as well as $50 million in damages. According to Gabbard's legal complaint against Google:

{{Quotebox|At the height of Gabbard’s popularity among Internet searchers in the immediate hours after the debate ended, and in the thick of the critical post-debate period (when television viewers, radio listeners, newspaper read-ers, and millions of other Americans are discussing and searching for presidential candidates), Google suspended Tulsi’s Google Ads account without warning. For hours, as millions of Americans searched Google for information about Tulsi, and as Tulsi was trying, through Google, to speak to them, her Google Ads account was arbitrarily and forcibly taken offline. Throughout this period, the Campaign worked frantically to gather more information about the suspension; to get through to someone at Google who could get the Account back online; and to understand and remedy the restraint that had been placed on Tulsi’s speech—at precisely the moment when everyone wanted to hear from her.}}

The legal complaint argues that Google could have a nefarious impact on American democracy if its behavior is allowed to continue unchecked. This is the viewpoint of Dr. Robert Epstein, who says the Silicon Valley Masters of the Universe will “go all out” to influence the 2020 election.

In a series of Tweets, the Hawaii Democrat said Google's actions “reveals the danger of their dominance & how the dominance of big tech over public discourse threatens core American values.”<ref>https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2019/07/25/tulsi-gabbard-sues-google-for-censorship-of-ads/</ref>

After Hillary's Clinton's xenophobic smear, [[Steven Crowder]] demonstrated during his radio program how Google was actively suppressing Tulsi Gabbard search results in the United States.<ref>https://www.zerohedge.com/political/tulsis-youtube-suppressed</ref>

===Interference with Trump presidency===
Owing to all of the above, Google has been accused of trying to stifle conservative voices (especially those that support Trump) and only allowing for left-wing viewpoints to be shown on the search engine. Although Google twice denied these claims, this was eventually confirmed on September 12, 2018, via a leaked video via Breitbart for the TGIF session immediately after Donald Trump's election, where the upper management not only made their views of the American public clear by inferring that those who voted for Donald Trump were "fascists and communists", but also strongly implied that they were going to dedicate all of their resources to making sure the rise of populism is squashed.<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FRf9UxsM-NE&feature=youtu.be</ref><ref>Bokhari, Allum (September 12, 2018). [https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2018/09/12/leaked-video-google-leaderships-dismayed-reaction-to-trump-election/ LEAKED VIDEO: Google Leadership’s Dismayed Reaction to Trump Election]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved September 14, 2018.</ref><ref>Freiburger, Calvin (September 17, 2018). [https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/top-google-leaders-vowed-to-alter-future-elections-to-avoid-trump-hiccup-le Top Google leaders vowed to alter future elections to avoid Trump ‘hiccup’: leaked video]. ''LifeSiteNews''. Retrieved September 19, 2018.</ref> Google also was caught trying to increase [[Latino]] turnout in the 2016 election.<ref>Duke, Selwyn (September 14, 2018). [https://www.thenewamerican.com/tech/computers/item/30073-google-caught-red-handed-tried-to-get-clinton-elected Google Caught Red-handed: Tried to Get Clinton Elected]. ''The New American''. Retrieved September 14, 2018.</ref>

On a similar note, Professor Epstein when giving testimony towards Google's efforts in overturning elections mentioned that, aside from its aforementioned role in manipulating votes in Hillary Clinton's favor, it also may have been responsible for the manipulation of as many as 78 million votes during the 2018 midterm elections, and has also implied that they are using their autocomplete programs for their products as a form of social engineering.<ref name="Epstein testimony PDF" /><ref name="Epstein testimony YouTube" />

=== Relationship with the Obama Administration ===
Consumer Watchdog crafted a 32-page report detailing how Google has inappropriately benefited from its close ties to the Obama Administration. [[NASA]]'s Moffett Airfield has been turned into a taxpayer-subsidized private airport for Google executives used for corporate junkets. NASA's Moffett Airfield is a short distance from Google's world headquarters. The report details, ''"A growing fleet of jets and helicopters stand ready to ferry the company's top executives near or far, for business or pleasure, for vacations or schmoozing, including at least three wintertime trips to the [[Caribbean]] and a trip by Google chief executive Eric Schmidt to the Cannes Film Festival."'' <ref>[http://www.redorbit.com/news/technology/1983792/consumer_watchdog_sends_issas_oversight_committee_google_report_showing_inappropriate/index.html Consumer Watchdog Sends Issa's Oversight Committee Google Report Showing Inappropriate Relationship with Obama Administration, RedOrbit.com, January 24, 2011]</ref>

====Attempted regime change in Syria====
Google collaborated with the Obama regime in the attempted [[regime change]] in [[Syria]]. Jared Cohen, head of Google Jigsaw (formerly Google Ideas) emailed the State Dept.:
{{quotebox-float|"Please keep close hold, but my team is planning to launch a tool on Sunday that will publicly track and map the defections in Syria and which parts of the government they are coming from. Our logic behind this is that while many people are tracking the atrocities, nobody is visually representing and mapping the defections, which we believe are important in encouraging more to defect and giving confidence to the opposition. Given how hard it is to get information into Syria right now, we are partnering with Al-Jazeera who will take primary ownership over the tool we have built, track the data, verify it, and broadcast it back into Syria. I've attached a few visuals that show what the tool will look like. Please keep this very close hold and let me know if there is anything eke you think we need to account for or think about before we launch. We believe this can have an important.<ref>https://wikileaks.org/clinton-emails/emailid/12166</ref>}}

===Homosexual agenda===
As was already mentioned, Google has been actively blocking certain websites and services which oppose sodomy (homosexuality). They also speak out in support of the homosexual movement, and promote search results which do the same.<ref>https://blog.google/topics/causes-community/transvoices</ref><ref>https://money.cnn.com/2012/07/08/technology/google-legalize-love/index.htm</ref><ref>https://winteryknight.com/2012/07/09/google-starts-wordlwide-campaign-to-legalize-gay-marriage-target-donates-to-gay-rights-groups</ref><ref>https://onetoday.google.com</ref> They also donate to some other organizations which do the same, as well and politicians who seek the same goal.<ref>http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2008/09/our-position-on-californias-no-on-8.html , Our position on California's No on 8 campaign</ref>

Google considers the term "family friendly" to be "[[homophobic]]."<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=--3oGtllMXY&feature=youtu.be</ref> On June 21, 2009, Google displayed a special multicolored line for searches on the word "gay". Additionally, Google compensates employees to cover taxes paid on their domestic partner's health benefits, but only offers its 'generosity' to homosexual couples.<ref>https://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/07/01/google-raises-eyebrows-new-gay-employee-benefit/</ref>

===Collaboration with China===
It was revealed in 2018 that Google was collaborating with China and supported the government's [[censorship]] agenda.<ref>Nash, Charlie (October 10, 2018). [https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2018/10/10/googes-shift-towards-censorship-aids-relationship-with-china/ Google’s ‘Shift Towards Censorship’ Aids Relationship with China]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved October 10, 2018.</ref>

Reporters Without Borders joined others in asking how Google could stand up for US users' freedoms while controlling what Chinese users can search for. Its previous search engine for China's fast-growing market was subject to government blocks. The new site - Google.cn - censors itself to satisfy Beijing. While cooperating with China's government, Google refuses to fulfill requests by the U.S. Department of Justice.<ref>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/4630694.stm , BBC Google defies US over search data, January 20, 2006</ref> Google counsel Nicole Wong said "..we intend to resist their motion vigorously."

===Opposing industry standards===
In addition to their political activities, Google has caused some controversy within its own industry by refusing to comply with industry standards. Since they own the most popular web browser and the most popular search engine (at least within the US), they have decided that they can bring about changes they believe are needed despite what the rest of the industry has decided. 
For example, the norm is that users are only logged into a service when they request it, and when they attempt to delete the cookies in their browser, the browser does so. However, Google decided in 2018 to automatically log users into their google accounts, and protect the google cookies from deletion, so that Google's cookies could not be deleted by the user (through the browser).<ref>https://www.wired.com/story/google-chrome-login-privacy/</ref><ref>https://www.theverge.com/2018/9/24/17895536/google-chrome-69-log-in-sync-password-user-data-privacy</ref> 
As another example, Google search was changed in 2018 to hide certain subdomains, including the "www" which many websites use. Users only would see the domain name and the [[TLD]], while the rest was masked. Further, the search engine would link users to sites which were using the "www" subdomain without that subdomain, so the site would need to redirect users to the proper location. Google knew this was not what the sites wanted, but chose to make this change anyway.<ref>https://www.makeuseof.com/tag/google-security-risk-hiding-subdomains/</ref><ref>https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/google/google-testing-removal-of-www-subdomain-from-search-results/</ref><ref>https://technocodex.com/google-removed-www-and-m-subdomains-in-chrome-69-how-to-disable-it/</ref> Not only is this inconvenient, but masking parts of URLs in inherently dangerous, since attackers can abuse such features to trick users into trusting a fraudulent site or page. The industry standard is, therefore, to show users the entire link which they have used to connect. 
Also in 2018, Google decided to make an additional change. They began trying to force websites to begin using the [[HTTPS|Hyper-text transfer protocol secure (HTTPS)]] rather than the older standard HTTP. While HTTPS is helpful, some webpages have reason to not use HTTPS. While the industry is moving slowly to HTTPS, Google decided to begin interfering with the loading and interaction in Chrome of sites which are not using HTTPS for their pages and all of the content therein. This caused many users to experience problems visiting websites, simply because Google no longer approved of sites using HTTP.

===Wi-Fi Snooping===
Google collected information from [[Wi-Fi]] networks as its street-view vans cruised neighborhoods around the globe, raising issues in more than 30 countries. The information Google gathered included e-mail fragments and passwords, alarming politicians and privacy and security advocates in Germany, France, and [[Spain]].<ref>[https://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/07/22/national-security-google-wi-fi-spy-scandal/ Is National Security Behind Google's Wi-Fi Spying?, Fox News, July 23, 2010]</ref> It was noted that Google supplies special mapping and search products to the U.S. military and intelligence community, with some Google employees enjoying Top Secret clearance to work with the government. Google said it was "accidental" data gathering. Rep. Joe Barton of Texas, a senior [[Republican]] lawmaker, suggested that Google's data collection wasn't accidental and that it was "something to look at." Under the Democrat leadership, the [[FCC]] investigated, but dropped further inquiry, coincidentally, just before a Google [[Democrat]] fundraiser was held. Many groups have been calling on Republican [[Darrell Issa]] to investigate Google's cozy relationship with the [[Obama administration]].<ref>[http://www.nlpc.org/stories/2010/11/10/congress-must-investigate-google-obama-ties Congress Must Investigate Google-Obama Ties, National Legal and Policy Center, November 10, 2010]</ref>

*France: Privacy watchdog CNIL awarded its largest fine to date with a judgement of $141,300 against Google in relation to snooping.<ref>[https://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2011/03/21/general-broadcasting-amp-entertainment-eu-france-google-fined_8366482.html France fines Google for Street View privacy breach, Forbes, March 21, 2011]</ref>

===Support for Antifa and Black Lives Matter===
In June 2020, Google was listed as one of numerous leftist-controlled companies that have gone "[[woke]]" and now support the criminal rioters of [[Antifa]] and [[Black Lives Matter]] in the wake of the [[2020 leftist riots]].<ref>[https://gab.com/a/posts/104311289660016704 Here Are The Companies That Support Antifa, Black Lives Matter, and Want You Dead] at Gab.com</ref>

Seattle Google engineer, Zachary Ames Trudo, was arrested at the [[Portland, Oregon]] Antifa riot. The 32-year-old [[Marxist]] was charged with [[assault]], attempting escape and resisting arrest. Trudo posted on [[Facebook]], "One way to hurt the [[bourgeoisie]] is to hurt their business. Closing down the ports is a terrific show of solidarity between labour and BLM.”<ref>https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/07/burn-ground-marxist-google-engineer-arrested-portland-riot-charged-assault-resisting-arrest-attempting-escape/</ref>

==International Agitation==
Google's Map service is responsible for escalating tensions between foreign nations by radically misleading versions of current borders.

Google has been labeled "professionally irresponsible" for disseminated [[Cambodia]] territory, which is embroiled in a bitter diplomatic row with Thailand over the demarcation of the frontier.<ref>[https://www.reuters.com/article/2010/02/05/cambodia-google-idUSSGE61406G20100205 Cambodia blasts Google map of disputed Thai border, Reuters, February 5, 2010]</ref>

[[Costa Rica]] took offense to Google Maps version showing that a specific area of encampment was on Nicaraguan soil. The dispute that had ensued over Google's version of the Nicaragua-Costa Rica border has became rather serious. So much so that the secretary general of the [[Organization of American States]] had to intervene.<ref>[http://news.cnet.com/8301-17852_3-20021977-71.html Envoy to solve latest Google Maps border dispute? CNET, November 5, 2010]</ref><ref>[http://spectregroup.wordpress.com/2010/11/12/google-maps-blamed-for-border-dispute/ GOOGLE MAPS BLAMED for BORDER DISPUTE, Spectre Footnotes, November 11, 2010]</ref>

Google Maps was busy fixing another error in its map program of a port city that reignited border tensions between [[Germany]] and The Netherlands.<ref>[https://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/02/21/google-maps-slipup-sparks-diplomatic-crisis/ Google Maps Blunder Reignites Centuries Old Border Dispute, Fox News, February 21, 2011]</ref>

===Egyptian Uprising===
Google executive Wael Ghonim helped with protesting [[Egypt]]'s rule of [[Hosni Mubarak]], calling for him to step down and organizing protests. He was detained by authorities and released after two weeks. Ghonim is credited as being a major factor in sparking Egypt's uprising. Google CEO Eric Schmidt said that Google is "very, very proud" of Wael Ghonim.<ref>[http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/technology/2011/02/google-ceo-eric-schmidt-says-company-is-proud-of-wael-ghonim-in-egypt.html Google CEO Eric Schmidt says company is 'very proud' of Egypt's Wael Ghonim, LA Times, February 15, 2011]</ref>

=== Benghazi massacre ===
After the [[Benghazi attack]], Hillary's State Department was in contact with Google. Hillary publicly claimed a controversial video was the source of a 'spontaneous' riot which proved to be a knowingly false statement. Google participated in the ruse by agreeing to block the video even after President Obama admitted it was a pre-planned terrorist attack. Copies of the email were forwarded to [[Denis McDonough]], [[Cheryl Mills]], Patrick F Kennedy, [[Jake Sullivan]] and [[John Brennan]]. The email also contains contact information for Google CEO Afternoon (Larry) Page and [[YouTube]] CEO Salar Kamangar including their mobile and office phone numbers.<ref>[https://wikileaks.org/clinton-emails/emailid/16800 UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04841 Doc No. C05739829 STATE DEPT]. wikileaks.org</ref>

=== Syrian Civil War ===
Newly released emails from [[Hillary Clinton]]'s State Department shows Google coordinating the overthrow of Bashar Assad in Syria.<ref>[https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/clinton-email-reveals-google-sought-overthrow-of-syrias-assad/article/2586300 Clinton email reveals: Google sought overthrow of Syria's Assad, Washington Examiner, March 19, 2016]</ref>

===Coronavirus===
Google funded research conducted by [[Peter Daszak]]’s EcoHealth Alliance, a group which collaborated with the [[Wuhan Institute of Virology]] on [[gain-of-function]] research for the “killer” bat [[coronavirus]] for over a decade.<ref>https://thenationalpulse.com/exclusive/google-funded-wuhan-linked-ecohealth-research/</ref>

==Alternatives to Google==
: ''Main Article: [[Alternatives to Google]]''
*[[DuckDuckGo]] — a search engine that is said to not track people. It also has "Privacy Essentials" on Firefox and Chrome and "Privacy browser" on mobile.
*[[Result Hunter]] — a search engine that favors conservative results, as opposed to Google which favors liberal results.
*[[Mojeek]] — a search engine that doesn't track people and uses a proprietary page ranking engine as opposed to PageRank, and is intended to give unbiased search results.
*[https://www.seekfind.org/ Seek Find] — a Christian search engine. Cannot be used for a general search, but a search over the Internet for information from Christian sites.
*[https://www.worthyseek.com/ Worthy Christian Search] — A similar Christian search engine.
*[https://www.StartPage.com/ StartPage]

==See also==
* [[Search engine manipulation effect]]
* [[Bing]]
* [[Censorability]]
*[[Far Left]]
* [[Censorship]]
* [[DuckDuckGo]]
* [[Evolutionist censorship]]
* [[Fairness Doctrine]]
* [[Liberal censorship]]
* [[Media censorship]]
* [[Tools of censorship]]
* [[Yahoo]]
*[[Fake news in the 2020 presidential election]]

== References ==
{{Reflist|colwidth=35em}}

== External links ==
* [https://www.google.com/ Google]
*[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lsSbpQklWyI Former Google CEO Eric Schmidt]
* [https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/07/29/google-and-the-adjustment-of-inconvenient-viewpoints-especially-climate/ GOOGLE and the ‘adjustment’ of inconvenient viewpoints, especially climate]
* [https://www.thecreepyline.com/ The Creepy Line]
*[https://www.liveleak.com/view?t=ksvnD_1561429279 Project Veritas "Trump Situation" Backup - Youtube yanked the vid off their site!], June 24, 2019.
*[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NTjmQKyOYlM Project Veritas Nails Google/Youtube Over Election Tampering], Original complete video, June 24, 2019.
*[https://gohmert.house.gov/uploadedfiles/google.mp4 Project Veritas Google election subversion video], June 24, 2019. https://gohmert.house.gov
*[https://www.oneangrygamer.net/2019/08/google-news-blacklist-revealed-websites-listed/90919/GOOGLE NEWS BLACKLIST REVEALED, WEBSITES LISTED] August 14, 2019.

[[Category:United States Businesses]]
[[Category:Search Engines]]
[[Category:Google]][[Category:San Francisco Bay Area]]
[[Category:Homosexual Agenda]]
[[Category:Communism]]
[[Category:Liberal Companies]]
[[Category:Anti Second Amendment]]
[[Category:SJWs]]
[[Category:Anti-Free Speech]]
[[Category:Perpetrators of Cancel Culture]]

Google

2021-07-23T07:57:26Z

Dave Wilcox: copy-edit

{{Infobox organization
| name = Google
| image = Google.png
| established = September 4, 1998
| founder = [[Larry Page]] [[Sergey Brin]]
| founding_location = California
| type =
| status =
| headquarters =
| website =
}}
'''Google''' is an Internet services company whose primary business is the collection and dissemination of information. However, they have become known for their political bias, as they continually slant the information they serve (particularly through their search engine and YouTube platform), in favor of leftist ideology. Their services include a [[monopoly|monopolistic]] [[search engine]] (which promotes something [[liberal]] nearly every day), a [[web browser]], webmaster tools, and [[Android (operating system)|phone operating system]]. Google is associated with liberal causes and has been criticized for manipulating search results,<ref>Nolan, Lucas (September 21, 2018). [https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2018/09/21/5-times-google-manipulated-search-youtube-and-news-results/ 5 Times Google Manipulated Search, YouTube, and News Results]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved September 21, 2018.</ref> along with catering to communist [[China]] in [[censorship|censoring]] information from the people as requested by the [[genocidal]] [[Communist Party of China]] from 2006 to 2010.<ref>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/4647398.stm</ref>

Google opposes diversity of opinion and virtually never features a [[conservative]] theme on its search page, and repeatedly promotes [[liberal]] themes instead. Google espouses [[Leftist]] political policies while underpaying its own workers and even creating a severe housing crisis in its community for low-income workers. Google also exploits [[H-1B visas]] in order to import foreigners to do engineering work, with less risk of the workers leaving for a competitor to Google. Google has been criticized for its election interference, its anti-American views and anti-Semitism.

Major competitors of Google include [[Yahoo!]], [[DuckDuckGo]], and Microsoft's [[Bing]].

== Corporate Information ==
The CEO of Google since 2001 was [[Eric Schmidt]]. He announced that he was stepping down as CEO in 2011. Google is headquartered in Mountain View, [[California]]. Google was founded on September 7, 1998, by [[Larry Page]] and [[Sergey Brin]]. Since then, it has grown to be the largest Internet search engine in the world. According to Alexa Internet, over 25% of all Internet users visit Google monthly.<ref>[http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_details?url=www.google.com Alexa Traffic Results for Google]</ref>

Google also owns [[YouTube]], the homemade [[video clip]] site. [[Viacom]] is suing YouTube, and thus Google, for a reported $1 billion, arguing that the economic model of YouTube is based on copyright infringement.<ref>[http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/6446193.stm Viacom will sue YouTube for $1bn]</ref>

After much debate about their corporate Code of Conduct, Google's founders settled on the all-encompassing "Don't be evil", saying,"It's built around the recognition that everything we do in connection with our work at Google will be, and should be, measured against the highest possible standards".<ref>[http://investor.google.com/conduct.html Google Code of Conduct]</ref> This Code of Conduct has generated much criticism, saying they have missed that mark badly.

==History==
[[Image:Google2.gif|thumb|right|300px| Google's logo on [[Earth Day]], April 22, 2007.]]

===Founding===
Google was originally a research project, started by Larry Page and Sergey Brin in 1996, when the two attended [[Stanford University]]. The two registered the domain name ''google.stanford.edu'', and the small search engine went online for the first time.<ref>[http://www.google.com/intl/en/corporate/history.html Corporate Information:Google Milestones]</ref>

===Growth===
The year Google was created 1998, it had amassed 26 million unique URLs in their database. By 2000, Google had indexed more than 1 billion pages. As of July 2008, Google has indexed over 1 [[trillion]] pages. Its core service is usually referred to as Google Search.<ref>[http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-9999814-93.html Google reveals scope of Web-crawling task] CNET News, July 25, 2008</ref> Google Search was enhanced with a feature called Google Instant in 2010 which quickly displays suggested search works as the user types. This reveals how the search information is organized in a "semantic Web" and the degree to which is it understood beyond just simple string matching. This feature seems to be further enhanced by the semantic information in [[Knowledge Graph]].

===Competition===
[[Microsoft]] has been aggressively competing with Google for a larger share of the search market. Their latest effort, [[Bing]].com, is a "next generation" search service which has generated praise for its user interface and criticism for its speed and performance in comparison to Google and Yahoo.

Other potential competitors, such as [[Apple]], have chosen to keep Google as its default search provider. In return, Apple received $9 billion.<ref>[https://9to5mac.com/2018/09/28/google-paying-apple-9-billion-default-seach-engine/ Google reportedly paying Apple $9 billion to remain default search engine in Safari on iOS]</ref> That amount will increase to $12 billion in 2019.<ref>[http://fortune.com/2018/09/29/google-apple-safari-search-engine/ Google reportedly paying Apple $9 billion to remain default search engine in Safari on iOS]</ref>

==Antitrust lawsuit==
On October 20, 2020, [[Attorney General]] [[William P. Barr]] announced an [[antitrust]] action initiated by the [[Department of Justice]] (DOJ) under the [[Sherman Anti-Trust Act]] for Google's anti-competative practices. In the statement the DOJ said:
{{quotebox-float|As one of the wealthiest companies on the planet with a market value of $1 trillion, Google is the monopoly gatekeeper to the internet for billions of users and countless advertisers worldwide. For years, Google has accounted for almost 90 percent of all search queries in the United States and has used anticompetitive tactics to maintain and extend its monopolies in search and search advertising.

As alleged in the Complaint, Google has entered into a series of exclusionary agreements that collectively lock up the primary avenues through which users access search engines, and thus the Internet, by requiring that Google be set as the preset default general search engine on billions of mobile devices and computers worldwide and, in many cases, prohibiting preinstallation of a competitor. In particular, the Complaint alleges that Google has unlawfully maintained monopolies in search and search advertising by:

*Entering into exclusivity agreements that forbid preinstallation of any competing search service.
*Entering into tying and other arrangements that force preinstallation of its search applications in prime locations on mobile devices and make them undeletable, regardless of consumer preference.
*Entering into long-term agreements with Apple that require Google to be the default – and de facto exclusive – general search engine on Apple’s popular Safari browser and other Apple search tools.
*Generally using monopoly profits to buy preferential treatment for its search engine on devices, web browsers, and other search access points, creating a continuous and self-reinforcing cycle of monopolization.<ref>https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-sues-monopolist-google-violating-antitrust-laws</ref>}}

==Secular Progressive Culture==
Google's West Coast headquarters hires a majority of left-leaning personalities, explicitly in executive decision-making.<ref>See [http://www.google.com/corporate/execs.html] for a list of board members and senior staff.</ref> Google supports causes that are a radical departure from traditional American views, such as their public support of a 'no' vote for [[California]]'s [[Proposition 8]], which defined marriage as being between a husband and wife. Also in a subtle way, they favor politically-correct global liberalism, championed by secular progressives. They select certain ''days of importance'' for tribute, some of which are controversial. As such, ''Merry Christmas'' is replaced by ''Happy Holidays''. Even though, poll <ref>[http://www.prweb.com/releases/2008/11/prweb1670824.htm Wish Me A Merry Christmas Campaign Crusades to Change Retail Culture] PRWeb, November 26, 2008</ref> after poll <ref>[http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/lifestyle/general_lifestyle/68_prefer_merry_christmas_to_happy_holidays 68% Prefer “Merry Christmas” to “Happy Holidays”] Rasmussen, November 27, 2008</ref> after poll <ref>[https://www.cnn.com/2005/US/12/20/poll.season/ Poll: More Americans prefer 'Merry Christmas' greeting] CNN, December 20, 2005</ref> shows the public prefers 'Merry Christmas'. The problem may be that Google doesn't respect traditional [[Christian]] holidays, in favor of a 'culturally-correct' approach. In addition, Google accepts the [[Theory of Evolution]] by [[Charles Darwin]] as fact, promotes Darwin on their homepage with a Google Doodle logo.<ref>[Scientists unveil fossil of Darwinius masillae]</ref>

Google often honors Russia with their logo of Sputnik and for composer Igor Stravinsky. Google based their [[United States Independence Day]] logo on ‘This Land Is Your Land’ as an ode to leftism. Woody Guthrie wrote the lyrics and also wrote for ''[[The Daily Worker]],'' a [[Marxist]] newspaper.<ref>[https://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/07/04/Google-chooses-this-land-is-your-land Google Chooses Communist-Oriented ‘This Land Is Your Land’ July 4th Theme, Breitbart.com, July 4, 2012]</ref>

=== Google versus Conservatives ===
Google has also been accused of delisting [[conservative]] news sites from its search engine. As one of many examples, "In February 2005, [[Michelle Malkin]] wrote of the difficulties she was having becoming part of Google News."<ref>http://newsbusters.org/node/5477</ref> Google has made it harder to find websites promoting conservative content.<ref>Multiple references:
*Svab, Petr (May 3, 2019). [https://www.theepochtimes.com/google-doubles-down-making-trump-reddit-fan-club-even-harder-to-find_2905658.html Google Doubles Down, Making Trump Reddit Fan Club Even Harder to Find]. ''The Epoch Times''. Retrieved May 4, 2019.
*Grind, Kirsten; Schechner, Sam; McMillan, Robert; West, John (November 15, 2019). [https://www.wsj.com/articles/how-google-interferes-with-its-search-algorithms-and-changes-your-results-11573823753 How Google Interferes With Its Search Algorithms and Changes Your Results]. ''The Wall Street Journal''. Retrieved November 17, 2019.
*Bokhari, Allum (November 18, 2019). [https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2019/11/18/wsj-investigation-further-debunks-googles-claim-of-no-manual-intervention-in-searches/ WSJ Investigation Further Debunks Google’s Claim of No Manual Intervention in Searches]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved November 18, 2019.
*Bokhari, Allum (November 19, 2019). [https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2019/11/19/wall-street-journal-google-manipulation-report-corroborates-years-of-breitbart-reporting/ Wall Street Journal Google Manipulation Report Corroborates Years of Breitbart Reporting]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved November 19, 2019.</ref>

* Many instances whereby [[information]] is comprised ideologically and displayed for the masses. Watchdog Web site NewsBusters.org published that Google had in fact labeled [[conservative]] [[American Spectator]] as "This site may harm your computer."<ref>[http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2007/12/28/google-claims-american-spectator-site-may-harm-your-computer Google Claims Conservative Website ‘May Harm Your Computer’] December 28, 2007</ref>
* Google once blocked pro-family Web site [http://www.massresistance.org/ MassResistance]. Some people complained his organization promotes hatred towards homosexuals. Google gave the standard legal trash as an excuse "'Users may not publish material that promotes hate towards groups based on race, ethnic origin, religion, disability, gender, age, veteran status, and sexual orientation/gender identity.'" MassResistance replied "Of course we are not promoting hate against anybody."<ref>[https://www.onenewsnow.com/Culture/Default.aspx?id=603372 Accusation: Google targets, blocks pro-family Web site again OneNewsNow.com, July 15, 2009]</ref>
* [[YouTube]] owner, Google continues to protect [[Planned Parenthood]] by removing undercover videos exposing abortion clinic law-breaking.<ref>[http://www.christiannewswire.com/news/7416111014.html YouTube Bans Student Group's Video Showing Abuse at Planned Parenthood Christian News Wire, July 21, 2009]</ref>
* Without any prior explanation or notice, Google had been terminating its News relationships with conservative e-zines and Web journals.<ref>[http://newsbusters.org/node/5477 Is Google Purging Conservative News Sites? NewsBusters, May 22, 2006]</ref>
* Google attempted to minimize global awareness of the [[ClimateGate]] emails and the truth about the [[anthropogenic global warming theory]], whence the term "[[Climategate#Googlegate|Googlegate]]" gained recognition across the [[Web]]. Non-coincidentally, [[Al Gore]] is on the Google advisory board.
* Curiously, leading up to [[Restoring Honor 8-28|Restoring Honor 8-28-10]]—on Google Maps—the [[Lincoln Memorial]] was being misplaced in favor of the [http://www.pcworld.com/zoom?id=204373&page=1&zoomIdx=1 Franklin D. Roosevelt Memorial], which is a good half a mile south of the more famous memorial.<ref>Sarah Jacobsson Purewal. [http://www.pcworld.com/article/204373/google_maps_misplaces_lincoln_memorial.html Google Maps Misplaces Lincoln Memorial], ''PC World'', Aug 28, 2010.</ref> This may have been an ongoing, known problem or bug in Google Maps that hadn't been fixed yet; or, Google is censoring search results; or, Google is playing with searches for political power and gain.
* As of August 15, 2016, a Google search for "The Murder of Seth Rich" Conservapedia, yields no results, likewise a search by "The Murder of Seth Rich" Site: Conservapedia.com. But a Yahoo search brings up the Conservapedia article. Google Finally added the page to their results, but keeps it ranked lower than numerous liberal articles claiming it was all a hoax.
* During the 2016 Presidential campaign Google filtered emails from [[Donald Trump]] into Gmail users spam boxes.<ref>[https://dailycaller.com/2016/06/23/users-claim-google-is-putting-trump-emails-in-their-spam-box/ Users Claim Google Is Putting Trump Emails In Their Spam Box], Alex Pfeiffer, ''Daily Caller'', 8:19 AM 06/23/2016</ref>
*Many more examples exist of Google [[Censorship|censoring]] conservatives or exhibiting bias against them.<ref>Duke, Selwyn (August 28, 2018). [https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/item/29900-google-is-not-a-search-engine-twitter-and-facebook-aren-t-social-media Google Is Not a Search Engine; Twitter and Facebook Aren’t Social Media]. ''The New American''. Retrieved August 28, 2018.</ref><ref>Bokhari, Allum (August 28, 2018). [https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2018/08/28/10-times-googles-far-left-anti-trump-bias-was-exposed/ 10 Times Google’s Far-Left, Anti-Trump Bias Was Exposed]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved August 28, 2018.</ref>
*Google search results are biased in favor of the [[mainstream media]] and liberal websites.<ref>Freiburger, Calvin (May 15, 2019). [https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/google-prioritizes-left-wing-media-sites-in-search-results-new-study-finds Google prioritizes left-wing media sites in search results, new study finds]. ''LifeSiteNews''. Retrieved May 15, 2019.</ref>

Google is also a major promoter of [[Charles Darwin]] and atheistic science, even to the point of giving special recognition to the anniversary of Darwin's birthday ("Darwin Day").

Google's online translator system generally "translates" by predicting from linguistic patterns based on UN documents in various languages.<ref>https://blogs.transparent.com/language-news/2015/09/02/how-google-translate-works-and-why-it-doesnt-measure-up/</ref> This generally results in shoddy translations from languages that don't have the same or similar linguistics as English, such as [[Japanese]].

=== Google versus Anti- Obama Blogs ===
The question immediately raised, "Did Google Silence [[Barack Obama]] critics?" It turns out, no they did not. A group of separate blogs were targeted by their spam filter as a result of manipulating the 'flag' feature. This caused a temporary blockage for five days. Sites affected were Hillary supporters and all anti-Obama. They include http://bluelyon.blogspot.com, http://comealongway.blogspot.com, http://hillaryorbust.blogspot.com and http://mccaindemocrats.blogspot.com and their main associate JustSayNoDeal.com <ref>[http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/06/30/google-and-the-anti-obama-bloggers/ Google and the Anti-Obama Bloggers] NYTimes June 30, 2008</ref>

=== Google sensitive to Islam ===
In 2010, it was noted that Google's search suggestions for the world's various religions would bring up many negative results for [[Christianity]], Judaism, Hinduism and Buddhism. Typing a search for "Christianity is..." the results would be "Christianity is a lie," or "Judaism is..." would be "Judaism is a cult." Google removed negative search suggestions when typing "Islam is...",<ref>[http://thenextweb.com/2010/01/05/google-blocking-negative-search-recommendations-islam/ Google Blocking Negative Search Recommendations On Islam – Why?, The Next Web, May 1, 2010]</ref> however it seems that Google has reverted this, as the current first suggestion when typing "islam is..." is "Islam is evil".

=== Google versus Vladimir Putin ===
On the day of Olympic Winter Games in Russia, Google created a homepage icon, that supports the [[homosexual agenda]]. It shows a rainbow-coloured group of athletes. The background is [[Putin]]'s position on Homosexuality.<ref>https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26080047</ref>

===Google and anti-Semitism===
According to the ''[[Washington Free Beacon]]'',<ref>https://freebeacon.com/latest-news/google-sanctions-use-of-anti-semitic-slogan/</ref> Google’s human resources department allows an employee’s use of the phrase "From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free," the call-to-arms frequently employed by anti-Israel activists. The company's determination came after a Jewish employee raised concerns about the anti-Semitic slogan by a top Google union official on an internal company profile. "The Googler who shared this phrase on his page did so as a show of solidarity with the Palestinian community, which Googlers are permitted to do in the workplace," the human resources employee wrote in an email response to the Jewish employee’s complaint. "While the phrase used is understandably divisive, it was not intended to be anti-Semitic in the way the author used it."
[[File:Driving the Jews into the sea.PNG|thumb|[https://books.google.com/books?id=Jh9CAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA3#v=onepage&q&f=false "Driving the Jews into the sea." Syrian cartoon. (How the phrase has always literally meant in the Arab world)]]]
A political slogan used by Palestinian nationalists and terrorist groups like the [[Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine]], "From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free" describes an aspirational Palestinian state that would extend from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea, eliminating the state of Israel. [[PLO]] chairman [[Ahmad Shukairy]] made sure he really meant his genocidal calls and only realizing the PR disaster and military defeat of '67 is when the following PLO, [[Yasir Arafat]] tried to camouflage its real aims - progressives admitted that ''This once even the Right could be Right'': <ref>[https://books.google.com/books?id=k5eyAAAAIAAJ&q=%22shukairy%22 In Search of Facts, Ideas and Challenges], Vol. 5, Iss. 80. Vol. 8, Iss. 159. ''Institute for the Study of Relevant Progressivism''. 1976.</ref>

<gallery>

Even the Right could be Right.PNG|[https://books.google.com/books?id=k5eyAAAAIAAJ&q=%22the+right%22 Proggressives admit: 'Right cound be right']

Shukairy push the Israelis into the sea.PNG|[https://books.google.com/books?id=k5eyAAAAIAAJ&q=%22shukairy%22 Shukairy meant it when called for the Jews to be 'thrown into the sea']

</gallery>

<blockquote>

The P.L.O. - What Sort of Precedent?

This Once Even the Right Could be Righ

...professing its genocidal ambition openly, without hiding it in any disguise whatever. Its leader, Ahmed Shukairy, kept making a point of it that the Arabs were absolutely literal when speaking of pushing the Israelis into the sea. Following the military disaster Israel that year inflicted on the Arabs, they were internationally overheard discussing the public relations error of their past genocidal candor. Heads of Arab states and Palestinian leaders were voicing this tactical self-criticism in newspaper interviews and articles, in radio and television broadcasts, in speeches before parliaments.

The adjustments made in the aftermath of this self-criticism included the replacement of the undiplomatic Ahmed Shukairy with the highly diplomatic Yassir Arafat as leader of the Palestine Liberation Organization . Also included was a new semantic formula which, incorporated in the Charter of the PLO, for the first time provided however thin and tortuous a camouflage of the genocidal ambition. What used up until that point to be loudly and proudly advertised was now being pro forma denied whenever necessary, accompanied by a meaningful wink of an eyelid.

</blockquote>

Google’s determination comes as the tech giant faces outrage and scrutiny from Jewish employees and Jewish organizations for its silence in the wake of a ''Free Beacon'' report on an anti-Semitic blog post authored by a top member of the Google diversity team.<ref>https://freebeacon.com/latest-news/google-diversity-head-said-jews-have-insatiable-appetite-for-war/</ref> The [[Simon Wiesenthal|Somin Wiesenthal Center]] began an online ad campaign slamming Google for its "failure to address anti-Semitism in its workplace."

== Google bombing ==
Perhaps the most innovative contribution Google has made to Internet searching is its '''PageRank''' algorithm. This system works by counting the number of sites that link to another site; the more links pointing to a page, the higher that page will be ranked. The engine also takes note of how often the page is updated. Due to this, [[Wikipedia®]] is consistently ranked very highly by Google, due to its constant updating and heavy linkage. More recently, Internet-savvy Googlers have discovered ways to game the system; creating massive numbers of pages with links pointing to one page to form what is known as a "Google Bomb". Some examples can be found below.<ref>[http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20040614/news_mz1b14google.html Dropping 'Google-bombs']</ref>

*'''"Miserable Failure"''': For nearly two years, typing "miserable failure" (or even just "miserable", or "failure") and then clicking "I'm Feeling Lucky" in the Google search engine would return the [https://www.whitehouse.gov/president/biography.html White House Biography] of [[George W. Bush]].<ref>[http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3298443.stm 'Miserable failure' links to Bush]</ref> This was orchestrated by [[Democratic]] Party supporters in late 2003,<ref>[http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2004/01/26/BUG3M4GVDS1.DTL In October, Johnson, a Democrat, added the phrase "miserable failure" to his Web site, Old Fashioned Patriot. He then linked the site to the online White House biography of President Bush and asked others to follow his lead]</ref> as part of the 2004 Presidential election. However, at times, [[Conservative]] supporters were able to shift the phrase to [[Jimmy Carter]], [[Hillary Clinton]] and [[Michael Moore]].
*''''"Great President"''': returns the [https://www.whitehouse.gov/president/biography.html White House Biography] of [[George W. Bush]].
*'''"Jew"''': The first result used to be the home page for "Jew Watch", a racist, anti-Semitic hate group. As of September 2012, Jew Watch is the 4th result, although it has now shown even lower in the result list.
*'''"Waffles"''': Also as part of the 2004 Presidential election, Conservative supporters managed to link the term "waffles" to the official Web site of [[John Kerry]].
*'''"French Military Victories"''': Hitting "I'm Feeling Lucky" for this term directs you to a fake Google page (in reality, it is an AlbinoBlackSheep.com page, styled to look exactly like a Google page, [http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/text/victories.html here]) giving no matches, and asking if you meant "French military defeats?".
*'''"Weapons of Mass Destruction"''' would bring up a similar page with the error message 'not found.'
*'''"[Rick] Santorum"''': Homosexual activist [[Dan Savage]] created a Web site with an obscene definition for the word "santorum" because politician [[Rick Santorum]] opposes same-sex marriage. This page was number one on Google for several years when people searched for his last name (and at times, his full name as well). Once Santorum began to campaign for President, his campaign Web site eventually made it up to the top spot, but as of September 2012, the [[Wikipedia]] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Campaign_for_%22santorum%22_neologism page] about Savage's actions is currently the top result, followed by the Wikipedia page for Santorum. Savage's site has fallen to the third spot. Santorum's presidential campaign Web site has fallen to number four, since Santorum is no longer in the race.

On January 25, 2007, Google claimed to have modified their PageRank algorithm to lessen the likelihood of future Google bombs<ref>[http://boingboing.net/2007/01/26/bush_no_longer_miser.html Bush no longer "miserable failure": Google tackles googlebombs]</ref>

== Google News ==

Google provides a news aggregator service named "Google News," which tailors without user consent which articles appear for them. Alternative news aggregator services are freely available.<ref>https://beebom.com/best-google-news-alternatives/</ref>
== Controversy ==
=== Tax Dodging ===
A report by Bloomberg News has Google setting up offshore banks accounts to avoid paying taxes on foreign profits. More than $3.9 billion have made it to [[Bermuda]] bank accounts over the last several years. Google has cut its effective tax rate abroad to just 2.4%. The practice is common and [[George Soros]] has been known to place his billions of dollars in Cayman Island banks. This costs the U.S. government more than $60 billion in revenue.<ref>[https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/After-news-of-Google-tax-dodges-Obama-raises-money-with-Google-execs-105513473.html#ixzz13LE2lg1F After news of Google tax dodges, Obama raises money with Google execs, Washington Examiner, October 22, 2010]</ref>

=== Privacy Concerns===
Google has been criticized by privacy activists and others. Google chief executive Eric Schmidt said, "We cannot even answer the most basic questions because we don’t know enough about you. That is the most important aspect of Google’s expansion." <ref>http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/c3e49548-088e-11dc-b11e-000b5df10621,dwp_uuid=e8477cc4-c820-11db-b0dc-000b5df10621.html</ref> Google has attempted to "remedy" this situation by storing search information, in effect, keeping tabs on people for two years after they search. This has led Google critic [[Daniel Brandt]] to create "Scroogle.org", which runs Google searches that users conduct through his organization's personal servers to prevent Google from being able to connect any personal information to the searchers.<ref>http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55935</ref> 

A number of other privacy concerns have arisen, including the disclosure of Google's Sensorvault database in 2019. This database reportedly contains extensive records of GPS locations on almost all Android devices. This is an extensive record of every precise location almost every individual device has ever been. This wealth of information reveals many aspects of each owner's behavior, interests, and overall lifestyle. Sensorvault has also reportedly been utilized by law enforcement to find behavioral correlations of devices, then acquire the identity information of certain users of special interest. It is unclear exactly to what extend Google (and [[Alphabet Inc.]]) have been selling/sharing access to this data, or analytical conclusion from it.<ref>https://www.eff.org/es/deeplinks/2019/04/googles-sensorvault-can-tell-police-where-youve-been</ref><ref>https://www.cnet.com/news/law-enforcement-taps-googles-sensorvault-for-location-data-report-says/</ref><ref>https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/13/technology/google-sensorvault-location-tracking.html</ref>

Google has sometimes been called the [[Newspeak|Orwellian]] "Ministry of Truth." In many ways, its offerings have evolved into one singular full-scale surveillance platform.<ref>[https://medium.com/@fredbcampbelljr/how-google-made-android-the-worlds-most-ubiquitous-surveillance-platform-987cdae3d08f How Google Made Android The World’s Most Ubiquitous Surveillance Platform]</ref>

''The Wall Street Journal'' reported in November 2019 that Google had been collecting the health data of millions of Americans.<ref>Copeland, Rob (November 11, 2019). [https://www.wsj.com/articles/google-s-secret-project-nightingale-gathers-personal-health-data-on-millions-of-americans-11573496790 Google’s ‘Project Nightingale’ Gathers Personal Health Data on Millions of Americans]. ''The Wall Street Journal''. Retrieved November 17, 2019.</ref>

=== Net neutrality ===
Google has repeatedly demonstrated hypocrisy as it says one thing and does another, tarnishing their reputation in the process. This can can be seen again with their support of net neutrality, while at the same time doing what they want in regards to restricting access.<ref>[https://www.redstate.com/neil_stevens/2009/08/23/google-undermines-the-internet/ Google undermines the Internet, RedState.com, August 23, 2009]</ref>

===Election meddling===
:{{See also|Trump-Russia collusion hoax|Ukrainian collusion}}
Dr. Robert Epstein of the American Institute for Behavioral Research and Technology testified before Congress in 2019 that Google [[bias]] and meddling had shifted "between 2.6 million and up to 10.4 million votes" to Hillary Clinton.<ref>https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2019/08/psychologist-google-generated-at-least-2-6-million-votes-for-hillary.php</ref>

On October 20, 2018, Google, acting in collusion with the liberal media outlets and other mayoral candidates (including incumbent [[Toronto]] mayor and former Ontario Progressive Conservative leader John Tory, who is also a former broadcaster and has connections in the mainstream media), illegally shut down the online advertising campaign of conservative journalist and [[Toronto]] mayoral candidate [[Faith Goldy]], 48 hours before the opening of polls for the Toronto civic election on October 22, with no justifiable explanation for the shutdown against Goldy and in potential violation of Canada's campaign financing and election laws.<ref>[https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2018/10/22/google-shuts-down-advertising-campaign-of-toronto-mayoral-candidate-faith-goldy-before-election/ Google Shuts Down Advertising Campaign of Toronto Mayoral Candidate Faith Goldy Before Election] at Breitbart News Network</ref>

In June 2019, [[Project Veritas]] released an undercover video in which a Google executive admitted that the company was working, through its policies and products, to prevent "the next Trump situation."<ref>Multiple references:
*Svab, Petr (June 24, 2019). [https://www.theepochtimes.com/google-stealthily-infuses-political-agenda-into-products-to-prevent-trump-reelection-insiders-documents-say_2976582.html Google Stealthily Infuses Political Agenda Into Products to Prevent Trump Reelection, Insiders, Documents Say]. ''The Epoch Times''. Retrieved June 24, 2019.
*Richardson, Valerie (June 24, 2019). [https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/jun/24/google-exec-project-veritas-sting-says-only-big-te/ Google exec in Project Veritas sting says only big tech can stop 'the next Trump situation']. ''The Washington Times''. Retrieved June 24, 2019.
*Bokhari, Allum (June 24, 2019). [https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2019/06/24/project-veritas-google-exec-decries-trumps-election-how-do-we-prevent-it-from-happening-again/ Project Veritas – Google Exec Decries Trump’s Election: ‘How Do We Prevent It from Happening Again’]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved June 24, 2019.
*Kirkwood, R. Cort (June 24, 2019). [https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/item/32684-google-is-gearing-up-to-defeat-trump-in-2020 Google Is Gearing Up To Defeat Trump In 2020]. ''The New American''. Retrieved June 24, 2019.
See also:
*Svab, Petr (June 26, 2019). [https://www.theepochtimes.com/google-doubles-down-on-deceiving-customers-about-its-political-manipulation_2980032.html Google Doubles Down on Deceiving Customers About Its Political Manipulation]. ''The Epoch Times''. Retrieved June 26, 2019.</ref> The video had over one million views in the first 24 hours (available in External link section, below). Google subsequently moved to censor the video from its platforms.<ref>Multiple references:
*Bokhari, Allum (June 24, 2019). [https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2019/06/24/google-censors-video-exposing-google/ Google Censors Video Exposing Google]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved June 24, 2019.
*Kirkwood, R. Cort (June 25, 2019). [https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/item/32698-youtube-scraps-veritas-expose-after-privacy-complaints YouTube Scraps Veritas' Exposé After Privacy Complaints]. ''The New American''. Retrieved June 25, 2019.
*Svab, Petr (June 25, 2019). [https://www.theepochtimes.com/youtube-deletes-expose-on-googles-stealthily-pushing-its-politics-on-users_2978328.html YouTube Deletes Exposé on Google’s Stealthily Pushing Its Politics on Users]. ''The Epoch Times''. Retrieved June 26, 2019.</ref>

As noted above, Professor Epstein in his testimony before the Judiciary Senate Committee stated that his research indicated that Google had manipulated the votes for the 2016 presidential elections in Hillary Clinton's favor, and also had been manipulating national elections as early as 2015, and has even insinuated that they had also manipulated the results of the 2018 midterm elections.<ref name="Epstein testimony PDF" /><ref name="Epstein testimony YouTube" />

====FEC disclosure exemptions====
Political advertising regarding federal elections and candidates that is purchased for appearance on radio, television and print generally must adhere to [[Federal Election Commission]] rules requiring clear disclosure of the committee or donor paying for the advertisements. During 2011, Google and [[Facebook]] hired [[Marxist]] operative [[Marc Elias]] to help them obtain an exemption from this requirement for political advertising on their platforms. Elias argued the restrictions were not practical for his clients, with FEC commissioners ultimately voting 4-2 in favor of the exemption for Google and deadlocking 3-3 on the request regarding Facebook.<ref>Vogel, Kenneth P.; and Kang, Cecilia. [https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/19/us/politics/facebook-google-russia-meddling-disclosure.html “Senators Demand Online Ad Disclosures as Tech Lobby Mobilizes.”] New York Times. October 19, 2017.</ref>

Facebook continued to operate as if exempt from disclosure rules. During the 2016 U.S. general election, $100,000 worth of Russian-backed and undisclosed advertisements intended to influence voters were purchased on Facebook with another $4,700 spent by Russian sources on Google political advertisements. In October 2017, following the controversy that ensued regarding Russian interference in the 2016 elections, both Republican and Democratic Senators advocated for legislation to require Facebook and Google to adhere to the same disclosure rules as other media.

====2016 election meddling====
{{See also|Presidential Election 2016|}}
It was discovered Google was manipulating autocomplete [[search engine]] results to favor Hillary Clinton.<ref>[http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-06-10/must-see-video-how-google-manipulates-search-results-favor-hillary-clinton How Google Manipulates Search Results In Favor Of Hillary Clinton], by Tyler Durden, Jun 10, 2016. zerohedge.com</ref> Autocomplete returns the most popular trending search queries.
<ref>[https://freebeacon.com/politics/here-are-10-more-examples-of-google-search-results-favorable-to-hillary/ Here Are 10 More Examples of Google Search Results Favorable to Hillary], Tech giant accused of whitewashing autocomplete results, Brent Scher and Elizabeth Harrington, ''Washington Free Beacon'', June 10, 2016</ref> When a user types in ''Hillary Clinton cri'' to query about the criminal investigation into Mrs. Clinton for example, the Google results do not match at all popular trends on all other major search engines.<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PFxFRqNmXKg Did Google Manipulate Search for Hillary?], Matt Lieberman, SourceFed, Jun 9, 2016. UPDATE: Friday June 10. youtube.com</ref>

Supporters of [[Bernie Sanders]] complained throughout the 2016 primary season Google had inflated Hillary's delegate count by adding unelected [[Superdelegate]]s who, by rule, were to remain unpledged until the convention.<ref>[http://www.snopes.com/sanders-vs-clinton-delegate-count/ Failing Delegate Math], A popular [[meme]] detailing the actual delegate count between Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton in May 2016 is mostly accurate. Kim LaCapria, ''Snopes'', May 10, 2016</ref> Some in late primary states considered this another form of [[voter suppression]].<ref>[http://thebernreport.com/superdelegate-system-has-been-used-as-a-form-of-voter-supression/ Superdelegate System Has Been Used as a Form of Voter Suppression], Posted by G.A. Casebeer, ''The Bern Report'', May 23, 2016</ref>

In an article titled ''How Google Could Rig the 2016 Election'' in August 2015 ''Politico'' warned Google "can easily shift the voting preferences of undecided voters by 20 percent or more—up to 80 percent in some demographic groups—with virtually no one knowing they are being manipulated... In the United States, half of our presidential elections have been won by margins under 7.6 percent".<ref>[https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/08/how-google-could-rig-the-2016-election-121548 How Google Could Rig the 2016 Election], Google has the ability to drive millions of votes to a candidate with no one the wiser, By Robert Epstein, ''Politico'', August 19, 2015</ref>

Billionaire Eric Schmidt, [[CEO]] of Google's parent company Alphabet funded a startup company called The Groundwork to ensure Hillary has the engineering talent needed to win the election.<ref>[http://qz.com/520652/groundwork-eric-schmidt-startup-working-for-hillary-clinton-campaign/ THE GROUNDWORK The stealthy, Eric Schmidt-backed startup that’s working to put Hillary Clinton in the White House], Adam Pasick & Tim Fernholz, ''Quartz'', October 09, 2015. qz.com</ref> Schmidt and Google are both donors to the Clinton Foundation.

When Googling, '''Hillary Clinton's he-''' 
Google yielded,
*Hillary Clinton's headquarters
*Hillary Clinton's health plan
*Hillary Clinton's healthcare plan

Search results on Bing return the suggestions
*Hillary Clinton's health
*Hillary Clinton's health issues
*Hillary Clinton's health and weight

Search results on Yahoo return the suggestions
*Hillary Clinton's health problems
*Hillary Clinton's health
*Hillary Clinton's health issues

On July 19, 2019, Professor Robert Epstein revealed before the Judiciary Senate Committee that Google was responsible for swaying 2.6 million people into voting for Hillary Clinton during the 2016 presidential elections, and had also implied that the amount of people swayed may have been as many as 10.4 million votes, and may have even been trying to influence national elections as early as 2015.<ref name="Epstein testimony PDF">https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Epstein%20Testimony.pdf</ref><ref name="Epstein testimony YouTube">https://youtu.be/IzF7nBmwPso</ref>

====2020 election meddling====
:{{See also|United States presidential election, 2020|Tulsi Gabbard 2020 presidential campaign}}
[[Tulsi Gabbard]] is suing Google for $50 million for [[censorship]] of her campaign ads.<ref>https://thehill.com/policy/technology/454746-tulsi-gabbard-sues-google-over-censorship-claims</ref> Google blocked her ads account shortly after the first Democrat presidential debate, when Gabbard became the most-searched-for candidate in the Democrat field.

Gabbard's complaint accuses Google of censoring the candidate at the very moment when millions of Americans wanted to learn more about her. It also accuses Google of sending Gabbard's campaign emails to people's Gmail spam folders at a “disproportionately high rate.” The campaign seeks a legal injunction against Google to prevent further election meddling, as well as $50 million in damages. According to Gabbard's legal complaint against Google:

{{Quotebox|At the height of Gabbard’s popularity among Internet searchers in the immediate hours after the debate ended, and in the thick of the critical post-debate period (when television viewers, radio listeners, newspaper read-ers, and millions of other Americans are discussing and searching for presidential candidates), Google suspended Tulsi’s Google Ads account without warning. For hours, as millions of Americans searched Google for information about Tulsi, and as Tulsi was trying, through Google, to speak to them, her Google Ads account was arbitrarily and forcibly taken offline. Throughout this period, the Campaign worked frantically to gather more information about the suspension; to get through to someone at Google who could get the Account back online; and to understand and remedy the restraint that had been placed on Tulsi’s speech—at precisely the moment when everyone wanted to hear from her.}}

The legal complaint argues that Google could have a nefarious impact on American democracy if its behavior is allowed to continue unchecked. This is the viewpoint of Dr. Robert Epstein, who says the Silicon Valley Masters of the Universe will “go all out” to influence the 2020 election.

In a series of Tweets, the Hawaii Democrat said Google's actions “reveals the danger of their dominance & how the dominance of big tech over public discourse threatens core American values.”<ref>https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2019/07/25/tulsi-gabbard-sues-google-for-censorship-of-ads/</ref>

After Hillary's Clinton's xenophobic smear, [[Steven Crowder]] demonstrated during his radio program how Google was actively suppressing Tulsi Gabbard search results in the United States.<ref>https://www.zerohedge.com/political/tulsis-youtube-suppressed</ref>

===Interference with Trump presidency===
Owing to all of the above, Google has been accused of trying to stifle conservative voices (especially those that support Trump) and only allowing for left-wing viewpoints to be shown on the search engine. Although Google twice denied these claims, this was eventually confirmed on September 12, 2018, via a leaked video via Breitbart for the TGIF session immediately after Donald Trump's election, where the upper management not only made their views of the American public clear by inferring that those who voted for Donald Trump were "fascists and communists", but also strongly implied that they were going to dedicate all of their resources to making sure the rise of populism is squashed.<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FRf9UxsM-NE&feature=youtu.be</ref><ref>Bokhari, Allum (September 12, 2018). [https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2018/09/12/leaked-video-google-leaderships-dismayed-reaction-to-trump-election/ LEAKED VIDEO: Google Leadership’s Dismayed Reaction to Trump Election]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved September 14, 2018.</ref><ref>Freiburger, Calvin (September 17, 2018). [https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/top-google-leaders-vowed-to-alter-future-elections-to-avoid-trump-hiccup-le Top Google leaders vowed to alter future elections to avoid Trump ‘hiccup’: leaked video]. ''LifeSiteNews''. Retrieved September 19, 2018.</ref> Google also was caught trying to increase [[Latino]] turnout in the 2016 election.<ref>Duke, Selwyn (September 14, 2018). [https://www.thenewamerican.com/tech/computers/item/30073-google-caught-red-handed-tried-to-get-clinton-elected Google Caught Red-handed: Tried to Get Clinton Elected]. ''The New American''. Retrieved September 14, 2018.</ref>

On a similar note, Professor Epstein when giving testimony towards Google's efforts in overturning elections mentioned that, aside from its aforementioned role in manipulating votes in Hillary Clinton's favor, it also may have been responsible for the manipulation of as many as 78 million votes during the 2018 midterm elections, and has also implied that they are using their autocomplete programs for their products as a form of social engineering.<ref name="Epstein testimony PDF" /><ref name="Epstein testimony YouTube" />

=== Relationship with the Obama Administration ===
Consumer Watchdog crafted a 32-page report detailing how Google has inappropriately benefited from its close ties to the Obama Administration. [[NASA]]'s Moffett Airfield has been turned into a taxpayer-subsidized private airport for Google executives used for corporate junkets. NASA's Moffett Airfield is a short distance from Google's world headquarters. The report details, ''"A growing fleet of jets and helicopters stand ready to ferry the company's top executives near or far, for business or pleasure, for vacations or schmoozing, including at least three wintertime trips to the [[Caribbean]] and a trip by Google chief executive Eric Schmidt to the Cannes Film Festival."'' <ref>[http://www.redorbit.com/news/technology/1983792/consumer_watchdog_sends_issas_oversight_committee_google_report_showing_inappropriate/index.html Consumer Watchdog Sends Issa's Oversight Committee Google Report Showing Inappropriate Relationship with Obama Administration, RedOrbit.com, January 24, 2011]</ref>

====Attempted regime change in Syria====
Google collaborated with the Obama regime in the attempted [[regime change]] in [[Syria]]. Jared Cohen, head of Google Jigsaw (formerly Google Ideas) emailed the State Dept.:
{{quotebox-float|"Please keep close hold, but my team is planning to launch a tool on Sunday that will publicly track and map the defections in Syria and which parts of the government they are coming from. Our logic behind this is that while many people are tracking the atrocities, nobody is visually representing and mapping the defections, which we believe are important in encouraging more to defect and giving confidence to the opposition. Given how hard it is to get information into Syria right now, we are partnering with Al-Jazeera who will take primary ownership over the tool we have built, track the data, verify it, and broadcast it back into Syria. I've attached a few visuals that show what the tool will look like. Please keep this very close hold and let me know if there is anything eke you think we need to account for or think about before we launch. We believe this can have an important.<ref>https://wikileaks.org/clinton-emails/emailid/12166</ref>}}

===Homosexual agenda===
As was already mentioned, Google has been actively blocking certain websites and services which oppose sodomy (homosexuality). They also speak out in support of the homosexual movement, and promote search results which do the same.<ref>https://blog.google/topics/causes-community/transvoices</ref><ref>https://money.cnn.com/2012/07/08/technology/google-legalize-love/index.htm</ref><ref>https://winteryknight.com/2012/07/09/google-starts-wordlwide-campaign-to-legalize-gay-marriage-target-donates-to-gay-rights-groups</ref><ref>https://onetoday.google.com</ref> They also donate to some other organizations which do the same, as well and politicians who seek the same goal.<ref>http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2008/09/our-position-on-californias-no-on-8.html , Our position on California's No on 8 campaign</ref>

Google considers the term "family friendly" to be "[[homophobic]]."<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=--3oGtllMXY&feature=youtu.be</ref> On June 21, 2009, Google displayed a special multicolored line for searches on the word "gay". Additionally, Google compensates employees to cover taxes paid on their domestic partner's health benefits, but only offers its 'generosity' to homosexual couples.<ref>https://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/07/01/google-raises-eyebrows-new-gay-employee-benefit/</ref>

===Collaboration with China===
It was revealed in 2018 that Google was collaborating with China and supported the government's [[censorship]] agenda.<ref>Nash, Charlie (October 10, 2018). [https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2018/10/10/googes-shift-towards-censorship-aids-relationship-with-china/ Google’s ‘Shift Towards Censorship’ Aids Relationship with China]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved October 10, 2018.</ref>

Reporters Without Borders joined others in asking how Google could stand up for US users' freedoms while controlling what Chinese users can search for. Its previous search engine for China's fast-growing market was subject to government blocks. The new site - Google.cn - censors itself to satisfy Beijing. While cooperating with China's government, Google refuses to fulfill requests by the U.S. Department of Justice.<ref>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/4630694.stm , BBC Google defies US over search data, January 20, 2006</ref> Google counsel Nicole Wong said "..we intend to resist their motion vigorously."

===Opposing industry standards===
In addition to their political activities, Google has caused some controversy within its own industry by refusing to comply with industry standards. Since they own the most popular web browser and the most popular search engine (at least within the US), they have decided that they can bring about changes they believe are needed despite what the rest of the industry has decided. 
For example, the norm is that users are only logged into a service when they request it, and when they attempt to delete the cookies in their browser, the browser does so. However, Google decided in 2018 to automatically log users into their google accounts, and protect the google cookies from deletion, so that Google's cookies could not be deleted by the user (through the browser).<ref>https://www.wired.com/story/google-chrome-login-privacy/</ref><ref>https://www.theverge.com/2018/9/24/17895536/google-chrome-69-log-in-sync-password-user-data-privacy</ref> 
As another example, Google search was changed in 2018 to hide certain subdomains, including the "www" which many websites use. Users only would see the domain name and the [[TLD]], while the rest was masked. Further, the search engine would link users to sites which were using the "www" subdomain without that subdomain, so the site would need to redirect users to the proper location. Google knew this was not what the sites wanted, but chose to make this change anyway.<ref>https://www.makeuseof.com/tag/google-security-risk-hiding-subdomains/</ref><ref>https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/google/google-testing-removal-of-www-subdomain-from-search-results/</ref><ref>https://technocodex.com/google-removed-www-and-m-subdomains-in-chrome-69-how-to-disable-it/</ref> Not only is this inconvenient, but masking parts of URLs in inherently dangerous, since attackers can abuse such features to trick users into trusting a fraudulent site or page. The industry standard is, therefore, to show users the entire link which they have used to connect. 
Also in 2018, Google decided to make an additional change. They began trying to force websites to begin using the [[HTTPS|Hyper-text transfer protocol secure (HTTPS)]] rather than the older standard HTTP. While HTTPS is helpful, some webpages have reason to not use HTTPS. While the industry is moving slowly to HTTPS, Google decided to begin interfering with the loading and interaction in Chrome of sites which are not using HTTPS for their pages and all of the content therein. This caused many users to experience problems visiting websites, simply because Google no longer approved of sites using HTTP.

===Wi-Fi Snooping===
Google collected information from [[Wi-Fi]] networks as its street-view vans cruised neighborhoods around the globe, raising issues in more than 30 countries. The information Google gathered included e-mail fragments and passwords, alarming politicians and privacy and security advocates in Germany, France, and [[Spain]].<ref>[https://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/07/22/national-security-google-wi-fi-spy-scandal/ Is National Security Behind Google's Wi-Fi Spying?, Fox News, July 23, 2010]</ref> It was noted that Google supplies special mapping and search products to the U.S. military and intelligence community, with some Google employees enjoying Top Secret clearance to work with the government. Google said it was "accidental" data gathering. Rep. Joe Barton of Texas, a senior [[Republican]] lawmaker, suggested that Google's data collection wasn't accidental and that it was "something to look at." Under the Democrat leadership, the [[FCC]] investigated, but dropped further inquiry, coincidentally, just before a Google [[Democrat]] fundraiser was held. Many groups have been calling on Republican [[Darrell Issa]] to investigate Google's cozy relationship with the [[Obama administration]].<ref>[http://www.nlpc.org/stories/2010/11/10/congress-must-investigate-google-obama-ties Congress Must Investigate Google-Obama Ties, National Legal and Policy Center, November 10, 2010]</ref>

*France: Privacy watchdog CNIL awarded its largest fine to date with a judgement of $141,300 against Google in relation to snooping.<ref>[https://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2011/03/21/general-broadcasting-amp-entertainment-eu-france-google-fined_8366482.html France fines Google for Street View privacy breach, Forbes, March 21, 2011]</ref>

===Support for Antifa and Black Lives Matter===
In June 2020, Google was listed as one of numerous leftist-controlled companies that have gone "[[woke]]" and now support the criminal rioters of [[Antifa]] and [[Black Lives Matter]] in the wake of the [[2020 leftist riots]].<ref>[https://gab.com/a/posts/104311289660016704 Here Are The Companies That Support Antifa, Black Lives Matter, and Want You Dead] at Gab.com</ref>

Seattle Google engineer, Zachary Ames Trudo, was arrested at the [[Portland, Oregon]] Antifa riot. The 32-year-old [[Marxist]] was charged with [[assault]], attempting escape and resisting arrest. Trudo posted on [[Facebook]], "One way to hurt the [[bourgeoisie]] is to hurt their business. Closing down the ports is a terrific show of solidarity between labour and BLM.”<ref>https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/07/burn-ground-marxist-google-engineer-arrested-portland-riot-charged-assault-resisting-arrest-attempting-escape/</ref>

==International Agitation==
Google's Map service is responsible for escalating tensions between foreign nations by radically misleading versions of current borders.

Google has been labeled "professionally irresponsible" for disseminated [[Cambodia]] territory, which is embroiled in a bitter diplomatic row with Thailand over the demarcation of the frontier.<ref>[https://www.reuters.com/article/2010/02/05/cambodia-google-idUSSGE61406G20100205 Cambodia blasts Google map of disputed Thai border, Reuters, February 5, 2010]</ref>

[[Costa Rica]] took offense to Google Maps version showing that a specific area of encampment was on Nicaraguan soil. The dispute that had ensued over Google's version of the Nicaragua-Costa Rica border has became rather serious. So much so that the secretary general of the [[Organization of American States]] had to intervene.<ref>[http://news.cnet.com/8301-17852_3-20021977-71.html Envoy to solve latest Google Maps border dispute? CNET, November 5, 2010]</ref><ref>[http://spectregroup.wordpress.com/2010/11/12/google-maps-blamed-for-border-dispute/ GOOGLE MAPS BLAMED for BORDER DISPUTE, Spectre Footnotes, November 11, 2010]</ref>

Google Maps was busy fixing another error in its map program of a port city that reignited border tensions between [[Germany]] and The Netherlands.<ref>[https://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/02/21/google-maps-slipup-sparks-diplomatic-crisis/ Google Maps Blunder Reignites Centuries Old Border Dispute, Fox News, February 21, 2011]</ref>

===Egyptian Uprising===
Google executive Wael Ghonim helped with protesting [[Egypt]]'s rule of [[Hosni Mubarak]], calling for him to step down and organizing protests. He was detained by authorities and released after two weeks. Ghonim is credited as being a major factor in sparking Egypt's uprising. Google CEO Eric Schmidt said that Google is "very, very proud" of Wael Ghonim.<ref>[http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/technology/2011/02/google-ceo-eric-schmidt-says-company-is-proud-of-wael-ghonim-in-egypt.html Google CEO Eric Schmidt says company is 'very proud' of Egypt's Wael Ghonim, LA Times, February 15, 2011]</ref>

=== Benghazi massacre ===
After the [[Benghazi attack]], Hillary's State Department was in contact with Google. Hillary publicly claimed a controversial video was the source of a 'spontaneous' riot which proved to be a knowingly false statement. Google participated in the ruse by agreeing to block the video even after President Obama admitted it was a pre-planned terrorist attack. Copies of the email were forwarded to [[Denis McDonough]], [[Cheryl Mills]], Patrick F Kennedy, [[Jake Sullivan]] and [[John Brennan]]. The email also contains contact information for Google CEO Afternoon (Larry) Page and [[YouTube]] CEO Salar Kamangar including their mobile and office phone numbers.<ref>[https://wikileaks.org/clinton-emails/emailid/16800 UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04841 Doc No. C05739829 STATE DEPT]. wikileaks.org</ref>

=== Syrian Civil War ===
Newly released emails from [[Hillary Clinton]]'s State Department shows Google coordinating the overthrow of Bashar Assad in Syria.<ref>[https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/clinton-email-reveals-google-sought-overthrow-of-syrias-assad/article/2586300 Clinton email reveals: Google sought overthrow of Syria's Assad, Washington Examiner, March 19, 2016]</ref>

===Coronavirus===
Google funded research conducted by [[Peter Daszak]]’s EcoHealth Alliance, a group which collaborated with the [[Wuhan Institute of Virology]] on [[gain-of-function]] research for the “killer” bat [[coronavirus]] for over a decade.<ref>https://thenationalpulse.com/exclusive/google-funded-wuhan-linked-ecohealth-research/</ref>

==Alternatives to Google==
: ''Main Article: [[Alternatives to Google]]''
*[[DuckDuckGo]] — a search engine that is said to not track people. It also has "Privacy Essentials" on Firefox and Chrome and "Privacy browser" on mobile.
*[[Result Hunter]] — a search engine that favors conservative results, as opposed to Google which favors liberal results.
*[[Mojeek]] — a search engine that doesn't track people and uses a proprietary page ranking engine as opposed to PageRank, and is intended to give unbiased search results.
*[https://www.seekfind.org/ Seek Find] — a Christian search engine. Cannot be used for a general search, but a search over the Internet for information from Christian sites.
*[https://www.worthyseek.com/ Worthy Christian Search] — A similar Christian search engine.
*[https://www.StartPage.com/ StartPage]

==See also==
* [[Search engine manipulation effect]]
* [[Bing]]
* [[Censorability]]
*[[Far Left]]
* [[Censorship]]
* [[Duck Duck Go]]
* [[Evolutionist censorship]]
* [[Fairness Doctrine]]
* [[Liberal censorship]]
* [[Media censorship]]
* [[Tools of censorship]]
* [[Yahoo]]
*[[Fake news in the 2020 presidential election]]

== References ==
{{Reflist|colwidth=35em}}

== External links ==
* [https://www.google.com/ Google]
*[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lsSbpQklWyI Former Google CEO Eric Schmidt]
* [https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/07/29/google-and-the-adjustment-of-inconvenient-viewpoints-especially-climate/ GOOGLE and the ‘adjustment’ of inconvenient viewpoints, especially climate]
* [https://www.thecreepyline.com/ The Creepy Line]
*[https://www.liveleak.com/view?t=ksvnD_1561429279 Project Veritas "Trump Situation" Backup - Youtube yanked the vid off their site!], June 24, 2019.
*[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NTjmQKyOYlM Project Veritas Nails Google/Youtube Over Election Tampering], Original complete video, June 24, 2019.
*[https://gohmert.house.gov/uploadedfiles/google.mp4 Project Veritas Google election subversion video], June 24, 2019. https://gohmert.house.gov
*[https://www.oneangrygamer.net/2019/08/google-news-blacklist-revealed-websites-listed/90919/GOOGLE NEWS BLACKLIST REVEALED, WEBSITES LISTED] August 14, 2019.

[[Category:United States Businesses]]
[[Category:Search Engines]]
[[Category:Google]][[Category:San Francisco Bay Area]]
[[Category:Homosexual Agenda]]
[[Category:Communism]]
[[Category:Liberal Companies]]
[[Category:Anti Second Amendment]]
[[Category:SJWs]]
[[Category:Anti-Free Speech]]
[[Category:Perpetrators of Cancel Culture]]

Larry Sanger

2021-07-23T07:29:28Z

Dave Wilcox: copy-edit

{{quote|The days of Wikipedia's robust commitment to neutrality are long gone.|Larry Sanger}}
'''Larry Sanger''' created [[Nupedia]] and [[Wikipedia]] while working for [[Jimmy Wales]]. Sanger invented the name, "Wikipedia." He left Wikipedia after Wales cut his salary by 50% and founded [[Citizendium]]. Since 2020, Sanger began organizing a wiki-based encyclopedia known as [[Encyclosphere]].

Sanger's role in the founding of Wikipedia is a matter of dispute. Although Sanger came up with the idea of using wiki software to host their encyclopedia, Wales claims to be the sole "founder" of Wikipedia.
Citizendium,<ref>http://www.citizendium.org/faq.html#introductory FAQ page</ref> presumably speaking for Sanger, describes him as a "Wikipedia co-founder." Digital Universe says, "He was the chief organizer of Wikipedia in its first year and played a key role in its creation."<ref>http://www.dufoundation.org/foundation-bios.php</ref>

''Wired'' says:
{{quotebox|Wales started an Internet company called Bomis, a search engine and Web directory. He began hearing about the fledgling open source movement and wondered whether volunteers could create something besides software. So he recruited Larry Sanger, then an Ohio State University doctoral student in philosophy, whom he'd encountered on some listservs. He put Sanger on the Bomis payroll, and together they launched a free online encyclopedia called Nupedia.<ref>https://www.wired.com/wired/archive/13.03/wiki.html?pg=3&topic=wiki&topic_set=</ref>}}

==Criticism of Wikipedia's bias==
In May 2020, Larry Sanger made a post on his blog about Wikipedia's left wing bias. It opens with an image of the [[Uncyclopedia]] logo, which Sanger deems more appropriate for Wikipedia. The post mentions that Wikipedia's article on [[Barack Obama]] makes no mention of several scandals during his administration. Contrarily, Wikipedia's article on [[Donald Trump]] is rife with criticisms, and information on investigations and controversies involving Trump are nearly as long as information directly pertaining to his presidency.<ref>https://larrysanger.org/2020/05/wikipedia-is-badly-biased/</ref>

In February 2021, Larry Sanger openly condemned Wikipedia for its bias again. One prominent example he cited was the Wikipedia's [[socialism]] and [[communism]] articles having zero mention of the [[genocide]]s, [[forced labor]], and man-made [[famine]]s caused by socialist and communist regimes.<ref>https://justthenews.com/nation/technology/wikipedia-co-founder-launching-competitor-website-upset-about-pro-socialism</ref><ref>https://www.foxnews.com/politics/wikipedia-bias-socialism-pages-whitewashed</ref>

==References==
{{reflist}}

== External links ==
*[https://larrysanger.org/community/ Larry Sanger's Blog]
*[http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/ Citizendium (Beta)]
*[http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Conservapedia Conservapedia]

{{DEFAULTSORT:Sanger, Larry}}
[[Category:Wikis]]
[[Category:Business People]]
[[Category:Wikipedia Critics]]
[[Category:Wikipedia People]]
[[Category:Conservatives]]

Jimmy Wales

2021-07-23T07:22:48Z

Dave Wilcox: copy-edit

{{infobox person
|name=Jimmy Wales
|image=Jimmy_wales_1.jpg‎
|birth_date=August 7, 1966 (age 54)
|birth_place=Huntsville, Alabama
|religion=[[Athiesm]]
|spouse=Kate Garvey (m. 2012)
3 daughters
}}
'''Jimmy Donal "Jimbo" Wales''' (born August 7, 1966 in [[Huntsville, Alabama|Huntsville]]) is an American entrepreneur, the co-founder of the [[Examples of Bias in Wikipedia|politically left]] online encyclopedia [[Wikipedia]], and a self-described [[libertarian]]. Jimmy Wales claims to be an [[Objectivism|objectivist]] who follows the philosophy of [[Atheism|atheist]] [[Ayn Rand]]. His favorite book is Rand's ''[[Atlas Shrugged]]''.<ref>[http://qanda.org/Transcript/?ProgramID=1042 Interview with Jimmy Wales conducted by Brian Lamb], C-SPAN Transcript, September 25, 2005.</ref> Wales told an interviewer in ''Reason'' magazine, "One can't understand my ideas about Wikipedia without understanding [[Hayek]] ... Wales is fleshing out and bringing to life Hayek's insights about the power of decentralized knowledge gathering, the surprising strength of communities bound only by reputation, and the fluidity of self-governance." <ref>[http://reason.com/news/show/119689.html Wikipedia and Beyond],
Jimmy Wales' sprawling vision, Katherine Mangu-Ward, ''Reasononline.com'', June 2007.</ref> These ideas that Wales claims to follow were put forward in Hayek's essay "The Use of Knowledge in Society". However, there is thin evidence for his being a true follower of Hayek politically, given the radical [[leftist]] agenda of Wales' close confidants in control of Wikipedia.<ref name="Left_in_Control_of_Wikipedia">{{cite news
|first=Jim
|last=Davis
|title=Left in Control of Wikipedia
|url=https://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2007/5/13/212015.shtml?s=lh
|work=
|publisher=[[NewsMax]]
|date=May 14, 2007
|accessdate=2007-10-04}}</ref> Wales describes himself as a [[communitarianism|communitarian]] (someone who could be said to be "radical center", meaning they agree with the left on issues relating to the economy, such as the need for environmental protection and public education, but not on cultural issues, but instead generally agree with the right or conservatives on cultural issues, such as support for character education and faith-based programs).<ref name="Left_in_Control_of_Wikipedia"/> The revisions have since been deleted by liberal Wikipedia administrators wishing to protect Jimmy's public image.<ref>https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jimbo_Wales&diff=238013334&oldid=366216764</ref> Editors trying to make this point in Wikipedia are routinely [[politically profiled|profiled]], stalked, harassed, slandered, and banned. An irony of Internet history is that Jimmy Wales, despite being an atheist, refers to himself as Wikipedia's "spiritual leader" and God-king.<ref>http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/05/09/wikimedia_pron_purge/</ref>

==Career==
From 1994 to 2000, Wales was the research director at Chicago Options Associates, a futures and options trading firm in Chicago.<ref name=speakersbio>http://www.speakers.com/speaker/jimmy-wales-speaker-biography</ref>
Jimmy Wales became a millionaire{{fact}} by trading commodity options; before funding Wikipedia, he funded Bomis Inc. in 1996, which contained pornographic material.<ref>https://www.wired.com/culture/lifestyle/news/2005/12/69880</ref> Bomis produced two unsuccessful search engines: "Search Bastard" and "3Apes", which went out of their way to insult users with obscenities.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://wikipedia-sucks-badly.blogspot.com/2014/12/before-wikipedia-search-bastard-and.html|title=Before Wikipedia: Search Bastard and 3Apes |date=December 23, 2014|accessdate=December 24, 2014}} Search Bastard existed from 2000 to 2006.</ref> Besides funding the non-profit Wikipedia, Jimmy Wales also funded the for-profit [[Wikia]], a company that provides wiki services for businesses and organizations.

From 2008 to 2014, Wales' main source of income was speaking fees based on his celebrity for co-founding Wikipedia. Unlike many other non-profits, the [[Wikimedia Foundation]] (WMF) does not require Wales' to share his speaking fees or honoraria with the charity.

Wales was caught editing his own profile on Wikipedia in a bit of a scandal in an effort to downplay [[Larry Sanger]]'s role in the company and distance himself from his Bomis past.<ref>[https://www.wired.com/news/culture/0,1284,69880,00.html ''Wikipedia Founder Edits Own Bio''] Wired. Accessed 17 March 2008</ref>

In 2014, Wales accepted a new job as executive director of strategy and digital community for [[The People’s Operator]] (TPO), a cell phone startup company with ties to the British [[Labour Party]]. Wales owned 10% of the new company. TPO struggled to gain subscribers in the UK and the United States,<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/mediatechnologyandtelecoms/telecoms/11156163/Wikipedia-founder-to-float-mobile-phone-company.html|title=
Wikipedia founder to float mobile phone company|first=Graham|last=Ruddick|work=The Telegraph|date=October 11, 2014|accessdate=October 14, 2014}}</ref> and it has lost over 90% of its market capitalization.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.sharesmagazine.co.uk/news/shares/the-peoples-floperator|title=
The People's Floperator|first=Steven|last=Frazer|work=Shares Magazine|date=September 30, 2016|accessdate=April 25, 2017}}</ref> Wales became the Chairman of TPO's Board of Directors upon the death of its founder, [[Andrew Rosenfeld]] on February 8, 2015. Wales then ran TPO into the ground while drawing an impressive salary. On January 25, 2017, Wales stepped down from leading TPO.<ref>http://www.investegate.co.uk/the-people-soperator--tpop-/rns/board-changes--subscription---trading-update/201701250700070218V/</ref>

In order to replace TPO as his source of income, in April 2017, Wales decided to found a for-profit news organization, WikiTribune. According to the [[British Broadcasting Corporation|BBC]], "Mr Wales said he would be '100% hands-on' with the project in its early stages and would be likely to serve as Wikitribune's chief executive for at least a year."<ref name=bbc1>{{cite news|url=https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-39695767|title=Wikipedia's Jimmy Wales creates news service Wikitribune|work=BBC|date=April 25, 2017|accessdate=May 16, 2017}}</ref> In addition to paying Wales a salary, WikiTribune will hire ten professional journalists and also work with volunteer editors and fact checkers. Unlike Wikipedia which is owned by the non-profit Wikimedia Foundation, WikiTribune is owned by Jimmy Wales Ltd, a private company. WikiTribune is being financed by crowd-sourcing with both startup donations and pledges of monthly subscription payments. Because of the obvious conflict between WikiTribune and ''[[The Guardian]]'', Wales was forced to resign from ''The Guardian'''s board, where he had been serving for one year.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2017/04/25/wikipedia-co-founder-jimmy-wales-exits-guardian-board-conflict/|title=Wikipedia co-founder Jimmy Wales exits Guardian board over conflict of interest with Wikitribune news site |work=The Telegraph|date=April 25, 2017|accessdate=May 16, 2017}}</ref> To date, he has not been forced to resign from either the WMF Board or the Tide Foundation's WMF Endowment Advisory Board. Wales' advisors on WikiTribune include: Silicon Valley venture capitalist Guy Kawasaki,
Journalism lecturer Prof Jeff Jarvis,
US law professor Larry Lessig, and
Model/actress Lily Cole.<ref name=bbc1/> The WikiTribune project follows a 2014 news project created by Wikipedia co-founded [[Larry Sanger]] called InfoBitt or the ongoing WMF-owned Wikinews.

WikiTribune is based in London, United Kingdom, which is a controversial choice because UK law makes it much easier for celebrities to recover for libel. Also, WikiTribune's terms of service require volunteer editors to indemnify WikiTribune for any liability resulting from their work including libel damages. So, if a public figure, such as Donald Trump cannot sue a United States-based news outlet for libel, WikiTribune will be able to be sued in London under British legal standards, and any US-based volunteer that helped to write or edit the article will be forced to pay if the court awards damages.

==Controversies==

In early October 2005, former [[Robert F. Kennedy]] aide and retired journalist [[John Seigenthaler Sr.]] contacted Wales about false and libelous information in his Wikipedia biographical entry. [[Wikipedia#Second casualty: Wikipedia .22experts.22 called into question.2C the Essjay Scandal|Essjay]] got the call to deal with the situation.<ref>[http://www.wikitruth.info/index.php?title=User:Essjay/Letter User:Essjay/Letter]. Retrieved from WikiTruth, November 3, 2007.</ref> On December 1, 2005 Wales told ''Editor & Publisher'' magazine, the nation’s oldest trade journal serving the newspaper industry regarding [[Daniel Brandt]],
{{Cquote|I don't regard him as a valid source about anything at all... I find it hard to take him very seriously ...<ref>[http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/article_brief/eandp/1/1001612839 Wikipedia Founder, Readers Respond to Seigenthaler Article], Jay DeFoore, ''Editor & Publisher'', December 01, 2005.</ref>}}Brandt was the victim of malicious<ref>http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=5641&st=60&p=22336&mode=linear#entry22336</ref> and vile slanders placed within his Wikipedia biographical entry<ref>https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Daniel_Brandt&diff=prev&oldid=55132392</ref> by prominent Wikipedia contributors, in violation of numerous published Wikipedia policies.<ref>[http://www.conservapedia.com/Wikipedia#Impugning_critics Wikipedia#Impugning critics], Conservapedia.com</ref> Four days later in a joint appearance with Seigenthaler on [[CNN]] Wales said,
{{Cquote|we are very, very responsive to complaints and concerns.<ref>http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0512/05/lol.02.html</ref>}}
Essjay was entrusted with oversight responsibilities in the wake of the Seigenthaler scandal and wrote to a professor to persuade her to allow students to cite Wikipedia as a "reliable source,"
{{Cquote|It is never the case that known incorrect information is allowed to remain in Wikipedia; we strive to provide a resource that is both accurate and expansive. As we approach one million articles (far more than any other encyclopedia could ever hope to attain) on the English Wikipedia alone (there are hundreds of thousands of articles in the projects that make up the Wikimedia Foundation in dozens of different languages), we prove ourselves as a resource like none ever known before.}}

The derogatory smears against Brandt, self-cited to a certifiably "extremist source" which "should never be used" remained in Brandt's biography for one and half years, with Jimmy Wales and the WikiMedia Foundations full knowledge.

On December 14, 2012, WND columnist Judith Reisman defended heavy-metal drummer Bradlee Dean, who had been unfairly attacked on Wikipedia. She wrote,
<blockquote>"Jimmy Wales, Wikipedia’s creator, made his original fortune as a pornography trafficker. Wales’ cult of far-leftist volunteer editor zealots labor minute-by-minute to mislead readers who think Wikipedia’s half-truths – and worse – are a legitimate 'encyclopedia.'"</blockquote>
Wales sent an email in response claiming, "I have never been a 'pornography trafficker' at all." Instead of posting a correction WND posted detailed documentation which includes a posed photo of Wales flanked by two mostly undressed female models.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.wnd.com/2012/12/heres-your-correction-wikipedia-founder/|title=Here's Your Correction, Wikipedia Founder|date=December 17, 2012|accessdate=December 26, 2012|work=WND}}</ref>

Some people start discussions on [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jimbo_Wales his user talk page] much as supplicants approach a monarch. In response, he might engage in a discussion, promise "to look into it", or simply delete it.<ref>E.g., {{cite web|url=https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jimbo_Wales&diff=prev&oldid=30754316|title= Speaking of "Unreadable Crap"|date=Dec. 5, 2005|accessdate=Sept. 20, 2013}}</ref> However, the number of deletions and users banished from his talk page have increased in 2013.

In 2014, Wales received the "Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum Knowledge Award", which is named after the Vice President of the [[United Arab Emirates]] (UAE) and carries a $500,000 value. Many Wikipedia editors were troubled because of the poor record that the UAE has on human rights. In response, Wales said that he would use the money to establish his own private foundation to address human rights.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/12/22/the_withinthelaw_jimmy_wales_on_the_run_with_500000/|title=What's Jimmy Wales going to do with $500k from the UAE? He's gonna set up one of them darn foundations, of course... |work=The Register|date=December 22, 2014
|first=Andrew |last=Orlowski|accessdate=December 22, 2014}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.examiner.com/article/broken-promises-of-jimmy-wales|title=Broken promises of Jimmy Wales|date=December 26, 2014|accessdate=December 27, 2014|work=Examiner}}</ref>

[[File:Katherine Maher.jpg|thumb|right|Katherine Maher, WMF Executive Director]]
Wales has had a turbulent private life. Prior to starting Wikipedia, Wales was a minority partner in Bomis, which provided adult photographs for a male audience. As Wikipedia's fame grew, Wales traveled without his family around the world to promote it. He created controversy when he sought travel reimbursement from the Wikimedia Foundation for a trip to a Russian massage parlor. Wales then established Wikia, a new for-profit venture with Angela Beesley. When the Foundation grew to the point that it could afford a paid staff, Wales ensured that a number of women were hired for management roles, including all three Executive Directors, Sue Gardner, Lila Tretikov and Katherine Maher.

==Personal life==
Wales became romatically involved with a number of women, both before and after his divorces. Wales has been married three times. At the age of twenty, he married Pamela Green,<ref name=Chozick-2013-06-30>{{cite news|last=Chozick|first=Amy|title=Jimmy Wales Is Not an Internet Billionaire|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/30/magazine/jimmy-wales-is-not-an-internet-billionaire.html|newspaper=The New York Times|date=June 30, 2013}}</ref> a co-worker at a grocery store in Alabama. They divorced in 1993. He met his second wife, Christine Rohan, while she was working as a steel trader for [[Mitsubishi]]. They were married in March 1997,<ref>{{cite book | title=Jimmy Wales and Wikipedia | publisher=[[Rosen Publishing]] | author=Meyer, Susan | year=2013 | page=27}}</ref> and had a daughter Kira Namiko Wales before separating. Wales had a brief relationship with Canadian conservative columnist [[Rachel Marsden]] in 2008 that began after Marsden contacted Wales about her Wikipedia biography. Wales later broke up with Marsden over the Internet. Marsden was so angered by Wales that she put an item of intimate apparel up for auction on [[eBay]].

Wales married [[Kate Garvey]] in [[London]] on October 6, 2012.<ref>{{cite news|last=Donnelly|first=Laura|title=Wiki wedding: Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales marries Tony Blair's former aide|url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/9591824/Wiki-wedding-Wikipedia-founder-Jimmy-Wales-marries-Tony-Blairs-former-aide.html#|newspaper=The Daily Telegraph|location=London|date=October 6, 2012}}</ref> Garvey is [[Tony Blair]]'s former diary secretary, whom Wales met in [[Davos]], Switzerland. Wales and Garvey have two daughters.

==References==
{{Reflist}}

==External links==
* [http://blog.jimmywales.com/ Jimmy Wales' Blog] (this blog was last updated Jan. 19, 2012)

{{DEFAULTSORT:Wales, Jimmy}}

[[Category:Wikis]]
[[Category:Business People]]
[[Category:Wikimedia Foundation]]
[[Category:Libertarians]]
[[Category:Atheists]]
[[Category:Wikipedia People]]
[[Category:Millionaires]]
[[Category:Liberals]]
[[Category:Globalists]]

Jimmy Wales

2021-07-23T07:19:17Z

Dave Wilcox: capitalization

{{infobox person
|name=Jimmy Wales
|image=Jimmy_wales_1.jpg‎
|birth_date=August 7, 1966 (age 54)
|birth_place=Huntsville, Alabama
|religion=[[Athiesm]]
|spouse=Kate Garvey (m. 2012)
3 daughters
}}
'''Jimmy Donal "Jimbo" Wales''' (born August 7, 1966 in [[Huntsville, Alabama|Huntsville]]) is an American entrepreneur, the co-founder of the [[Examples of Bias in Wikipedia|politically left]] online encyclopedia [[Wikipedia]], and a self-described [[libertarian]]. Jimmy Wales claims to be an [[Objectivism|objectivist]] who follows the philosophy of [[Atheism|atheist]] [[Ayn Rand]]. His favorite book is Rand's ''[[Atlas Shrugged]]''.<ref>[http://qanda.org/Transcript/?ProgramID=1042 Interview with Jimmy Wales conducted by Brian Lamb], C-SPAN Transcript, September 25, 2005.</ref> Wales told an interviewer in ''Reason'' magazine, "One can't understand my ideas about Wikipedia without understanding [[Hayek]]...Wales is fleshing out and bringing to life Hayek's insights about the power of decentralized knowledge gathering, the surprising strength of communities bound only by reputation, and the fluidity of self-governance." <ref>[http://reason.com/news/show/119689.html Wikipedia and Beyond],
Jimmy Wales' sprawling vision, Katherine Mangu-Ward, ''Reasononline.com'', June 2007.</ref> These ideas that Wales claims to follow were put forward in Hayek's essay "The Use of Knowledge in Society". However, there is thin evidence for his being a true follower of Hayek politically given the radical [[leftist]] agenda of Wales close confidants in control of Wikipedia.<ref name="Left_in_Control_of_Wikipedia">{{cite news
|first=Jim
|last=Davis
|title=Left in Control of Wikipedia
|url=https://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2007/5/13/212015.shtml?s=lh
|work=
|publisher=[[NewsMax]]
|date=May 14, 2007
|accessdate=2007-10-04}}</ref> Wales describes himself as a [[communitarianism|communitarian]] (someone who could be said to be "radical center", meaning they agree with the left on issues relating to the economy, such as the need for environmental protection and public education, but not on cultural issues, but instead generally agree with the right or conservatives on cultural issues, such as support for character education and faith-based programs).<ref name="Left_in_Control_of_Wikipedia"/> The revisions have since been deleted by liberal Wikipedia administrators wishing to protect Jimmy's public image.<ref>https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jimbo_Wales&diff=238013334&oldid=366216764</ref> Editors trying to make this point in Wikipedia are routinely [[politically profiled|profiled]], stalked, harassed, slandered, and banned. An irony of internet history is that Jimmy Wales, despite being an atheist, refers to himself as Wikipedia's "spiritual leader" and God-king.<ref>http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/05/09/wikimedia_pron_purge/</ref>

==Career==
From 1994 to 2000, Wales was the research director at Chicago Options Associates, a futures and options trading firm in Chicago.<ref name=speakersbio>http://www.speakers.com/speaker/jimmy-wales-speaker-biography</ref>
Jimmy Wales became a millionaire{{fact}} by trading commodity options; before funding Wikipedia, he funded Bomis Inc. in 1996, which contained pornographic material.<ref>https://www.wired.com/culture/lifestyle/news/2005/12/69880</ref> Bomis produced two unsuccessful search engines: "Search Bastard" and "3Apes", which went out of their way to insult users with obscenities.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://wikipedia-sucks-badly.blogspot.com/2014/12/before-wikipedia-search-bastard-and.html|title=Before Wikipedia: Search Bastard and 3Apes |date=December 23, 2014|accessdate=December 24, 2014}} Search Bastard existed from 2000 to 2006.</ref> Besides funding the non-profit Wikipedia, Jimmy Wales also funded the for-profit [[Wikia]], a company that provides wiki services for businesses and organizations.

From 2008 to 2014, Wales' main source of income was speaking fees based on his celebrity for co-founding Wikipedia. Unlike many other non-profits, the [[Wikimedia Foundation]] (WMF) does not require Wales' to share his speaking fees or honoraria with the charity.

Wales was caught editing his own profile on Wikipedia in a bit of a scandal in an effort to downplay [[Larry Sanger]]'s role in the company and distance himself from his Bomis past.<ref>[https://www.wired.com/news/culture/0,1284,69880,00.html ''Wikipedia Founder Edits Own Bio''] Wired. Accessed 17 March 2008</ref>

In 2014, Wales accepted a new job as executive director of strategy and digital community for [[The People’s Operator]] (TPO), a cell phone startup company with ties to the British [[Labour Party]]. Wales owned 10% of the new company. TPO struggled to gain subscribers in the UK and the United States,<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/mediatechnologyandtelecoms/telecoms/11156163/Wikipedia-founder-to-float-mobile-phone-company.html|title=
Wikipedia founder to float mobile phone company|first=Graham|last=Ruddick|work=The Telegraph|date=October 11, 2014|accessdate=October 14, 2014}}</ref> and it has lost over 90% of its market capitalization.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.sharesmagazine.co.uk/news/shares/the-peoples-floperator|title=
The People's Floperator|first=Steven|last=Frazer|work=Shares Magazine|date=September 30, 2016|accessdate=April 25, 2017}}</ref> Wales became the Chairman of TPO's Board of Directors upon the death of its founder, [[Andrew Rosenfeld]] on February 8, 2015. Wales then ran TPO into the ground while drawing an impressive salary. On January 25, 2017, Wales stepped down from leading TPO.<ref>http://www.investegate.co.uk/the-people-soperator--tpop-/rns/board-changes--subscription---trading-update/201701250700070218V/</ref>

In order to replace TPO as his source of income, in April 2017, Wales decided to found a for-profit news organization, WikiTribune. According to the [[British Broadcasting Corporation|BBC]], "Mr Wales said he would be '100% hands-on' with the project in its early stages and would be likely to serve as Wikitribune's chief executive for at least a year."<ref name=bbc1>{{cite news|url=https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-39695767|title=Wikipedia's Jimmy Wales creates news service Wikitribune|work=BBC|date=April 25, 2017|accessdate=May 16, 2017}}</ref> In addition to paying Wales a salary, WikiTribune will hire ten professional journalists and also work with volunteer editors and fact checkers. Unlike Wikipedia which is owned by the non-profit Wikimedia Foundation, WikiTribune is owned by Jimmy Wales Ltd, a private company. WikiTribune is being financed by crowd-sourcing with both startup donations and pledges of monthly subscription payments. Because of the obvious conflict between WikiTribune and ''[[The Guardian]]'', Wales was forced to resign from ''The Guardian'''s board, where he had been serving for one year.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2017/04/25/wikipedia-co-founder-jimmy-wales-exits-guardian-board-conflict/|title=Wikipedia co-founder Jimmy Wales exits Guardian board over conflict of interest with Wikitribune news site |work=The Telegraph|date=April 25, 2017|accessdate=May 16, 2017}}</ref> To date, he has not been forced to resign from either the WMF Board or the Tide Foundation's WMF Endowment Advisory Board. Wales' advisors on WikiTribune include: Silicon Valley venture capitalist Guy Kawasaki,
Journalism lecturer Prof Jeff Jarvis,
US law professor Larry Lessig, and
Model/actress Lily Cole.<ref name=bbc1/> The WikiTribune project follows a 2014 news project created by Wikipedia co-founded [[Larry Sanger]] called InfoBitt or the ongoing WMF-owned Wikinews.

WikiTribune is based in London, United Kingdom, which is a controversial choice because UK law makes it much easier for celebrities to recover for libel. Also, WikiTribune's terms of service require volunteer editors to indemnify WikiTribune for any liability resulting from their work including libel damages. So, if a public figure, such as Donald Trump cannot sue a United States-based news outlet for libel, WikiTribune will be able to be sued in London under British legal standards, and any US-based volunteer that helped to write or edit the article will be forced to pay if the court awards damages.

==Controversies==

In early October 2005, former [[Robert F. Kennedy]] aide and retired journalist [[John Seigenthaler Sr.]] contacted Wales about false and libelous information in his Wikipedia biographical entry. [[Wikipedia#Second casualty: Wikipedia .22experts.22 called into question.2C the Essjay Scandal|Essjay]] got the call to deal with the situation.<ref>[http://www.wikitruth.info/index.php?title=User:Essjay/Letter User:Essjay/Letter]. Retrieved from WikiTruth, November 3, 2007.</ref> On December 1, 2005 Wales told ''Editor & Publisher'' magazine, the nation’s oldest trade journal serving the newspaper industry regarding [[Daniel Brandt]],
{{Cquote|I don't regard him as a valid source about anything at all... I find it hard to take him very seriously ...<ref>[http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/article_brief/eandp/1/1001612839 Wikipedia Founder, Readers Respond to Seigenthaler Article], Jay DeFoore, ''Editor & Publisher'', December 01, 2005.</ref>}}Brandt was the victim of malicious<ref>http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=5641&st=60&p=22336&mode=linear#entry22336</ref> and vile slanders placed within his Wikipedia biographical entry<ref>https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Daniel_Brandt&diff=prev&oldid=55132392</ref> by prominent Wikipedia contributors, in violation of numerous published Wikipedia policies.<ref>[http://www.conservapedia.com/Wikipedia#Impugning_critics Wikipedia#Impugning critics], Conservapedia.com</ref> Four days later in a joint appearance with Seigenthaler on [[CNN]] Wales said,
{{Cquote|we are very, very responsive to complaints and concerns.<ref>http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0512/05/lol.02.html</ref>}}
Essjay was entrusted with oversight responsibilities in the wake of the Seigenthaler scandal and wrote to a professor to persuade her to allow students to cite Wikipedia as a "reliable source,"
{{Cquote|It is never the case that known incorrect information is allowed to remain in Wikipedia; we strive to provide a resource that is both accurate and expansive. As we approach one million articles (far more than any other encyclopedia could ever hope to attain) on the English Wikipedia alone (there are hundreds of thousands of articles in the projects that make up the Wikimedia Foundation in dozens of different languages), we prove ourselves as a resource like none ever known before.}}

The derogatory smears against Brandt, self-cited to a certifiably "extremist source" which "should never be used" remained in Brandt's biography for one and half years, with Jimmy Wales and the WikiMedia Foundations full knowledge.

On December 14, 2012, WND columnist Judith Reisman defended heavy-metal drummer Bradlee Dean, who had been unfairly attacked on Wikipedia. She wrote,
<blockquote>"Jimmy Wales, Wikipedia’s creator, made his original fortune as a pornography trafficker. Wales’ cult of far-leftist volunteer editor zealots labor minute-by-minute to mislead readers who think Wikipedia’s half-truths – and worse – are a legitimate 'encyclopedia.'"</blockquote>
Wales sent an email in response claiming, "I have never been a 'pornography trafficker' at all." Instead of posting a correction WND posted detailed documentation which includes a posed photo of Wales flanked by two mostly undressed female models.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.wnd.com/2012/12/heres-your-correction-wikipedia-founder/|title=Here's Your Correction, Wikipedia Founder|date=December 17, 2012|accessdate=December 26, 2012|work=WND}}</ref>

Some people start discussions on [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jimbo_Wales his user talk page] much as supplicants approach a monarch. In response, he might engage in a discussion, promise "to look into it", or simply delete it.<ref>E.g., {{cite web|url=https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jimbo_Wales&diff=prev&oldid=30754316|title= Speaking of "Unreadable Crap"|date=Dec. 5, 2005|accessdate=Sept. 20, 2013}}</ref> However, the number of deletions and users banished from his talk page have increased in 2013.

In 2014, Wales received the "Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum Knowledge Award", which is named after the Vice President of the [[United Arab Emirates]] (UAE) and carries a $500,000 value. Many Wikipedia editors were troubled because of the poor record that the UAE has on human rights. In response, Wales said that he would use the money to establish his own private foundation to address human rights.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/12/22/the_withinthelaw_jimmy_wales_on_the_run_with_500000/|title=What's Jimmy Wales going to do with $500k from the UAE? He's gonna set up one of them darn foundations, of course... |work=The Register|date=December 22, 2014
|first=Andrew |last=Orlowski|accessdate=December 22, 2014}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.examiner.com/article/broken-promises-of-jimmy-wales|title=Broken promises of Jimmy Wales|date=December 26, 2014|accessdate=December 27, 2014|work=Examiner}}</ref>

[[File:Katherine Maher.jpg|thumb|right|Katherine Maher, WMF Executive Director]]
Wales has had a turbulent private life. Prior to starting Wikipedia, Wales was a minority partner in Bomis, which provided adult photographs for a male audience. As Wikipedia's fame grew, Wales traveled without his family around the world to promote it. He created controversy when he sought travel reimbursement from the Wikimedia Foundation for a trip to a Russian massage parlor. Wales then established Wikia, a new for-profit venture with Angela Beesley. When the Foundation grew to the point that it could afford a paid staff, Wales ensured that a number of women were hired for management roles, including all three Executive Directors, Sue Gardner, Lila Tretikov and Katherine Maher.

==Personal life==
Wales became romatically involved with a number of women, both before and after his divorces. Wales has been married three times. At the age of twenty, he married Pamela Green,<ref name=Chozick-2013-06-30>{{cite news|last=Chozick|first=Amy|title=Jimmy Wales Is Not an Internet Billionaire|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/30/magazine/jimmy-wales-is-not-an-internet-billionaire.html|newspaper=The New York Times|date=June 30, 2013}}</ref> a co-worker at a grocery store in Alabama. They divorced in 1993. He met his second wife, Christine Rohan, while she was working as a steel trader for [[Mitsubishi]]. They were married in March 1997,<ref>{{cite book | title=Jimmy Wales and Wikipedia | publisher=[[Rosen Publishing]] | author=Meyer, Susan | year=2013 | page=27}}</ref> and had a daughter Kira Namiko Wales before separating. Wales had a brief relationship with Canadian conservative columnist [[Rachel Marsden]] in 2008 that began after Marsden contacted Wales about her Wikipedia biography. Wales later broke up with Marsden over the Internet. Marsden was so angered by Wales that she put an item of intimate apparel up for auction on [[eBay]].

Wales married [[Kate Garvey]] in [[London]] on October 6, 2012.<ref>{{cite news|last=Donnelly|first=Laura|title=Wiki wedding: Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales marries Tony Blair's former aide|url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/9591824/Wiki-wedding-Wikipedia-founder-Jimmy-Wales-marries-Tony-Blairs-former-aide.html#|newspaper=The Daily Telegraph|location=London|date=October 6, 2012}}</ref> Garvey is [[Tony Blair]]'s former diary secretary, whom Wales met in [[Davos]], Switzerland. Wales and Garvey have two daughters.

==References==
{{Reflist}}

==External links==
* [http://blog.jimmywales.com/ Jimmy Wales' Blog] (this blog was last updated Jan. 19, 2012)

{{DEFAULTSORT:Wales, Jimmy}}

[[Category:Wikis]]
[[Category:Business People]]
[[Category:Wikimedia Foundation]]
[[Category:Libertarians]]
[[Category:Atheists]]
[[Category:Wikipedia People]]
[[Category:Millionaires]]
[[Category:Liberals]]
[[Category:Globalists]]

Wikimedia Foundation

2021-07-23T07:11:44Z

Dave Wilcox: spelling

'''Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.''' (WMF) is a not-for-profit Florida corporation with its principal place of business in [[San Francisco, California]]. It was founded by [[Jimmy Wales]], who has a permanent position on the Board of Directors. It operates several online collaborative wiki projects, including [[Wikipedia]], [[Wiktionary]], [[Wikiquote]], [[Wikibooks]], [[Wikisource]], [[Wikimedia Commons]], [[Wikispecies]], [[Wikinews]], [[Wikiversity]], Wikimedia Incubator, Meta-Wiki, [[Wikidata]], [[Wikivoyage]], and owns the now-defunct Nupedia online encyclopedia. Its Executive Director is Katherine Maher. In essence, an operator of a phonographic Web site, set up a non-profit foundation to which to transfer his crowd-sourced project, only to end up with the Chairman of its Board of Directors being a lesbian secretly married to a woman who misused her Foundation connections to openly harass male volunteers that attempted to maintain quality control on her articles. The WMF Board then turned its back on the army of long-time volunteers to reinvent their projects to promote subjective individual personal opinions rather than objective truth to create "epistemic justice". Meanwhile, it is using its donations to sue the National Security Agency (NSA) over government efforts to fight terrorism.

The foundation's headquarters address is 1 Montgomery Street, Suite 1600, San Francisco, CA 94104, Phone:(415) 839-6885. Supposed business hours are 9 a.m.–5 p.m. PST.<ref>https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Contact_us</ref> However, the WMF shifted to remote operations and half-time work at full-time pay in response to the COVID-19 pandemic.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://wikimediafoundation.org/news/2020/03/06/wikimedia-foundation-will-close-san-francisco-office-and-encourage-remote-work-for-march-2020-amidst-covid-19-concerns/|title=Amid COVID-19, Wikimedia Foundation offers full pay for reduced hours, mobilizes all staff to work remote, and waives sick time|date=March 6, 2020|accessdate=Sept. 20, 2020}}</ref>

For the fiscal year ending 2017-06-30, the Executive Director's salary was $307,141.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=search.summary&orgid=11212|title=Wikimedia Foundation|accessdate=June 24, 2019}}</ref>

==History==
The creation of the foundation was officially announced on June 20, 2003, by the [[atheism|atheist]] and Wikipedia co-founder [[Jimmy Wales]],<ref name="Rupert Neate">{{cite news | first = Rupert | last = Neate | title = Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales goes bananas | url = https://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/mediatechnologyandtelecoms/3399843/Wikipedia-founder-Jimmy-Wales-goes-bananas.html |work=The Daily Telegraph | date= October 7, 2008 | accessdate =October 25, 2009 | quote = The encyclopedia's huge fan base became such a drain on Bomis's resources that Mr Wales, and co-founder Larry Sanger, thought of a radical new funding model – charity.}}</ref> who had been operating Wikipedia within his pornographic company [[Bomis]].<ref>{{cite web | url = http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikipedia-l/2003-June/010743.html | title = Wikipedia English mailing list message | date = June 20, 2003 | first = Jimmy | last = Wales | authorlink = Jimmy Wales}}</ref> At the time, Wikipedia was operating out of Bomis' offices in St. Petersburg, Florida.

The name "Wikimedia" was [[neologism|coined]] by American author [[Sheldon Rampton]] in a post to the English mailing list in March 2003.<ref>{{cite web | url = http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2003-March/001887.html | title = Wikipedia English mailing list message | date = March 16, 2003 | first = Sheldon | last = Rampton | authorlink = Sheldon Rampton }}</ref>
At the start, Wales transferred ownership of all Wikipedia, Wiktionary and [[Nupedia]] [[domain name]]s to Wikimedia along with the copyrights for all materials related to these projects that were created by [[Bomis]] employees or Wales himself. The computer equipment used to run all the Wikimedia projects was also donated by Wales to the foundation, which also acquired the domain names "wikimedia.org" and "wikimediafoundation.org".

In April 2005, the US [[Internal Revenue Service]] determined that the foundation was an educational foundation in the category "[[Adult education|Adult]], [[Continuing education|Continuing Education]]", making all contributions to the foundation [[Tax deduction|tax-deductible]] for U.S. federal income tax purposes.

On September 25, 2007, the foundation's board decided to move to the [[San Francisco Bay Area]]. The Board said its major reasons for choosing San Francisco were proximity to like-minded organizations and potential partners as well as cheaper and more convenient international travel than is available from St. Petersburg, Florida.<ref name="MoncadaWikimoveTribune">{{cite web | url = http://www2.tbo.com/content/2007/sep/25/wikimedia-foundation-moving-another-bay-area/?news-breaking | title= Wikimedia Foundation Moving To Another Bay Area | author = Carlos Moncada | work = [[The Tampa Tribune]] |date = September 25, 2007 | quote = }}</ref><ref name="MullinsWikimoveTribune">{{cite web | url= http://www.tbo.com/news/money/MGBNF5F517F.html | title = Online Encyclopedia To Leave St. Petersburg For San Francisco | author = Richard Mullins | work = The Tampa Tribune |date = September 26, 2007 | quote = }}</ref><ref name="KimWikimoveSFChronicle">{{cite web | url= https://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/10/10/BU69SNMQ2.DTL&tsp=1 | title = Wikipedia team plans move to San Francisco | first = Ryan | last = Kim |work=San Francisco Chronicle | date = October 10, 2007 | quote = }}</ref>

The Wikimedia Foundation Board met in 2016 in a small town in Italy to discuss transparency and communication. The Foundation funded all Board members' travel to Italy.

==Wikia==
{{Main|Wikia}} 
In January 2004, [[Jimmy Wales]] appointed his business partners [[Tim Shell]] and Michael E. Davis to the foundation's board. In June 2004, an election was held for two user representative board members. Following one month of campaigning and two weeks of online voting, [[Angela Beesley Starling|Angela Beesley]] and [[Florence Devouard|Florence Nibart-Devouard]] were elected to join the board. In late 2004, Wales and Beesley launched a startup company, [[Wikia]], affiliated with neither Wikimedia nor Bomis, except for their presence as principals/trustees. In July 2005, Beesley and Nibart-Devouard were re-elected to the board. On July 1, 2006, Beesley resigned from the board effective upon election of her successor, expressing concern about "certain events and tendencies that have arisen within the organization since the start of this year," but stating her intent to continue to participate in the Wikimedia projects, and in the formation of an Australian chapter. A special election was held in September to finish Beesley's term, ending with the mid-2007 election. [[Erik Möller]] won the election. Möller was subsequently hired as Deputy Executive Director of the WMF. On December 8, 2006, the board expanded to seven people with the appointments of Kat Walsh and [[Oscar van Dillen]]. Walsh was elected Chair of the board in July 2012. Walsh was not re-elected to the WMF Board in 2013.

Wales and Beesley continued to develop Wikia as a for-profit alternative to the WMF projects, and some critics allege that by deleting very specialized articles and content from Wikipedia, a core team was pushing people to develop specialized wikis on Wikia. When Wikipedia community voted 61-39% percent to treat all links to other sites equally by removing nofollow (Google-ignored) tags for all of them, the Wikipedia co-founder overruled this decision and Wikipedia now favors Wikia in its treatment of nofollow tags.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.techcrunch.com/2007/04/28/wikipedia-special-treatment-for-wikia-and-other-wikis/|title=Wikipedia: Special Treatment for Wikia and some other Wikis|author=Nik Cubrilovic|date=April 28, 2007|accessdate=July 22, 2012}}</ref><ref>http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2007-January/061137.html</ref> Michael E. Davis, a former business partner of Wales who served for years as a founding member of the WMF board and was MWF's Treasurer, was named Treasurer and Secretary of Wikia in January 2006. In January 2009, Wikia subleased two conference rooms to the WMF.

Wales continues as a voting member of the WMF Board and serves as its spokesperson.

In August 2009, Matt Halprin, Partner of the Omidyar Network, was asked to join the Wikimedia Foundation board of trustees. Halprin was responsible for an Omidyar team that “pursues investments in Social Media”, and Omidyar invested part of $4 million into Wikia, Inc. in 2006. So, his company would succeed if Wikia made a nice return on investment, yet of all of the available competent Silcon Valley experts, the WMF selected Halprin to serve on the Board that is entrusted to ensure that the WMF treats Wikia on an arms-length basis.

In 2006, Wikia received a major round of venture capital funding from Amazon.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.bizjournals.com/seattle/stories/2006/12/04/daily16.html?jst=b_ln_hl|title=Amazon invests in Wikia|work=Puget Sound Business Journal|date=December 6, 2006|accessdate=February 4, 2013}}</ref> Although a large number of payment processors are available, as of 2013, the WMF uses Amazon to process donation payments.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Village_pump_%28policy%29&diff=526220744&oldid=526213000#Wikipedia_is_now_enriching_itself_by_contributing_to_the_destruction_of_small_businesses|title=Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)|date=December 3, 2012|accessdate=February 4, 2013}}</ref>

Wikia created the "Speedy Deletion Wikia" in which a robot harvested the Wikipedia articles that were deleted on an expedited basis and then reposted them on Wikia. These included copyrighted material and pornographic images that were deleted because of their objectionable nature.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jimbo_Wales&diff=498803845&oldid=498803787|title=User Talk:Jimbo Wales|accessdate=January 13, 2017}}</ref>

==Controversies==

===Patrick administration===
WMF announced on 2006-06-19 that it had hired attorney Bradford Patrick as internal counsel acted as interim Executive Director.<ref>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2006-06-19/Brad_Patrick</ref>

In early 2007, a prominent Wikipedia editor, named only "Essjay" online and described on his user profile "as a tenured professor of religion at a private university with expertise in canon law," was exposed as a 24-year-old college kid in Kentucky. He resigned in disgrace — even though Wikipedia tried to retain him, claiming he'd edited thousands of articles with flair.<ref>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Essjay_controversy</ref>

===Gardner administration===

====Doran scandal====
In January 2007, WMF named Carolyn Doran chief operating officer and Sandy Ordonez joined as [http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Head_of_Communications head of communications].<ref>{{cite web | title = Current staff | publisher = Wikimedia Foundation | url = https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Current_staff | accessdate =February 1, 2007 | author = Danny | authorlink = foundation:User:Danny | archiveurl = https://wikimediafoundation.org/w/index.php?title=Current_staff&oldid=19370 | archivedate = February 1, 2007 }}</ref> Doran began working at WMF as a part-time bookkeeper in 2006 after being sent by a [[Temporary work|temporary agency]]. Doran later left the foundation in July 2007, and [[Sue Gardner]] was hired as consultant and special advisor (later becoming the Chief Executive Officer). It was later disclosed<ref>{{cite news | first = Cade | last = Metz | title = Wikipedia COO was convicted felon | url = http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/12/13/wikimedia_coo_convicted_felon/ | date = December 13, 2007 | accessdate =December 27, 2007 }}</ref> that Doran was a convicted [[felony|felon]], with a [[DUI]] arrest during her tenure at the foundation and a substantial criminal history, including shooting her boyfriend and complicity in credit card forgery.<ref>{{cite news |authorlink=Brian Bergstein | first = Brian | last = Bergstein | title = Felon Became COO of Wikipedia Foundation | url = http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hcWLu3fg-aDeJNfWTY6hlbz93oCwD8TM0HVG0 | date = December 21, 2007 | accessdate =December 27, 2007 }}</ref> Her departure from the organization was cited as one of the reasons the foundation took about seven months to release its fiscal 2007 financial audit.<ref>{{cite news | author = Ral315 | title = ''Signpost'' interview: Florence Devouard | url = https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2007-11-19/Anthere_interview | work = The Wikipedia Signpost | date = November 19, 2007 }}</ref>

====2014 Staffing controversies====
One of the growing pains that organizations experience is that paid staff can be hired and perhaps perform their job duties well, but their off-duty conduct brings discredit to their employer. This is particularly challenging for the WMF, who hired staff from the pool of Wikipedia volunteers, with many staff continuing to edit Wikipedia outside their regular WMF job duties.

In January 2014, Sarah Stierch was discovered to have written Wikipedia articles for hire while being a full-time WMF employee. The WMF promptly announced her departure as an employee without any official explanation.<ref>http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2014-January/129466.html</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2014-01-08/News_and_notes|work=Wikimedia Signpost|date=January 8, 2014|title=WMF employee forced out over "paid advocacy editing"|accessdate=March 12, 2014}}</ref>

In March 2014, Ryan Kaldari, who has been working for the WMF for almost four years and is a Wikipedia administrator, got into an editing battle with another editor. Kaldari then made complaining comments about that editor under a second assumed name. For that policy violation, Kaldari lost his administrator privileges. However, the dispute caused Wikipedia users to research Kaldari's background and discovered that for years he has been the owner and operator of several other websites including "Snuffster.com", which was intended as a parody of Friendster, but soon became a haven for Internet trolls to mock murdered children. Kaldari has been paying for the site for 10 years and has actively added comments to various threads on the site.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.examiner.com/article/wikimedia-foundation-employee-caught-sockpuppeting-and-loses-admin-rights|first=Gregory|last=Kohs|title=Wikimedia Foundation employee caught sockpuppeting and loses admin rights |date=March 8, 204|accessdate=March 12, 2014}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.dailydot.com/news/wikipedia-sockpuppet-ryan-kaldari/|title=Wikipedia staffer at center of latest sockpuppet scandal|first=Rob|last=Price|work=Daily Dot|date= March 12, 2014|accessdate=March 16, 2014}}</ref> Kaldari's poor judgment in owning and operating this site was called to the attention of Jimmy Wales, who dismissed it out of hand.<ref>https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jimbo_Wales&oldid=599304349</ref>

===Tretikov Administration===
In March 2013, Executive Director Sue Gardner announced that she would leave,<ref name=bizinsider/><ref>http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Press_releases/The_search_for_our_next_Executive_Director Retrieved June 16, 2014.</ref> and an extensive search did not produce a satisfactory candidate. After a second search, Russian-born Lila Tretikov was selected as Gardner's replacement, and she took office on June 2, 2014. The WMF appointed a transition team to assist her in learning her new role, and there was a three-week transition period following the announcement of her selection. At the time, Tretikov was dating PHP programmer Will Sinclair. Both Tretikov and Sinclair attempted to become immersed in Wikipedia culture, and Sinclair quickly found his way to the noted criticism website [[Wikipediocracy]], where he registered an account. On May 30-June 1, 2014, the WMF sponsored a conference called "WikiConference USA" at the [[New York Law School]] which welcomed everyone to attend including "the curious, the skeptical, and others wishing to engage in meaningful conversation about the Wikimedia movement in the United States."<ref>http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e1/WikiCon_USA_2014_Press_Release_v1.pdf Retrieved June 16, 2014</ref> However, the afternoon before the conference began, Greg Kohs who had proposed to give a presentation on "paid editing" had his registration cancelled and was told not to attend.<ref>http://wikipediocracy.com/2014/06/02/wikiconference-usa-bans-critic-from-open-meeting/ Retrieved June 16, 2014</ref> Sinclair defended Kohs' right to attend and started a [http://wllm.com/ blog] and an [http://www.change.org/petitions/wikipedia-make-wikipedia-conferences-truly-open-to-all-by-allowing-greg-kohs-to-attend online petition] to advocate these views. He also expressed his views on a WMF listserv. In response, the WMF insiders turned vicious and openly suggested that Tretikov should break up their family and leave Sinclair because of his support for Kohs.<ref>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jimbo#Regarding_the_nauseating_and_cowardly_remarks_made_by_Wikiconference_USA_attendees</ref> On June 15, Sinclair announced on Mr. Wales talk page that he would no longer participate on Wikipediocracy.<ref>https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jimbo_Wales&diff=612984072&oldid=612983354 June 15, 2014.</ref> Efforts to get Mr. Wales to clarify why Kohs was banned from the conference were met with censorship.<ref>https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jimbo_Wales&diff=613156950&oldid=613156824 June 16, 2014.</ref>

Sinclair later in 2014 started his own "Off-Wiki" Wikipedia criticism site.

As Executive Director, Tretikov gave speeches and participated in meetings and conferences around the world. Her travels may have made her less accessible to the WMF staff. One important initiative that Tretikov started was improving the WMF's efforts in child protection. Previously, the WMF left the decision to take disciplinary action against users to untrained volunteers on individual projects. The project leaders complained that they were not properly trained to handle allegations that a user was a child predator. Under Tretikov, the WMF legal staff began handling such complaints and banned a number of users from all WMF projects.

In 2015, the WMF Board and Tretikov reorganized the "Advancement" fundraising staff and secretly entered into an agreement with the [[Tides Foundation]] to establish a separate endowment fund. The Tides Foundation was established by liberal [[George Soros]]. Under the arrangement, the Tides Foundation will invest and control the endowment until it reaches its goal of $100 million at which time the WMF and Tides will agree on how to handle the money in the future. The WMF has hired staff to solicit and process gifts for the endowment, and the endowment was publicly launched on January 15, 2016.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://15.wikipedia.org/endowment.html|title=Wikimedia Endowment|accessdate=Feb. 26, 2016}}</ref> Many people have questioned how the WMF could embark on a $100 million endowment fund drive just a few weeks after a banner ad campaign on its website begging for money to keep its servers running.

In 2015, Tretikov reorganized the staff and launched a secret project to develop a "Knowledge Engine" (KE) which some planning documents said would compete with [[Google]] as a means of searching sources beyond the WMF projects by automating the process of evaluating what information on the Internet was reliable.<ref>[https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/02/head-of-wikimedia-foundation-resigns-as-tensions-with-editors-mount/ Wikimedia Foundation director resigns after uproar over “Knowledge Engine”], ''Ars Technica''.</ref> Tretikov applied for a grant of $2 million per year over three years from the Knight Foundation, but only received a one-time $250,000 grant to explore the concept. In November 2015, the WMF Board reaffirmed its support of Tretikov's leadership and retained a management consultant to mentor her. In addition, a number of senior WMF staff (including Deputy Director Erik Möller) departed, some making critical public remarks as they left.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://wikipediocracy.com/2016/02/26/unicorns-are-a-myth-lila-tretikov-resigns-as-wikimedia-foundation-executive-director/#comment-44801|title=Unicorns are a Myth: Lila Tretikov resigns as Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director|date=Feb. 26, 2016|accessdate=Feb. 26, 2016}}</ref> It is easy to imagine KE to evolve into an attempt to provide the equivalent of a FICO score for every domain name, perhaps every known person on Earth, that third-party software would likely utilities to influence how second-rate search engines would rank information. Wales frequently uses software features at his web sites to discredit or silence the communications anyone he disapproves of. Wales had previously welcomed the idea of having a biography for every person on Earth but the "deletionist" element of his "community" (who simply lust after the destroying of information about low-fame entities) rejected the notion.

[[File:James Heilman.png|thumb|left|200px|James Heilman, M.D. was removed from the Board]] In July 2015, James Heilman, MD was elected to the WMF Board by the editing community after starting working at WP in 2008 and being a very active ("many hours a day") and highly qualified non-anonymous editor and later administrator. He made many mass media presentations promoting the project and worked to improve its reliability especially for those seeking medical information. He attempted to recruit other physicians to help in the effort. Heilman brought staff dissatisfaction with Tretikov's leadership to the Board and pressed for more information on the Knowledge Engine and the Knight Foundation grant. On December 28, 2015, on the eve of two members leaving the Board, the Board held an emergency meeting and removed Heilman from the WMF Board by a vote of 8 to 2. The Board released a statement that Heilman "lacked the confidence" of his fellow trustees. The Community responded to his dismissal by pressing for the release of the Knowledge Engine grant application resulting in a public apology from Tretikov for pushing the project without first gaining consensus. Heilman continues to spend many hours a day contributing to WP as an editor and an admin and continues to make media appearances promoting the WP project.<ref>http://thewikipedian.net/tag/james-heilman/</ref><ref>https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2016/11/08/501087493/should-i-trust-wikipedia-with-my-health</ref>

The WMF Board appointed two new people to fill outside Board slots effective January 1, one of which was a Google executive, Arnnon Geshuri who was a central figure in an antitrust case. Community outrage over this improperly vetted appointment resulted in his resignation from the WMF Board.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/01/editors-demand-ouster-of-wikimedia-board-member-involved-in-no-poach-deal/|title= Law & Disorder / Civilization & Discontents Wikipedia editors revolt, vote "no confidence" in newest board member|date=Jan. 25, 2016|accessdate=Feb. 25, 2016}}</ref> On February 25, 2016, Tretikov announced her resignation as the Wikimedia Foundation's Executive Director.<ref name=ltresign/> She continued until March 31.

===Maher Administration===
[[File:Katherine Maher.jpg|thumb|right|Katherine Maher, Executive Director]]
Katherine Maher was announced as the interim ED was announced and later it was announced that she was appointed permanently to the position.<ref name=ltresign>{{cite web|url=https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2016-February/082472.html|title=Executive transition planning|date=February 25, 2016|accessdate=February 25, 2016}}</ref>

The female Chair of the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Directors is married to Laura Hale. Ms. Hale has a long history, dating back to 2011 of incompetent edits and abusing male editors. A long-time male administrator, Fram, followed Ms. Hale around making corrections to her problematic edits. In turn, Ms. Hale complained to the Trust & Security staff of the Wikimedia Foundation, rather than to the volunteer-staffed complaint mechanisms on Wikipedia. Although the Trust & Security staff has previously banned a few editors for problems involving illegal conduct such as pedophilia, in June 2019, for the first time, they suspended Fram for one year for "incivility". In response, an English Wikipedia administrator lifted the block and was in turn stripped of his administratorship, and several other administrators resigned in protest.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Community_response_to_the_Wikimedia_Foundation%27s_ban_of_Fram|title=Wikipedia:Community response to the Wikimedia Foundation's ban of Fram|accessdate=June 24, 2019}}</ref> In response to a Buzzfeed article about the controversy,<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/josephbernstein/wikipedia-ban-editor-culture-war|title=The Culture War Has Finally Come For Wikipedia|date=July 27, 2019|accessdate=July 28, 2019|work=Buzzfeed News}}</ref> Maher sent a tweet calling the article "s***ty.".<ref>{{cite web|url=https://twitter.com/krmaher/status/1144394019893460993|title=tweet|accessdate=June 28, 2019}}</ref> As more Wikipedia Administrators and Bureaucrats resign or go on strike, the crisis has also been reported by Breitbart.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2019/06/28/wikipedia-editors-revolt-over-sites-ban-of-veteran-administrator/|title=Wikipedia Editors Revolt over Site’s Ban of Veteran Administrator|date=July 28, 2019|work=Breitbart|accessdate=July 28, 2019}}</ref> Despite the Fram-Laura Hale scandal, on August 15, 2019, the WMF Board re-elected Laura Hale's wife to serve another year as Board chair.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://wikimediafoundation.org/news/2019/08/16/wikimedia-foundation-announces-shani-evenstein-sigalov-as-new-trustee-as-well-as-leadership-appointments-at-fifteenth-annual-wikimania/
|title=Wikimedia Foundation announces Shani Evenstein Sigalov as new Trustee, as well as leadership appointments at fifteenth annual Wikimania|date=August 16, 2019|accessdate=August 17, 2019}}</ref>

There is a fundamental rift at Wikipedia. On the one hand, editors from the global north advocate that knowledge is produced by the scientific method, and that Wikipedia should only document verifiable facts. On the other hand, editors from the global south believe that Western civilization is the product of old or dead white men and that Wikipedia should give voice to suppressed people who have personal experiences that may not meet the accepted standards currently imposed by the traditional views of knowledge. These people advocate a "post-modernist" definition of knowledge, including folk remedies supplanting Western medicine and counteracting the historic bias that views males as holding key roles in history, when they serve as military or political leaders. This later group views the current governing structure and resource allocation of the Foundation as illegitimate and wants to rebuild both Wikipedia and the Foundation into something very different so that when internet access spreads throughout the world by 2030, people in the global south will be involved with Wikipedia instead of some other website that might become established to serve their own communities.

To assure that all views were heard, the WMF devoted millions of dollars on a strategic planning exercise that held workshops in the global south and provided very few opportunities for input from editors in Europe or the United States. The result was a large set of self-contradictory recommendations. Next, the WMF hosted a "harmonization sprint" in Tunis which was attended by Laura Hale's wife and Maher to try to unify the recommendations. Finally, a writing group was appointed to write a self-consistent set of recommendations, for which public comment will be collected in January-February 2020.

Although a large number of non-profit groups issued virtue signaling statements following the death of George Floyd, Maher (speaking for the WMF) used the opportunity to announce a complete surrender to the faction that refocused the mission on knowledge equity and also announced that WMF websites would abandon their unbiased coverage of race relations.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://wikimediafoundation.org/news/2020/06/03/we-stand-for-racial-justice/|title=We stand for racial justice.|date=June 3, 2020|accessdate=Sept. 17. 2020}}</ref> Maher described as a goal:
{{cquote|Our content: Building power, relationships, and resources to advance epistemic justice and redress the exclusion and omission of Black, indigenous, and communities of color within knowledge systems in general and the Wikimedia projects specifically.}}

==Site shut downs==
As a section 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organization, the foundation must not be "carrying on propaganda, or otherwise attempting, to influence legislation (except as otherwise provided in subsection (h)), and which does not participate in, or intervene in (including the publishing or distributing of statements), any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for public office."<ref>{{USC|26|501(c)(3)}}.</ref> However, WMF has repeatedly used shutting down its website or threatening to shut down its website as a tactic to pressure specific legislative outcomes.

On October 4, 2011, the WMF servers were reprogrammed to hide the contents of the [[Italian Wikipedia|Italian language version of Wikipedia]], as a protest against paragraph 29 of the "''[[DDL intercettazioni]]''" (Wiretapping Bill).<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.camera.it/_dati/leg16/lavori/stampati/pdf/16PDL0038530.pdf |title=Camera dei Deputati: disegno di legge N. 1415-B |language=Italian |date=11 June 2010 |accessdate=September 18, 2012 |publisher=Camera dei Deputati}} ([http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=it&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.camera.it%2F_dati%2Fleg16%2Flavori%2Fstampati%2Fpdf%2F16PDL0038530.pdf English translation])</ref> The proposed bill would empower anyone who believes themselves to have been attacked by the content of a web site to enforce publication of a reply, uneditable and uncommented, on the same web site, within 48 hours and without any prior evaluation of the claim by a judge or to face a €12,000 fine.

On October 4 through 6, 2011, the WMF redirected all pages on the Italian language version of Wikipedia redirected to a statement opposing the proposed legislation.<ref>[https://www.businessinsider.com/italy-wikipedia-wiretapping-2011-10 "Wikipedia Shuts Down Italian Site In Response To Berlusconi's New Wiretap Act"], Adam Taylor, ''Business Insider'', 4 October 2011</ref> This was true for all users, not just those IP addresses based in Italy. On October 7, the Italian Wikipedia pages were again available, but a notice about the proposed legislation was still displayed at the top of pages.

The success of the Italian shut down whetted the appetite of people seeking to influence legislation in the United States. In December 2011, Wikipedia co-founder [[Jimmy Wales]] discussed a possible coordinated blackout by Wikipedia and other United States websites to protest anti-piracy two bills pending before the United States Congress: [[SOPA]] and [[PIPA]]. After committing the WMF to join a larger boycott, Wales initiated discussion with editors about his plan. Editors and others<ref>Charlie Osborne, [https://www.zdnet.com/blog/igeneration/would-a-wikipedia-blackout-be-such-a-bad-thing/13726 "Would a Wikipedia blackout be such a bad thing?"], ''iGeneration'' on [[ZDNet]], December 13, 2011, 11:04 am PST. Retrieved September 18, 2012.</ref> debated the alternatives of completely interrupting service for one or more days, or alternatively presenting site visitors with a blanked page directing them to further information before permitting them to complete searches.<ref>{{cite news |url= https://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/jimmy-wales/8953273/Wikipedia-co-founder-threatens-blackout-over-anti-piracy-law.html |title=Wikipedia co-founder threatens blackout over anti-piracy law |work=The Telegraph |date=December 13, 2011 |author=Christopher Williams |accessdate=September 18, 2012 |location=London}}</ref><ref name="itnews wikipedia mulls blackout">{{cite news |url=http://www.itnews.com.au/News/284285,wikipedia-mulls-blackout-to-protest-sopa.aspx |title=Wikipedia mulls blackout to protest SOPA |publisher=itnews |date=December 13, 2011 |accessdate=September 18, 2012 |author=Brett Winterford |quote=Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales has threatened a knowledge "blackout" of the online encyclopedia to protest a US anti-piracy bill that could have serious ramifications for online service providers.}}</ref> On January 16, the Wikimedia Foundation announced that the English-language Wikipedia would be blacked out for 24 hours on January 18.<ref>{{cite news |title=Wikipedia to go dark in piracy protest |date=January 17, 2012 |work=[[Australian Broadcasting Corporation]] |url=http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-01-17/wiki-to-go-dark-in-piracy-protest/3778452 |accessdate=September 18, 2012}}</ref> The Simple English Wikipedia voted to continue full service and did not join the blackout.<ref>https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Simple_talk/Archive_97#Potential_black-out_of_Simple_English_Wikipedia_in_the_US</ref> Many editors complained that the blackout decision was not made in a democratic fashion and undercut Wikipedia's objectivity and non-political mission.<ref>{{cite news | url = https://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/wikipedia-editors-question-sites-planned-blackout-15381673 | title = Wikipedia Editors Question Site's Planned Blackout | first = Peter | last = Svensson | date = January 17, 2012 | accessdate = September 18, 2012| agency = Associated Press }}</ref>

The SOPA/PIPA issue is so important to Sue Gardner, the WMF Executive Director, that in March 2013, she announced that she will be leaving her position to pursue the issue in another capacity.<ref name=bizinsider>{{cite news|url=https://www.businessinsider.com/wikimedia-foundations-sue-gardner-leaving-2013-3|work=Business Insider|date= March 28, 2013|title=The Woman Who Made Wikipedia Huge Is Stepping Down|accessdate=Arpril 27, 2013}}</ref> She left on June 1, 2014.

==Finances==
WMF's fundraising and expenses have grown at a very rapid rate. Some critics claim that WMF is taking in money faster than it can spend wisely.<ref>http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikimedia_Forum&oldid=4864408</ref>
{| class="wikitable sortable"
|+ Wikimedia financial data through June 2016 (financial years run from July 1 to June 30)
|-
! style="text-align: left; vertical-align: top" | Fiscal year
! style="text-align: right; vertical-align: top" | Revenue
! style="text-align: right; vertical-align: top" | Year-over-year ratio (revenue)
! style="text-align: right; vertical-align: top" | Expenses
! style="text-align: right; vertical-align: top" | Year-over-year ratio (expenses)
! style="text-align: right; vertical-align: top" | Net assets
! style="text-align: right; vertical-align: top" | Year-over-year ratio (net assets)
|-
| 2003–2004<ref name=2004-2006>{{cite web|url=//upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/foundation/2/28/Wikimedia_2006_fs.pdf |title=Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. Financial Statements June 30, 2006, 2005 and 2004 |publisher=Wikimedia Foundation|accessdate=November 26, 2012|format=PDF}}</ref>
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="80129" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 12%" | {{steady}} || style="text-align: right; width: 88%" | $80,129
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="0" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 58%" | {{steady}} || style="text-align: center; width: 42%" | N/A
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="23463" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 5%" | {{steady}} || style="text-align: right; width: 95%" | $23,463
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="0" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 58%" | {{steady}} || style="text-align: center; width: 42%" | N/A
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="56666" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 5%" | {{steady}} || style="text-align: right; width: 95%" | $56,666
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="0" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 58%" | {{steady}} || style="text-align: center; width: 42%" | N/A
|}
|-
| 2004–2005<ref name=2004-2006 />
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="379088" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 12%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 88%" | $379,088
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="373.10" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 58%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 42%" | 373.1%
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="177670" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 5%" | {{increaseNegative}} || style="text-align: right; width: 95%" | $177,670
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="657.2" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 58%" | {{increaseNegative}} || style="text-align: right; width: 42%" | 657.2%
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="268084" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 5%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 95%" | $268,084
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="373.09" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 58%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 42%" | 373.1%
|}
|-
| 2005–2006<ref name=2004-2006 />
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="1508039" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 12%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 88%" | $1,508,039
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="297.81" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 58%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 42%" | 297.8%
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="791907" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 5%" | {{increaseNegative}} || style="text-align: right; width: 95%" | $791,907
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="345.72" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 58%" | {{increaseNegative}} || style="text-align: right; width: 42%" | 345.7%
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="1004216" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 5%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 95%" | $1,004,216
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="274.59" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 58%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 42%" | 274.6%
|}
|-
| 2006–2007<ref>{{cite web|url=http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/foundation/4/49/Wikimedia_2007_fs.pdf |title=Microsoft Word – {F0900CC7-D37E-4CDF-95E3-B1F38D7DCD03}.doc |format=PDF |date= |accessdate=November 26, 2012}}</ref>
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="2734909" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 12%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 88%" | $2,734,909
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="81.4" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 58%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 42%" | 81.4%
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="2077843" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 5%" | {{increaseNegative}} || style="text-align: right; width: 95%" | $2,077,843
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="162.38" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 58%" | {{increaseNegative}} || style="text-align: right; width: 42%" | 162.4%
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="1658282" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 5%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 95%" | $1,658,282
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="65.13" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 58%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 42%" | 65.1%
|}
|-
| 2007–2008<ref>{{cite web|url=http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/foundation/4/4c/Wikimedia_20072008_fs.pdf |title=Microsoft Word – 31935 SFO Wikimedia fs.doc |format=PDF |date= |accessdate=November 26, 2012}}</ref>
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="5032981" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 12%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 88%" | $5,032,981
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="84.0" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 58%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 42%" | 84.0%
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="3540724" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 5%" | {{increaseNegative}} || style="text-align: right; width: 95%" | $3,540,724
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="70.40" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 58%" | {{increaseNegative}} || style="text-align: right; width: 42%" | 70.4%
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="5178168" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 5%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 95%" | $5,178,168
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="212.26" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 58%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 42%" | 212.3%
|}
|-
| 2008–2009<ref>{{cite web|url=http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/foundation/4/4f/FINAL_08_09From_KPMG.pdf |title=Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. Financial Statements June 30, 2009 and 2008 |publisher=Wikimedia Foundation|accessdate=November 26, 2012|format=PDF}}</ref>
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="8658006" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 12%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 88%" | $8,658,006
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="72.0" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 58%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 42%" | 72.0%
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="5617236" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 5%" | {{increaseNegative}} || style="text-align: right; width: 95%" | $5,617,236
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="58.65" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 58%" | {{increaseNegative}} || style="text-align: right; width: 42%" | 58.6%
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="8231767" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 5%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 95%" | $8,231,767
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="58.97" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 58%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 42%" | 59.0%
|}
|-
| 2009–2010<ref>{{cite web|url=http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/foundation/c/cc/FINAL_09_10From_KPMG.pdf |title=Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. Financial Statements June 30, 2010 and 2009 |publisher=Wikimedia Foundation|accessdate=November 26, 2012|format=PDF}}</ref>
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="17979312" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 12%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 88%" | $17,979,312
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="107.7" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 58%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 42%" | 107.7%
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="10266793" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 5%" | {{increaseNegative}} || style="text-align: right; width: 95%" | $10,266,793
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="82.77" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 58%" | {{increaseNegative}} || style="text-align: right; width: 42%" | 82.8%
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="14542731" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 5%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 95%" | $14,542,731
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="76.67" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 58%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 42%" | 76.7%
|}
|-
| 2010–2011<ref>{{cite web|url=http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/foundation/a/ac/FINAL_10_11From_KPMG.pdf |title=Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. Financial Statements June, 2011 and 2010 |publisher=Wikimedia Foundation| format=PDF|accessdate=2015-10-25}}</ref>
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="24785092" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 12%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 88%" | $24,785,092
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="37.8" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 58%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 42%" | 37.8%
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="17889794" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 5%" | {{increaseNegative}} || style="text-align: right; width: 95%" | $17,889,794
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="74.25" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 58%" | {{increaseNegative}} || style="text-align: right; width: 42%" | 74.2%
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="24192144" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 5%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 95%" | $24,192,144
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="66.35" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 58%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 42%" | 66.3%
|}
|-
| 2011–2012<ref name=2011-2012>{{cite web|url=http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/foundation/0/09/FINAL_11_12From_KPMG.pdf|title= Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. Financial Statements June, 2012 and 2011|publisher=Wikimedia Foundation|accessdate=December 26, 2012|format=PDF}}</ref>
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="38479665" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 12%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 88%" | $38,479,665
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="55.2" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 58%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 42%" | 55.2%
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="29260652" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 5%" | {{increaseNegative}} || style="text-align: right; width: 95%" | $29,260,652
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="63.56" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 58%" | {{increaseNegative}} || style="text-align: right; width: 42%" | 63.6%
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="34929058" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 5%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 95%" | $34,929,058
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="44.38" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 58%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 42%" | 44.4%
|}
|-
| 2012–2013<ref name=2012-2013>{{cite web|url=http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/foundation/6/6e/FINAL_12_13From_KPMG.pdf|title= Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. Financial Statements June, 2013 and 2012|publisher=Wikimedia Foundation|accessdate=December 14, 2013|format=PDF}}</ref>
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="48635408" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 12%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 88%" | $48,635,408
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="26.4" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 58%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 42%" | 26.4%
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="35704796" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 5%" | {{increaseNegative}} || style="text-align: right; width: 95%" | $35,704,796
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="22.02" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 58%" | {{increaseNegative}} || style="text-align: right; width: 42%" | 22.0%
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="45189124" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 5%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 95%" | $45,189,124
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="29.37" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 58%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 42%" | 29.4%
|}
|-
| 2013–2014<ref name=2014-2015 />
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="52465287" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 12%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 88%" | $52,465,287
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="8.6" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 58%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 42%" | 8.6%
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="45900745" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 5%" | {{increaseNegative}} || style="text-align: right; width: 95%" | $45,900,745
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="28.6" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 58%" | {{increaseNegative}} || style="text-align: right; width: 42%" | 28.6%
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="53475021" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 5%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 95%" | $53,475,021
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="18.3" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 58%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 42%" | 18.3%
|}
|-
| 2014–2015<ref name=2014-2015>{{cite web|url=https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/foundation/4/43/Wikimedia_Foundation_Audit_Report_-_FY15-16.pdf|title=Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. Financial Statements June, 2016 and 2015|publisher=Wikimedia Foundation|accessdate=November 15, 2016}}</ref>
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="74536375" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 12%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 88%" | $74,536,375
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="44.5" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 58%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 42%" | 44.5%
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="52596782" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 5%" | {{increaseNegative}} || style="text-align: right; width: 95%" | $52,596,782
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="14.6" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 58%" | {{increaseNegative}} || style="text-align: right; width: 42%" | 14.6%
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="77820298" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 5%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 95%" | $77,820,298
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="45.5" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 58%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 42%" | 45.5%
|}
|-
| 2015–2016<ref name=2015-2016>{{cite web|url=https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/foundation/4/43/Wikimedia_Foundation_Audit_Report_-_FY15-16.pdf|title=Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. Financial Statements June, 2016 and 2015|publisher=Wikimedia Foundation|accessdate=November 15, 2016}}</ref>
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="81862724" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 12%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 88%" | $81,862,724
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="9.8" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 58%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 42%" | 9.8%
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="65947465" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 5%" | {{increaseNegative}} || style="text-align: right; width: 95%" | $65,947,465
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="25.4" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 58%" | {{increaseNegative}} || style="text-align: right; width: 42%" | 25.4%
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="91782795" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 5%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 95%" | $91,782,795
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="17.9" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 58%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 42%" | 17.9%
|}
|}
If the WMF has $91 million in the bank, those funds could produce (at 4%) $3,640,000 in annual income, which is more than enough to fund the Wikipedia web servers in perpetuity. So, people are questioning the need for the WMF's annual fund raising campaign.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://wikipediocracy.com/2014/12/11/the-wikipedia-fundraising-banner-sad-but-untrue/|title=The Wikipedia Fundraising Banner: Sad but Untrue|date=December 11, 2014|accessdate=December 12, 2014}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.quora.com/What-are-some-good-arguments-against-donating-to-the-Wikimedia-Foundation/answer/Andreas-Kolbe|title=What are some good arguments against donating to the Wikimedia Foundation?|work=Quora|accessdate=December 15, 2014}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://newslines.org/blog/stop-giving-wikipedia-money/|title=Stop giving Wikipedia money|date=December 4, 2014|accessdate=December 15, 2014|work=Newslines}}</ref>

Each year the WMF conducts a fundraising drive to keep the webservers working on that popular liberal website. They claim the donations go to "Servers, bandwidth, maintenance, development."<ref>{{cite web|url=https://donate.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:FundraiserLandingPage&country=US&uselang=en&utm_medium=sidebar&utm_source=donate&utm_campaign=C13_en.wikipedia.org|title=Make Your Donation Now - Donate|accessdate=September 3, 2013}}</ref> Yet, in the period July - December 2012, the WMF took in $30.9 million but spent only $1.3 million on internet hosting.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/foundation/6/68/Jul-Dec%2712_Mid-year_financials2.pdf|title=Actual vs. Plan Comparison|work=Wikimedia Foundation|accessdate=September 3, 2013}}</ref> During 2012, the net worth of the WMF grew by $11 million. Yet, liberal Wikipedia users continue to donate in response to the WMF's urgent appeals.

In spring 2014, Jimmy Wales began to pander for [[bitcoin]] donations at websites where bitcoin investors were seeking ways to lend legitimacy to the digital currency. He promised to ask the WMF Board to allow bitcoin donations on the Wikipedia website. In the summer of 2014, the WMF made arrangements with Coinbase, who promised to convert bitcoin into dollars without charge. Thereafter, a bitcoin option was added to the WMF donation page.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://techcrunch.com/2014/07/30/wikipedia-now-accepts-bitc donations-with-coinbase/|publisher=techcrunch.com|title=Wikipedia Now Accepts Bitcoin Donations With Coinbase|date=July 30, 2014|accessdate=August 8, 2014}}</ref> Seth Meyers noted on his ''Late Night'' program, "Wikipedia is now accepting donations using the online currency Bitcoin. So now you can support information you're not sure is true with currency you're not sure is money."<ref>http://www.thespec.com/living-story/4733681-tuesdayfile/ Retrieved August 8, 2014</ref>

In addition to the WMF staff, the WMF awards grants and hires outside contractors. In the 2016 fiscal year, two law firms, Jones Day ($1,557,553) and Cooley LLP ($410,560), were among the largest payments. The WMF paid $436,104 to Minassian Media Inc. for public relations.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/foundation/4/44/Wikimedia_Foundation_2015_Form_990.pdf|title=2015-16 Form 990|accessdate=July 7, 2017}}</ref> Craig Minassian also serves as Chief Communications Officer of the [[Clinton Foundation]].

==Dispersed accountability==
A major factor in preventing accountability is that the fundraising conducted on the Wikipedia website links to a number of different solicitation pages depending on the nationality of the donor. Although the WMF collects the funds from donors located in the United States and other nations, fundraising in many countries is conducted by the country's own national chapter. The chapters then share the revenues with WMF. However, each chapter adopts its own spending practices and accountability standards.

The German chapter spends a portion of its funds on technology, but most of the other chapters focus on conferences, travel and other soft costs. Needless to say, with so much money being spent on non-technology / infrastructure items, the WMF and its chapters have drawn critics from within their own organization. However, internal dissent is quickly deleted.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Netball&diff=next&oldid=535697243|title=Talk:Netball|date=January 30, 2013}}</ref>

The WMF has two chapters in the United States: Wikimedia New York (which has a 501(c)(3) status from the IRS) and Wikimedia District of Columbia, whose 501(c)(3) exemption application was abandoned. The Treasurer of the UK WMF chapter suddenly resigned in 2013.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://blog.wikimedia.org.uk/2013/02/john-byrne-stands-down-as-the-treasurer-and-a-trustee-of-wikimedia-uk/|title=John Byrne Stands Down as the Treasurer and a Trustee of Wikimedia UK|date=February 3, 2013|accessdate=February 4, 2013}}</ref> Laura Hale, the outgoing vice president of Wikimedia Australia (who was an unsuccessful candidate for President in its 2012 election) applied for a travel grant with two of her friends to visit Colorado ski resorts in December 2012 and sought the funding retroactively.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/Proposal:Paralympic_Winter_Sports|title=Proposal:Paralympic Winter Sports|accessdate=February 4, 2013|work=Wikimedia Australia}}</ref>

The President of Wikimedia Australia has spend so much time traveling with the President of Wikimedia Indonesia that the two married.{{citation needed}}

A number of departing WMF employees have left comments on the Glassdoor website, citing problems with senior management creating a very confused work environment. The WMF suffers from a high staff turnover rate.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.glassdoor.com/Reviews/Wikimedia-Foundation-Reviews-E38331.htm|title=Wikimedia Foundation|accessdate=April 27, 2013}}</ref>

The WMF's endowment is held separately by the [[Tides Foundation]] and is controlled by their Board of Trustees. However, the agreement establishing the endowment between WMF and Tides provides for a separate "Wikimedia Endowment Advisory Board" to represent the Wikimedia communities interests when Tides makes decisions about the endowment. Instead of just having the WMF Board have a say in what will become the WMF's largest financial resource, a separate Board has been appointed with Jimmy Wales and Annette Campbell-White as its initial members.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://blog.wikimedia.org/2016/05/11/annette-campbell-white-endowment/|title=Annette Campbell-White named to the Wikimedia Endowment Advisory Board|date=May 11, 2016|accessdate=January 17, 2017}}</ref> In September, Peter Baldwin was added to the Advisory Board.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://blog.wikimedia.org/2016/09/09/peter-baldwin-endowment-board/|title=Peter Baldwin, professor and philanthropist, is appointed to the Wikimedia Endowment Advisory Board|quote=Endowment Board members are selected based on active involvement in philanthropic endeavors, prior nonprofit board experience, fundraising expertise, and a strong commitment to the Wikimedia Foundation’s mission.|accessdate=January 17, 2017}}</ref>

==Lawsuits==
In March 2015, the WMF and other groups filed a lawsuit against the [[National Security Agency]] (NSA) challenging an upstream surveillance program that was revealled by [[Edward Snowden]], a former NSA contractor. The District Court granted the NSA's motion to dismiss the lawsuit, but the WMF successfully appealed to the US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. That decision left the WMF as the only remaining plaintiff in the case, and the case continued in District Court on remand.<ref>{{cite news|last=Nelson|first=Steven|title=Appeals Court: Wikimedia Can Fight NSA's 'Not Speculative' Internet Surveillance|url=https://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2017-05-23/appeals-court-wikimedia-can-fight-nsas-not-speculative-internet-surveillance|accessdate=24 May 2017|work=U.S. World and News Report|date=May 23, 2017}}</ref> On December 16, 2019, the District Court held that the WMF did not have standing to proceed with its claims. On February 14, 2020, the Wikimedia Foundation filed a notice of appeal in the Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit.<ref>{{cite web|title=District Court rules for government in Wikimedia Foundation's mass surveillance case against the NSA |url=https://wikimediafoundation.org/news/2019/12/17/district-court-rules-for-government-in-wikimedia-foundations-mass-surveillance-case-against-the-nsa/ |publisher=Wikimedia Foundation |accessdate=September 20, 2020 |date=December 17, 2019}}</ref>

In 2019, cold fusion researcher Abd ul-Rahman Lomax who was banned from Wikipedia filed a lawsuit against the Wikimedia Foundation, seeking $200,000 in damages.<ref>https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.mad.207020/gov.uscourts.mad.207020.1.0.pdf</ref>

==References==
<references/>

[[Category:Liberal Organizations]]
[[Category:Wikimedia Foundation]]

Wikimedia Foundation

2021-07-23T06:58:23Z

Dave Wilcox: copy-edit

'''Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.''' (WMF) is a not-for-profit Florida corporation with its principal place of business in [[San Francisco, California]]. It was founded by [[Jimmy Wales]], who has a permanent position on the Board of Directors. It operates several online collaborative wiki projects, including [[Wikipedia]], [[Wiktionary]], [[Wikiquote]], [[Wikibooks]], [[Wikisource]], [[Wikimedia Commons]], [[Wikispecies]], [[Wikinews]], [[Wikiversity]], Wikimedia Incubator, Meta-Wiki, [[Wikidata]], [[Wikivoyage]], and owns the now-defunct Nupedia online encyclopedia. Its Executive Director is Katherine Maher. In essence, an operator of a phonographic Web site, set up a non-profit foundation to which to transfer his crowd-sourced project, only to end up with the Chairman of its Board of Directors being a lesbian secretly married to a woman who misused her Foundation connections to openly harass male volunteers that attempted to maintain quality control on her articles. The WMF Board then turned its back on the army of long-time volunteers to reinvent their projects to promote subjective individual personal opinions rather than objective truth to create "epistemic justice". Meanwhile, it is using its donations to sue the National Security Agency (NSA) over government efforts to fight terrorism.

The foundation's headquarters address is 1 Montgomery Street, Suite 1600, San Francisco, CA 94104, Phone:(415) 839-6885. Supposed business hours are 9 a.m.–5 p.m. PST.<ref>https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Contact_us</ref> However, the WMF shifted to remote operations and half-time work at full-time pay in response to the COVID-19 pandemic.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://wikimediafoundation.org/news/2020/03/06/wikimedia-foundation-will-close-san-francisco-office-and-encourage-remote-work-for-march-2020-amidst-covid-19-concerns/|title=Amid COVID-19, Wikimedia Foundation offers full pay for reduced hours, mobilizes all staff to work remote, and waives sick time|date=March 6, 2020|accessdate=Sept. 20, 2020}}</ref>

For the fiscal year ending 2017-06-30, the Executive Director's salary was $307,141.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=search.summary&orgid=11212|title=Wikimedia Foundation|accessdate=June 24, 2019}}</ref>

==History==
The creation of the foundation was officially announced on June 20, 2003, by the [[atheism|atheist]] and Wikipedia co-founder [[Jimmy Wales]],<ref name="Rupert Neate">{{cite news | first = Rupert | last = Neate | title = Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales goes bananas | url = https://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/mediatechnologyandtelecoms/3399843/Wikipedia-founder-Jimmy-Wales-goes-bananas.html |work=The Daily Telegraph | date= October 7, 2008 | accessdate =October 25, 2009 | quote = The encyclopedia's huge fan base became such a drain on Bomis's resources that Mr Wales, and co-founder Larry Sanger, thought of a radical new funding model – charity.}}</ref> who had been operating Wikipedia within his pornographic company [[Bomis]].<ref>{{cite web | url = http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikipedia-l/2003-June/010743.html | title = Wikipedia English mailing list message | date = June 20, 2003 | first = Jimmy | last = Wales | authorlink = Jimmy Wales}}</ref> At the time, Wikipedia was operating out of Bomis' offices in St. Petersburg, Florida.

The name "Wikimedia" was [[neologism|coined]] by American author [[Sheldon Rampton]] in a post to the English mailing list in March 2003.<ref>{{cite web | url = http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2003-March/001887.html | title = Wikipedia English mailing list message | date = March 16, 2003 | first = Sheldon | last = Rampton | authorlink = Sheldon Rampton }}</ref>
At the start, Wales transferred ownership of all Wikipedia, Wiktionary and [[Nupedia]] [[domain name]]s to Wikimedia along with the copyrights for all materials related to these projects that were created by [[Bomis]] employees or Wales himself. The computer equipment used to run all the Wikimedia projects was also donated by Wales to the foundation, which also acquired the domain names "wikimedia.org" and "wikimediafoundation.org".

In April 2005, the US [[Internal Revenue Service]] determined that the foundation was an educational foundation in the category "[[Adult education|Adult]], [[Continuing education|Continuing Education]]", making all contributions to the foundation [[Tax deduction|tax-deductible]] for U.S. federal income tax purposes.

On September 25, 2007, the foundation's board decided to move to the [[San Francisco Bay Area]]. The Board said its major reasons for choosing San Francisco were proximity to like-minded organizations and potential partners as well as cheaper and more convenient international travel than is available from St. Petersburg, Florida.<ref name="MoncadaWikimoveTribune">{{cite web | url = http://www2.tbo.com/content/2007/sep/25/wikimedia-foundation-moving-another-bay-area/?news-breaking | title= Wikimedia Foundation Moving To Another Bay Area | author = Carlos Moncada | work = [[The Tampa Tribune]] |date = September 25, 2007 | quote = }}</ref><ref name="MullinsWikimoveTribune">{{cite web | url= http://www.tbo.com/news/money/MGBNF5F517F.html | title = Online Encyclopedia To Leave St. Petersburg For San Francisco | author = Richard Mullins | work = The Tampa Tribune |date = September 26, 2007 | quote = }}</ref><ref name="KimWikimoveSFChronicle">{{cite web | url= https://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/10/10/BU69SNMQ2.DTL&tsp=1 | title = Wikipedia team plans move to San Francisco | first = Ryan | last = Kim |work=San Francisco Chronicle | date = October 10, 2007 | quote = }}</ref>

The Wikimedia Foundation Board met in 2016 in a small town in Italy to discuss transparency and communication. The Foundation funded all Board members' travel to Italy.

==Wikia==
{{Main|Wikia}} 
In January 2004, [[Jimmy Wales]] appointed his business partners [[Tim Shell]] and Michael E. Davis to the foundation's board. In June 2004, an election was held for two user representative board members. Following one month of campaigning and two weeks of online voting, [[Angela Beesley Starling|Angela Beesley]] and [[Florence Devouard|Florence Nibart-Devouard]] were elected to join the board. In late 2004, Wales and Beesley launched a startup company, [[Wikia]], affiliated with neither Wikimedia nor Bomis, except for their presence as principals/trustees. In July 2005, Beesley and Nibart-Devouard were re-elected to the board. On July 1, 2006, Beesley resigned from the board effective upon election of her successor, expressing concern about "certain events and tendencies that have arisen within the organization since the start of this year," but stating her intent to continue to participate in the Wikimedia projects, and in the formation of an Australian chapter. A special election was held in September to finish Beesley's term, ending with the mid-2007 election. [[Erik Möller]] won the election. Möller was subsequently hired as Deputy Executive Director of the WMF. On December 8, 2006, the board expanded to seven people with the appointments of Kat Walsh and [[Oscar van Dillen]]. Walsh was elected Chair of the board in July 2012. Walsh was not re-elected to the WMF Board in 2013.

Wales and Beesley continued to develop Wikia as a for-profit alternative to the WMF projects, and some critics allege that by deleting very specialized articles and content from Wikipedia, a core team was pushing people to develop specialized wikis on Wikia. When Wikipedia community voted 61-39% percent to treat all links to other sites equally by removing nofollow (Google-ignored) tags for all of them, the Wikipedia co-founder overruled this decision and Wikipedia now favors Wikia in its treatment of nofollow tags.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.techcrunch.com/2007/04/28/wikipedia-special-treatment-for-wikia-and-other-wikis/|title=Wikipedia: Special Treatment for Wikia and some other Wikis|author=Nik Cubrilovic|date=April 28, 2007|accessdate=July 22, 2012}}</ref><ref>http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2007-January/061137.html</ref> Michael E. Davis, a former business partner of Wales who served for years as a founding member of the WMF board and was MWF's Treasurer, was named Treasurer and Secretary of Wikia in January 2006. In January 2009, Wikia subleased two conference rooms to the WMF.

Wales continues as a voting member of the WMF Board and serves as its spokesperson.

In August 2009, Matt Halprin, Partner of the Omidyar Network, was asked to join the Wikimedia Foundation board of trustees. Halprin was responsible for an Omidyar team that “pursues investments in Social Media”, and Omidyar invested part of $4 million into Wikia, Inc. in 2006. So, his company would succeed if Wikia made a nice return on investment, yet of all of the available competent Silcon Valley experts, the WMF selected Halprin to serve on the Board that is entrusted to ensure that the WMF treats Wikia on an arms-length basis.

In 2006, Wikia received a major round of venture capital funding from Amazon.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.bizjournals.com/seattle/stories/2006/12/04/daily16.html?jst=b_ln_hl|title=Amazon invests in Wikia|work=Puget Sound Business Journal|date=December 6, 2006|accessdate=February 4, 2013}}</ref> Although a large number of payment processors are available, as of 2013, the WMF uses Amazon to process donation payments.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Village_pump_%28policy%29&diff=526220744&oldid=526213000#Wikipedia_is_now_enriching_itself_by_contributing_to_the_destruction_of_small_businesses|title=Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)|date=December 3, 2012|accessdate=February 4, 2013}}</ref>

Wikia created the "Speedy Deletion Wikia" in which a robot harvested the Wikipedia articles that were deleted on an expedited basis and then reposted them on Wikia. These included copyrighted material and pornographic images that were deleted because of their objectionable nature.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jimbo_Wales&diff=498803845&oldid=498803787|title=User Talk:Jimbo Wales|accessdate=January 13, 2017}}</ref>

==Controversies==

===Patrick administration===
WMF announced on 2006-06-19 that it had hired attorney Bradford Patrick as internal counsel acted as interim Executive Director.<ref>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2006-06-19/Brad_Patrick</ref>

In early 2007, a prominent Wikipedia editor, named only "Essjay" online and described on his user profile "as a tenured professor of religion at a private university with expertise in canon law," was exposed as a 24-year-old college kid in Kentucky. He resigned in disgrace — even though Wikipedia tried to retain him, claiming he'd edited thousands of articles with flair.<ref>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Essjay_controversy</ref>

===Gardner administration===

====Doran scandal====
In January 2007, WMF named Carolyn Doran chief operating officer and Sandy Ordonez joined as [http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Head_of_Communications head of communications].<ref>{{cite web | title = Current staff | publisher = Wikimedia Foundation | url = https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Current_staff | accessdate =February 1, 2007 | author = Danny | authorlink = foundation:User:Danny | archiveurl = https://wikimediafoundation.org/w/index.php?title=Current_staff&oldid=19370 | archivedate = February 1, 2007 }}</ref> Doran began working at WMF as a part-time bookkeeper in 2006 after being sent by a [[Temporary work|temporary agency]]. Doran later left the foundation in July 2007, and [[Sue Gardner]] was hired as consultant and special advisor (later becoming the Chief Executive Officer). It was later disclosed<ref>{{cite news | first = Cade | last = Metz | title = Wikipedia COO was convicted felon | url = http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/12/13/wikimedia_coo_convicted_felon/ | date = December 13, 2007 | accessdate =December 27, 2007 }}</ref> that Doran was a convicted [[felony|felon]], with a [[DUI]] arrest during her tenure at the foundation and a substantial criminal history, including shooting her boyfriend and complicity in credit card forgery.<ref>{{cite news |authorlink=Brian Bergstein | first = Brian | last = Bergstein | title = Felon Became COO of Wikipedia Foundation | url = http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hcWLu3fg-aDeJNfWTY6hlbz93oCwD8TM0HVG0 | date = December 21, 2007 | accessdate =December 27, 2007 }}</ref> Her departure from the organization was cited as one of the reasons the foundation took about seven months to release its fiscal 2007 financial audit.<ref>{{cite news | author = Ral315 | title = ''Signpost'' interview: Florence Devouard | url = https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2007-11-19/Anthere_interview | work = The Wikipedia Signpost | date = November 19, 2007 }}</ref>

====2014 Staffing controversies====
One of the growing pains that organizations experience is that paid staff can be hired and perhaps perform their job duties well, but their off-duty conduct brings discredit to their employer. This is particularly challenging for the WMF, who hired staff from the pool of Wikipedia volunteers, with many staff continuing to edit Wikipedia outside their regular WMF job duties.

In January 2014, Sarah Stierch was discovered to have written Wikipedia articles for hire while being a full-time WMF employee. The WMF promptly announced her departure as an employee without any official explanation.<ref>http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2014-January/129466.html</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2014-01-08/News_and_notes|work=Wikimedia Signpost|date=January 8, 2014|title=WMF employee forced out over "paid advocacy editing"|accessdate=March 12, 2014}}</ref>

In March 2014, Ryan Kaldari, who has been working for the WMF for almost four years and is a Wikipedia administrator, got into an editing battle with another editor. Kaldari then made complaining comments about that editor under a second assumed name. For that policy violation, Kaldari lost his administrator privileges. However, the dispute caused Wikipedia users to research Kaldari's background and discovered that for years he has been the owner and operator of several other websites including "Snuffster.com", which was intended as a parody of Friendster, but soon became a haven for Internet trolls to mock murdered children. Kaldari has been paying for the site for 10 years and has actively added comments to various threads on the site.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.examiner.com/article/wikimedia-foundation-employee-caught-sockpuppeting-and-loses-admin-rights|first=Gregory|last=Kohs|title=Wikimedia Foundation employee caught sockpuppeting and loses admin rights |date=March 8, 204|accessdate=March 12, 2014}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.dailydot.com/news/wikipedia-sockpuppet-ryan-kaldari/|title=Wikipedia staffer at center of latest sockpuppet scandal|first=Rob|last=Price|work=Daily Dot|date= March 12, 2014|accessdate=March 16, 2014}}</ref> Kaldari's poor judgment in owning and operating this site was called to the attention of Jimbo Wales, who dismissed it out of hand.<ref>https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jimbo_Wales&oldid=599304349</ref>

===Tretikov Administration===
In March 2013, Executive Director Sue Gardner announced that she would leave,<ref name=bizinsider/><ref>http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Press_releases/The_search_for_our_next_Executive_Director Retrieved June 16, 2014.</ref> and an extensive search did not produce a satisfactory candidate. After a second search, Russian-born Lila Tretikov was selected as Gardner's replacement, and she took office on June 2, 2014. The WMF appointed a transition team to assist her in learning her new role, and there was a three-week transition period following the announcement of her selection. At the time, Tretikov was dating PHP programmer Will Sinclair. Both Tretikov and Sinclair attempted to become immersed in Wikipedia culture, and Sinclair quickly found his way to the noted criticism website [[Wikipediocracy]], where he registered an account. On May 30-June 1, 2014, the WMF sponsored a conference called "WikiConference USA" at the [[New York Law School]] which welcomed everyone to attend including "the curious, the skeptical, and others wishing to engage in meaningful conversation about the Wikimedia movement in the United States."<ref>http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e1/WikiCon_USA_2014_Press_Release_v1.pdf Retrieved June 16, 2014</ref> However, the afternoon before the conference began, Greg Kohs who had proposed to give a presentation on "paid editing" had his registration cancelled and was told not to attend.<ref>http://wikipediocracy.com/2014/06/02/wikiconference-usa-bans-critic-from-open-meeting/ Retrieved June 16, 2014</ref> Sinclair defended Kohs' right to attend and started a [http://wllm.com/ blog] and an [http://www.change.org/petitions/wikipedia-make-wikipedia-conferences-truly-open-to-all-by-allowing-greg-kohs-to-attend online petition] to advocate these views. He also expressed his views on a WMF listserv. In response, the WMF insiders turned vicious and openly suggested that Tretikov should break up their family and leave Sinclair because of his support for Kohs.<ref>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jimbo#Regarding_the_nauseating_and_cowardly_remarks_made_by_Wikiconference_USA_attendees</ref> On June 15, Sinclair announced on Mr. Wales talk page that he would no longer participate on Wikipediocracy.<ref>https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jimbo_Wales&diff=612984072&oldid=612983354 June 15, 2014.</ref> Efforts to get Mr. Wales to clarify why Kohs was banned from the conference were met with censorship.<ref>https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jimbo_Wales&diff=613156950&oldid=613156824 June 16, 2014.</ref>

Sinclair later in 2014 started his own "Off-Wiki" Wikipedia criticism site.

As Executive Director, Tretikov gave speeches and participated in meetings and conferences around the world. Her travels may have made her less accessible to the WMF staff. One important initiative that Tretikov started was improving the WMF's efforts in child protection. Previously, the WMF left the decision to take disciplinary action against users to untrained volunteers on individual projects. The project leaders complained that they were not properly trained to handle allegations that a user was a child predator. Under Tretikov, the WMF legal staff began handling such complaints and banned a number of users from all WMF projects.

In 2015, the WMF Board and Tretikov reorganized the "Advancement" fundraising staff and secretly entered into an agreement with the [[Tides Foundation]] to establish a separate endowment fund. The Tides Foundation was established by liberal [[George Soros]]. Under the arrangement, the Tides Foundation will invest and control the endowment until it reaches its goal of $100 million at which time the WMF and Tides will agree on how to handle the money in the future. The WMF has hired staff to solicit and process gifts for the endowment, and the endowment was publicly launched on January 15, 2016.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://15.wikipedia.org/endowment.html|title=Wikimedia Endowment|accessdate=Feb. 26, 2016}}</ref> Many people have questioned how the WMF could embark on a $100 million endowment fund drive just a few weeks after a banner ad campaign on its website begging for money to keep its servers running.

In 2015, Tretikov reorganized the staff and launched a secret project to develop a "Knowledge Engine" (KE) which some planning documents said would compete with [[Google]] as a means of searching sources beyond the WMF projects by automating the process of evaluating what information on the Internet was reliable.<ref>[https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/02/head-of-wikimedia-foundation-resigns-as-tensions-with-editors-mount/ Wikimedia Foundation director resigns after uproar over “Knowledge Engine”], ''Ars Technica''.</ref> Tretikov applied for a grant of $2 million per year over three years from the Knight Foundation, but only received a one-time $250,000 grant to explore the concept. In November 2015, the WMF Board reaffirmed its support of Tretikov's leadership and retained a management consultant to mentor her. In addition, a number of senior WMF staff (including Deputy Director Erik Möller) departed, some making critical public remarks as they left.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://wikipediocracy.com/2016/02/26/unicorns-are-a-myth-lila-tretikov-resigns-as-wikimedia-foundation-executive-director/#comment-44801|title=Unicorns are a Myth: Lila Tretikov resigns as Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director|date=Feb. 26, 2016|accessdate=Feb. 26, 2016}}</ref> It is easy to imagine KE to evolve into an attempt to provide the equivalent of a FICO score for every domain name, perhaps every known person on Earth, that third-party software would likely utilities to influence how second-rate search engines would rank information. Wales frequently uses software features at his web sites to discredit or silence the communications anyone he disapproves of. Wales had previously welcomed the idea of having a biography for every person on Earth but the "deletionist" element of his "community" (who simply lust after the destroying of information about low-fame entities) rejected the notion.

[[File:James Heilman.png|thumb|left|200px|James Heilman, M.D. was removed from the Board]] In July 2015, James Heilman, MD was elected to the WMF Board by the editing community after starting working at WP in 2008 and being a very active ("many hours a day") and highly qualified non-anonymous editor and later administrator. He made many mass media presentations promoting the project and worked to improve its reliability especially for those seeking medical information. He attempted to recruit other physicians to help in the effort. Heilman brought staff dissatisfaction with Tretikov's leadership to the Board and pressed for more information on the Knowledge Engine and the Knight Foundation grant. On December 28, 2015, on the eve of two members leaving the Board, the Board held an emergency meeting and removed Heilman from the WMF Board by a vote of 8 to 2. The Board released a statement that Heilman "lacked the confidence" of his fellow trustees. The Community responded to his dismissal by pressing for the release of the Knowledge Engine grant application resulting in a public apology from Tretikov for pushing the project without first gaining consensus. Heilman continues to spend many hours a day contributing to WP as an editor and an admin and continues to make media appearances promoting the WP project.<ref>http://thewikipedian.net/tag/james-heilman/</ref><ref>https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2016/11/08/501087493/should-i-trust-wikipedia-with-my-health</ref>

The WMF Board appointed two new people to fill outside Board slots effective January 1, one of which was a Google executive, Arnnon Geshuri who was a central figure in an antitrust case. Community outrage over this improperly vetted appointment resulted in his resignation from the WMF Board.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/01/editors-demand-ouster-of-wikimedia-board-member-involved-in-no-poach-deal/|title= Law & Disorder / Civilization & Discontents Wikipedia editors revolt, vote "no confidence" in newest board member|date=Jan. 25, 2016|accessdate=Feb. 25, 2016}}</ref> On February 25, 2016, Tretikov announced her resignation as the Wikimedia Foundation's Executive Director.<ref name=ltresign/> She continued until March 31.

===Maher Administration===
[[File:Katherine Maher.jpg|thumb|right|Katherine Maher, Executive Director]]
Katherine Maher was announced as the interim ED was announced and later it was announced that she was appointed permanently to the position.<ref name=ltresign>{{cite web|url=https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2016-February/082472.html|title=Executive transition planning|date=February 25, 2016|accessdate=February 25, 2016}}</ref>

The female Chair of the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Directors is married to Laura Hale. Ms. Hale has a long history, dating back to 2011 of incompetent edits and abusing male editors. A long-time male administrator, Fram, followed Ms. Hale around making corrections to her problematic edits. In turn, Ms. Hale complained to the Trust & Security staff of the Wikimedia Foundation, rather than to the volunteer-staffed complaint mechanisms on Wikipedia. Although the Trust & Security staff has previously banned a few editors for problems involving illegal conduct such as pedophilia, in June 2019, for the first time, they suspended Fram for one year for "incivility". In response, an English Wikipedia administrator lifted the block and was in turn stripped of his administratorship, and several other administrators resigned in protest.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Community_response_to_the_Wikimedia_Foundation%27s_ban_of_Fram|title=Wikipedia:Community response to the Wikimedia Foundation's ban of Fram|accessdate=June 24, 2019}}</ref> In response to a Buzzfeed article about the controversy,<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/josephbernstein/wikipedia-ban-editor-culture-war|title=The Culture War Has Finally Come For Wikipedia|date=July 27, 2019|accessdate=July 28, 2019|work=Buzzfeed News}}</ref> Maher sent a tweet calling the article "s***ty.".<ref>{{cite web|url=https://twitter.com/krmaher/status/1144394019893460993|title=tweet|accessdate=June 28, 2019}}</ref> As more Wikipedia Administrators and Bureaucrats resign or go on strike, the crisis has also been reported by Breitbart.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2019/06/28/wikipedia-editors-revolt-over-sites-ban-of-veteran-administrator/|title=Wikipedia Editors Revolt over Site’s Ban of Veteran Administrator|date=July 28, 2019|work=Breitbart|accessdate=July 28, 2019}}</ref> Despite the Fram-Laura Hale scandal, on August 15, 2019, the WMF Board re-elected Laura Hale's wife to serve another year as Board chair.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://wikimediafoundation.org/news/2019/08/16/wikimedia-foundation-announces-shani-evenstein-sigalov-as-new-trustee-as-well-as-leadership-appointments-at-fifteenth-annual-wikimania/
|title=Wikimedia Foundation announces Shani Evenstein Sigalov as new Trustee, as well as leadership appointments at fifteenth annual Wikimania|date=August 16, 2019|accessdate=August 17, 2019}}</ref>

There is a fundamental rift at Wikipedia. On the one hand, editors from the global north advocate that knowledge is produced by the scientific method, and that Wikipedia should only document verifiable facts. On the other hand, editors from the global south believe that Western civilization is the product of old or dead white men and that Wikipedia should give voice to suppressed people who have personal experiences that may not meet the accepted standards currently imposed by the traditional views of knowledge. These people advocate a "post-modernist" definition of knowledge, including folk remedies supplanting Western medicine and counteracting the historic bias that views males as holding key roles in history, when they serve as military or political leaders. This later group views the current governing structure and resource allocation of the Foundation as illegitimate and wants to rebuild both Wikipedia and the Foundation into something very different so that when internet access spreads throughout the world by 2030, people in the global south will be involved with Wikipedia instead of some other website that might become established to serve their own communities.

To assure that all views were heard, the WMF devoted millions of dollars on a strategic planning exercise that held workshops in the global south and provided very few opportunities for input from editors in Europe or the United States. The result was a large set of self-contradictory recommendations. Next, the WMF hosted a "harmonization sprint" in Tunis which was attended by Laura Hale's wife and Maher to try to unify the recommendations. Finally, a writing group was appointed to write a self-consistent set of recommendations, for which public comment will be collected in January-February 2020.

Although a large number of non-profit groups issued virtue signaling statements following the death of George Floyd, Maher (speaking for the WMF) used the opportunity to announce a complete surrender to the faction that refocused the mission on knowledge equity and also announced that WMF websites would abandon their unbiased coverage of race relations.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://wikimediafoundation.org/news/2020/06/03/we-stand-for-racial-justice/|title=We stand for racial justice.|date=June 3, 2020|accessdate=Sept. 17. 2020}}</ref> Maher described as a goal:
{{cquote|Our content: Building power, relationships, and resources to advance epistemic justice and redress the exclusion and omission of Black, indigenous, and communities of color within knowledge systems in general and the Wikimedia projects specifically.}}

==Site shut downs==
As a section 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organization, the foundation must not be "carrying on propaganda, or otherwise attempting, to influence legislation (except as otherwise provided in subsection (h)), and which does not participate in, or intervene in (including the publishing or distributing of statements), any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for public office."<ref>{{USC|26|501(c)(3)}}.</ref> However, WMF has repeatedly used shutting down its website or threatening to shut down its website as a tactic to pressure specific legislative outcomes.

On October 4, 2011, the WMF servers were reprogrammed to hide the contents of the [[Italian Wikipedia|Italian language version of Wikipedia]], as a protest against paragraph 29 of the "''[[DDL intercettazioni]]''" (Wiretapping Bill).<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.camera.it/_dati/leg16/lavori/stampati/pdf/16PDL0038530.pdf |title=Camera dei Deputati: disegno di legge N. 1415-B |language=Italian |date=11 June 2010 |accessdate=September 18, 2012 |publisher=Camera dei Deputati}} ([http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=it&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.camera.it%2F_dati%2Fleg16%2Flavori%2Fstampati%2Fpdf%2F16PDL0038530.pdf English translation])</ref> The proposed bill would empower anyone who believes themselves to have been attacked by the content of a web site to enforce publication of a reply, uneditable and uncommented, on the same web site, within 48 hours and without any prior evaluation of the claim by a judge or to face a €12,000 fine.

On October 4 through 6, 2011, the WMF redirected all pages on the Italian language version of Wikipedia redirected to a statement opposing the proposed legislation.<ref>[https://www.businessinsider.com/italy-wikipedia-wiretapping-2011-10 "Wikipedia Shuts Down Italian Site In Response To Berlusconi's New Wiretap Act"], Adam Taylor, ''Business Insider'', 4 October 2011</ref> This was true for all users, not just those IP addresses based in Italy. On October 7, the Italian Wikipedia pages were again available, but a notice about the proposed legislation was still displayed at the top of pages.

The success of the Italian shut down whetted the appetite of people seeking to influence legislation in the United States. In December 2011, Wikipedia co-founder [[Jimmy Wales]] discussed a possible coordinated blackout by Wikipedia and other United States websites to protest anti-piracy two bills pending before the United States Congress: [[SOPA]] and [[PIPA]]. After committing the WMF to join a larger boycott, Wales initiated discussion with editors about his plan. Editors and others<ref>Charlie Osborne, [https://www.zdnet.com/blog/igeneration/would-a-wikipedia-blackout-be-such-a-bad-thing/13726 "Would a Wikipedia blackout be such a bad thing?"], ''iGeneration'' on [[ZDNet]], December 13, 2011, 11:04 am PST. Retrieved September 18, 2012.</ref> debated the alternatives of completely interrupting service for one or more days, or alternatively presenting site visitors with a blanked page directing them to further information before permitting them to complete searches.<ref>{{cite news |url= https://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/jimmy-wales/8953273/Wikipedia-co-founder-threatens-blackout-over-anti-piracy-law.html |title=Wikipedia co-founder threatens blackout over anti-piracy law |work=The Telegraph |date=December 13, 2011 |author=Christopher Williams |accessdate=September 18, 2012 |location=London}}</ref><ref name="itnews wikipedia mulls blackout">{{cite news |url=http://www.itnews.com.au/News/284285,wikipedia-mulls-blackout-to-protest-sopa.aspx |title=Wikipedia mulls blackout to protest SOPA |publisher=itnews |date=December 13, 2011 |accessdate=September 18, 2012 |author=Brett Winterford |quote=Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales has threatened a knowledge "blackout" of the online encyclopedia to protest a US anti-piracy bill that could have serious ramifications for online service providers.}}</ref> On January 16, the Wikimedia Foundation announced that the English-language Wikipedia would be blacked out for 24 hours on January 18.<ref>{{cite news |title=Wikipedia to go dark in piracy protest |date=January 17, 2012 |work=[[Australian Broadcasting Corporation]] |url=http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-01-17/wiki-to-go-dark-in-piracy-protest/3778452 |accessdate=September 18, 2012}}</ref> The Simple English Wikipedia voted to continue full service and did not join the blackout.<ref>https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Simple_talk/Archive_97#Potential_black-out_of_Simple_English_Wikipedia_in_the_US</ref> Many editors complained that the blackout decision was not made in a democratic fashion and undercut Wikipedia's objectivity and non-political mission.<ref>{{cite news | url = https://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/wikipedia-editors-question-sites-planned-blackout-15381673 | title = Wikipedia Editors Question Site's Planned Blackout | first = Peter | last = Svensson | date = January 17, 2012 | accessdate = September 18, 2012| agency = Associated Press }}</ref>

The SOPA/PIPA issue is so important to Sue Gardner, the WMF Executive Director, that in March 2013, she announced that she will be leaving her position to pursue the issue in another capacity.<ref name=bizinsider>{{cite news|url=https://www.businessinsider.com/wikimedia-foundations-sue-gardner-leaving-2013-3|work=Business Insider|date= March 28, 2013|title=The Woman Who Made Wikipedia Huge Is Stepping Down|accessdate=Arpril 27, 2013}}</ref> She left on June 1, 2014.

==Finances==
WMF's fundraising and expenses have grown at a very rapid rate. Some critics claim that WMF is taking in money faster than it can spend wisely.<ref>http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikimedia_Forum&oldid=4864408</ref>
{| class="wikitable sortable"
|+ Wikimedia financial data through June 2016 (financial years run from July 1 to June 30)
|-
! style="text-align: left; vertical-align: top" | Fiscal year
! style="text-align: right; vertical-align: top" | Revenue
! style="text-align: right; vertical-align: top" | Year-over-year ratio (revenue)
! style="text-align: right; vertical-align: top" | Expenses
! style="text-align: right; vertical-align: top" | Year-over-year ratio (expenses)
! style="text-align: right; vertical-align: top" | Net assets
! style="text-align: right; vertical-align: top" | Year-over-year ratio (net assets)
|-
| 2003–2004<ref name=2004-2006>{{cite web|url=//upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/foundation/2/28/Wikimedia_2006_fs.pdf |title=Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. Financial Statements June 30, 2006, 2005 and 2004 |publisher=Wikimedia Foundation|accessdate=November 26, 2012|format=PDF}}</ref>
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="80129" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 12%" | {{steady}} || style="text-align: right; width: 88%" | $80,129
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="0" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 58%" | {{steady}} || style="text-align: center; width: 42%" | N/A
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="23463" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 5%" | {{steady}} || style="text-align: right; width: 95%" | $23,463
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="0" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 58%" | {{steady}} || style="text-align: center; width: 42%" | N/A
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="56666" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 5%" | {{steady}} || style="text-align: right; width: 95%" | $56,666
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="0" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 58%" | {{steady}} || style="text-align: center; width: 42%" | N/A
|}
|-
| 2004–2005<ref name=2004-2006 />
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="379088" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 12%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 88%" | $379,088
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="373.10" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 58%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 42%" | 373.1%
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="177670" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 5%" | {{increaseNegative}} || style="text-align: right; width: 95%" | $177,670
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="657.2" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 58%" | {{increaseNegative}} || style="text-align: right; width: 42%" | 657.2%
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="268084" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 5%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 95%" | $268,084
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="373.09" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 58%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 42%" | 373.1%
|}
|-
| 2005–2006<ref name=2004-2006 />
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="1508039" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 12%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 88%" | $1,508,039
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="297.81" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 58%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 42%" | 297.8%
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="791907" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 5%" | {{increaseNegative}} || style="text-align: right; width: 95%" | $791,907
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="345.72" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 58%" | {{increaseNegative}} || style="text-align: right; width: 42%" | 345.7%
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="1004216" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 5%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 95%" | $1,004,216
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="274.59" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 58%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 42%" | 274.6%
|}
|-
| 2006–2007<ref>{{cite web|url=http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/foundation/4/49/Wikimedia_2007_fs.pdf |title=Microsoft Word – {F0900CC7-D37E-4CDF-95E3-B1F38D7DCD03}.doc |format=PDF |date= |accessdate=November 26, 2012}}</ref>
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="2734909" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 12%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 88%" | $2,734,909
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="81.4" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 58%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 42%" | 81.4%
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="2077843" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 5%" | {{increaseNegative}} || style="text-align: right; width: 95%" | $2,077,843
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="162.38" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 58%" | {{increaseNegative}} || style="text-align: right; width: 42%" | 162.4%
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="1658282" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 5%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 95%" | $1,658,282
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="65.13" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 58%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 42%" | 65.1%
|}
|-
| 2007–2008<ref>{{cite web|url=http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/foundation/4/4c/Wikimedia_20072008_fs.pdf |title=Microsoft Word – 31935 SFO Wikimedia fs.doc |format=PDF |date= |accessdate=November 26, 2012}}</ref>
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="5032981" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 12%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 88%" | $5,032,981
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="84.0" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 58%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 42%" | 84.0%
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="3540724" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 5%" | {{increaseNegative}} || style="text-align: right; width: 95%" | $3,540,724
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="70.40" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 58%" | {{increaseNegative}} || style="text-align: right; width: 42%" | 70.4%
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="5178168" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 5%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 95%" | $5,178,168
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="212.26" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 58%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 42%" | 212.3%
|}
|-
| 2008–2009<ref>{{cite web|url=http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/foundation/4/4f/FINAL_08_09From_KPMG.pdf |title=Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. Financial Statements June 30, 2009 and 2008 |publisher=Wikimedia Foundation|accessdate=November 26, 2012|format=PDF}}</ref>
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="8658006" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 12%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 88%" | $8,658,006
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="72.0" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 58%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 42%" | 72.0%
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="5617236" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 5%" | {{increaseNegative}} || style="text-align: right; width: 95%" | $5,617,236
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="58.65" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 58%" | {{increaseNegative}} || style="text-align: right; width: 42%" | 58.6%
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="8231767" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 5%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 95%" | $8,231,767
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="58.97" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 58%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 42%" | 59.0%
|}
|-
| 2009–2010<ref>{{cite web|url=http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/foundation/c/cc/FINAL_09_10From_KPMG.pdf |title=Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. Financial Statements June 30, 2010 and 2009 |publisher=Wikimedia Foundation|accessdate=November 26, 2012|format=PDF}}</ref>
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="17979312" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 12%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 88%" | $17,979,312
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="107.7" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 58%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 42%" | 107.7%
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="10266793" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 5%" | {{increaseNegative}} || style="text-align: right; width: 95%" | $10,266,793
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="82.77" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 58%" | {{increaseNegative}} || style="text-align: right; width: 42%" | 82.8%
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="14542731" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 5%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 95%" | $14,542,731
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="76.67" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 58%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 42%" | 76.7%
|}
|-
| 2010–2011<ref>{{cite web|url=http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/foundation/a/ac/FINAL_10_11From_KPMG.pdf |title=Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. Financial Statements June, 2011 and 2010 |publisher=Wikimedia Foundation| format=PDF|accessdate=2015-10-25}}</ref>
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="24785092" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 12%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 88%" | $24,785,092
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="37.8" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 58%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 42%" | 37.8%
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="17889794" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 5%" | {{increaseNegative}} || style="text-align: right; width: 95%" | $17,889,794
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="74.25" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 58%" | {{increaseNegative}} || style="text-align: right; width: 42%" | 74.2%
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="24192144" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 5%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 95%" | $24,192,144
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="66.35" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 58%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 42%" | 66.3%
|}
|-
| 2011–2012<ref name=2011-2012>{{cite web|url=http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/foundation/0/09/FINAL_11_12From_KPMG.pdf|title= Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. Financial Statements June, 2012 and 2011|publisher=Wikimedia Foundation|accessdate=December 26, 2012|format=PDF}}</ref>
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="38479665" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 12%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 88%" | $38,479,665
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="55.2" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 58%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 42%" | 55.2%
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="29260652" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 5%" | {{increaseNegative}} || style="text-align: right; width: 95%" | $29,260,652
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="63.56" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 58%" | {{increaseNegative}} || style="text-align: right; width: 42%" | 63.6%
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="34929058" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 5%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 95%" | $34,929,058
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="44.38" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 58%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 42%" | 44.4%
|}
|-
| 2012–2013<ref name=2012-2013>{{cite web|url=http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/foundation/6/6e/FINAL_12_13From_KPMG.pdf|title= Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. Financial Statements June, 2013 and 2012|publisher=Wikimedia Foundation|accessdate=December 14, 2013|format=PDF}}</ref>
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="48635408" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 12%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 88%" | $48,635,408
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="26.4" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 58%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 42%" | 26.4%
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="35704796" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 5%" | {{increaseNegative}} || style="text-align: right; width: 95%" | $35,704,796
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="22.02" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 58%" | {{increaseNegative}} || style="text-align: right; width: 42%" | 22.0%
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="45189124" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 5%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 95%" | $45,189,124
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="29.37" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 58%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 42%" | 29.4%
|}
|-
| 2013–2014<ref name=2014-2015 />
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="52465287" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 12%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 88%" | $52,465,287
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="8.6" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 58%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 42%" | 8.6%
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="45900745" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 5%" | {{increaseNegative}} || style="text-align: right; width: 95%" | $45,900,745
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="28.6" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 58%" | {{increaseNegative}} || style="text-align: right; width: 42%" | 28.6%
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="53475021" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 5%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 95%" | $53,475,021
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="18.3" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 58%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 42%" | 18.3%
|}
|-
| 2014–2015<ref name=2014-2015>{{cite web|url=https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/foundation/4/43/Wikimedia_Foundation_Audit_Report_-_FY15-16.pdf|title=Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. Financial Statements June, 2016 and 2015|publisher=Wikimedia Foundation|accessdate=November 15, 2016}}</ref>
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="74536375" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 12%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 88%" | $74,536,375
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="44.5" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 58%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 42%" | 44.5%
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="52596782" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 5%" | {{increaseNegative}} || style="text-align: right; width: 95%" | $52,596,782
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="14.6" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 58%" | {{increaseNegative}} || style="text-align: right; width: 42%" | 14.6%
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="77820298" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 5%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 95%" | $77,820,298
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="45.5" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 58%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 42%" | 45.5%
|}
|-
| 2015–2016<ref name=2015-2016>{{cite web|url=https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/foundation/4/43/Wikimedia_Foundation_Audit_Report_-_FY15-16.pdf|title=Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. Financial Statements June, 2016 and 2015|publisher=Wikimedia Foundation|accessdate=November 15, 2016}}</ref>
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="81862724" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 12%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 88%" | $81,862,724
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="9.8" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 58%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 42%" | 9.8%
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="65947465" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 5%" | {{increaseNegative}} || style="text-align: right; width: 95%" | $65,947,465
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="25.4" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 58%" | {{increaseNegative}} || style="text-align: right; width: 42%" | 25.4%
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="91782795" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 5%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 95%" | $91,782,795
|}
| style="text-align: right" data-sort-value="17.9" |
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%;"
| style="width: 58%" | {{increase}} || style="text-align: right; width: 42%" | 17.9%
|}
|}
If the WMF has $91 million in the bank, those funds could produce (at 4%) $3,640,000 in annual income, which is more than enough to fund the Wikipedia web servers in perpetuity. So, people are questioning the need for the WMF's annual fund raising campaign.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://wikipediocracy.com/2014/12/11/the-wikipedia-fundraising-banner-sad-but-untrue/|title=The Wikipedia Fundraising Banner: Sad but Untrue|date=December 11, 2014|accessdate=December 12, 2014}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.quora.com/What-are-some-good-arguments-against-donating-to-the-Wikimedia-Foundation/answer/Andreas-Kolbe|title=What are some good arguments against donating to the Wikimedia Foundation?|work=Quora|accessdate=December 15, 2014}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://newslines.org/blog/stop-giving-wikipedia-money/|title=Stop giving Wikipedia money|date=December 4, 2014|accessdate=December 15, 2014|work=Newslines}}</ref>

Each year the WMF conducts a fundraising drive to keep the webservers working on that popular liberal website. They claim the donations go to "Servers, bandwidth, maintenance, development."<ref>{{cite web|url=https://donate.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:FundraiserLandingPage&country=US&uselang=en&utm_medium=sidebar&utm_source=donate&utm_campaign=C13_en.wikipedia.org|title=Make Your Donation Now - Donate|accessdate=September 3, 2013}}</ref> Yet, in the period July - December 2012, the WMF took in $30.9 million but spent only $1.3 million on internet hosting.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/foundation/6/68/Jul-Dec%2712_Mid-year_financials2.pdf|title=Actual vs. Plan Comparison|work=Wikimedia Foundation|accessdate=September 3, 2013}}</ref> During 2012, the net worth of the WMF grew by $11 million. Yet, liberal Wikipedia users continue to donate in response to the WMF's urgent appeals.

In spring 2014, Jimmy Wales began to pander for [[bitcoin]] donations at websites where bitcoin investors were seeking ways to lend legitimacy to the digital currency. He promised to ask the WMF Board to allow bitcoin donations on the Wikipedia website. In the summer of 2014, the WMF made arrangements with Coinbase, who promised to convert bitcoin into dollars without charge. Thereafter, a bitcoin option was added to the WMF donation page.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://techcrunch.com/2014/07/30/wikipedia-now-accepts-bitc donations-with-coinbase/|publisher=techcrunch.com|title=Wikipedia Now Accepts Bitcoin Donations With Coinbase|date=July 30, 2014|accessdate=August 8, 2014}}</ref> Seth Meyers noted on his ''Late Night'' program, "Wikipedia is now accepting donations using the online currency Bitcoin. So now you can support information you're not sure is true with currency you're not sure is money."<ref>http://www.thespec.com/living-story/4733681-tuesdayfile/ Retrieved August 8, 2014</ref>

In addition to the WMF staff, the WMF awards grants and hires outside contractors. In the 2016 fiscal year, two law firms, Jones Day ($1,557,553) and Cooley LLP ($410,560), were among the largest payments. The WMF paid $436,104 to Minassian Media Inc. for public relations.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/foundation/4/44/Wikimedia_Foundation_2015_Form_990.pdf|title=2015-16 Form 990|accessdate=July 7, 2017}}</ref> Craig Minassian also serves as Chief Communications Officer of the [[Clinton Foundation]].

==Dispersed accountability==
A major factor in preventing accountability is that the fundraising conducted on the Wikipedia website links to a number of different solicitation pages depending on the nationality of the donor. Although the WMF collects the funds from donors located in the United States and other nations, fundraising in many countries is conducted by the country's own national chapter. The chapters then share the revenues with WMF. However, each chapter adopts its own spending practices and accountability standards.

The German chapter spends a portion of its funds on technology, but most of the other chapters focus on conferences, travel and other soft costs. Needless to say, with so much money being spent on non-technology / infrastructure items, the WMF and its chapters have drawn critics from within their own organization. However, internal dissent is quickly deleted.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Netball&diff=next&oldid=535697243|title=Talk:Netball|date=January 30, 2013}}</ref>

The WMF has two chapters in the United States: Wikimedia New York (which has a 501(c)(3) status from the IRS) and Wikimedia District of Columbia, whose 501(c)(3) exemption application was abandoned. The Treasurer of the UK WMF chapter suddenly resigned in 2013.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://blog.wikimedia.org.uk/2013/02/john-byrne-stands-down-as-the-treasurer-and-a-trustee-of-wikimedia-uk/|title=John Byrne Stands Down as the Treasurer and a Trustee of Wikimedia UK|date=February 3, 2013|accessdate=February 4, 2013}}</ref> Laura Hale, the outgoing vice president of Wikimedia Australia (who was an unsuccessful candidate for President in its 2012 election) applied for a travel grant with two of her friends to visit Colorado ski resorts in December 2012 and sought the funding retroactively.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/Proposal:Paralympic_Winter_Sports|title=Proposal:Paralympic Winter Sports|accessdate=February 4, 2013|work=Wikimedia Australia}}</ref>

The President of Wikimedia Australia has spend so much time traveling with the President of Wikimedia Indonesia that the two married.{{citation needed}}

A number of departing WMF employees have left comments on the Glassdoor website, citing problems with senior management creating a very confused work environment. The WMF suffers from a high staff turnover rate.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.glassdoor.com/Reviews/Wikimedia-Foundation-Reviews-E38331.htm|title=Wikimedia Foundation|accessdate=April 27, 2013}}</ref>

The WMF's endowment is held separately by the [[Tides Foundation]] and is controlled by their Board of Trustees. However, the agreement establishing the endowment between WMF and Tides provides for a separate "Wikimedia Endowment Advisory Board" to represent the Wikimedia communities interests when Tides makes decisions about the endowment. Instead of just having the WMF Board have a say in what will become the WMF's largest financial resource, a separate Board has been appointed with Jimmy Wales and Annette Campbell-White as its initial members.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://blog.wikimedia.org/2016/05/11/annette-campbell-white-endowment/|title=Annette Campbell-White named to the Wikimedia Endowment Advisory Board|date=May 11, 2016|accessdate=January 17, 2017}}</ref> In September, Peter Baldwin was added to the Advisory Board.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://blog.wikimedia.org/2016/09/09/peter-baldwin-endowment-board/|title=Peter Baldwin, professor and philanthropist, is appointed to the Wikimedia Endowment Advisory Board|quote=Endowment Board members are selected based on active involvement in philanthropic endeavors, prior nonprofit board experience, fundraising expertise, and a strong commitment to the Wikimedia Foundation’s mission.|accessdate=January 17, 2017}}</ref>

==Lawsuits==
In March 2015, the WMF and other groups filed a lawsuit against the [[National Security Agency]] (NSA) challenging an upstream surveillance program that was revealled by [[Edward Snowden]], a former NSA contractor. The District Court granted the NSA's motion to dismiss the lawsuit, but the WMF successfully appealed to the US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. That decision left the WMF as the only remaining plaintiff in the case, and the case continued in District Court on remand.<ref>{{cite news|last=Nelson|first=Steven|title=Appeals Court: Wikimedia Can Fight NSA's 'Not Speculative' Internet Surveillance|url=https://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2017-05-23/appeals-court-wikimedia-can-fight-nsas-not-speculative-internet-surveillance|accessdate=24 May 2017|work=U.S. World and News Report|date=May 23, 2017}}</ref> On December 16, 2019, the District Court held that the WMF did not have standing to proceed with its claims. On February 14, 2020, the Wikimedia Foundation filed a notice of appeal in the Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit.<ref>{{cite web|title=District Court rules for government in Wikimedia Foundation's mass surveillance case against the NSA |url=https://wikimediafoundation.org/news/2019/12/17/district-court-rules-for-government-in-wikimedia-foundations-mass-surveillance-case-against-the-nsa/ |publisher=Wikimedia Foundation |accessdate=September 20, 2020 |date=December 17, 2019}}</ref>

In 2019, cold fusion researcher Abd ul-Rahman Lomax who was banned from Wikipedia filed a lawsuit against the Wikimedia Foundation, seeking $200,000 in damages.<ref>https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.mad.207020/gov.uscourts.mad.207020.1.0.pdf</ref>

==References==
<references/>

[[Category:Liberal Organizations]]
[[Category:Wikimedia Foundation]]

Stefan Molyneux

2021-07-23T06:54:05Z

Dave Wilcox: copy-edit

'''Stefan Molyneux''' is a popular Canadian American [[anarcho-capitalist]] pundit, historian and commentator on [https://www.youtube.com/user/stefbot/about YouTube].<ref>328,094 subscribers and 79,247,060 views as of January 25, 2016. [https://www.youtube.com/user/stefbot/about YouTube]</ref>

Molyneux is liberal on some social issues. The legalization of all drugs, and [[same-sex marriage]]. He formerly supported abortion. He's also an [[atheism|atheist]] and he dislikes the fact that the [[atheist worldview]] tends to produce people who are [[leftism|left]] leaning when it comes to economics (See: [[Atheism and economics]] and [[Atheism and politics]]).<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vqQdc0mX1_c Why I Was Wrong About Atheism]</ref>
He said it makes him question whether or not atheism is true.<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vqQdc0mX1_c Why I Was Wrong About Atheism]</ref>

He earned a Masters in History from University of Toronto in 1993, a Bachelor of Arts in History from McGill University in 1991, studied two years of English Literature at York University in Toronto, and studied acting at the National Theatre School of Canada.<ref>[https://www.facebook.com/stefan.molyneux/about Facebook profile]. Accessed January 25, 2016.</ref>

According to his YouTube pages, [[Freedomain Radio]] videocast and [[podcast]] offers "topics range from philosophy to economics to art to how to achieve real [[freedom]] in the modern world. Passionate, articulate, funny and irreverent, Freedomain Radio shines a bold light on old topics - and invents a few new ones to boot! Freedomain Radio is the largest and most popular philosophy show on the web, with over 100 million downloads and is 100% funded by viewers".<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/user/stefbot/about YouTube]</ref>

According to [[IMDB]], "Prior to launching Freedomain Radio, Stefan built a thriving career as a software entrepreneur and executive. In 2006, he left his work in the tech industry to devote his efforts to Freedomain Radio. Now a self-identified full-time parent and philosopher, Stefan speaks regularly at [[liberty]]-themed events all over North and South America. His speeches cover subjects ranging from politics, philosophy, science, atheism and economics to relationships, parenting and how to achieve real freedom in your life. As the host of Freedomain Radio, Stefan has interviewed experts [[Noam Chomsky]], Dr. Nathaniel Branden, Dr. Warren Farrell, [[Peter Schiff]], Dr. Peter Boghossian, Dr. Mary J. Ruwart and many others."<ref>[https://www.imdb.com/name/nm1919879/bio?ref_=nm_ov_bio_sm Stefan Molyneux on IMDB]. Accessed January 25, 2016.</ref>

==Published Works==
* [https://freedomainradio.com/free/#humanownership The Handbook of Human Ownership]
* [https://freedomainradio.com/free/#atg Against the Gods?]
* [https://freedomainradio.com/free/#truth On Truth]
* [https://freedomainradio.com/free/#upb Universally Preferable Behaviour]
* [https://freedomainradio.com/free/#rtr Real-Time Relationships]
* [https://freedomainradio.com/free/#ea Everyday Anarchy]
* [https://freedomainradio.com/free/#pa Practical Anarchy]
* [https://freedomainradio.com/free/#hownot How (not) To Achieve Freedom]
* [https://freedomainradio.com/free/#tgoa The God of Atheists]
* [https://freedomainradio.com/free/#rev Revolutions]
* [https://freedomainradio.com/free/#origins The Origins of War in Child Abuse]

==Quotes==
* "The idea that the [[State]] is capable of solving social problems is now viewed with great skepticism, which foretells a coming change. As soon as [[skepticism]] is applied to the State, the State falls, since it fails at everything except increasing its power, and so can only survive on [[propaganda]], which relies on unquestioning faith."<ref>[https://www.imdb.com/name/nm1919879/bio?ref_=nmbio_ql_dyk_1#quotes Quotes from Stefan on IMDB.com]. Accessed January 25, 2016</ref>

==See also==
* [[Libertarianism]]
* [[Anarchism]], a form of which Molyneux sees as a goal

==Further reading==
* [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dnt36Hm8keI The Truth About the Nova Scotia Shooting]

==External links==
* [http://stefanmolyneux.com Official StefanMolyneux.com Personal Webpage]
* [http://freedomainradio.com Official FreeDomainRadio.com Blog]
* [http://www.fdrpodcasts.com Official Podcast]
* [http://freedomain.blogspot.com Blogspot.com]: "The Logic of Personal and Political Freedom with Stefan Molyneux: Powerful ideas for all lovers of personal and political freedom."
* [https://www.youtube.com/user/stefbot YouTube: Stefbot]
* [https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCFHyoiRW5Ya5HJc9laaoUfA YouTube: Freedomain Radio]
* [https://www.facebook.com/stefan.molyneux Facebook: stefan.molyneux]
* [https://twitter.com/freedomainradio Twitter: @FreeDomainRadio], 11.5K followers as of January 24, 2016
* [https://twitter.com/stefanmolyneux Twitter: @StefanMolyneux], 19.7K followers as of January 24, 2016
* [https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/freedomain-radio!-volume-6/id552010683 ITunes podcast]
* [https://plus.google.com/+StefanMolyneux_Freedomain_Radio Google+]
* [https://www.pinterest.com/stefanmolyneux Pinterest: stefanmolyneux]
* [https://www.flickr.com/photos/stefanmolyneux Flickr.com stefanmolyneux]
* [https://vimeo.com/freedomainradio Vimeo:freedomainradio]
* [https://www.imdb.com/name/nm1919879/bio?ref_=nm_ov_bio_sm IMDB.com Bio]
* [https://duckduckgo.com/?q=Stefan+ Search for Stefan Molyneux on [[DuckDuckGo]] [[Privacy]] search engine]
* [mailto:operations@freedomainradio.com His email] is operations@freedomainradio.com

==References==
<references/>

{{DEFAULTSORT:Molyneux, Stefan}}

[[Category:YouTube]]
[[Category:Alternative Influence Network]]
[[Category:Libertarian Authors]]
[[Category:Libertarian Bloggers]]
[[Category:Libertarian Podcasters]]
[[Category:Libertarian Media]]
[[Category:Canadian Authors]]
[[Category:Bloggers]]
[[Category:YouTube]]
[[Category:Agnostics]]
[[Category:Pro Second Amendment]]
[[Category:Anti-Communism]]

Nitrate

2021-07-23T06:49:52Z

Dave Wilcox: link fix

'''Nitrate''' is an important [[polyatomic ion]] with [[chemical formula]] NO3- Nitrates have a wide variety of uses, but they are probably most commonly used as fertilizer (for farming) and as a food additive (to preserve the red color of meats).

==Health==
Unfortunately, nitrates tend to convert to [[nitrite]]s due to the digestive process and bacterial action. Chemically, this only means that the molecule lost an oxygen atom. However, nitrites are known to be unhealthy to ingest. Although not officially tested in a scientific manner, many believe that nitrates themselves are also unhealthy to eat.<ref>https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/are-nitrates-and-nitrites-harmful</ref><ref>https://healthfully.com/do-nitrates-food-do-body-4914598.html</ref> 
Additionally, nitrates are suspected to have a negative impact on mental health. It is now believed that nitrates kill off helpful bacteria in the body, which help the brain.<ref>https://www.miamiherald.com/news/nation-world/national/article215089580.html</ref> "Those who have been hospitalized for an episode of mania (hyperactivity, euphoria and insomnia) [are] 3.5 times as likely to have ever eaten nitrate-cured meats as those with no history of a serious mental disorder."<ref>https://www.upi.com/Health_News/2018/07/18/Nitrates-in-meat-may-be-tied-to-mania-study-says/8891531937309/</ref><ref>https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/can-jerky-affect-mental-illness-study-suggests-it-can-n892541</ref>

==See also==
* [[Nitrification bacteria]] convert [[Ammonia]] into Nitrates
* [[Aquaculture]]
* [[Aquaponics]] and Nitrates

==References==
{{reflist|2}}

==External links==
* [https://duckduckgo.com/?q=Nitrate Search for Nitrate on [[DuckDuckGo]] [[Privacy]] search engine]
* [http://www.backyardaquaponics.com Backyard Aquaponics on Nitrates]

[[Category:Permaculture]]
[[Category:Aquaponics]]
[[Category:Aquaculture]]
[[Category:Gardening]]
[[Category:Ions]]

Google

2021-07-23T06:49:00Z

Dave Wilcox: link fix

{{Infobox organization
| name = Google
| image = Google.png
| established = September 4, 1998
| founder = [[Larry Page]] [[Sergey Brin]]
| founding_location = California
| type =
| status =
| headquarters =
| website =
}}
'''Google''' is an Internet services company whose primary business is the collection and dissemination of information. However, they have become known for their political bias, as they continually slant the information they serve (particularly through their search engine and YouTube platform), in favor of leftist ideology. Their services include a [[monopoly|monopolistic]] [[search engine]] (which promotes something [[liberal]] nearly every day), a [[web browser]], webmaster tools, and [[Android (operating system)|phone operating system]]. Google is associated with liberal causes and has been criticized for manipulating search results,<ref>Nolan, Lucas (September 21, 2018). [https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2018/09/21/5-times-google-manipulated-search-youtube-and-news-results/ 5 Times Google Manipulated Search, YouTube, and News Results]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved September 21, 2018.</ref> along with catering to communist [[China]] in [[censorship|censoring]] information from the people as requested by the [[genocidal]] [[Communist Party of China]] from 2006 to 2010.<ref>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/4647398.stm</ref>

Google opposes diversity of opinion and virtually never features a [[conservative]] theme on its search page, and repeatedly promotes [[liberal]] themes instead. Google espouses [[Leftist]] political policies while underpaying its own workers and even creating a severe housing crisis in its community for low-income workers. Google also exploits [[H-1B visas]] in order to import foreigners to do engineering work, with less risk of the workers leaving for a competitor to Google. Google has been criticized for its election interference, its anti-American views and anti-Semitism.

Major competitors of Google include [[Yahoo!]], [[DuckDuckGo]], and Microsoft's [[Bing]].

== Corporate Information ==
The CEO of Google since 2001 was [[Eric Schmidt]]. He announced that he was stepping down as CEO in 2011. Google is headquartered in Mountain View, [[California]]. Google was founded on September 7, 1998, by [[Larry Page]] and [[Sergey Brin]]. Since then, it has grown to be the largest Internet search engine in the world. According to Alexa Internet, over 25% of all Internet users visit Google monthly.<ref>[http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_details?url=www.google.com Alexa Traffic Results for Google]</ref>

Google also owns [[YouTube]], the homemade [[video clip]] site. [[Viacom]] is suing YouTube, and thus Google, for a reported $1 billion, arguing that the economic model of YouTube is based on copyright infringement.<ref>[http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/6446193.stm Viacom will sue YouTube for $1bn]</ref>

After much debate about their corporate Code of Conduct, Google's founders settled on the all-encompassing "Don't be evil", saying,"It's built around the recognition that everything we do in connection with our work at Google will be, and should be, measured against the highest possible standards".<ref>[http://investor.google.com/conduct.html Google Code of Conduct]</ref> This Code of Conduct has generated much criticism, saying they have missed that mark badly.

==History==
[[Image:Google2.gif|thumb|right|300px| Google's logo on [[Earth Day]], April 22, 2007.]]

===Founding===
Google was originally a research project, started by Larry Page and Sergey Brin in 1996, when the two attended [[Stanford University]]. The two registered the domain name ''google.stanford.edu'', and the small search engine went online for the first time.<ref>[http://www.google.com/intl/en/corporate/history.html Corporate Information:Google Milestones]</ref>

===Growth===
The year Google was created 1998, it had amassed 26 million unique URLs in their database. By 2000, Google had indexed more than 1 billion pages. As of July 2008, Google has indexed over 1 [[trillion]] pages. Its core service is usually referred to as Google Search.<ref>[http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-9999814-93.html Google reveals scope of Web-crawling task] CNET News, July 25, 2008</ref> Google Search was enhanced with a feature called Google Instant in 2010 which quickly displays suggested search works as the user types. This reveals how the search information is organized in a "semantic Web" and the degree to which is it understood beyond just simple string matching. This feature seems to be further enhanced by the semantic information in [[Knowledge Graph]].

===Competition===
[[Microsoft]] has been aggressively competing with Google for a larger share of the search market. Their latest effort, [[Bing]].com, is a "next generation" search service which has generated praise for its user interface and criticism for its speed and performance in comparison to Google and Yahoo.

Other potential competitors, such as [[Apple]], have chosen to keep Google as its default search provider. In return, Apple received $9 billion.<ref>[https://9to5mac.com/2018/09/28/google-paying-apple-9-billion-default-seach-engine/ Google reportedly paying Apple $9 billion to remain default search engine in Safari on iOS]</ref> That amount will increase to $12 billion in 2019.<ref>[http://fortune.com/2018/09/29/google-apple-safari-search-engine/ Google reportedly paying Apple $9 billion to remain default search engine in Safari on iOS]</ref>

==Antitrust lawsuit==
On October 20, 2020, [[Attorney General]] [[William P. Barr]] announced an [[antitrust]] action initiated by the [[Department of Justice]] (DOJ) under the [[Sherman Anti-Trust Act]] for Google's anti-competative practices. In the statement the DOJ said:
{{quotebox-float|As one of the wealthiest companies on the planet with a market value of $1 trillion, Google is the monopoly gatekeeper to the internet for billions of users and countless advertisers worldwide. For years, Google has accounted for almost 90 percent of all search queries in the United States and has used anticompetitive tactics to maintain and extend its monopolies in search and search advertising.

As alleged in the Complaint, Google has entered into a series of exclusionary agreements that collectively lock up the primary avenues through which users access search engines, and thus the Internet, by requiring that Google be set as the preset default general search engine on billions of mobile devices and computers worldwide and, in many cases, prohibiting preinstallation of a competitor. In particular, the Complaint alleges that Google has unlawfully maintained monopolies in search and search advertising by:

*Entering into exclusivity agreements that forbid preinstallation of any competing search service.
*Entering into tying and other arrangements that force preinstallation of its search applications in prime locations on mobile devices and make them undeletable, regardless of consumer preference.
*Entering into long-term agreements with Apple that require Google to be the default – and de facto exclusive – general search engine on Apple’s popular Safari browser and other Apple search tools.
*Generally using monopoly profits to buy preferential treatment for its search engine on devices, web browsers, and other search access points, creating a continuous and self-reinforcing cycle of monopolization.<ref>https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-sues-monopolist-google-violating-antitrust-laws</ref>}}

==Secular Progressive Culture==
Google's West Coast headquarters hires a majority of left-leaning personalities, explicitly in executive decision-making.<ref>See [http://www.google.com/corporate/execs.html] for a list of board members and senior staff.</ref> Google supports causes that are a radical departure from traditional American views, such as their public support of a 'no' vote for [[California]]'s [[Proposition 8]], which defined marriage as being between a husband and wife. Also in a subtle way, they favor politically-correct global liberalism, championed by secular progressives. They select certain ''days of importance'' for tribute, some of which are controversial. As such, ''Merry Christmas'' is replaced by ''Happy Holidays''. Even though, poll <ref>[http://www.prweb.com/releases/2008/11/prweb1670824.htm Wish Me A Merry Christmas Campaign Crusades to Change Retail Culture] PRWeb, November 26, 2008</ref> after poll <ref>[http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/lifestyle/general_lifestyle/68_prefer_merry_christmas_to_happy_holidays 68% Prefer “Merry Christmas” to “Happy Holidays”] Rasmussen, November 27, 2008</ref> after poll <ref>[https://www.cnn.com/2005/US/12/20/poll.season/ Poll: More Americans prefer 'Merry Christmas' greeting] CNN, December 20, 2005</ref> shows the public prefers 'Merry Christmas'. The problem may be that Google doesn't respect traditional [[Christian]] holidays, in favor of a 'culturally-correct' approach. In addition, Google accepts the [[Theory of Evolution]] by [[Charles Darwin]] as fact, promotes Darwin on their homepage with a Google Doodle logo.<ref>[Scientists unveil fossil of Darwinius masillae]</ref>

Google often honors Russia with their logo of Sputnik and for composer Igor Stravinsky. Google based their [[United States Independence Day]] logo on ‘This Land Is Your Land’ as an ode to leftism. Woody Guthrie wrote the lyrics and also wrote for ''[[The Daily Worker]],'' a [[Marxist]] newspaper.<ref>[https://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/07/04/Google-chooses-this-land-is-your-land Google Chooses Communist-Oriented ‘This Land Is Your Land’ July 4th Theme, Breitbart.com, July 4, 2012]</ref>

=== Google versus Conservatives ===
Google has also been accused of delisting [[conservative]] news sites from its search engine. As one of many examples, "In February 2005, [[Michelle Malkin]] wrote of the difficulties she was having becoming part of Google News."<ref>http://newsbusters.org/node/5477</ref> Google has made it harder to find websites promoting conservative content.<ref>Multiple references:
*Svab, Petr (May 3, 2019). [https://www.theepochtimes.com/google-doubles-down-making-trump-reddit-fan-club-even-harder-to-find_2905658.html Google Doubles Down, Making Trump Reddit Fan Club Even Harder to Find]. ''The Epoch Times''. Retrieved May 4, 2019.
*Grind, Kirsten; Schechner, Sam; McMillan, Robert; West, John (November 15, 2019). [https://www.wsj.com/articles/how-google-interferes-with-its-search-algorithms-and-changes-your-results-11573823753 How Google Interferes With Its Search Algorithms and Changes Your Results]. ''The Wall Street Journal''. Retrieved November 17, 2019.
*Bokhari, Allum (November 18, 2019). [https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2019/11/18/wsj-investigation-further-debunks-googles-claim-of-no-manual-intervention-in-searches/ WSJ Investigation Further Debunks Google’s Claim of No Manual Intervention in Searches]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved November 18, 2019.
*Bokhari, Allum (November 19, 2019). [https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2019/11/19/wall-street-journal-google-manipulation-report-corroborates-years-of-breitbart-reporting/ Wall Street Journal Google Manipulation Report Corroborates Years of Breitbart Reporting]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved November 19, 2019.</ref>

* Many instances whereby [[information]] is comprised ideologically and displayed for the masses. Watchdog Web site NewsBusters.org published that Google had in fact labeled [[conservative]] [[American Spectator]] as "This site may harm your computer."<ref>[http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2007/12/28/google-claims-american-spectator-site-may-harm-your-computer Google Claims Conservative Website ‘May Harm Your Computer’] December 28, 2007</ref>
* Google once blocked pro-family Web site [http://www.massresistance.org/ MassResistance]. Some people complained his organization promotes hatred towards homosexuals. Google gave the standard legal trash as an excuse "'Users may not publish material that promotes hate towards groups based on race, ethnic origin, religion, disability, gender, age, veteran status, and sexual orientation/gender identity.'" MassResistance replied "Of course we are not promoting hate against anybody."<ref>[https://www.onenewsnow.com/Culture/Default.aspx?id=603372 Accusation: Google targets, blocks pro-family Web site again OneNewsNow.com, July 15, 2009]</ref>
* [[YouTube]] owner, Google continues to protect [[Planned Parenthood]] by removing undercover videos exposing abortion clinic law-breaking.<ref>[http://www.christiannewswire.com/news/7416111014.html YouTube Bans Student Group's Video Showing Abuse at Planned Parenthood Christian News Wire, July 21, 2009]</ref>
* Without any prior explanation or notice, Google had been terminating its News relationships with conservative e-zines and Web journals.<ref>[http://newsbusters.org/node/5477 Is Google Purging Conservative News Sites? NewsBusters, May 22, 2006]</ref>
* Google attempted to minimize global awareness of the [[ClimateGate]] emails and the truth about the [[anthropogenic global warming theory]], whence the term "[[Climategate#Googlegate|Googlegate]]" gained recognition across the [[Web]]. Non-coincidentally, [[Al Gore]] is on the Google advisory board.
* Curiously, leading up to [[Restoring Honor 8-28|Restoring Honor 8-28-10]]—on Google Maps—the [[Lincoln Memorial]] was being misplaced in favor of the [http://www.pcworld.com/zoom?id=204373&page=1&zoomIdx=1 Franklin D. Roosevelt Memorial], which is a good half a mile south of the more famous memorial.<ref>Sarah Jacobsson Purewal. [http://www.pcworld.com/article/204373/google_maps_misplaces_lincoln_memorial.html Google Maps Misplaces Lincoln Memorial], ''PC World'', Aug 28, 2010.</ref> This may have been an ongoing, known problem or bug in Google Maps that hadn't been fixed yet; or, Google is censoring search results; or, Google is playing with searches for political power and gain.
* As of August 15, 2016, a Google search for "The Murder of Seth Rich" Conservapedia, yields no results, likewise a search by "The Murder of Seth Rich" Site: Conservapedia.com. But a Yahoo search brings up the Conservapedia article. Google Finally added the page to their results, but keeps it ranked lower than numerous liberal articles claiming it was all a hoax.
* During the 2016 Presidential campaign Google filtered emails from [[Donald Trump]] into Gmail users spam boxes.<ref>[https://dailycaller.com/2016/06/23/users-claim-google-is-putting-trump-emails-in-their-spam-box/ Users Claim Google Is Putting Trump Emails In Their Spam Box], Alex Pfeiffer, ''Daily Caller'', 8:19 AM 06/23/2016</ref>
*Many more examples exist of Google [[Censorship|censoring]] conservatives or exhibiting bias against them.<ref>Duke, Selwyn (August 28, 2018). [https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/item/29900-google-is-not-a-search-engine-twitter-and-facebook-aren-t-social-media Google Is Not a Search Engine; Twitter and Facebook Aren’t Social Media]. ''The New American''. Retrieved August 28, 2018.</ref><ref>Bokhari, Allum (August 28, 2018). [https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2018/08/28/10-times-googles-far-left-anti-trump-bias-was-exposed/ 10 Times Google’s Far-Left, Anti-Trump Bias Was Exposed]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved August 28, 2018.</ref>
*Google search results are biased in favor of the [[mainstream media]] and liberal websites.<ref>Freiburger, Calvin (May 15, 2019). [https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/google-prioritizes-left-wing-media-sites-in-search-results-new-study-finds Google prioritizes left-wing media sites in search results, new study finds]. ''LifeSiteNews''. Retrieved May 15, 2019.</ref>

Google is also a major promoter of [[Charles Darwin]] and atheistic science, even to the point of giving special recognition to the anniversary of Darwin's birthday ("Darwin Day").

Google's online translator system generally "translates" by predicting from linguistic patterns based on UN documents in various languages.<ref>https://blogs.transparent.com/language-news/2015/09/02/how-google-translate-works-and-why-it-doesnt-measure-up/</ref> This generally results in shoddy translations from languages that don't have the same or similar linguistics as English, such as [[Japanese]].

=== Google versus Anti- Obama Blogs ===
The question immediately raised, "Did Google Silence [[Barack Obama]] critics?" It turns out, no they did not. A group of separate blogs were targeted by their spam filter as a result of manipulating the 'flag' feature. This caused a temporary blockage for five days. Sites affected were Hillary supporters and all anti-Obama. They include http://bluelyon.blogspot.com, http://comealongway.blogspot.com, http://hillaryorbust.blogspot.com and http://mccaindemocrats.blogspot.com and their main associate JustSayNoDeal.com <ref>[http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/06/30/google-and-the-anti-obama-bloggers/ Google and the Anti-Obama Bloggers] NYTimes June 30, 2008</ref>

=== Google sensitive to Islam ===
In 2010, it was noted that Google's search suggestions for the world's various religions would bring up many negative results for [[Christianity]], Judaism, Hinduism and Buddhism. Typing a search for "Christianity is..." the results would be "Christianity is a lie," or "Judaism is..." would be "Judaism is a cult." Google removed negative search suggestions when typing "Islam is...",<ref>[http://thenextweb.com/2010/01/05/google-blocking-negative-search-recommendations-islam/ Google Blocking Negative Search Recommendations On Islam – Why?, The Next Web, May 1, 2010]</ref> however it seems that Google has reverted this, as the current first suggestion when typing "islam is..." is "Islam is evil".

=== Google versus Vladimir Putin ===
On the day of Olympic Winter Games in Russia, Google created a homepage icon, that supports the [[homosexual agenda]]. It shows a rainbow-coloured group of athletes. The background is [[Putin]]'s position on Homosexuality.<ref>https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26080047</ref>

===Google and anti-Semitism===
According to the ''[[Washington Free Beacon]]'',<ref>https://freebeacon.com/latest-news/google-sanctions-use-of-anti-semitic-slogan/</ref> Google’s human resources department allows an employee’s use of the phrase "From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free," the call-to-arms frequently employed by anti-Israel activists. The company's determination came after a Jewish employee raised concerns about the anti-Semitic slogan by a top Google union official on an internal company profile. "The Googler who shared this phrase on his page did so as a show of solidarity with the Palestinian community, which Googlers are permitted to do in the workplace," the human resources employee wrote in an email response to the Jewish employee’s complaint. "While the phrase used is understandably divisive, it was not intended to be anti-Semitic in the way the author used it."
[[File:Driving the Jews into the sea.PNG|thumb|[https://books.google.com/books?id=Jh9CAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA3#v=onepage&q&f=false "Driving the Jews into the sea." Syrian cartoon. (How the phrase has always literally meant in the Arab world)]]]
A political slogan used by Palestinian nationalists and terrorist groups like the [[Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine]], "From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free" describes an aspirational Palestinian state that would extend from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea, eliminating the state of Israel. [[PLO]] chairman [[Ahmad Shukairy]] made sure he really meant his genocidal calls and only realizing the PR disaster and military defeat of '67 is when the following PLO, [[Yasir Arafat]] tried to camouflage its real aims - progressives admitted that ''This once even the Right could be Right'': <ref>[https://books.google.com/books?id=k5eyAAAAIAAJ&q=%22shukairy%22 In Search of Facts, Ideas and Challenges], Vol. 5, Iss. 80. Vol. 8, Iss. 159. ''Institute for the Study of Relevant Progressivism''. 1976.</ref>

<gallery>

Even the Right could be Right.PNG|[https://books.google.com/books?id=k5eyAAAAIAAJ&q=%22the+right%22 Proggressives admit: 'Right cound be right']

Shukairy push the Israelis into the sea.PNG|[https://books.google.com/books?id=k5eyAAAAIAAJ&q=%22shukairy%22 Shukairy meant it when called for the Jews to be 'thrown into the sea']

</gallery>

<blockquote>

The P.L.O. - What Sort of Precedent?

This Once Even the Right Could be Righ

...professing its genocidal ambition openly, without hiding it in any disguise whatever. Its leader, Ahmed Shukairy, kept making a point of it that the Arabs were absolutely literal when speaking of pushing the Israelis into the sea. Following the military disaster Israel that year inflicted on the Arabs, they were internationally overheard discussing the public relations error of their past genocidal candor. Heads of Arab states and Palestinian leaders were voicing this tactical self-criticism in newspaper interviews and articles, in radio and television broadcasts, in speeches before parliaments.

The adjustments made in the aftermath of this self-criticism included the replacement of the undiplomatic Ahmed Shukairy with the highly diplomatic Yassir Arafat as leader of the Palestine Liberation Organization . Also included was a new semantic formula which, incorporated in the Charter of the PLO, for the first time provided however thin and tortuous a camouflage of the genocidal ambition. What used up until that point to be loudly and proudly advertised was now being pro forma denied whenever necessary, accompanied by a meaningful wink of an eyelid.

</blockquote>

Google’s determination comes as the tech giant faces outrage and scrutiny from Jewish employees and Jewish organizations for its silence in the wake of a ''Free Beacon'' report on an anti-Semitic blog post authored by a top member of the Google diversity team.<ref>https://freebeacon.com/latest-news/google-diversity-head-said-jews-have-insatiable-appetite-for-war/</ref> The [[Simon Wiesenthal|Somin Wiesenthal Center]] began an online ad campaign slamming Google for its "failure to address anti-Semitism in its workplace."

== Google bombing ==
Perhaps the most innovative contribution Google has made to Internet searching is its '''PageRank''' algorithm. This system works by counting the number of sites that link to another site; the more links pointing to a page, the higher that page will be ranked. The engine also takes note of how often the page is updated. Due to this, [[Wikipedia®]] is consistently ranked very highly by Google, due to its constant updating and heavy linkage. More recently, Internet-savvy Googlers have discovered ways to game the system; creating massive numbers of pages with links pointing to one page to form what is known as a "Google Bomb". Some examples can be found below.<ref>[http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20040614/news_mz1b14google.html Dropping 'Google-bombs']</ref>

*'''"Miserable Failure"''': For nearly two years, typing "miserable failure" (or even just "miserable", or "failure") and then clicking "I'm Feeling Lucky" in the Google search engine would return the [https://www.whitehouse.gov/president/biography.html White House Biography] of [[George W. Bush]].<ref>[http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3298443.stm 'Miserable failure' links to Bush]</ref> This was orchestrated by [[Democratic]] Party supporters in late 2003,<ref>[http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2004/01/26/BUG3M4GVDS1.DTL In October, Johnson, a Democrat, added the phrase "miserable failure" to his Web site, Old Fashioned Patriot. He then linked the site to the online White House biography of President Bush and asked others to follow his lead]</ref> as part of the 2004 Presidential election. However, at times, [[Conservative]] supporters were able to shift the phrase to [[Jimmy Carter]], [[Hillary Clinton]] and [[Michael Moore]].
*''''"Great President"''': returns the [https://www.whitehouse.gov/president/biography.html White House Biography] of [[George W. Bush]].
*'''"Jew"''': The first result used to be the home page for "Jew Watch", a racist, anti-Semitic hate group. As of September 2012, Jew Watch is the 4th result, although it has now shown even lower in the result list.
*'''"Waffles"''': Also as part of the 2004 Presidential election, Conservative supporters managed to link the term "waffles" to the official Web site of [[John Kerry]].
*'''"French Military Victories"''': Hitting "I'm Feeling Lucky" for this term directs you to a fake Google page (in reality, it is an AlbinoBlackSheep.com page, styled to look exactly like a Google page, [http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/text/victories.html here]) giving no matches, and asking if you meant "French military defeats?".
*'''"Weapons of Mass Destruction"''' would bring up a similar page with the error message 'not found.'
*'''"[Rick] Santorum"''': Homosexual activist [[Dan Savage]] created a Web site with an obscene definition for the word "santorum" because politician [[Rick Santorum]] opposes same-sex marriage. This page was number one on Google for several years when people searched for his last name (and at times, his full name as well). Once Santorum began to campaign for President, his campaign Web site eventually made it up to the top spot, but as of September 2012, the [[Wikipedia]] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Campaign_for_%22santorum%22_neologism page] about Savage's actions is currently the top result, followed by the Wikipedia page for Santorum. Savage's site has fallen to the third spot. Santorum's presidential campaign Web site has fallen to number four, since Santorum is no longer in the race.

On January 25, 2007, Google claimed to have modified their PageRank algorithm to lessen the likelihood of future Google bombs<ref>[http://boingboing.net/2007/01/26/bush_no_longer_miser.html Bush no longer "miserable failure": Google tackles googlebombs]</ref>

== Google News ==

Google provides a news aggregator service named "Google News," which tailors without user consent which articles appear for them. Alternative news aggregator services are freely available.<ref>https://beebom.com/best-google-news-alternatives/</ref>
== Controversy ==
=== Tax Dodging ===
A report by Bloomberg News has Google setting up offshore banks accounts to avoid paying taxes on foreign profits. More than $3.9 billion have made it to [[Bermuda]] bank accounts over the last several years. Google has cut its effective tax rate abroad to just 2.4%. The practice is common and [[George Soros]] has been known to place his billions of dollars in Cayman Island banks. This costs the U.S. government more than $60 billion in revenue.<ref>[https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/After-news-of-Google-tax-dodges-Obama-raises-money-with-Google-execs-105513473.html#ixzz13LE2lg1F After news of Google tax dodges, Obama raises money with Google execs, Washington Examiner, October 22, 2010]</ref>

=== Privacy Concerns===
Google has been criticized by privacy activists and others. Google chief executive Eric Schmidt said, "We cannot even answer the most basic questions because we don’t know enough about you. That is the most important aspect of Google’s expansion." <ref>http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/c3e49548-088e-11dc-b11e-000b5df10621,dwp_uuid=e8477cc4-c820-11db-b0dc-000b5df10621.html</ref> Google has attempted to "remedy" this situation by storing search information, in effect, keeping tabs on people for two years after they search. This has led Google critic [[Daniel Brandt]] to create "Scroogle.org", which runs Google searches that users conduct through his organization's personal servers to prevent Google from being able to connect any personal information to the searchers.<ref>http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55935</ref> 

A number of other privacy concerns have arisen, including the disclosure of Google's Sensorvault database in 2019. This database reportedly contains extensive records of GPS locations on almost all Android devices. This is an extensive record of every precise location almost every individual device has ever been. This wealth of information reveals many aspects of each owner's behavior, interests, and overall lifestyle. Sensorvault has also reportedly been utilized by law enforcement to find behavioral correlations of devices, then acquire the identity information of certain users of special interest. It is unclear exactly to what extend Google (and [[Alphabet Inc.]]) have been selling/sharing access to this data, or analytical conclusion from it.<ref>https://www.eff.org/es/deeplinks/2019/04/googles-sensorvault-can-tell-police-where-youve-been</ref><ref>https://www.cnet.com/news/law-enforcement-taps-googles-sensorvault-for-location-data-report-says/</ref><ref>https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/13/technology/google-sensorvault-location-tracking.html</ref>

Google has sometimes been called the [[Newspeak|Orwellian]] "Ministry of Truth." In many ways, its offerings have evolved into one singular full-scale surveillance platform.<ref>[https://medium.com/@fredbcampbelljr/how-google-made-android-the-worlds-most-ubiquitous-surveillance-platform-987cdae3d08f How Google Made Android The World’s Most Ubiquitous Surveillance Platform]</ref>

''The Wall Street Journal'' reported in November 2019 that Google had been collecting the health data of millions of Americans.<ref>Copeland, Rob (November 11, 2019). [https://www.wsj.com/articles/google-s-secret-project-nightingale-gathers-personal-health-data-on-millions-of-americans-11573496790 Google’s ‘Project Nightingale’ Gathers Personal Health Data on Millions of Americans]. ''The Wall Street Journal''. Retrieved November 17, 2019.</ref>

=== Net neutrality ===
Google has repeatedly demonstrated hypocrisy as it says one thing and does another, tarnishing their reputation in the process. This can can be seen again with their support of net neutrality, while at the same time doing what they want in regards to restricting access.<ref>[https://www.redstate.com/neil_stevens/2009/08/23/google-undermines-the-internet/ Google undermines the Internet, RedState.com, August 23, 2009]</ref>

===Election meddling===
:{{See also|Trump-Russia collusion hoax|Ukrainian collusion}}
Dr. Robert Epstein of the American Institute for Behavioral Research and Technology testified before Congress in 2019 that Google [[bias]] and meddling had shifted "between 2.6 million and up to 10.4 million votes" to Hillary Clinton.<ref>https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2019/08/psychologist-google-generated-at-least-2-6-million-votes-for-hillary.php</ref>

On October 20, 2018, Google, acting in collusion with the liberal media outlets and other mayoral candidates (including incumbent [[Toronto]] mayor and former Ontario Progressive Conservative leader John Tory, who is also a former broadcaster and has connections in the mainstream media), illegally shut down the online advertising campaign of conservative journalist and [[Toronto]] mayoral candidate [[Faith Goldy]], 48 hours before the opening of polls for the Toronto civic election on October 22, with no justifiable explanation for the shutdown against Goldy and in potential violation of Canada's campaign financing and election laws.<ref>[https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2018/10/22/google-shuts-down-advertising-campaign-of-toronto-mayoral-candidate-faith-goldy-before-election/ Google Shuts Down Advertising Campaign of Toronto Mayoral Candidate Faith Goldy Before Election] at Breitbart News Network</ref>

In June 2019, [[Project Veritas]] released an undercover video in which a Google executive admitted that the company was working, through its policies and products, to prevent "the next Trump situation."<ref>Multiple references:
*Svab, Petr (June 24, 2019). [https://www.theepochtimes.com/google-stealthily-infuses-political-agenda-into-products-to-prevent-trump-reelection-insiders-documents-say_2976582.html Google Stealthily Infuses Political Agenda Into Products to Prevent Trump Reelection, Insiders, Documents Say]. ''The Epoch Times''. Retrieved June 24, 2019.
*Richardson, Valerie (June 24, 2019). [https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/jun/24/google-exec-project-veritas-sting-says-only-big-te/ Google exec in Project Veritas sting says only big tech can stop 'the next Trump situation']. ''The Washington Times''. Retrieved June 24, 2019.
*Bokhari, Allum (June 24, 2019). [https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2019/06/24/project-veritas-google-exec-decries-trumps-election-how-do-we-prevent-it-from-happening-again/ Project Veritas – Google Exec Decries Trump’s Election: ‘How Do We Prevent It from Happening Again’]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved June 24, 2019.
*Kirkwood, R. Cort (June 24, 2019). [https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/item/32684-google-is-gearing-up-to-defeat-trump-in-2020 Google Is Gearing Up To Defeat Trump In 2020]. ''The New American''. Retrieved June 24, 2019.
See also:
*Svab, Petr (June 26, 2019). [https://www.theepochtimes.com/google-doubles-down-on-deceiving-customers-about-its-political-manipulation_2980032.html Google Doubles Down on Deceiving Customers About Its Political Manipulation]. ''The Epoch Times''. Retrieved June 26, 2019.</ref> The video had over one million views in the first 24 hours (available in External link section, below). Google subsequently moved to censor the video from its platforms.<ref>Multiple references:
*Bokhari, Allum (June 24, 2019). [https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2019/06/24/google-censors-video-exposing-google/ Google Censors Video Exposing Google]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved June 24, 2019.
*Kirkwood, R. Cort (June 25, 2019). [https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/item/32698-youtube-scraps-veritas-expose-after-privacy-complaints YouTube Scraps Veritas' Exposé After Privacy Complaints]. ''The New American''. Retrieved June 25, 2019.
*Svab, Petr (June 25, 2019). [https://www.theepochtimes.com/youtube-deletes-expose-on-googles-stealthily-pushing-its-politics-on-users_2978328.html YouTube Deletes Exposé on Google’s Stealthily Pushing Its Politics on Users]. ''The Epoch Times''. Retrieved June 26, 2019.</ref>

As noted above, Professor Epstein in his testimony before the Judiciary Senate Committee stated that his research indicated that Google had manipulated the votes for the 2016 presidential elections in Hillary Clinton's favor, and also had been manipulating national elections as early as 2015, and has even insinuated that they had also manipulated the results of the 2018 midterm elections.<ref name="Epstein testimony PDF" /><ref name="Epstein testimony YouTube" />

====FEC disclosure exemptions====
Political advertising regarding federal elections and candidates that is purchased for appearance on radio, television and print generally must adhere to [[Federal Election Commission]] rules requiring clear disclosure of the committee or donor paying for the advertisements. During 2011, Google and [[Facebook]] hired [[Marxist]] operative [[Marc Elias]] to help them obtain an exemption from this requirement for political advertising on their platforms. Elias argued the restrictions were not practical for his clients, with FEC commissioners ultimately voting 4-2 in favor of the exemption for Google and deadlocking 3-3 on the request regarding Facebook.<ref>Vogel, Kenneth P.; and Kang, Cecilia. [https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/19/us/politics/facebook-google-russia-meddling-disclosure.html “Senators Demand Online Ad Disclosures as Tech Lobby Mobilizes.”] New York Times. October 19, 2017.</ref>

Facebook continued to operate as if exempt from disclosure rules. During the 2016 U.S. general election, $100,000 worth of Russian-backed and undisclosed advertisements intended to influence voters were purchased on Facebook with another $4,700 spent by Russian sources on Google political advertisements. In October 2017, following the controversy that ensued regarding Russian interference in the 2016 elections, both Republican and Democratic Senators advocated for legislation to require Facebook and Google to adhere to the same disclosure rules as other media.

====2016 election meddling====
{{See also|Presidential Election 2016|}}
It was discovered Google was manipulating autocomplete [[search engine]] results to favor Hillary Clinton.<ref>[http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-06-10/must-see-video-how-google-manipulates-search-results-favor-hillary-clinton How Google Manipulates Search Results In Favor Of Hillary Clinton], by Tyler Durden, Jun 10, 2016. zerohedge.com</ref> Autocomplete returns the most popular trending search queries.
<ref>[https://freebeacon.com/politics/here-are-10-more-examples-of-google-search-results-favorable-to-hillary/ Here Are 10 More Examples of Google Search Results Favorable to Hillary], Tech giant accused of whitewashing autocomplete results, Brent Scher and Elizabeth Harrington, ''Washington Free Beacon'', June 10, 2016</ref> When a user types in ''Hillary Clinton cri'' to query about the criminal investigation into Mrs. Clinton for example, the Google results do not match at all popular trends on all other major search engines.<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PFxFRqNmXKg Did Google Manipulate Search for Hillary?], Matt Lieberman, SourceFed, Jun 9, 2016. UPDATE: Friday June 10. youtube.com</ref>

Supporters of [[Bernie Sanders]] complained throughout the 2016 primary season Google had inflated Hillary's delegate count by adding unelected [[Superdelegate]]s who, by rule, were to remain unpledged until the convention.<ref>[http://www.snopes.com/sanders-vs-clinton-delegate-count/ Failing Delegate Math], A popular [[meme]] detailing the actual delegate count between Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton in May 2016 is mostly accurate. Kim LaCapria, ''Snopes'', May 10, 2016</ref> Some in late primary states considered this another form of [[voter suppression]].<ref>[http://thebernreport.com/superdelegate-system-has-been-used-as-a-form-of-voter-supression/ Superdelegate System Has Been Used as a Form of Voter Suppression], Posted by G.A. Casebeer, ''The Bern Report'', May 23, 2016</ref>

In an article titled ''How Google Could Rig the 2016 Election'' in August 2015 ''Politico'' warned Google "can easily shift the voting preferences of undecided voters by 20 percent or more—up to 80 percent in some demographic groups—with virtually no one knowing they are being manipulated... In the United States, half of our presidential elections have been won by margins under 7.6 percent".<ref>[https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/08/how-google-could-rig-the-2016-election-121548 How Google Could Rig the 2016 Election], Google has the ability to drive millions of votes to a candidate with no one the wiser, By Robert Epstein, ''Politico'', August 19, 2015</ref>

Billionaire Eric Schmidt, [[CEO]] of Google's parent company Alphabet funded a startup company called The Groundwork to ensure Hillary has the engineering talent needed to win the election.<ref>[http://qz.com/520652/groundwork-eric-schmidt-startup-working-for-hillary-clinton-campaign/ THE GROUNDWORK The stealthy, Eric Schmidt-backed startup that’s working to put Hillary Clinton in the White House], Adam Pasick & Tim Fernholz, ''Quartz'', October 09, 2015. qz.com</ref> Schmidt and Google are both donors to the Clinton Foundation.

When Googling, '''Hillary Clinton's he-''' 
Google yielded,
*Hillary Clinton's headquarters
*Hillary Clinton's health plan
*Hillary Clinton's healthcare plan

Search results on Bing return the suggestions
*Hillary Clinton's health
*Hillary Clinton's health issues
*Hillary Clinton's health and weight

Search results on Yahoo return the suggestions
*Hillary Clinton's health problems
*Hillary Clinton's health
*Hillary Clinton's health issues

On July 19, 2019, Professor Robert Epstein revealed before the Judiciary Senate Committee that Google was responsible for swaying 2.6 million people into voting for Hillary Clinton during the 2016 presidential elections, and had also implied that the amount of people swayed may have been as many as 10.4 million votes, and may have even been trying to influence national elections as early as 2015.<ref name="Epstein testimony PDF">https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Epstein%20Testimony.pdf</ref><ref name="Epstein testimony YouTube">https://youtu.be/IzF7nBmwPso</ref>

====2020 election meddling====
:{{See also|United States presidential election, 2020|Tulsi Gabbard 2020 presidential campaign}}
[[Tulsi Gabbard]] is suing Google for $50 million for [[censorship]] of her campaign ads.<ref>https://thehill.com/policy/technology/454746-tulsi-gabbard-sues-google-over-censorship-claims</ref> Google blocked her ads account shortly after the first Democrat presidential debate, when Gabbard became the most-searched-for candidate in the Democrat field.

Gabbard's complaint accuses Google of censoring the candidate at the very moment when millions of Americans wanted to learn more about her. It also accuses Google of sending Gabbard's campaign emails to people's Gmail spam folders at a “disproportionately high rate.” The campaign seeks a legal injunction against Google to prevent further election meddling, as well as $50 million in damages. According to Gabbard's legal complaint against Google:

{{Quotebox|At the height of Gabbard’s popularity among Internet searchers in the immediate hours after the debate ended, and in the thick of the critical post-debate period (when television viewers, radio listeners, newspaper read-ers, and millions of other Americans are discussing and searching for presidential candidates), Google suspended Tulsi’s Google Ads account without warning. For hours, as millions of Americans searched Google for information about Tulsi, and as Tulsi was trying, through Google, to speak to them, her Google Ads account was arbitrarily and forcibly taken offline. Throughout this period, the Campaign worked frantically to gather more information about the suspension; to get through to someone at Google who could get the Account back online; and to understand and remedy the restraint that had been placed on Tulsi’s speech—at precisely the moment when everyone wanted to hear from her.}}

The legal complaint argues that Google could have a nefarious impact on American democracy if its behavior is allowed to continue unchecked. This is the viewpoint of Dr. Robert Epstein, who says the Silicon Valley Masters of the Universe will “go all out” to influence the 2020 election.

In a series of Tweets, the Hawaii Democrat said Google's actions “reveals the danger of their dominance & how the dominance of big tech over public discourse threatens core American values.”<ref>https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2019/07/25/tulsi-gabbard-sues-google-for-censorship-of-ads/</ref>

After Hillary's Clinton's xenophobic smear, [[Steven Crowder]] demonstrated during his radio program how Google was actively suppressing Tulsi Gabbard search results in the United States.<ref>https://www.zerohedge.com/political/tulsis-youtube-suppressed</ref>

===Interference with Trump presidency===
Owing to all of the above, Google has been accused of trying to stifle conservative voices (especially those that support Trump) and only allowing for left-wing viewpoints to be shown on the search engine. Although Google twice denied these claims, this was eventually confirmed on September 12, 2018, via a leaked video via Breitbart for the TGIF session immediately after Donald Trump's election, where the upper management not only made their views of the American public clear by inferring that those who voted for Donald Trump were "fascists and communists", but also strongly implied that they were going to dedicate all of their resources to making sure the rise of populism is squashed.<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FRf9UxsM-NE&feature=youtu.be</ref><ref>Bokhari, Allum (September 12, 2018). [https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2018/09/12/leaked-video-google-leaderships-dismayed-reaction-to-trump-election/ LEAKED VIDEO: Google Leadership’s Dismayed Reaction to Trump Election]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved September 14, 2018.</ref><ref>Freiburger, Calvin (September 17, 2018). [https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/top-google-leaders-vowed-to-alter-future-elections-to-avoid-trump-hiccup-le Top Google leaders vowed to alter future elections to avoid Trump ‘hiccup’: leaked video]. ''LifeSiteNews''. Retrieved September 19, 2018.</ref> Google also was caught trying to increase [[Latino]] turnout in the 2016 election.<ref>Duke, Selwyn (September 14, 2018). [https://www.thenewamerican.com/tech/computers/item/30073-google-caught-red-handed-tried-to-get-clinton-elected Google Caught Red-handed: Tried to Get Clinton Elected]. ''The New American''. Retrieved September 14, 2018.</ref>

On a similar note, Professor Epstein when giving testimony towards Google's efforts in overturning elections mentioned that, aside from its aforementioned role in manipulating votes in Hillary Clinton's favor, it also may have been responsible for the manipulation of as many as 78 million votes during the 2018 midterm elections, and has also implied that they are using their autocomplete programs for their products as a form of social engineering.<ref name="Epstein testimony PDF" /><ref name="Epstein testimony YouTube" />

=== Relationship with the Obama Administration ===
Consumer Watchdog crafted a 32-page report detailing how Google has inappropriately benefited from its close ties to the Obama Administration. [[NASA]]'s Moffett Airfield has been turned into a taxpayer-subsidized private airport for Google executives used for corporate junkets. NASA's Moffett Airfield is a short distance from Google's world headquarters. The report details, ''"A growing fleet of jets and helicopters stand ready to ferry the company's top executives near or far, for business or pleasure, for vacations or schmoozing, including at least three wintertime trips to the [[Caribbean]] and a trip by Google chief executive Eric Schmidt to the Cannes Film Festival."'' <ref>[http://www.redorbit.com/news/technology/1983792/consumer_watchdog_sends_issas_oversight_committee_google_report_showing_inappropriate/index.html Consumer Watchdog Sends Issa's Oversight Committee Google Report Showing Inappropriate Relationship with Obama Administration, RedOrbit.com, January 24, 2011]</ref>

====Attempted regime change in Syria====
Google collaborated with the Obama regime in the attempted [[regime change]] in [[Syria]]. Jared Cohen, head of Google Jigsaw (formerly Google Ideas) emailed the State Dept.:
{{quotebox-float|"Please keep close hold, but my team is planning to launch a tool on Sunday that will publicly track and map the defections in Syria and which parts of the government they are coming from. Our logic behind this is that while many people are tracking the atrocities, nobody is visually representing and mapping the defections, which we believe are important in encouraging more to defect and giving confidence to the opposition. Given how hard it is to get information into Syria right now, we are partnering with Al-Jazeera who will take primary ownership over the tool we have built, track the data, verify it, and broadcast it back into Syria. I've attached a few visuals that show what the tool will look like. Please keep this very close hold and let me know if there is anything eke you think we need to account for or think about before we launch. We believe this can have an important.<ref>https://wikileaks.org/clinton-emails/emailid/12166</ref>}}

===Homosexual agenda===
As was already mentioned, Google has been actively blocking certain websites and services which oppose sodomy (homosexuality). They also speak out in support of the homosexual movement, and promote search results which do the same.<ref>https://blog.google/topics/causes-community/transvoices</ref><ref>https://money.cnn.com/2012/07/08/technology/google-legalize-love/index.htm</ref><ref>https://winteryknight.com/2012/07/09/google-starts-wordlwide-campaign-to-legalize-gay-marriage-target-donates-to-gay-rights-groups</ref><ref>https://onetoday.google.com</ref> They also donate to some other organizations which do the same, as well and politicians who seek the same goal.<ref>http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2008/09/our-position-on-californias-no-on-8.html , Our position on California's No on 8 campaign</ref>

Google considers the term "family friendly" to be "[[homophobic]]."<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=--3oGtllMXY&feature=youtu.be</ref> On June 21, 2009, Google displayed a special multicolored line for searches on the word "gay". Additionally, Google compensates employees to cover taxes paid on their domestic partner's health benefits, but only offers its 'generosity' to homosexual couples.<ref>https://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/07/01/google-raises-eyebrows-new-gay-employee-benefit/</ref>

===Collaboration with China===
It was revealed in 2018 that Google was collaborating with China and supported the government's [[censorship]] agenda.<ref>Nash, Charlie (October 10, 2018). [https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2018/10/10/googes-shift-towards-censorship-aids-relationship-with-china/ Google’s ‘Shift Towards Censorship’ Aids Relationship with China]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved October 10, 2018.</ref>

Reporters Without Borders joined others in asking how Google could stand up for US users' freedoms while controlling what Chinese users can search for. Its previous search engine for China's fast-growing market was subject to government blocks. The new site - Google.cn - censors itself to satisfy Beijing. While cooperating with China's government, Google refuses to fulfill requests by the U.S. Department of Justice.<ref>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/4630694.stm , BBC Google defies US over search data, January 20, 2006</ref> Google counsel Nicole Wong said "..we intend to resist their motion vigorously."

===Opposing industry standards===
In addition to their political activities, Google has caused some controversy within its own industry by refusing to comply with industry standards. Since they own the most popular web browser and the most popular search engine (at least within the US), they have decided that they can bring about changes they believe are needed despite what the rest of the industry has decided. 
For example, the norm is that users are only logged into a service when they request it, and when they attempt to delete the cookies in their browser, the browser does so. However, Google decided in 2018 to automatically log users into their google accounts, and protect the google cookies from deletion, so that Google's cookies could not be deleted by the user (through the browser).<ref>https://www.wired.com/story/google-chrome-login-privacy/</ref><ref>https://www.theverge.com/2018/9/24/17895536/google-chrome-69-log-in-sync-password-user-data-privacy</ref> 
As another example, Google search was changed in 2018 to hide certain subdomains, including the "www" which many websites use. Users only would see the domain name and the [[TLD]], while the rest was masked. Further, the search engine would link users to sites which were using the "www" subdomain without that subdomain, so the site would need to redirect users to the proper location. Google knew this was not what the sites wanted, but chose to make this change anyway.<ref>https://www.makeuseof.com/tag/google-security-risk-hiding-subdomains/</ref><ref>https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/google/google-testing-removal-of-www-subdomain-from-search-results/</ref><ref>https://technocodex.com/google-removed-www-and-m-subdomains-in-chrome-69-how-to-disable-it/</ref> Not only is this inconvenient, but masking parts of URLs in inherently dangerous, since attackers can abuse such features to trick users into trusting a fraudulent site or page. The industry standard is, therefore, to show users the entire link which they have used to connect. 
Also in 2018, Google decided to make an additional change. They began trying to force websites to begin using the [[HTTPS|Hyper-text transfer protocol secure (HTTPS)]] rather than the older standard HTTP. While HTTPS is helpful, some webpages have reason to not use HTTPS. While the industry is moving slowly to HTTPS, Google decided to begin interfering with the loading and interaction in Chrome of sites which are not using HTTPS for their pages and all of the content therein. This caused many users to experience problems visiting websites, simply because Google no longer approved of sites using HTTP.

===Wi-Fi Snooping===
Google collected information from [[Wi-Fi]] networks as its street-view vans cruised neighborhoods around the globe, raising issues in more than 30 countries. The information Google gathered included e-mail fragments and passwords, alarming politicians and privacy and security advocates in Germany, France, and [[Spain]].<ref>[https://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/07/22/national-security-google-wi-fi-spy-scandal/ Is National Security Behind Google's Wi-Fi Spying?, Fox News, July 23, 2010]</ref> It was noted that Google supplies special mapping and search products to the U.S. military and intelligence community, with some Google employees enjoying Top Secret clearance to work with the government. Google said it was "accidental" data gathering. Rep. Joe Barton of Texas, a senior [[Republican]] lawmaker, suggested that Google's data collection wasn't accidental and that it was "something to look at." Under the Democrat leadership, the [[FCC]] investigated, but dropped further inquiry, coincidentally, just before a Google [[Democrat]] fundraiser was held. Many groups have been calling on Republican [[Darrell Issa]] to investigate Google's cozy relationship with the [[Obama administration]].<ref>[http://www.nlpc.org/stories/2010/11/10/congress-must-investigate-google-obama-ties Congress Must Investigate Google-Obama Ties, National Legal and Policy Center, November 10, 2010]</ref>

*France: Privacy watchdog CNIL awarded its largest fine to date with a judgement of $141,300 against Google in relation to snooping.<ref>[https://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2011/03/21/general-broadcasting-amp-entertainment-eu-france-google-fined_8366482.html France fines Google for Street View privacy breach, Forbes, March 21, 2011]</ref>

===Support for Antifa and Black Lives Matter===
In June 2020, Google was listed as one of numerous leftist-controlled companies that have gone "[[woke]]" and now support the criminal rioters of [[Antifa]] and [[Black Lives Matter]] in the wake of the [[2020 leftist riots]].<ref>[https://gab.com/a/posts/104311289660016704 Here Are The Companies That Support Antifa, Black Lives Matter, and Want You Dead] at Gab.com</ref>

Seattle Google engineer, Zachary Ames Trudo, was arrested at the [[Portland, Oregon]] Antifa riot. The 32-year-old [[Marxist]] was charged with [[assault]], attempting escape and resisting arrest. Trudo posted on [[Facebook]], "One way to hurt the [[bourgeoisie]] is to hurt their business. Closing down the ports is a terrific show of solidarity between labour and BLM.”<ref>https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/07/burn-ground-marxist-google-engineer-arrested-portland-riot-charged-assault-resisting-arrest-attempting-escape/</ref>

==International Agitation==
Google's Map service is responsible for escalating tensions between foreign nations by radically misleading versions of current borders.

Google has been labeled "professionally irresponsible" for disseminated [[Cambodia]] territory, which is embroiled in a bitter diplomatic row with Thailand over the demarcation of the frontier.<ref>[https://www.reuters.com/article/2010/02/05/cambodia-google-idUSSGE61406G20100205 Cambodia blasts Google map of disputed Thai border, Reuters, February 5, 2010]</ref>

[[Costa Rica]] took offense to Google Maps version showing that a specific area of encampment was on Nicaraguan soil. The dispute that had ensued over Google's version of the Nicaragua-Costa Rica border has became rather serious. So much so that the secretary general of the [[Organization of American States]] had to intervene.<ref>[http://news.cnet.com/8301-17852_3-20021977-71.html Envoy to solve latest Google Maps border dispute? CNET, November 5, 2010]</ref><ref>[http://spectregroup.wordpress.com/2010/11/12/google-maps-blamed-for-border-dispute/ GOOGLE MAPS BLAMED for BORDER DISPUTE, Spectre Footnotes, November 11, 2010]</ref>

Google Maps was busy fixing another error in its map program of a port city that reignited border tensions between [[Germany]] and The Netherlands.<ref>[https://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/02/21/google-maps-slipup-sparks-diplomatic-crisis/ Google Maps Blunder Reignites Centuries Old Border Dispute, Fox News, February 21, 2011]</ref>

===Egyptian Uprising===
Google executive Wael Ghonim helped with protesting [[Egypt]]'s rule of [[Hosni Mubarak]], calling for him to step down and organizing protests. He was detained by authorities and released after two weeks. Ghonim is credited as being a major factor in sparking Egypt's uprising. Google CEO Eric Schmidt said that Google is "very, very proud" of Wael Ghonim.<ref>[http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/technology/2011/02/google-ceo-eric-schmidt-says-company-is-proud-of-wael-ghonim-in-egypt.html Google CEO Eric Schmidt says company is 'very proud' of Egypt's Wael Ghonim, LA Times, February 15, 2011]</ref>

=== Benghazi massacre ===
After the [[Benghazi attack]], Hillary's State Department was in contact with Google. Hillary publicly claimed a controversial video was the source of a 'spontaneous' riot which proved to be a knowingly false statement. Google participated in the ruse by agreeing to block the video even after President Obama admitted it was a pre-planned terrorist attack. Copies of the email were forwarded to [[Denis McDonough]], [[Cheryl Mills]], Patrick F Kennedy, [[Jake Sullivan]] and [[John Brennan]]. The email also contains contact information for Google CEO Afternoon (Larry) Page and [[YouTube]] CEO Salar Kamangar including their mobile and office phone numbers.<ref>[https://wikileaks.org/clinton-emails/emailid/16800 UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04841 Doc No. C05739829 STATE DEPT]. wikileaks.org</ref>

=== Syrian Civil War ===
Newly released emails from [[Hillary Clinton]]'s State Department shows Google coordinating the overthrow of Bashar Assad in Syria.<ref>[https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/clinton-email-reveals-google-sought-overthrow-of-syrias-assad/article/2586300 Clinton email reveals: Google sought overthrow of Syria's Assad, Washington Examiner, March 19, 2016]</ref>

===Coronavirus===
Google funded research conducted by [[Peter Daszak]]’s EcoHealth Alliance, a group which collaborated with the [[Wuhan Institute of Virology]] on [[gain-of-function]] research for the “killer” bat [[coronavirus]] for over a decade.<ref>https://thenationalpulse.com/exclusive/google-funded-wuhan-linked-ecohealth-research/</ref>

==Alternatives to Google==

: ''Main Article: [[Alternatives to Google]]''
*[[Duck Duck Go| DuckDuckGo]] - a search engine that is said to not track people. It also has "Privacy Essentials" on Firefox and Chrome and "Privacy browser" on mobile.
*[[Result Hunter]] - a search engine that favors conservative results, as opposed to Google which favors liberal results.
*[[Mojeek]] - a search engine that doesn't track people and uses a proprietary page ranking engine as opposed to PageRank, and is intended to give unbiased search results.
*[https://www.seekfind.org/ Seek Find] - a Christian search engine. Cannot be used for a general search, but a search over the Internet for information from Christian sites.
*[https://www.worthyseek.com/ Worthy Christian Search] - A similar Christian search engine.
*[https://www.StartPage.com/ StartPage]

==See also==
* [[Search engine manipulation effect]]
* [[Bing]]
* [[Censorability]]
*[[Far Left]]
* [[Censorship]]
* [[Duck Duck Go]]
* [[Evolutionist censorship]]
* [[Fairness Doctrine]]
* [[Liberal censorship]]
* [[Media censorship]]
* [[Tools of censorship]]
* [[Yahoo]]
*[[Fake news in the 2020 presidential election]]

== References ==
{{Reflist|colwidth=35em}}

== External links ==
* [https://www.google.com/ Google]
*[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lsSbpQklWyI Former Google CEO Eric Schmidt]
* [https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/07/29/google-and-the-adjustment-of-inconvenient-viewpoints-especially-climate/ GOOGLE and the ‘adjustment’ of inconvenient viewpoints, especially climate]
* [https://www.thecreepyline.com/ The Creepy Line]
*[https://www.liveleak.com/view?t=ksvnD_1561429279 Project Veritas "Trump Situation" Backup - Youtube yanked the vid off their site!], June 24, 2019.
*[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NTjmQKyOYlM Project Veritas Nails Google/Youtube Over Election Tampering], Original complete video, June 24, 2019.
*[https://gohmert.house.gov/uploadedfiles/google.mp4 Project Veritas Google election subversion video], June 24, 2019. https://gohmert.house.gov
*[https://www.oneangrygamer.net/2019/08/google-news-blacklist-revealed-websites-listed/90919/GOOGLE NEWS BLACKLIST REVEALED, WEBSITES LISTED] August 14, 2019.

[[Category:United States Businesses]]
[[Category:Search Engines]]
[[Category:Google]][[Category:San Francisco Bay Area]]
[[Category:Homosexual Agenda]]
[[Category:Communism]]
[[Category:Liberal Companies]]
[[Category:Anti Second Amendment]]
[[Category:SJWs]]
[[Category:Anti-Free Speech]]
[[Category:Perpetrators of Cancel Culture]]

Yahoo

2021-07-23T06:47:47Z

Dave Wilcox: link fix

'''Yahoo!''' is an [[Internet]] [[search engine]] [[corporation]] and service provider of free, online [[email]].<ref>http://info.yahoo.com/center/us/yahoo/</ref> Founded in 1994 by [[Stanford University|Stanford]] Ph.D. students David Filo and Jerry Yang, Yahoo! began as a hobby and has evolved into a leading global brand that changed the way people communicate with each other, conduct transactions and access, share, and create information. Yahoo!'s vision is to be the center of people's online lives by delivering personally relevant, meaningful Internet experiences.<ref>[http://yhoo.client.shareholder.com/press/overview.cfm Yahoo! Inc. - Company Overview]</ref> [[Microsoft]] partnered with Yahoo! in 2010, and the search engine now delivers results using [[Bing|Bing's]] search [[algorithm]].

Yahoo! corporation trades on the [[Nasdaq]] exchange.<ref>Stock symbol: YHOO.</ref> The phrase, "Yahoo" is also a term used to express happiness or joy at something unexpected or desired.

On May 16, Marissa Mayer (formerly one of "public faces" of [[Google]]) become CEO of Yahoo.

==See also==
* [[Google]]
* [[Bing]]
* [[DuckDuckGo]]

==References==
{{reflist}}

== External links ==
* [https://www.yahoo.com/ Yahoo!]
* [https://search.yahoo.com/ Yahoo! Search] - [[World Wide Web|Web]] Search

[[Category:Search Engines]]

San Francisco values

2021-07-23T06:42:27Z

Dave Wilcox: copy-edit

[[File:Jim Jones and the Democrat party.jpg|right|400px|thumb|''Left to Right:'' The [[Rev. Jim Jones]], Mayor [[George Moscone]] (murdered along with City Councilman [[Harvey Milk]]), Speaker [[Nancy Pelosi]] a [[white privilege]]d refugee from [[Baltimore]], Speaker [[Willie Brown]] ex-lover and political patron of [[Kamala Harris]], and Sen. [[Dianne Feinstein]] whose rise came on the heels of the Moscone/Milk murders. The Moscone/Milk murders and the tragedy at [[Jonestown]] were intimately connected in San Francisco's [[Progressive]] [[Democratic party]],<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mzyXNWYmfXg Jim Jones, The Most Admired Democrat of The 1970s, Censored Info], youtube</ref> a fact kept hidden by the [[mainstream media]] for decades.]]
The phrase '''San Francisco values''' refers to the general moral degradation present in [[San Francisco]] and the greater [[San Francisco Bay Area]] and, by extension, "progressive" politicians who advocate these values.

The result is rampant [[homelessness]], which includes defecation on San Francisco public sidewalks in front of visitors. Crime by vagrants has become rampant, such that [[Target Corporation]] closes many of its stores at 6 p.m. there.

These values follow very strong liberal tendencies and grew out of the [[Hippie]] culture that flocked to this city in the 1960s and 1970s. San Francisco values include: [[gun control]], [[politically correct|political correctness]], heavy [[government]] regulation of [[business]] or even [[socialism|socialist]] and [[anarchism|anarchist]] tendencies, support and sanctuary of [[illegal immigrants]], anti-[[military]], legalization of [[marijuana]] and other drugs, special "rights" for [[homosexual]]s, pro-abortion, [[environmentalism]] and New Age spirituality. United States Speaker of the House [[Nancy Pelosi]] (Representative for the Congressional district containing San Francisco) and [[Senator]] [[Dianne Feinstein]] are generally considered the political embodiment of San Francisco values and its powerful role in the [[Democratic party|Democrat Party]].

==Examples==
* Anti-[[Second Amendment]] [[Gun control|gun-grabbing]] (authored a statewide measure in 2013 that passed both the Senate and the Assembly and was finally vetoed by Governor [[Jerry Brown]] to ban all [[semi-automatic]] [[rifle]]s especially the [[AR-15]], and even the [[Ruger 10/22]]) "State [[Senator]] [[Leland Yee]] was arraigned on seven charges of corruption and firearms trafficking<ref>https://hotair.com/archives/2014/03/27/we-hardly-knew-yee Accessed March 28, 2014</ref> Wednesday, swept up in a broad FBI sting involving more than two dozen people across the Bay Area suspected of selling drugs, smuggling guns<ref>http://www.mercurynews.com/crime-courts/ci_25428957/state-sen-leland-yee-indicted-arms-trafficking-corruption?source=pkg Accessed March 28, 2014</ref> and arranging murder for hire.<ref>https://www.sfgate.com/crime/article/Keith-Jackson-former-S-F-education-official-5352182.php Accessed March 28, 2014</ref>" "The allegations against Yee reach back to his losing run for San Francisco mayor in 2011, when he worked with a political consultant named Keith Jackson who at one time served on the San Francisco Unified School District board. Jackson was also arraigned Monday on charges that include involvement in a murder-for-hire scheme and narcotics trafficking." FBI Affidavits<ref>https://www.sfgate.com/file/757/757-complaint_affidavit_14-70421-nc.pdf Accessed March 28, 2014</ref> "say Lee also introduced another FBI agent posing as a [[medical marijuana]] businessman to two state legislators working on the issue in exchange for two contributions totaling $21,000."<ref>https://www.sacbee.com/2014/03/26/6271916/fbi-california-sen-leland-yee.html and https://www.redstate.com/2014/03/27/leland-yee-gun-control-gun-running-california/</ref>
* The principal of a San Francisco area elementary school turned out to be a drug dealer and a homosexual.<ref>http://www.methproject.org/action/montana/details/news-story-2012-09-24-02.html</ref>
* San Francisco is the headquarters of the [[Wikimedia Foundation]]. The Foundation was first based in Florida, but moved in 2007 so that its staff would be closer to similar institutions.
(Add more; a start)

==General offenses==
The drug [[marijuana]] has been legalized in [[California]] under the ruse of prescribed "medical" use. However, in San Francisco, [[Berkeley]] and Oakland, marijuana use is common among the general populace, and the few remaining laws against its use are not enforced. Similarly, [[prostitution]] is rampant and overlooked by the police.

Adoption agencies in California not only allow homosexual couples to adopt children, but there are even ones which purposefully seek out homosexual people to adopt children, on the faulty presumption that they will be "better" parents.<ref>https://www.cnn.com/2007/US/06/25/gay.adoption/index.html</ref><ref>http://www.adoptionopen.com/gay_adoption.html</ref>

==San Francisco==
San Francisco has been the eponymous exemplar for San Francisco values, being the most egregious offender of the traditional Christian values upon which the United States was founded. It has been the home base for [[homosexual activism]], as well as the launch site of several other unsettling movements.

===Hotbed for homosexuality===
San Francisco has the largest population of homosexuals in the nation of America, located in the urban neighborhood known as the Castro District (from Castro Street, named for Mexican soldier José Castro<ref>[http://www.jdcjr.us/SFStreets.html San Francisco Street Names {A-G}]</ref>), which was usurped from families by an influx of many homosexuals in the 1970s. It has become known as the "Gay Mecca", in an offensive analogy to the religious [[pilgrim]]s in [[Islam]] who are drawn to their holy city of [[Mecca]].

San Francisco has been the location of many flagrant [[gay pride|homosexual "pride"]] marches and other parades, which have degraded into drunkenness, public nudity, public sex and, in recent years, stabbings (2002) and shootings (2006).<ref>[http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E01EEDC133FF931A35752C1A9609C8B63 "Shooting in gay district at Halloween street party"] (October 2006). ''The New York Times''.</ref> All this has been tolerated by the police and mayoral government, and many citizens have been left apathetic to the matter, desensitized through the frequently excessive displays. (See: [[Homosexual Public Indecency Tolerated in San Francisco]])

''[[Christianity Today]]'' states the following about Pastor David Innes regarding the [[Hamilton Square Baptist Church Riot|Hamilton Square Baptist Church riot]]:
{{cquote|Innes says, he blames not police but those in political control of the city, particularly the board of supervisors. "You really can't compare San Francisco with any other city," says Innes. "Homosexual advocates infiltrate and dominate the political structures here. Police are in straitjackets. They can't do their job. They've been instructed not to arrest homosexuals."<ref name=CT93>Frame, Randy (November 8, 1993). "Baptist church becomes target in the culture wars." ''Christianity Today'', v. 37, p. 57.</ref>}}

Pastor Innes then cites a September 30, 1993 letter published in the ''[[San Francisco Chronicle]]'' from a veteran police officer who was "highly embarrassed" when people asked him why he was not making any arrests in regards to totally naked males engaging in lewd behavior at the San Francisco Folsom Street Fair. The officer stated that "At least a dozen times I had to painstakingly explain that we were to take a position of 'high tolerance' and not to create an incident."<ref name=CT93/>

In 1990 and 1991 extreme public lewdness was exhibited at the [[San Francisco Gay and Lesbian Parades|Gay and Lesbian Parades in San Francisco]], and when police authorities were asked why there were no arrests, they offered various excuses such as the primary responsibility was to "reflect community standards and maintain crowd control."<ref>http://www.leaderu.com/marco/special/spc12.html</ref>

In 2001, the city of San Francisco extended its workers health insurance to cover sex change operations for [[gender confusion|gender-confused]] municipal employees.<ref>http://www.berkeleydailyplanet.com/issue/2001-05-01/article/4630?headline=Sex-change-benefits-approved-in-San-Francisco</ref><ref>http://www.brentmorrison.com/0102Sex_change.htm</ref> The Board of Supervisors and Mayor approved the measure which extended up to $50,000 in benefits to city workers who want to switch their gender.<ref>http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9801E0D71130F93BA25751C0A9679C8B63</ref> Such health benefits are supported by [[taxpayer]]s' money.

In February 2004, San Francisco's Democrat mayor, [[Gavin Newsom]] ordered the city clerk to issue "marriage" licenses [[same-sex marriage|to same-sex couples]] despite the practice being explicitly illegal under California law. The "marriages" were nullified by the courts shortly thereafter, as the mayor and clerk were violating California state law.<ref>Smith, Peter J. (February 1, 2007). [https://web.archive.org/web/20070203121225/http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2007/feb/07020106.html "San Francisco mayor advocated gay agenda after sexual affair that damaged a marriage."] ''LifeSite'' website. Archived at Internet Archive.</ref>

In possibly the lowest level to which the city had sunk, the historic National Guard Armory building was sold to a company that produces disgusting hardcore and specifically homosexual [[pornography]]; tellingly, only 50 people showed up to protest the purchase.<ref>[https://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/02/08/BAG37O1B4U12.DTL San Francisco Gate article] on protests of the purchase</ref>

===Other values===
[[File:Pelosi poop map.jpg|right|350px|thumb|The City of San Francisco official "poop map" to warn tourist of areas to avoid due to reportings of human feces on the street covers Democrat [[Speaker Nancy Pelosi]]'s 12th Congressional district.<ref>https://www.mrctv.org/blog/new-report-shows-nancy-pelosis-district-seat-piled-high-dirty-needles-and-human-feces</ref>]]
There have been numerous anti-[[George W. Bush|Bush]], anti-[[military]], [[anti-American]] and anti-[[conservative]] protests and rallies in San Francisco.

San Francisco's newspaper, the ''[[San Francisco Chronicle]]'', is one of the most liberal in the nation, featuring many outspokenly liberal columnists and political cartoonists. Many believe it to be more leftist than the liberal standard, ''[[The New York Times]]''.

The election ballot for November 4, 2008 has two municipal [[measure]]s on it which exemplify San Francisco values in action. The first is to "decriminalize" [[prostitution]], which creates a legal [[limbo]] where prostitution continues to be illegal on a statewide level, but the San Francisco police are legally forbidden to arrest prostitutes or charge anyone with crimes related to prostitution.<ref>[https://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D93V4U0O0&show_article=1 Breitbart] San Francisco votes to decriminalize prostitution</ref> Again, San Francisco has curtailed the police's ability to perform its crimefighting duties. The second measure would be laughable if it didn't have the support it does. Proponents plan to rename a municipal sewage treatment plant after former president, [[George W. Bush]],<ref>[https://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/07/18/BA7A11QU1S.DTL San Francisco Chronicle], George W. Bush Sewage Plant plan is on ballot</ref> which pushes their loud dissent to a thoroughly unpatriotic echelon.

San Francisco was one of the first cities in the country to ban [[trans fat]]s, citing a need to promote healthy living.<ref>http://www.nbc11.com/news/15177139/detail.html?rss=bay&psp=news</ref> This ban was then extended to a statewide ban, the first in the country.<ref>https://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/07/25/RV9N11VMPR.DTL</ref> Of course, the burden is placed on [[restaurant]]s and [[business]]es, who have to pay for more expensive and less tasty alternatives to use in their cooking. The ban absolves the blame from the consumer who chooses to eat a double cheeseburger with extra bacon and fries instead of a sensible sandwich and pickle. [[Chef]]s have been left wondering "how the trans fat ban will affect the bottom line."<ref>[http://www.zagat.com/Blog/Detail.aspx?SNP=NLA&SCID=37&BLGID=13729 LA Chefs React to Cali Trans Fats Ban]</ref> The trans fat ban is another instance of the city's anti-business policies.

San Francisco is also a "city of refugees", which means they have passed an [[ordinance]] that it is "against the law" to report [[illegal immigrant]]s to the United States authorities as they are required to legally do. In other words, anyone upholding the federal law will get in trouble with the city. This has led to a culture of underage drug dealers continuing their trade with impunity.<ref>https://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,374803,00.html</ref>

Mayor Gavin Newsom has made [[recycling]] one of his biggest issues, in a blatant attempt to appeal to his leftist constituency. Unfortunately, San Francisco already has some of the most restrictive recycling ordinances in the country, including mandatory recycling. Therefore, any new laws proposed have been intrusive and unnecessary. Newsom most recently proposed a $1000 ban for improperly sorted recycling. Garbage collectors would inspect the trash and issue tickets to "violators", who will likely be regular citizens who made reasonable mistakes. The laws have been labeled [[Gestapo]]-like by the Canadian press.<ref>[http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/4314 San Francisco Recycling Gestapo, [[Canada Free Press]]</ref>

One of the largest offices of the [[ACLU]] is in San Francisco, as are the headquarters of several other activist [[nonprofit organization]]s, including the [[Wikimedia Foundation]].

As an indicator of the extreme liberalism in this city, the 2007 mayoral election had the following breakdown among major candidates, revealing an almost complete absence of grounded, moral, conservative values:<ref>http://www.sfgov.org/site/elections_index.asp?id=68841 SF Dept of Elections</ref> <ref>Technically all Board of Supervisors elections are "non-partisan"; however, party affiliation of candidates is generally known.</ref>

* Gavin Newsom ([[Democratic Party|Democrat Party]]): 73.66%
* Harold M. Hoogasian ([[Republican Party]]): 5.86%
* Quintin Mecke (Democrat Party): 6.33%
* Lonnie S. Holmes ([[United States Marijuana Party]]): 1.26%
* Wilma Pang ([[Peace and Freedom Party]]): 5.07%
* Josh Wolf ([[Socialist Party of America|Socialist Party USA]]): 1.24%

==Nearby cities==
Other close cities are also hot-beds of liberal, San Francisco values.

===Berkeley===
[[Berkeley]] has gained a particular notoriety as a hotbed of extreme liberalism, in particular [[University of California, Berkeley]]. In Berkeley the [[homeless]] are afforded more rights and protections than tax-paying residents.

In 2008 the city board voted to protest a [[Marines]] enlistment agency downtown, saying the Marines are "uninvited and unwelcome intruders" to the city.<ref>https://www.cnn.com/2008/US/02/07/berkeley.protests/</ref>

[[Tree sitter]]s hijacked a forested portion of the University of California campus, preventing several trees from being cut down in preparation for the building of a city-approved multimillion-dollar athletics facility.<ref name=sitters>http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_10419085</ref> The resulting standoff between the tree sitters and the University and police lasted 22 months and cost $800,000 and significant delays to traffic in the area and the student body.<ref name=sitterfines>https://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/09/21/BAUB131HLG.DTL</ref> The four final tree sitters were arrested for [[trespassing]] and violating a months-old court order to vacate the tree. None of these sitters were even students.<ref name=sitters/> They have been charged with numerous legal fees and judicial fines.<ref name=sitterfines />

===Oakland===
[[Oakland]] has one of the highest crime rates in the country due to extensive [[gang]] presence and a [[welfare]] system run amok.

In Oakland, even the [[Catholic Church]] is liberal: [http://members.tripod.com/~SRLCC/ St. Raphael's Liberal Catholic Church].

==See also==
* [[Gun control]]
* [[Liberal values]]
* [[Hollywood values]]
* [[Professor values]]
* [[Peoples Temple]]

==References==
{{reflist|2}}

{{communism}}
[[Category:Liberalism]]
[[Category:San Francisco]]
[[Category:San Francisco Bay Area]]
[[Category:Liberal Traits]]
[[Category:Liberal Activists]]
[[Category:Homosexual Agenda]]
[[Category:Anti Second Amendment]]
[[Category:Hollywood Values]]

Leland Yee

2021-07-23T06:38:34Z

Dave Wilcox: copy-edit

[[File:Leland_Yee.jpg|thumb|right|Leland Yee]]'''Leland Yee''' was the [[Democrat]]ic Assistant [[President pro tempore]] of the [[California State Senate]], and previously served in the [[California State Assembly]] until his March 26, 2014 arrest for gun trafficking and [[corruption]].

On March 28, 2014, the California State Senate suspended Yee as a Senator In response to the gun running and other criminal charges against him<ref name="McGreevyLATimes03282014">McGreevy, Patrick. [https://www.latimes.com/local/la-me-yee-capitol-20140329,0,2287785.story#axzz2xJpY8H19 In unprecedented move, state Senate votes to suspend three lawmakers],''[[Los Angeles Times]]'', March 28, 2014.</ref>

On July 1, 2015, Yee pled guilty to a felony racketeering count in relation to money laundering, public corruption and bribery in an organized crime case.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/Ex-Calif-Sen-Leland-Yee-Pleads-Guilty-Racketeering-in-Chinatown-Corruption-Case-311242141.html |title=Ex-Calif. Sen. Leland Yee Pleads Guilty in Chinatown Corruption Case |publisher=nbcbayarea.com |date= |accessdate=2015-07-01}}</ref> On February 24, 2016, Yee was sentenced to five years in federal prison.<ref>{{Cite web|title = Former state Sen. Leland Yee sentenced to prison|url = http://www.insidebayarea.com/california/ci_29556899/former-state-sen-leland-yee-sentenced-prison?source=rss|website = InsideBayArea.com|access-date = 2016-02-24}}</ref>

He is the author of [[video game]] legislation restricting the sale and distribution of the increasingly [[violence|violent]] and graphic video games to [[child]]ren. As a result, he is vilified by the video game addicts on the [[Internet]]. Senator Yee filed an [[amicus brief]] in the case on his [[California]] video game legislation pending before the [[U.S. Supreme Court]].<ref>http://dist08.casen.govoffice.com/vertical/Sites/%7BBF15804D-042F-4DCF-8803-86441E95CD9F%7D/uploads/%7BF338F527-8D2E-4B9B-8A2F-B6D865D54A31%7D.PDF</ref>

Senator Yee holds a [[Ph.D.|doctorate degree]] in [[Psychology|Developmental Psychology]] from the [[University of Hawaii]]. Dr. Yee previously served for eight years on the [[San Francisco]] Unified School District Board of Education, where he advocated for the improvement of the [[education]] system.

Senator Yee is also an advocate of free speech, authoring legislation to protect teachers from retaliation by administrators as a result of student speech. He has further been praised by increasing access by the public to [[government]] documents, earning him the nickname "Senator Sunshine."

== References ==
<references/>

{{DEFAULTSORT:Yee, Leland}}
[[Category:Politicians]]
[[Category:Democratic Party]]
[[Category:Liberals]]

San Francisco values

2021-07-23T06:34:12Z

Dave Wilcox: copy-edit

[[File:Jim Jones and the Democrat party.jpg|right|400px|thumb|''Left to Right:'' The [[Rev. Jim Jones]], Mayor [[George Moscone]] (murdered along with City Councilman [[Harvey Milk]]), Speaker [[Nancy Pelosi]] a [[white privilege]]d refugee from [[Baltimore]], Speaker [[Willie Brown]] ex-lover and political patron of [[Kamala Harris]], and Sen. [[Dianne Feinstein]] whose rise came on the heels of the Moscone/Milk murders. The Moscone/Milk murders and the tragedy at [[Jonestown]] were intimately connected in San Francisco's [[Progressive]] [[Democratic party]],<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mzyXNWYmfXg Jim Jones, The Most Admired Democrat of The 1970s, Censored Info], youtube</ref> a fact kept hidden by the [[mainstream media]] for decades.]]
The phrase '''San Francisco values''' refers to the general moral degradation present in [[San Francisco]] and the greater [[San Francisco Bay Area]] and, by extension, "progressive" politicians who advocate these values.

The result is rampant [[homelessness]], which includes defecation on San Francisco public sidewalks in front of visitors. Crime by vagrants has become rampant, such that [[Target Corporation]] closes many of its stores at 6 p.m. there.

These values follow very strong liberal tendencies and grew out of the [[Hippie]] culture that flocked to this city in the 1960s and 1970s. San Francisco values include: [[gun control]], [[politically correct|political correctness]], heavy [[government]] regulation of [[business]] or even [[socialism|socialist]] and [[anarchism|anarchist]] tendencies, support and sanctuary of [[illegal immigrants]], anti-[[military]], legalization of [[marijuana]] and other drugs, special "rights" for [[homosexual]]s, pro-abortion, [[environmentalism]] and New Age spirituality. United States Speaker of the House [[Nancy Pelosi]] (Representative for the Congressional district containing San Francisco) and [[Senator]] [[Dianne Feinstein]] are generally considered the political embodiment of San Francisco values and its powerful role in the [[Democratic party|Democrat Party]].

==Examples==
* Anti-[[Second Amendment]] [[Gun control|gun-grabbing]] (authored a statewide measure in 2013 that passed both the Senate and the Assembly and was finally vetoed by Governor [[Jerry Brown]] to ban all [[semi-automatic]] [[rifles]] especially the [[AR-15]] and even the [[Ruger 10/22]]) "State [[Senator]] [[Leland Yee]] was arraigned on seven charges of corruption and firearms trafficking<ref>https://hotair.com/archives/2014/03/27/we-hardly-knew-yee Accessed March 28, 2014</ref> Wednesday, swept up in a broad FBI sting involving more than two dozen people across the Bay Area suspected of selling drugs, smuggling guns<ref>http://www.mercurynews.com/crime-courts/ci_25428957/state-sen-leland-yee-indicted-arms-trafficking-corruption?source=pkg Accessed March 28, 2014</ref> and arranging murder for hire.<ref>https://www.sfgate.com/crime/article/Keith-Jackson-former-S-F-education-official-5352182.php Accessed March 28, 2014</ref>" "The allegations against Yee reach back to his losing run for San Francisco mayor in 2011, when he worked with a political consultant named Keith Jackson who at one time served on the San Francisco Unified School District board. Jackson was also arraigned Monday on charges that include involvement in a murder-for-hire scheme and narcotics trafficking." FBI Affidavits<ref>https://www.sfgate.com/file/757/757-complaint_affidavit_14-70421-nc.pdf Accessed March 28, 2014</ref> "say Lee also introduced another FBI agent posing as a [[medical marijuana]] businessman to two state legislators working on the issue in exchange for two contributions totaling $21,000."<ref>https://www.sacbee.com/2014/03/26/6271916/fbi-california-sen-leland-yee.html and https://www.redstate.com/2014/03/27/leland-yee-gun-control-gun-running-california/</ref>
* The principal of a San Francisco area elementary school turned out to be a drug dealer and a homosexual.<ref>http://www.methproject.org/action/montana/details/news-story-2012-09-24-02.html</ref>
* San Francisco is the headquarters of the [[Wikimedia Foundation]]. The Foundation was first based in Florida, but moved so that its staff would be closer to similar institutions.
(Add more; a start)

==General offenses==
The drug [[marijuana]] has been legalized in [[California]] under the ruse of prescribed "medical" use. However, in San Francisco, [[Berkeley]] and Oakland, marijuana use is common among the general populace, and the few remaining laws against its use are not enforced. Similarly, [[prostitution]] is rampant and overlooked by the police.

Adoption agencies in California not only allow homosexual couples to adopt children, but there are even ones which purposefully seek out homosexual people to adopt children, on the faulty presumption that they will be "better" parents.<ref>https://www.cnn.com/2007/US/06/25/gay.adoption/index.html</ref><ref>http://www.adoptionopen.com/gay_adoption.html</ref>

==San Francisco==
San Francisco has been the eponymous exemplar for San Francisco values, being the most egregious offender of the traditional Christian values upon which the United States was founded. It has been the home base for [[homosexual activism]], as well as the launch site of several other unsettling movements.

===Hotbed for homosexuality===
San Francisco has the largest population of homosexuals in the nation of America, located in the urban neighborhood known as the Castro District (from Castro Street, named for Mexican soldier José Castro<ref>[http://www.jdcjr.us/SFStreets.html San Francisco Street Names {A-G}]</ref>), which was usurped from families by an influx of many homosexuals in the 1970s. It has become known as the "Gay Mecca", in an offensive analogy to the religious [[pilgrim]]s in [[Islam]] who are drawn to their holy city of [[Mecca]].

San Francisco has been the location of many flagrant [[gay pride|homosexual "pride"]] marches and other parades, which have degraded into drunkenness, public nudity, public sex and, in recent years, stabbings (2002) and shootings (2006).<ref>[http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E01EEDC133FF931A35752C1A9609C8B63 "Shooting in gay district at Halloween street party"] (October 2006). ''The New York Times''.</ref> All this has been tolerated by the police and mayoral government, and many citizens have been left apathetic to the matter, desensitized through the frequently excessive displays. (See: [[Homosexual Public Indecency Tolerated in San Francisco]])

''[[Christianity Today]]'' states the following about Pastor David Innes regarding the [[Hamilton Square Baptist Church Riot|Hamilton Square Baptist Church riot]]:
{{cquote|Innes says, he blames not police but those in political control of the city, particularly the board of supervisors. "You really can't compare San Francisco with any other city," says Innes. "Homosexual advocates infiltrate and dominate the political structures here. Police are in straitjackets. They can't do their job. They've been instructed not to arrest homosexuals."<ref name=CT93>Frame, Randy (November 8, 1993). "Baptist church becomes target in the culture wars." ''Christianity Today'', v. 37, p. 57.</ref>}}

Pastor Innes then cites a September 30, 1993 letter published in the ''[[San Francisco Chronicle]]'' from a veteran police officer who was "highly embarrassed" when people asked him why he was not making any arrests in regards to totally naked males engaging in lewd behavior at the San Francisco Folsom Street Fair. The officer stated that "At least a dozen times I had to painstakingly explain that we were to take a position of 'high tolerance' and not to create an incident."<ref name=CT93/>

In 1990 and 1991 extreme public lewdness was exhibited at the [[San Francisco Gay and Lesbian Parades|Gay and Lesbian Parades in San Francisco]], and when police authorities were asked why there were no arrests, they offered various excuses such as the primary responsibility was to "reflect community standards and maintain crowd control."<ref>http://www.leaderu.com/marco/special/spc12.html</ref>

In 2001, the city of San Francisco extended its workers health insurance to cover sex change operations for [[gender confusion|gender-confused]] municipal employees.<ref>http://www.berkeleydailyplanet.com/issue/2001-05-01/article/4630?headline=Sex-change-benefits-approved-in-San-Francisco</ref><ref>http://www.brentmorrison.com/0102Sex_change.htm</ref> The Board of Supervisors and Mayor approved the measure which extended up to $50,000 in benefits to city workers who want to switch their gender.<ref>http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9801E0D71130F93BA25751C0A9679C8B63</ref> Such health benefits are supported by [[taxpayer]]s' money.

In February 2004, San Francisco's Democrat mayor, [[Gavin Newsom]] ordered the city clerk to issue "marriage" licenses [[same-sex marriage|to same-sex couples]] despite the practice being explicitly illegal under California law. The "marriages" were nullified by the courts shortly thereafter, as the mayor and clerk were violating California state law.<ref>Smith, Peter J. (February 1, 2007). [https://web.archive.org/web/20070203121225/http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2007/feb/07020106.html "San Francisco mayor advocated gay agenda after sexual affair that damaged a marriage."] ''LifeSite'' website. Archived at Internet Archive.</ref>

In possibly the lowest level to which the city had sunk, the historic National Guard Armory building was sold to a company that produces disgusting hardcore and specifically homosexual [[pornography]]; tellingly, only 50 people showed up to protest the purchase.<ref>[https://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/02/08/BAG37O1B4U12.DTL San Francisco Gate article] on protests of the purchase</ref>

===Other values===
[[File:Pelosi poop map.jpg|right|350px|thumb|The City of San Francisco official "poop map" to warn tourist of areas to avoid due to reportings of human feces on the street covers Democrat [[Speaker Nancy Pelosi]]'s 12th Congressional district.<ref>https://www.mrctv.org/blog/new-report-shows-nancy-pelosis-district-seat-piled-high-dirty-needles-and-human-feces</ref>]]
There have been numerous anti-[[George W. Bush|Bush]], anti-[[military]], [[anti-American]] and anti-[[conservative]] protests and rallies in San Francisco.

San Francisco's newspaper, the ''[[San Francisco Chronicle]]'', is one of the most liberal in the nation, featuring many outspokenly liberal columnists and political cartoonists. Many believe it to be more leftist than the liberal standard, ''[[The New York Times]]''.

The election ballot for November 4, 2008 has two municipal [[measure]]s on it which exemplify San Francisco values in action. The first is to "decriminalize" [[prostitution]], which creates a legal [[limbo]] where prostitution continues to be illegal on a statewide level, but the San Francisco police are legally forbidden to arrest prostitutes or charge anyone with crimes related to prostitution.<ref>[https://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D93V4U0O0&show_article=1 Breitbart] San Francisco votes to decriminalize prostitution</ref> Again, San Francisco has curtailed the police's ability to perform its crimefighting duties. The second measure would be laughable if it didn't have the support it does. Proponents plan to rename a municipal sewage treatment plant after former president, [[George W. Bush]],<ref>[https://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/07/18/BA7A11QU1S.DTL San Francisco Chronicle], George W. Bush Sewage Plant plan is on ballot</ref> which pushes their loud dissent to a thoroughly unpatriotic echelon.

San Francisco was one of the first cities in the country to ban [[trans fat]]s, citing a need to promote healthy living.<ref>http://www.nbc11.com/news/15177139/detail.html?rss=bay&psp=news</ref> This ban was then extended to a statewide ban, the first in the country.<ref>https://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/07/25/RV9N11VMPR.DTL</ref> Of course, the burden is placed on [[restaurant]]s and [[business]]es, who have to pay for more expensive and less tasty alternatives to use in their cooking. The ban absolves the blame from the consumer who chooses to eat a double cheeseburger with extra bacon and fries instead of a sensible sandwich and pickle. [[Chef]]s have been left wondering "how the trans fat ban will affect the bottom line."<ref>[http://www.zagat.com/Blog/Detail.aspx?SNP=NLA&SCID=37&BLGID=13729 LA Chefs React to Cali Trans Fats Ban]</ref> The trans fat ban is another instance of the city's anti-business policies.

San Francisco is also a "city of refugees", which means they have passed an [[ordinance]] that it is "against the law" to report [[illegal immigrant]]s to the United States authorities as they are required to legally do. In other words, anyone upholding the federal law will get in trouble with the city. This has led to a culture of underage drug dealers continuing their trade with impunity.<ref>https://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,374803,00.html</ref>

Mayor Gavin Newsom has made [[recycling]] one of his biggest issues, in a blatant attempt to appeal to his leftist constituency. Unfortunately, San Francisco already has some of the most restrictive recycling ordinances in the country, including mandatory recycling. Therefore, any new laws proposed have been intrusive and unnecessary. Newsom most recently proposed a $1000 ban for improperly sorted recycling. Garbage collectors would inspect the trash and issue tickets to "violators", who will likely be regular citizens who made reasonable mistakes. The laws have been labeled [[Gestapo]]-like by the Canadian press.<ref>[http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/4314 San Francisco Recycling Gestapo, [[Canada Free Press]]</ref>

One of the largest offices of the [[ACLU]] is in San Francisco, as are the headquarters of several other activist [[nonprofit organization]]s, including the [[Wikimedia Foundation]].

As an indicator of the extreme liberalism in this city, the 2007 mayoral election had the following breakdown among major candidates, revealing an almost complete absence of grounded, moral, conservative values:<ref>http://www.sfgov.org/site/elections_index.asp?id=68841 SF Dept of Elections</ref> <ref>Technically all Board of Supervisors elections are "non-partisan"; however, party affiliation of candidates is generally known.</ref>

* Gavin Newsom ([[Democratic Party|Democrat Party]]): 73.66%
* Harold M. Hoogasian ([[Republican Party]]): 5.86%
* Quintin Mecke (Democrat Party): 6.33%
* Lonnie S. Holmes ([[United States Marijuana Party]]): 1.26%
* Wilma Pang ([[Peace and Freedom Party]]): 5.07%
* Josh Wolf ([[Socialist Party of America|Socialist Party USA]]): 1.24%

==Nearby cities==
Other close cities are also hot-beds of liberal, San Francisco values.

===Berkeley===
[[Berkeley]] has gained a particular notoriety as a hotbed of extreme liberalism, in particular [[University of California, Berkeley]]. In Berkeley the [[homeless]] are afforded more rights and protections than tax-paying residents.

In 2008 the city board voted to protest a [[Marines]] enlistment agency downtown, saying the Marines are "uninvited and unwelcome intruders" to the city.<ref>https://www.cnn.com/2008/US/02/07/berkeley.protests/</ref>

[[Tree sitter]]s hijacked a forested portion of the University of California campus, preventing several trees from being cut down in preparation for the building of a city-approved multimillion-dollar athletics facility.<ref name=sitters>http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_10419085</ref> The resulting standoff between the tree sitters and the University and police lasted 22 months and cost $800,000 and significant delays to traffic in the area and the student body.<ref name=sitterfines>https://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/09/21/BAUB131HLG.DTL</ref> The four final tree sitters were arrested for [[trespassing]] and violating a months-old court order to vacate the tree. None of these sitters were even students.<ref name=sitters/> They have been charged with numerous legal fees and judicial fines.<ref name=sitterfines />

===Oakland===
[[Oakland]] has one of the highest crime rates in the country due to extensive [[gang]] presence and a [[welfare]] system run amok.

In Oakland, even the [[Catholic Church]] is liberal: [http://members.tripod.com/~SRLCC/ St. Raphael's Liberal Catholic Church].

==See also==
* [[Gun control]]
* [[Liberal values]]
* [[Hollywood values]]
* [[Professor values]]
* [[Peoples Temple]]

==References==
{{reflist|2}}

{{communism}}
[[Category:Liberalism]]
[[Category:San Francisco]]
[[Category:San Francisco Bay Area]]
[[Category:Liberal Traits]]
[[Category:Liberal Activists]]
[[Category:Homosexual Agenda]]
[[Category:Anti Second Amendment]]
[[Category:Hollywood Values]]

Atheism and immaturity

2021-06-15T17:33:59Z

Dave Wilcox: correct wikilink

[[File:Ryan Hall and St. Joseph.jpg|thumbnail|right|250px|In 2012, a [[Georgetown University]] study was published indicating that only about 30 percent of those who grow up in an atheist household remain atheists as adults.<ref>http://www.christianpost.com/news/study-atheists-have-lowest-retention-rate-compared-to-religious-groups-78029/ Study: Atheists Have Lowest 'Retention Rate' Compared to Religious Groups</ref>]]
In the [[United States]], the ages 14–17 are very influential in terms of an individual adopting atheism.<ref>
*[https://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2013/06/listening-to-young-atheists-lessons-for-a-stronger-christianity/276584/?single_page=true Listening to Young Atheists: Lessons for a Stronger Christianity] by Larry Taunton, The Atlantic
*[https://answersingenesis.org/christianity/church/already-gone/ Chapter 1 - Already Gone]</ref> Of those in the United States who embrace unbelief, many do so in their high school years.<ref>
*[https://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2013/06/listening-to-young-atheists-lessons-for-a-stronger-christianity/276584/?single_page=true Listening to Young Atheists: Lessons for a Stronger Christianity] by Larry Taunton, The Atlantic
*[https://answersingenesis.org/christianity/church/already-gone/ Chapter 1 - Already Gone]
*[http://headhearthand.org/blog/2014/10/28/what-led-you-to-become-an-atheist-some-surprising-answers/ What Led You To Become An Atheist? Some Surprising Answers]</ref>

[[Vox Day|Theodore Beale]] declared: "... the age at which most people become [[atheism|atheists]] indicates that it is almost never an intellectual decision, but an emotional one."<ref>[http://voxday.blogspot.com/2011/01/answering-atheists-question.html Answering an atheist's question]</ref>

The [[Christian apologetics|Christian apologist]] [[True Freethinker|Ken Ammi]] concurs in his essay ''The Argument for Atheism from Immaturity'' and writes: "It is widely known that some atheists rejected [[God]] in their childhood, based on child like reasons, have not matured beyond these childish notions and thus, maintain childish-emotional reactions toward the idea of God."<ref>[http://www.truefreethinker.com/articles/argument-atheism-immaturity]</ref>

In 2012, a [[Georgetown University]] study was published indicating that only about 30 percent of those who grow up in an atheist household are atheists as adults. (For more information, please see: [[Atheism and its retention rate in individuals]]).<ref>http://www.christianpost.com/news/study-atheists-have-lowest-retention-rate-compared-to-religious-groups-78029/ Study: Atheists Have Lowest 'Retention Rate' Compared to Religious Groups</ref>

A 2012 study by the [[General Social Survey]] of the social science research organization NORC at the University of Chicago found that belief in God rises with age, even in atheistic nations.<ref>[https://www.healthcanal.com/mental-health-behavior/28601-belief-in-god-rises-with-age-even-in-atheist-nations.html Belief in God rises with age, even in atheist nations]</ref>

The popular [[YouTube]] [[Christianity|Christian]] [[Shockofgod]] received many hostile responses from YouTube atheists when he asked atheists for proof and evidence that atheism is true and they could not provide any.<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RjS__cWr0Y0 The question that is causing atheists to leave atheism]</ref>

For more information, please see: [[Atheism and anger]] and [[Atheism and bitterness]]

== Paul Vitz and the psychology of atheism ==
''See also:'' [[Atheism and poor relationships with parents]]

It is often argued that a troubled/non-existent relationship with a father may influence one of the causes of atheism.<ref>http://www.leaderu.com/truth/1truth12.html</ref> Dr. Paul Vitz wrote a book entitled ''Faith of the Fatherless'' in which he points out that after studying the lives of more than a dozen leading atheists he found that a large majority of them had a father who was present but weak, present but abusive, or absent.<ref>Vitz, Paul, [http://www.columbia.edu/cu/augustine/arch/vitz.txt The Psychology of Atheism], September 24, 1997 (lecture notes taken by an audience member).</ref><ref>Anders, Kerby, [http://www.probe.org/content/view/36/91/ Atheists and Their Fathers] (Probe Ministries)</ref> Dr. Vitz also examined the lives of prominent theists who were contemporaneous to their atheist counterparts and from the same culture and in every instance these prominent theists had a good relationship with his father.<ref>http://www.columbia.edu/cu/augustine/arch/vitz.txt</ref> Dr. Vitz has also stated other common factors he observed in the leading atheists he profiled: they were all intelligent and arrogant.<ref>http://www.columbia.edu/cu/augustine/arch/vitz.txt</ref>

== See also ==

*[[Atheism and children]]
*[[Global atheism and aging populations]]
*[[Atheism and moral intelligence]]
*[[Atheism and profanity]]
*[[Atheism and intolerance]]
*[[Causes of atheism]]
*[[Books on the causes of atheism]]
*[[Ex-atheists]]
*[[Denials that atheists exist]]
*[[Resources for leaving atheism and becoming a Christian]]
*[[Christian apologetics|Evidence for Christianity]]

{{Nb Atheism}}

==References==
{{reflist|2}}

Atheism and immaturity

2021-06-15T17:32:45Z

Dave Wilcox: syntax

[[File:Ryan Hall and St. Joseph.jpg|thumbnail|right|250px|In 2012, a [[Georgetown University]] study was published indicating that only about 30 percent of those who grow up in an atheist household remain atheists as adults.<ref>http://www.christianpost.com/news/study-atheists-have-lowest-retention-rate-compared-to-religious-groups-78029/ Study: Atheists Have Lowest 'Retention Rate' Compared to Religious Groups</ref>]]
In the [[United States]], the ages 14–17 are very influential in terms of an individual adopting atheism.<ref>
*[https://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2013/06/listening-to-young-atheists-lessons-for-a-stronger-christianity/276584/?single_page=true Listening to Young Atheists: Lessons for a Stronger Christianity] by Larry Taunton, The Atlantic
*[https://answersingenesis.org/christianity/church/already-gone/ Chapter 1 - Already Gone]</ref> Of those in the United States who embrace unbelief, many do so in their high school years.<ref>
*[https://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2013/06/listening-to-young-atheists-lessons-for-a-stronger-christianity/276584/?single_page=true Listening to Young Atheists: Lessons for a Stronger Christianity] by Larry Taunton, The Atlantic
*[https://answersingenesis.org/christianity/church/already-gone/ Chapter 1 - Already Gone]
*[http://headhearthand.org/blog/2014/10/28/what-led-you-to-become-an-atheist-some-surprising-answers/ What Led You To Become An Atheist? Some Surprising Answers]</ref>

[[Vox Day|Theodore Beale]] declared: "... the age at which most people become [[atheism|atheists]] indicates that it is almost never an intellectual decision, but an emotional one."<ref>[http://voxday.blogspot.com/2011/01/answering-atheists-question.html Answering an atheist's question]</ref>

The [[Christian apologetics|Christian apologist]] [[True Free Thinker|Ken Ammi]] concurs in his essay ''The Argument for Atheism from Immaturity'' and writes: "It is widely known that some atheists rejected [[God]] in their childhood, based on child like reasons, have not matured beyond these childish notions and thus, maintain childish-emotional reactions toward the idea of God."<ref>[http://www.truefreethinker.com/articles/argument-atheism-immaturity]</ref>

In 2012, a [[Georgetown University]] study was published indicating that only about 30 percent of those who grow up in an atheist household are atheists as adults. (For more information, please see: [[Atheism and its retention rate in individuals]]).<ref>http://www.christianpost.com/news/study-atheists-have-lowest-retention-rate-compared-to-religious-groups-78029/ Study: Atheists Have Lowest 'Retention Rate' Compared to Religious Groups</ref>

A 2012 study by the [[General Social Survey]] of the social science research organization NORC at the University of Chicago found that belief in God rises with age, even in atheistic nations.<ref>[https://www.healthcanal.com/mental-health-behavior/28601-belief-in-god-rises-with-age-even-in-atheist-nations.html Belief in God rises with age, even in atheist nations]</ref>

The popular [[YouTube]] [[Christianity|Christian]] [[Shockofgod]] received many hostile responses from YouTube atheists when he asked atheists for proof and evidence that atheism is true and they could not provide any.<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RjS__cWr0Y0 The question that is causing atheists to leave atheism]</ref>

For more information, please see: [[Atheism and anger]] and [[Atheism and bitterness]]

== Paul Vitz and the psychology of atheism ==
''See also:'' [[Atheism and poor relationships with parents]]

It is often argued that a troubled/non-existent relationship with a father may influence one of the causes of atheism.<ref>http://www.leaderu.com/truth/1truth12.html</ref> Dr. Paul Vitz wrote a book entitled ''Faith of the Fatherless'' in which he points out that after studying the lives of more than a dozen leading atheists he found that a large majority of them had a father who was present but weak, present but abusive, or absent.<ref>Vitz, Paul, [http://www.columbia.edu/cu/augustine/arch/vitz.txt The Psychology of Atheism], September 24, 1997 (lecture notes taken by an audience member).</ref><ref>Anders, Kerby, [http://www.probe.org/content/view/36/91/ Atheists and Their Fathers] (Probe Ministries)</ref> Dr. Vitz also examined the lives of prominent theists who were contemporaneous to their atheist counterparts and from the same culture and in every instance these prominent theists had a good relationship with his father.<ref>http://www.columbia.edu/cu/augustine/arch/vitz.txt</ref> Dr. Vitz has also stated other common factors he observed in the leading atheists he profiled: they were all intelligent and arrogant.<ref>http://www.columbia.edu/cu/augustine/arch/vitz.txt</ref>

== See also ==

*[[Atheism and children]]
*[[Global atheism and aging populations]]
*[[Atheism and moral intelligence]]
*[[Atheism and profanity]]
*[[Atheism and intolerance]]
*[[Causes of atheism]]
*[[Books on the causes of atheism]]
*[[Ex-atheists]]
*[[Denials that atheists exist]]
*[[Resources for leaving atheism and becoming a Christian]]
*[[Christian apologetics|Evidence for Christianity]]

{{Nb Atheism}}

==References==
{{reflist|2}}

Google

2021-06-15T17:25:49Z

Dave Wilcox: annotate image; capitalize proper nouns

[[File:Google.png|thumb|right|250px|Google logo as of September 2015]]
'''Google''' is an Internet services company whose primary business is the collection and dissemination of information. However, they have become known for their political bias, as they continually slant the information they serve (particularly through their search engine and YouTube platform), in favor of leftist ideology. Their services include a [[monopoly|monopolistic]] [[search engine]] (which promotes something [[liberal]] nearly every day), a [[web browser]], webmaster tools, and [[Android (operating system)|phone operating system]]. Google is associated with liberal causes and has been criticized for manipulating search results,<ref>Nolan, Lucas (September 21, 2018). [https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2018/09/21/5-times-google-manipulated-search-youtube-and-news-results/ 5 Times Google Manipulated Search, YouTube, and News Results]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved September 21, 2018.</ref> along with catering to communist [[China]] in [[censorship|censoring]] information from the people as requested by the [[genocidal]] [[Communist Party of China]] from 2006 to 2010.<ref>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/4647398.stm</ref>

Google opposes diversity of opinion and virtually never features a [[conservative]] theme on its search page, and repeatedly promotes [[liberal]] themes instead. Google espouses [[Leftist]] political policies while underpaying its own workers and even creating a severe housing crisis in its community for low-income workers. Google also exploits [[H-1B visas]] in order to import foreigners to do engineering work, with less risk of the workers leaving for a competitor to Google. Google has been criticized for its election interference, its anti-American views and anti-Semitism.

Major competitors of Google include [[Yahoo!]], [[Duck Duck Go|DuckDuckGo]], and Microsoft's [[Bing]].

== Corporate Information ==
The CEO of Google since 2001 was [[Eric Schmidt]]. He announced that he was stepping down as CEO in 2011. Google is headquartered in Mountain View, [[California]]. Google was founded on September 7, 1998, by [[Larry Page]] and [[Sergey Brin]]. Since then, it has grown to be the largest Internet search engine in the world. According to Alexa Internet, over 25% of all Internet users visit Google monthly.<ref>[http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_details?url=www.google.com Alexa Traffic Results for Google]</ref>

Google also owns [[YouTube]], the homemade [[video clip]] site. [[Viacom]] is suing YouTube, and thus Google, for a reported $1 billion, arguing that the economic model of YouTube is based on copyright infringement.<ref>[http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/6446193.stm Viacom will sue YouTube for $1bn]</ref>

After much debate about their corporate Code of Conduct, Google's founders settled on the all-encompassing "Don't be evil", saying,"It's built around the recognition that everything we do in connection with our work at Google will be, and should be, measured against the highest possible standards".<ref>[http://investor.google.com/conduct.html Google Code of Conduct]</ref> This Code of Conduct has generated much criticism, saying they have missed that mark badly.

==History==
[[Image:Google2.gif|thumb|right|300px| Google's logo on [[Earth Day]], April 22, 2007.]]

===Founding===
Google was originally a research project, started by Larry Page and Sergey Brin in 1996, when the two attended [[Stanford University]]. The two registered the domain name ''google.stanford.edu'', and the small search engine went online for the first time.<ref>[http://www.google.com/intl/en/corporate/history.html Corporate Information:Google Milestones]</ref>

===Growth===
The year Google was created 1998, it had amassed 26 million unique URLs in their database. By 2000, Google had indexed more than 1 billion pages. As of July 2008, Google has indexed over 1 [[trillion]] pages. Its core service is usually referred to as Google Search.<ref>[http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-9999814-93.html Google reveals scope of Web-crawling task] CNET News, July 25, 2008</ref> Google Search was enhanced with a feature called Google Instant in 2010 which quickly displays suggested search works as the user types. This reveals how the search information is organized in a "semantic Web" and the degree to which is it understood beyond just simple string matching. This feature seems to be further enhanced by the semantic information in [[Knowledge Graph]].

===Competition===
[[Microsoft]] has been aggressively competing with Google for a larger share of the search market. Their latest effort, [[Bing]].com, is a "next generation" search service which has generated praise for its user interface and criticism for its speed and performance in comparison to Google and Yahoo.

Other potential competitors, such as [[Apple]], have chosen to keep Google as its default search provider. In return, Apple received $9 billion.<ref>[https://9to5mac.com/2018/09/28/google-paying-apple-9-billion-default-seach-engine/ Google reportedly paying Apple $9 billion to remain default search engine in Safari on iOS]</ref> That amount will increase to $12 billion in 2019.<ref>[http://fortune.com/2018/09/29/google-apple-safari-search-engine/ Google reportedly paying Apple $9 billion to remain default search engine in Safari on iOS]</ref>

==Antitrust lawsuit==
On October 20, 2020, [[Attorney General]] [[William P. Barr]] announced an [[antitrust]] action initiated by the [[Department of Justice]] (DOJ) under the [[Sherman Anti-Trust Act]] for Google's anti-competative practices. In the statement the DOJ said:
{{quotebox-float|As one of the wealthiest companies on the planet with a market value of $1 trillion, Google is the monopoly gatekeeper to the internet for billions of users and countless advertisers worldwide. For years, Google has accounted for almost 90 percent of all search queries in the United States and has used anticompetitive tactics to maintain and extend its monopolies in search and search advertising.

As alleged in the Complaint, Google has entered into a series of exclusionary agreements that collectively lock up the primary avenues through which users access search engines, and thus the Internet, by requiring that Google be set as the preset default general search engine on billions of mobile devices and computers worldwide and, in many cases, prohibiting preinstallation of a competitor. In particular, the Complaint alleges that Google has unlawfully maintained monopolies in search and search advertising by:

*Entering into exclusivity agreements that forbid preinstallation of any competing search service.
*Entering into tying and other arrangements that force preinstallation of its search applications in prime locations on mobile devices and make them undeletable, regardless of consumer preference.
*Entering into long-term agreements with Apple that require Google to be the default – and de facto exclusive – general search engine on Apple’s popular Safari browser and other Apple search tools.
*Generally using monopoly profits to buy preferential treatment for its search engine on devices, web browsers, and other search access points, creating a continuous and self-reinforcing cycle of monopolization.<ref>https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-sues-monopolist-google-violating-antitrust-laws</ref>}}

==Secular Progressive Culture==
Google's West Coast headquarters hires a majority of left-leaning personalities, explicitly in executive decision-making.<ref>See [http://www.google.com/corporate/execs.html] for a list of board members and senior staff.</ref> Google supports causes that are a radical departure from traditional American views, such as their public support of a 'no' vote for [[California]]'s [[Proposition 8]], which defined marriage as being between a husband and wife. Also in a subtle way, they favor politically-correct global liberalism, championed by secular progressives. They select certain ''days of importance'' for tribute, some of which are controversial. As such, ''Merry Christmas'' is replaced by ''Happy Holidays''. Even though, poll <ref>[http://www.prweb.com/releases/2008/11/prweb1670824.htm Wish Me A Merry Christmas Campaign Crusades to Change Retail Culture] PRWeb, November 26, 2008</ref> after poll <ref>[http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/lifestyle/general_lifestyle/68_prefer_merry_christmas_to_happy_holidays 68% Prefer “Merry Christmas” to “Happy Holidays”] Rasmussen, November 27, 2008</ref> after poll <ref>[https://www.cnn.com/2005/US/12/20/poll.season/ Poll: More Americans prefer 'Merry Christmas' greeting] CNN, December 20, 2005</ref> shows the public prefers 'Merry Christmas'. The problem may be that Google doesn't respect traditional [[Christian]] holidays, in favor of a 'culturally-correct' approach. In addition, Google accepts the [[Theory of Evolution]] by [[Charles Darwin]] as fact, promotes Darwin on their homepage with a Google Doodle logo.<ref>[Scientists unveil fossil of Darwinius masillae]</ref>

Google often honors Russia with their logo of Sputnik and for composer Igor Stravinsky. Google based their [[United States Independence Day]] logo on ‘This Land Is Your Land’ as an ode to leftism. Woody Guthrie wrote the lyrics and also wrote for ''[[The Daily Worker]],'' a [[Marxist]] newspaper.<ref>[https://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/07/04/Google-chooses-this-land-is-your-land Google Chooses Communist-Oriented ‘This Land Is Your Land’ July 4th Theme, Breitbart.com, July 4, 2012]</ref>

=== Google versus Conservatives ===
Google has also been accused of delisting [[conservative]] news sites from its search engine. As one of many examples, "In February 2005, [[Michelle Malkin]] wrote of the difficulties she was having becoming part of Google News."<ref>http://newsbusters.org/node/5477</ref> Google has made it harder to find websites promoting conservative content.<ref>Multiple references:
*Svab, Petr (May 3, 2019). [https://www.theepochtimes.com/google-doubles-down-making-trump-reddit-fan-club-even-harder-to-find_2905658.html Google Doubles Down, Making Trump Reddit Fan Club Even Harder to Find]. ''The Epoch Times''. Retrieved May 4, 2019.
*Grind, Kirsten; Schechner, Sam; McMillan, Robert; West, John (November 15, 2019). [https://www.wsj.com/articles/how-google-interferes-with-its-search-algorithms-and-changes-your-results-11573823753 How Google Interferes With Its Search Algorithms and Changes Your Results]. ''The Wall Street Journal''. Retrieved November 17, 2019.
*Bokhari, Allum (November 18, 2019). [https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2019/11/18/wsj-investigation-further-debunks-googles-claim-of-no-manual-intervention-in-searches/ WSJ Investigation Further Debunks Google’s Claim of No Manual Intervention in Searches]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved November 18, 2019.
*Bokhari, Allum (November 19, 2019). [https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2019/11/19/wall-street-journal-google-manipulation-report-corroborates-years-of-breitbart-reporting/ Wall Street Journal Google Manipulation Report Corroborates Years of Breitbart Reporting]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved November 19, 2019.</ref>

* Many instances whereby [[information]] is comprised ideologically and displayed for the masses. Watchdog Web site NewsBusters.org published that Google had in fact labeled [[conservative]] [[American Spectator]] as "This site may harm your computer."<ref>[http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2007/12/28/google-claims-american-spectator-site-may-harm-your-computer Google Claims Conservative Website ‘May Harm Your Computer’] December 28, 2007</ref>
* Google once blocked pro-family Web site [http://www.massresistance.org/ MassResistance]. Some people complained his organization promotes hatred towards homosexuals. Google gave the standard legal trash as an excuse "'Users may not publish material that promotes hate towards groups based on race, ethnic origin, religion, disability, gender, age, veteran status, and sexual orientation/gender identity.'" MassResistance replied "Of course we are not promoting hate against anybody."<ref>[https://www.onenewsnow.com/Culture/Default.aspx?id=603372 Accusation: Google targets, blocks pro-family Web site again OneNewsNow.com, July 15, 2009]</ref>
* [[YouTube]] owner, Google continues to protect [[Planned Parenthood]] by removing undercover videos exposing abortion clinic law-breaking.<ref>[http://www.christiannewswire.com/news/7416111014.html YouTube Bans Student Group's Video Showing Abuse at Planned Parenthood Christian News Wire, July 21, 2009]</ref>
* Without any prior explanation or notice, Google had been terminating its News relationships with conservative e-zines and Web journals.<ref>[http://newsbusters.org/node/5477 Is Google Purging Conservative News Sites? NewsBusters, May 22, 2006]</ref>
* Google attempted to minimize global awareness of the [[ClimateGate]] emails and the truth about the [[anthropogenic global warming theory]], whence the term "[[Climategate#Googlegate|Googlegate]]" gained recognition across the [[Web]]. Non-coincidentally, [[Al Gore]] is on the Google advisory board.
* Curiously, leading up to [[Restoring Honor 8-28|Restoring Honor 8-28-10]]—on Google Maps—the [[Lincoln Memorial]] was being misplaced in favor of the [http://www.pcworld.com/zoom?id=204373&page=1&zoomIdx=1 Franklin D. Roosevelt Memorial], which is a good half a mile south of the more famous memorial.<ref>Sarah Jacobsson Purewal. [http://www.pcworld.com/article/204373/google_maps_misplaces_lincoln_memorial.html Google Maps Misplaces Lincoln Memorial], ''PC World'', Aug 28, 2010.</ref> This may have been an ongoing, known problem or bug in Google Maps that hadn't been fixed yet; or, Google is censoring search results; or, Google is playing with searches for political power and gain.
* As of August 15, 2016, a Google search for "The Murder of Seth Rich" Conservapedia, yields no results, likewise a search by "The Murder of Seth Rich" Site: Conservapedia.com. But a Yahoo search brings up the Conservapedia article. Google Finally added the page to their results, but keeps it ranked lower than numerous liberal articles claiming it was all a hoax.
* During the 2016 Presidential campaign Google filtered emails from [[Donald Trump]] into Gmail users spam boxes.<ref>[https://dailycaller.com/2016/06/23/users-claim-google-is-putting-trump-emails-in-their-spam-box/ Users Claim Google Is Putting Trump Emails In Their Spam Box], Alex Pfeiffer, ''Daily Caller'', 8:19 AM 06/23/2016</ref>
*Many more examples exist of Google [[Censorship|censoring]] conservatives or exhibiting bias against them.<ref>Duke, Selwyn (August 28, 2018). [https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/item/29900-google-is-not-a-search-engine-twitter-and-facebook-aren-t-social-media Google Is Not a Search Engine; Twitter and Facebook Aren’t Social Media]. ''The New American''. Retrieved August 28, 2018.</ref><ref>Bokhari, Allum (August 28, 2018). [https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2018/08/28/10-times-googles-far-left-anti-trump-bias-was-exposed/ 10 Times Google’s Far-Left, Anti-Trump Bias Was Exposed]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved August 28, 2018.</ref>
*Google search results are biased in favor of the [[mainstream media]] and liberal websites.<ref>Freiburger, Calvin (May 15, 2019). [https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/google-prioritizes-left-wing-media-sites-in-search-results-new-study-finds Google prioritizes left-wing media sites in search results, new study finds]. ''LifeSiteNews''. Retrieved May 15, 2019.</ref>

Google is also a major promoter of [[Charles Darwin]] and atheistic science, even to the point of giving special recognition to the anniversary of Darwin's birthday ("Darwin Day").

Google's online translator system generally "translates" by predicting from linguistic patterns based on UN documents in various languages.<ref>https://blogs.transparent.com/language-news/2015/09/02/how-google-translate-works-and-why-it-doesnt-measure-up/</ref> This generally results in shoddy translations from languages that don't have the same or similar linguistics as English, such as [[Japanese]].

=== Google versus Anti- Obama Blogs ===
The question immediately raised, "Did Google Silence [[Barack Obama]] critics?" It turns out, no they did not. A group of separate blogs were targeted by their spam filter as a result of manipulating the 'flag' feature. This caused a temporary blockage for five days. Sites affected were Hillary supporters and all anti-Obama. They include http://bluelyon.blogspot.com, http://comealongway.blogspot.com, http://hillaryorbust.blogspot.com and http://mccaindemocrats.blogspot.com and their main associate JustSayNoDeal.com <ref>[http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/06/30/google-and-the-anti-obama-bloggers/ Google and the Anti-Obama Bloggers] NYTimes June 30, 2008</ref>

=== Google sensitive to Islam ===
In 2010, it was noted that Google's search suggestions for the world's various religions would bring up many negative results for [[Christianity]], Judaism, Hinduism and Buddhism. Typing a search for "Christianity is..." the results would be "Christianity is a lie," or "Judaism is..." would be "Judaism is a cult." Google removed negative search suggestions when typing "Islam is...",<ref>[http://thenextweb.com/2010/01/05/google-blocking-negative-search-recommendations-islam/ Google Blocking Negative Search Recommendations On Islam – Why?, The Next Web, May 1, 2010]</ref> however it seems that Google has reverted this, as the current first suggestion when typing "islam is..." is "Islam is evil".

=== Google versus Vladimir Putin ===
On the day of Olympic Winter Games in Russia, Google created a homepage icon, that supports the [[homosexual agenda]]. It shows a rainbow-coloured group of athletes. The background is [[Putin]]'s position on Homosexuality.<ref>https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26080047</ref>

== Google bombing ==
Perhaps the most innovative contribution Google has made to Internet searching is its '''PageRank''' algorithm. This system works by counting the number of sites that link to another site; the more links pointing to a page, the higher that page will be ranked. The engine also takes note of how often the page is updated. Due to this, [[Wikipedia®]] is consistently ranked very highly by Google, due to its constant updating and heavy linkage. More recently, Internet-savvy Googlers have discovered ways to game the system; creating massive numbers of pages with links pointing to one page to form what is known as a "Google Bomb". Some examples can be found below.<ref>[http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20040614/news_mz1b14google.html Dropping 'Google-bombs']</ref>

*'''"Miserable Failure"''': For nearly two years, typing "miserable failure" (or even just "miserable", or "failure") and then clicking "I'm Feeling Lucky" in the Google search engine would return the [https://www.whitehouse.gov/president/biography.html White House Biography] of [[George W. Bush]].<ref>[http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3298443.stm 'Miserable failure' links to Bush]</ref> This was orchestrated by [[Democratic]] Party supporters in late 2003,<ref>[http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2004/01/26/BUG3M4GVDS1.DTL In October, Johnson, a Democrat, added the phrase "miserable failure" to his Web site, Old Fashioned Patriot. He then linked the site to the online White House biography of President Bush and asked others to follow his lead]</ref> as part of the 2004 Presidential election. However, at times, [[Conservative]] supporters were able to shift the phrase to [[Jimmy Carter]], [[Hillary Clinton]] and [[Michael Moore]].
*''''"Great President"''': returns the [https://www.whitehouse.gov/president/biography.html White House Biography] of [[George W. Bush]].
*'''"Jew"''': The first result used to be the home page for "Jew Watch", a racist, anti-Semitic hate group. As of September 2012, Jew Watch is the 4th result, although it has now shown even lower in the result list.
*'''"Waffles"''': Also as part of the 2004 Presidential election, Conservative supporters managed to link the term "waffles" to the official Web site of [[John Kerry]].
*'''"French Military Victories"''': Hitting "I'm Feeling Lucky" for this term directs you to a fake Google page (in reality, it is an AlbinoBlackSheep.com page, styled to look exactly like a Google page, [http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/text/victories.html here]) giving no matches, and asking if you meant "French military defeats?".
*'''"Weapons of Mass Destruction"''' would bring up a similar page with the error message 'not found.'
*'''"[Rick] Santorum"''': Homosexual activist [[Dan Savage]] created a Web site with an obscene definition for the word "santorum" because politician [[Rick Santorum]] opposes same-sex marriage. This page was number one on Google for several years when people searched for his last name (and at times, his full name as well). Once Santorum began to campaign for President, his campaign Web site eventually made it up to the top spot, but as of September 2012, the [[Wikipedia]] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Campaign_for_%22santorum%22_neologism page] about Savage's actions is currently the top result, followed by the Wikipedia page for Santorum. Savage's site has fallen to the third spot. Santorum's presidential campaign Web site has fallen to number four, since Santorum is no longer in the race.

On January 25, 2007, Google claimed to have modified their PageRank algorithm to lessen the likelihood of future Google bombs<ref>[http://boingboing.net/2007/01/26/bush_no_longer_miser.html Bush no longer "miserable failure": Google tackles googlebombs]</ref>

== Google News ==

Google provides a news aggregator service named "Google News," which tailors without user consent which articles appear for them. Alternative news aggregator services are freely available.<ref>https://beebom.com/best-google-news-alternatives/</ref>
== Controversy ==
=== Tax Dodging ===
A report by Bloomberg News has Google setting up offshore banks accounts to avoid paying taxes on foreign profits. More than $3.9 billion have made it to [[Bermuda]] bank accounts over the last several years. Google has cut its effective tax rate abroad to just 2.4%. The practice is common and [[George Soros]] has been known to place his billions of dollars in Cayman Island banks. This costs the U.S. government more than $60 billion in revenue.<ref>[https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/After-news-of-Google-tax-dodges-Obama-raises-money-with-Google-execs-105513473.html#ixzz13LE2lg1F After news of Google tax dodges, Obama raises money with Google execs, Washington Examiner, October 22, 2010]</ref>

=== Privacy Concerns===
Google has been criticized by privacy activists and others. Google chief executive Eric Schmidt said, "We cannot even answer the most basic questions because we don’t know enough about you. That is the most important aspect of Google’s expansion." <ref>http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/c3e49548-088e-11dc-b11e-000b5df10621,dwp_uuid=e8477cc4-c820-11db-b0dc-000b5df10621.html</ref> Google has attempted to "remedy" this situation by storing search information, in effect, keeping tabs on people for two years after they search. This has led Google critic [[Daniel Brandt]] to create "Scroogle.org", which runs Google searches that users conduct through his organization's personal servers to prevent Google from being able to connect any personal information to the searchers.<ref>http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55935</ref> 

A number of other privacy concerns have arisen, including the disclosure of Google's Sensorvault database in 2019. This database reportedly contains extensive records of GPS locations on almost all Android devices. This is an extensive record of every precise location almost every individual device has ever been. This wealth of information reveals many aspects of each owner's behavior, interests, and overall lifestyle. Sensorvault has also reportedly been utilized by law enforcement to find behavioral correlations of devices, then acquire the identity information of certain users of special interest. It is unclear exactly to what extend Google (and [[Alphabet Inc.]]) have been selling/sharing access to this data, or analytical conclusion from it.<ref>https://www.eff.org/es/deeplinks/2019/04/googles-sensorvault-can-tell-police-where-youve-been</ref><ref>https://www.cnet.com/news/law-enforcement-taps-googles-sensorvault-for-location-data-report-says/</ref><ref>https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/13/technology/google-sensorvault-location-tracking.html</ref>

Google has sometimes been called the [[Newspeak|Orwellian]] "Ministry of Truth." In many ways, its offerings have evolved into one singular full-scale surveillance platform.<ref>[https://medium.com/@fredbcampbelljr/how-google-made-android-the-worlds-most-ubiquitous-surveillance-platform-987cdae3d08f How Google Made Android The World’s Most Ubiquitous Surveillance Platform]</ref>

''The Wall Street Journal'' reported in November 2019 that Google had been collecting the health data of millions of Americans.<ref>Copeland, Rob (November 11, 2019). [https://www.wsj.com/articles/google-s-secret-project-nightingale-gathers-personal-health-data-on-millions-of-americans-11573496790 Google’s ‘Project Nightingale’ Gathers Personal Health Data on Millions of Americans]. ''The Wall Street Journal''. Retrieved November 17, 2019.</ref>

=== Net neutrality ===
Google has repeatedly demonstrated hypocrisy as it says one thing and does another, tarnishing their reputation in the process. This can can be seen again with their support of net neutrality, while at the same time doing what they want in regards to restricting access.<ref>[https://www.redstate.com/neil_stevens/2009/08/23/google-undermines-the-internet/ Google undermines the Internet, RedState.com, August 23, 2009]</ref>

===Election meddling===
:{{See also|Trump-Russia collusion hoax|Ukrainian collusion}}
Dr. Robert Epstein of the American Institute for Behavioral Research and Technology testified before Congress in 2019 that Google [[bias]] and meddling had shifted "between 2.6 million and up to 10.4 million votes" to Hillary Clinton.<ref>https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2019/08/psychologist-google-generated-at-least-2-6-million-votes-for-hillary.php</ref>

On October 20, 2018, Google, acting in collusion with the liberal media outlets and other mayoral candidates (including incumbent [[Toronto]] mayor and former Ontario Progressive Conservative leader John Tory, who is also a former broadcaster and has connections in the mainstream media), illegally shut down the online advertising campaign of conservative journalist and [[Toronto]] mayoral candidate [[Faith Goldy]], 48 hours before the opening of polls for the Toronto civic election on October 22, with no justifiable explanation for the shutdown against Goldy and in potential violation of Canada's campaign financing and election laws.<ref>[https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2018/10/22/google-shuts-down-advertising-campaign-of-toronto-mayoral-candidate-faith-goldy-before-election/ Google Shuts Down Advertising Campaign of Toronto Mayoral Candidate Faith Goldy Before Election] at Breitbart News Network</ref>

In June 2019, [[Project Veritas]] released an undercover video in which a Google executive admitted that the company was working, through its policies and products, to prevent "the next Trump situation."<ref>Multiple references:
*Svab, Petr (June 24, 2019). [https://www.theepochtimes.com/google-stealthily-infuses-political-agenda-into-products-to-prevent-trump-reelection-insiders-documents-say_2976582.html Google Stealthily Infuses Political Agenda Into Products to Prevent Trump Reelection, Insiders, Documents Say]. ''The Epoch Times''. Retrieved June 24, 2019.
*Richardson, Valerie (June 24, 2019). [https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/jun/24/google-exec-project-veritas-sting-says-only-big-te/ Google exec in Project Veritas sting says only big tech can stop 'the next Trump situation']. ''The Washington Times''. Retrieved June 24, 2019.
*Bokhari, Allum (June 24, 2019). [https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2019/06/24/project-veritas-google-exec-decries-trumps-election-how-do-we-prevent-it-from-happening-again/ Project Veritas – Google Exec Decries Trump’s Election: ‘How Do We Prevent It from Happening Again’]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved June 24, 2019.
*Kirkwood, R. Cort (June 24, 2019). [https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/item/32684-google-is-gearing-up-to-defeat-trump-in-2020 Google Is Gearing Up To Defeat Trump In 2020]. ''The New American''. Retrieved June 24, 2019.
See also:
*Svab, Petr (June 26, 2019). [https://www.theepochtimes.com/google-doubles-down-on-deceiving-customers-about-its-political-manipulation_2980032.html Google Doubles Down on Deceiving Customers About Its Political Manipulation]. ''The Epoch Times''. Retrieved June 26, 2019.</ref> The video had over one million views in the first 24 hours (available in External link section, below). Google subsequently moved to censor the video from its platforms.<ref>Multiple references:
*Bokhari, Allum (June 24, 2019). [https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2019/06/24/google-censors-video-exposing-google/ Google Censors Video Exposing Google]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved June 24, 2019.
*Kirkwood, R. Cort (June 25, 2019). [https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/item/32698-youtube-scraps-veritas-expose-after-privacy-complaints YouTube Scraps Veritas' Exposé After Privacy Complaints]. ''The New American''. Retrieved June 25, 2019.
*Svab, Petr (June 25, 2019). [https://www.theepochtimes.com/youtube-deletes-expose-on-googles-stealthily-pushing-its-politics-on-users_2978328.html YouTube Deletes Exposé on Google’s Stealthily Pushing Its Politics on Users]. ''The Epoch Times''. Retrieved June 26, 2019.</ref>

As noted above, Professor Epstein in his testimony before the Judiciary Senate Committee stated that his research indicated that Google had manipulated the votes for the 2016 presidential elections in Hillary Clinton's favor, and also had been manipulating national elections as early as 2015, and has even insinuated that they had also manipulated the results of the 2018 midterm elections.<ref name="Epstein testimony PDF" /><ref name="Epstein testimony YouTube" />

====FEC disclosure exemptions====
Political advertising regarding federal elections and candidates that is purchased for appearance on radio, television and print generally must adhere to [[Federal Election Commission]] rules requiring clear disclosure of the committee or donor paying for the advertisements. During 2011, Google and [[Facebook]] hired [[Marxist]] operative [[Marc Elias]] to help them obtain an exemption from this requirement for political advertising on their platforms. Elias argued the restrictions were not practical for his clients, with FEC commissioners ultimately voting 4-2 in favor of the exemption for Google and deadlocking 3-3 on the request regarding Facebook.<ref>Vogel, Kenneth P.; and Kang, Cecilia. [https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/19/us/politics/facebook-google-russia-meddling-disclosure.html “Senators Demand Online Ad Disclosures as Tech Lobby Mobilizes.”] New York Times. October 19, 2017.</ref>

Facebook continued to operate as if exempt from disclosure rules. During the 2016 U.S. general election, $100,000 worth of Russian-backed and undisclosed advertisements intended to influence voters were purchased on Facebook with another $4,700 spent by Russian sources on Google political advertisements. In October 2017, following the controversy that ensued regarding Russian interference in the 2016 elections, both Republican and Democratic Senators advocated for legislation to require Facebook and Google to adhere to the same disclosure rules as other media.

====2016 election meddling====
{{See also|Presidential Election 2016|}}
It was discovered Google was manipulating autocomplete [[search engine]] results to favor Hillary Clinton.<ref>[http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-06-10/must-see-video-how-google-manipulates-search-results-favor-hillary-clinton How Google Manipulates Search Results In Favor Of Hillary Clinton], by Tyler Durden, Jun 10, 2016. zerohedge.com</ref> Autocomplete returns the most popular trending search queries.
<ref>[https://freebeacon.com/politics/here-are-10-more-examples-of-google-search-results-favorable-to-hillary/ Here Are 10 More Examples of Google Search Results Favorable to Hillary], Tech giant accused of whitewashing autocomplete results, Brent Scher and Elizabeth Harrington, ''Washington Free Beacon'', June 10, 2016</ref> When a user types in ''Hillary Clinton cri'' to query about the criminal investigation into Mrs. Clinton for example, the Google results do not match at all popular trends on all other major search engines.<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PFxFRqNmXKg Did Google Manipulate Search for Hillary?], Matt Lieberman, SourceFed, Jun 9, 2016. UPDATE: Friday June 10. youtube.com</ref>

Supporters of [[Bernie Sanders]] complained throughout the 2016 primary season Google had inflated Hillary's delegate count by adding unelected [[Superdelegate]]s who, by rule, were to remain unpledged until the convention.<ref>[http://www.snopes.com/sanders-vs-clinton-delegate-count/ Failing Delegate Math], A popular [[meme]] detailing the actual delegate count between Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton in May 2016 is mostly accurate. Kim LaCapria, ''Snopes'', May 10, 2016</ref> Some in late primary states considered this another form of [[voter suppression]].<ref>[http://thebernreport.com/superdelegate-system-has-been-used-as-a-form-of-voter-supression/ Superdelegate System Has Been Used as a Form of Voter Suppression], Posted by G.A. Casebeer, ''The Bern Report'', May 23, 2016</ref>

In an article titled ''How Google Could Rig the 2016 Election'' in August 2015 ''Politico'' warned Google "can easily shift the voting preferences of undecided voters by 20 percent or more—up to 80 percent in some demographic groups—with virtually no one knowing they are being manipulated... In the United States, half of our presidential elections have been won by margins under 7.6 percent".<ref>[https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/08/how-google-could-rig-the-2016-election-121548 How Google Could Rig the 2016 Election], Google has the ability to drive millions of votes to a candidate with no one the wiser, By Robert Epstein, ''Politico'', August 19, 2015</ref>

Billionaire Eric Schmidt, [[CEO]] of Google's parent company Alphabet funded a startup company called The Groundwork to ensure Hillary has the engineering talent needed to win the election.<ref>[http://qz.com/520652/groundwork-eric-schmidt-startup-working-for-hillary-clinton-campaign/ THE GROUNDWORK The stealthy, Eric Schmidt-backed startup that’s working to put Hillary Clinton in the White House], Adam Pasick & Tim Fernholz, ''Quartz'', October 09, 2015. qz.com</ref> Schmidt and Google are both donors to the Clinton Foundation.

When Googling, '''Hillary Clinton's he-''' 
Google yielded,
*Hillary Clinton's headquarters
*Hillary Clinton's health plan
*Hillary Clinton's healthcare plan

Search results on Bing return the suggestions
*Hillary Clinton's health
*Hillary Clinton's health issues
*Hillary Clinton's health and weight

Search results on Yahoo return the suggestions
*Hillary Clinton's health problems
*Hillary Clinton's health
*Hillary Clinton's health issues

On July 19, 2019, Professor Robert Epstein revealed before the Judiciary Senate Committee that Google was responsible for swaying 2.6 million people into voting for Hillary Clinton during the 2016 presidential elections, and had also implied that the amount of people swayed may have been as many as 10.4 million votes, and may have even been trying to influence national elections as early as 2015.<ref name="Epstein testimony PDF">https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Epstein%20Testimony.pdf</ref><ref name="Epstein testimony YouTube">https://youtu.be/IzF7nBmwPso</ref>

====2020 election meddling====
:{{See also|United States presidential election, 2020|Tulsi Gabbard 2020 presidential campaign}}
[[Tulsi Gabbard]] is suing Google for $50 million for [[censorship]] of her campaign ads.<ref>https://thehill.com/policy/technology/454746-tulsi-gabbard-sues-google-over-censorship-claims</ref> Google blocked her ads account shortly after the first Democrat presidential debate, when Gabbard became the most-searched-for candidate in the Democrat field.

Gabbard's complaint accuses Google of censoring the candidate at the very moment when millions of Americans wanted to learn more about her. It also accuses Google of sending Gabbard's campaign emails to people's Gmail spam folders at a “disproportionately high rate.” The campaign seeks a legal injunction against Google to prevent further election meddling, as well as $50 million in damages. According to Gabbard's legal complaint against Google:

{{Quotebox|At the height of Gabbard’s popularity among Internet searchers in the immediate hours after the debate ended, and in the thick of the critical post-debate period (when television viewers, radio listeners, newspaper read-ers, and millions of other Americans are discussing and searching for presidential candidates), Google suspended Tulsi’s Google Ads account without warning. For hours, as millions of Americans searched Google for information about Tulsi, and as Tulsi was trying, through Google, to speak to them, her Google Ads account was arbitrarily and forcibly taken offline. Throughout this period, the Campaign worked frantically to gather more information about the suspension; to get through to someone at Google who could get the Account back online; and to understand and remedy the restraint that had been placed on Tulsi’s speech—at precisely the moment when everyone wanted to hear from her.}}

The legal complaint argues that Google could have a nefarious impact on American democracy if its behavior is allowed to continue unchecked. This is the viewpoint of Dr. Robert Epstein, who says the Silicon Valley Masters of the Universe will “go all out” to influence the 2020 election.

In a series of Tweets, the Hawaii Democrat said Google's actions “reveals the danger of their dominance & how the dominance of big tech over public discourse threatens core American values.”<ref>https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2019/07/25/tulsi-gabbard-sues-google-for-censorship-of-ads/</ref>

After Hillary's Clinton's xenophobic smear, [[Steven Crowder]] demonstrated during his radio program how Google was actively suppressing Tulsi Gabbard search results in the United States.<ref>https://www.zerohedge.com/political/tulsis-youtube-suppressed</ref>

===Interference with Trump presidency===
Owing to all of the above, Google has been accused of trying to stifle conservative voices (especially those that support Trump) and only allowing for left-wing viewpoints to be shown on the search engine. Although Google twice denied these claims, this was eventually confirmed on September 12, 2018, via a leaked video via Breitbart for the TGIF session immediately after Donald Trump's election, where the upper management not only made their views of the American public clear by inferring that those who voted for Donald Trump were "fascists and communists", but also strongly implied that they were going to dedicate all of their resources to making sure the rise of populism is squashed.<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FRf9UxsM-NE&feature=youtu.be</ref><ref>Bokhari, Allum (September 12, 2018). [https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2018/09/12/leaked-video-google-leaderships-dismayed-reaction-to-trump-election/ LEAKED VIDEO: Google Leadership’s Dismayed Reaction to Trump Election]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved September 14, 2018.</ref><ref>Freiburger, Calvin (September 17, 2018). [https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/top-google-leaders-vowed-to-alter-future-elections-to-avoid-trump-hiccup-le Top Google leaders vowed to alter future elections to avoid Trump ‘hiccup’: leaked video]. ''LifeSiteNews''. Retrieved September 19, 2018.</ref> Google also was caught trying to increase [[Latino]] turnout in the 2016 election.<ref>Duke, Selwyn (September 14, 2018). [https://www.thenewamerican.com/tech/computers/item/30073-google-caught-red-handed-tried-to-get-clinton-elected Google Caught Red-handed: Tried to Get Clinton Elected]. ''The New American''. Retrieved September 14, 2018.</ref>

On a similar note, Professor Epstein when giving testimony towards Google's efforts in overturning elections mentioned that, aside from its aforementioned role in manipulating votes in Hillary Clinton's favor, it also may have been responsible for the manipulation of as many as 78 million votes during the 2018 midterm elections, and has also implied that they are using their autocomplete programs for their products as a form of social engineering.<ref name="Epstein testimony PDF" /><ref name="Epstein testimony YouTube" />

=== Relationship with the Obama Administration ===
Consumer Watchdog crafted a 32-page report detailing how Google has inappropriately benefited from its close ties to the Obama Administration. [[NASA]]'s Moffett Airfield has been turned into a taxpayer-subsidized private airport for Google executives used for corporate junkets. NASA's Moffett Airfield is a short distance from Google's world headquarters. The report details, ''"A growing fleet of jets and helicopters stand ready to ferry the company's top executives near or far, for business or pleasure, for vacations or schmoozing, including at least three wintertime trips to the [[Caribbean]] and a trip by Google chief executive Eric Schmidt to the Cannes Film Festival."'' <ref>[http://www.redorbit.com/news/technology/1983792/consumer_watchdog_sends_issas_oversight_committee_google_report_showing_inappropriate/index.html Consumer Watchdog Sends Issa's Oversight Committee Google Report Showing Inappropriate Relationship with Obama Administration, RedOrbit.com, January 24, 2011]</ref>

===Homosexual agenda===
As was already mentioned, Google has been actively blocking certain websites and services which oppose sodomy (homosexuality). They also speak out in support of the homosexual movement, and promote search results which do the same.<ref>https://blog.google/topics/causes-community/transvoices</ref><ref>https://money.cnn.com/2012/07/08/technology/google-legalize-love/index.htm</ref><ref>https://winteryknight.com/2012/07/09/google-starts-wordlwide-campaign-to-legalize-gay-marriage-target-donates-to-gay-rights-groups</ref><ref>https://onetoday.google.com</ref> They also donate to some other organizations which do the same, as well and politicians who seek the same goal.<ref>http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2008/09/our-position-on-californias-no-on-8.html , Our position on California's No on 8 campaign</ref>

Google considers the term "family friendly" to be "[[homophobic]]."<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=--3oGtllMXY&feature=youtu.be</ref> On June 21, 2009, Google displayed a special multicolored line for searches on the word "gay". Additionally, Google compensates employees to cover taxes paid on their domestic partner's health benefits, but only offers its 'generosity' to homosexual couples.<ref>https://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/07/01/google-raises-eyebrows-new-gay-employee-benefit/</ref>

===Collaboration with China===
It was revealed in 2018 that Google was collaborating with China and supported the government's [[censorship]] agenda.<ref>Nash, Charlie (October 10, 2018). [https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2018/10/10/googes-shift-towards-censorship-aids-relationship-with-china/ Google’s ‘Shift Towards Censorship’ Aids Relationship with China]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved October 10, 2018.</ref>

Reporters Without Borders joined others in asking how Google could stand up for US users' freedoms while controlling what Chinese users can search for. Its previous search engine for China's fast-growing market was subject to government blocks. The new site - Google.cn - censors itself to satisfy Beijing. While cooperating with China's government, Google refuses to fulfill requests by the U.S. Department of Justice.<ref>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/4630694.stm , BBC Google defies US over search data, January 20, 2006</ref> Google counsel Nicole Wong said "..we intend to resist their motion vigorously."

===Opposing industry standards===
In addition to their political activities, Google has caused some controversy within its own industry by refusing to comply with industry standards. Since they own the most popular web browser and the most popular search engine (at least within the US), they have decided that they can bring about changes they believe are needed despite what the rest of the industry has decided. 
For example, the norm is that users are only logged into a service when they request it, and when they attempt to delete the cookies in their browser, the browser does so. However, Google decided in 2018 to automatically log users into their google accounts, and protect the google cookies from deletion, so that Google's cookies could not be deleted by the user (through the browser).<ref>https://www.wired.com/story/google-chrome-login-privacy/</ref><ref>https://www.theverge.com/2018/9/24/17895536/google-chrome-69-log-in-sync-password-user-data-privacy</ref> 
As another example, Google search was changed in 2018 to hide certain subdomains, including the "www" which many websites use. Users only would see the domain name and the [[TLD]], while the rest was masked. Further, the search engine would link users to sites which were using the "www" subdomain without that subdomain, so the site would need to redirect users to the proper location. Google knew this was not what the sites wanted, but chose to make this change anyway.<ref>https://www.makeuseof.com/tag/google-security-risk-hiding-subdomains/</ref><ref>https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/google/google-testing-removal-of-www-subdomain-from-search-results/</ref><ref>https://technocodex.com/google-removed-www-and-m-subdomains-in-chrome-69-how-to-disable-it/</ref> Not only is this inconvenient, but masking parts of URLs in inherently dangerous, since attackers can abuse such features to trick users into trusting a fraudulent site or page. The industry standard is, therefore, to show users the entire link which they have used to connect. 
Also in 2018, Google decided to make an additional change. They began trying to force websites to begin using the [[HTTPS|Hyper-text transfer protocol secure (HTTPS)]] rather than the older standard HTTP. While HTTPS is helpful, some webpages have reason to not use HTTPS. While the industry is moving slowly to HTTPS, Google decided to begin interfering with the loading and interaction in Chrome of sites which are not using HTTPS for their pages and all of the content therein. This caused many users to experience problems visiting websites, simply because Google no longer approved of sites using HTTP.

===Wi-Fi Snooping===
Google collected information from [[Wi-Fi]] networks as its street-view vans cruised neighborhoods around the globe, raising issues in more than 30 countries. The information Google gathered included e-mail fragments and passwords, alarming politicians and privacy and security advocates in Germany, France, and [[Spain]].<ref>[https://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/07/22/national-security-google-wi-fi-spy-scandal/ Is National Security Behind Google's Wi-Fi Spying?, Fox News, July 23, 2010]</ref> It was noted that Google supplies special mapping and search products to the U.S. military and intelligence community, with some Google employees enjoying Top Secret clearance to work with the government. Google said it was "accidental" data gathering. Rep. Joe Barton of Texas, a senior [[Republican]] lawmaker, suggested that Google's data collection wasn't accidental and that it was "something to look at." Under the Democrat leadership, the [[FCC]] investigated, but dropped further inquiry, coincidentally, just before a Google [[Democrat]] fundraiser was held. Many groups have been calling on Republican [[Darrell Issa]] to investigate Google's cozy relationship with the [[Obama administration]].<ref>[http://www.nlpc.org/stories/2010/11/10/congress-must-investigate-google-obama-ties Congress Must Investigate Google-Obama Ties, National Legal and Policy Center, November 10, 2010]</ref>

*France: Privacy watchdog CNIL awarded its largest fine to date with a judgement of $141,300 against Google in relation to snooping.<ref>[https://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2011/03/21/general-broadcasting-amp-entertainment-eu-france-google-fined_8366482.html France fines Google for Street View privacy breach, Forbes, March 21, 2011]</ref>

===Support for Antifa and Black Lives Matter===
In June 2020, Google was listed as one of numerous leftist-controlled companies that have gone "[[woke]]" and now support the criminal rioters of [[Antifa]] and [[Black Lives Matter]] in the wake of the [[2020 leftist riots]].<ref>[https://gab.com/a/posts/104311289660016704 Here Are The Companies That Support Antifa, Black Lives Matter, and Want You Dead] at Gab.com</ref>

Seattle Google engineer, Zachary Ames Trudo, was arrested at the [[Portland, Oregon]] Antifa riot. The 32-year-old [[Marxist]] was charged with [[assault]], attempting escape and resisting arrest. Trudo posted on [[Facebook]], "One way to hurt the [[bourgeoisie]] is to hurt their business. Closing down the ports is a terrific show of solidarity between labour and BLM.”<ref>https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/07/burn-ground-marxist-google-engineer-arrested-portland-riot-charged-assault-resisting-arrest-attempting-escape/</ref>

==International Agitation==
Google's Map service is responsible for escalating tensions between foreign nations by radically misleading versions of current borders.

Google has been labeled "professionally irresponsible" for disseminated [[Cambodia]] territory, which is embroiled in a bitter diplomatic row with Thailand over the demarcation of the frontier.<ref>[https://www.reuters.com/article/2010/02/05/cambodia-google-idUSSGE61406G20100205 Cambodia blasts Google map of disputed Thai border, Reuters, February 5, 2010]</ref>

[[Costa Rica]] took offense to Google Maps version showing that a specific area of encampment was on Nicaraguan soil. The dispute that had ensued over Google's version of the Nicaragua-Costa Rica border has became rather serious. So much so that the secretary general of the [[Organization of American States]] had to intervene.<ref>[http://news.cnet.com/8301-17852_3-20021977-71.html Envoy to solve latest Google Maps border dispute? CNET, November 5, 2010]</ref><ref>[http://spectregroup.wordpress.com/2010/11/12/google-maps-blamed-for-border-dispute/ GOOGLE MAPS BLAMED for BORDER DISPUTE, Spectre Footnotes, November 11, 2010]</ref>

Google Maps was busy fixing another error in its map program of a port city that reignited border tensions between [[Germany]] and The Netherlands.<ref>[https://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/02/21/google-maps-slipup-sparks-diplomatic-crisis/ Google Maps Blunder Reignites Centuries Old Border Dispute, Fox News, February 21, 2011]</ref>

===Egyptian Uprising===
Google executive Wael Ghonim helped with protesting [[Egypt]]'s rule of [[Hosni Mubarak]], calling for him to step down and organizing protests. He was detained by authorities and released after two weeks. Ghonim is credited as being a major factor in sparking Egypt's uprising. Google CEO Eric Schmidt said that Google is "very, very proud" of Wael Ghonim.<ref>[http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/technology/2011/02/google-ceo-eric-schmidt-says-company-is-proud-of-wael-ghonim-in-egypt.html Google CEO Eric Schmidt says company is 'very proud' of Egypt's Wael Ghonim, LA Times, February 15, 2011]</ref>

=== Benghazi massacre ===
After the [[Benghazi attack]], Hillary's State Department was in contact with Google. Hillary publicly claimed a controversial video was the source of a 'spontaneous' riot which proved to be a knowingly false statement. Google participated in the ruse by agreeing to block the video even after President Obama admitted it was a pre-planned terrorist attack. Copies of the email were forwarded to [[Denis McDonough]], [[Cheryl Mills]], Patrick F Kennedy, [[Jake Sullivan]] and [[John Brennan]]. The email also contains contact information for Google CEO Afternoon (Larry) Page and [[YouTube]] CEO Salar Kamangar including their mobile and office phone numbers.<ref>[https://wikileaks.org/clinton-emails/emailid/16800 UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04841 Doc No. C05739829 STATE DEPT]. wikileaks.org</ref>

=== Syrian Civil War ===
Newly released emails from [[Hillary Clinton]]'s State Department shows Google coordinating the overthrow of Bashar Assad in Syria.<ref>[https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/clinton-email-reveals-google-sought-overthrow-of-syrias-assad/article/2586300 Clinton email reveals: Google sought overthrow of Syria's Assad, Washington Examiner, March 19, 2016]</ref>
==Alternatives to Google==

: ''Main Article: [[Alternatives to Google]]''
*[[Duck Duck Go| DuckDuckGo]] - a search engine that is said to not track people. It also has "Privacy Essentials" on Firefox and Chrome and "Privacy browser" on mobile.
*[[Result Hunter]] - a search engine that favors conservative results, as opposed to Google which favors liberal results.
*[[Mojeek]] - a search engine that doesn't track people and uses a proprietary page ranking engine as opposed to PageRank, and is intended to give unbiased search results.
*[https://www.seekfind.org/ Seek Find] - a Christian search engine. Cannot be used for a general search, but a search over the Internet for information from Christian sites.
*[https://www.worthyseek.com/ Worthy Christian Search] - A similar Christian search engine.
*[https://www.StartPage.com/ StartPage]

==See also==
* [[Search engine manipulation effect]]
* [[Bing]]
* [[Censorability]]
*[[Far Left]]
* [[Censorship]]
* [[Duck Duck Go]]
* [[Evolutionist censorship]]
* [[Fairness Doctrine]]
* [[Liberal censorship]]
* [[Media censorship]]
* [[Tools of censorship]]
* [[Yahoo]]
*[[Fake news in the 2020 presidential election]]

== References ==
{{Reflist|colwidth=35em}}

== External links ==
* [https://www.google.com/ Google]
*[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lsSbpQklWyI Former Google CEO Eric Schmidt]
* [https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/07/29/google-and-the-adjustment-of-inconvenient-viewpoints-especially-climate/ GOOGLE and the ‘adjustment’ of inconvenient viewpoints, especially climate]
* [https://www.thecreepyline.com/ The Creepy Line]
*[https://www.liveleak.com/view?t=ksvnD_1561429279 Project Veritas "Trump Situation" Backup - Youtube yanked the vid off their site!], June 24, 2019.
*[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NTjmQKyOYlM Project Veritas Nails Google/Youtube Over Election Tampering], Original complete video, June 24, 2019.
*[https://gohmert.house.gov/uploadedfiles/google.mp4 Project Veritas Google election subversion video], June 24, 2019. https://gohmert.house.gov
*[https://www.oneangrygamer.net/2019/08/google-news-blacklist-revealed-websites-listed/90919/GOOGLE NEWS BLACKLIST REVEALED, WEBSITES LISTED] August 14, 2019.

[[Category:United States Businesses]]
[[Category:Search Engines]]
[[Category:Google]][[Category:San Francisco Bay Area]]
[[Category:Homosexual Agenda]]
[[Category:Communism]]
[[Category:Liberal Companies]]
[[Category:Anti Second Amendment]]
[[Category:SJWs]]
[[Category:Anti-Free Speech]]
[[Category:Perpetrators of Cancel Culture]]

User talk:Aschlafly/Archive59

2021-06-15T17:09:07Z

Dave Wilcox: add comment

== Database Download? ==
I homeschool my children and they are too young to allow online access. I do use Kiwix (see kiwix.org) though and would like to build a ZIM file of Conservapedia that they can use for research. Does Conservapedia make a database dump of the articles available? Thank you for this wonderful resource! [[User:CurtisJ|CurtisJ]] 12:00 PM 24 December 2014 (EDT)

== Promotion ==
Thanks a lot Mr. Schlafly, I promise to make good use of my new rights. - [[User:PetyrB|PetyrB]] 12:33, 29 June 2014 (EDT)

== Meritocracy ==

Andy, you have repeatedly stated that Conservapedia is a meritocracy, and you often rewarded editors by bestowing rights on their accounts. Therefore, I have to ask: has [[User:PetyrB]] some merits besides those which are on display here at Conservapedia? Otherwise, the promotion of his account is rather surprising:
*His account is just a week old. The only other other account which I remember to have risen so quickly, was [[User:Markman]]
*He hasn't made any substantial edit to an article, or started a new article
*For an observer, his greatest merit seems to be that he agrees with you in everything.
I'm surprised how quickly [[User:PetyrB]] picked up the peculiar lingo of Conservapedia, terms like "talk pollution", "last wordism".
Do you think he is such a fast learner? I remember the pattern, and I've seen the little atrocities (deleting comments, petty insults) before! Are you interested in repeating history over and over again?

--[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 15:28, 1 July 2014 (EDT)
:User:PetyrB is another Markman/Bugler. Consider blocking him now. So far my track record is 100% being right when indicating someone is an insincere editor. And I don't expect to see User:PetyrB adding a lot of content to main space articles.

::Here are 3 acid tests to consider in the future: 1) Is he/she creating a significant amount of main space article content? If no, this is definitely a red flag. 2) Does the person have an aggressive personality? If so, then they may be trying to get rid of good faith editors. 3) Does the person use language that I use or praise my favorite projects at Conservapedia? If so, the person may be engaged [http://sales.about.com/od/glossaryofsalesterms/g/What-Is-Mirroring.htm in mirroring] in order to quickly gain rapport. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 16:35, 1 July 2014 (EDT)

:::I think that you two are overreacting. AugusO, you talk as if Andy has officially made me his second in command. In reality, the promotion I have been granted is rather modest. He has given me blocking rights and Skipcaptcha. That's it. You stated that I "hasn't made any substantial edit to an article, or started a new article". I don't see why this is relevant for me to have block rights, you don't need to write any article in order to properly block a spammer, a vandal or someone with an inappropriate username. As far as I gather, Andy has given me blocking rights for my work in reverting vandalism, not for any edits I have made.

:::User:Conservaitve wrote "User:PetyrB is another Markman/Bugler." How exactly did you reach this conclusion? I have lurked for some time on Conservapedia, and I'm aware that there are some mischievous vandals who try to insert parody into our wiki. Why do you think I'm one of them? Do you find hints of parody in any of the edits I have made so far?

:::Anyhow, the reason why I came to CP is to contribute, not to be endowed with blocking rights. Should Andy revoke my blocking rights, it would not cause me any grief (although I do want to retain the Skipcaptcha, it is helpful when editing). I just hope that this exchange of ours will soon forgotten and that our next interactions on this website will be more cordial. - [[User:PetyrB|PetyrB]] 16:54, 1 July 2014 (EDT)
::::PetyrB, please feel free to prove me wrong by creating a significant amount of new main space content.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 19:11, 1 July 2014 (EDT)
:::::Creating more content for CP is why I registered here. It will take me some time to reach impressive achievements since I'm relatively inexperienced at wiki-editing, but I hope that within a few months at the most I'll be able to show you that I mean well. - [[User:PetyrB|PetyrB]] 15:02, 2 July 2014 (EDT)
Based on IP address research that Karajou just performed, the evidence is pointing to PetyrB being user Markman/Markoman. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 16:39, 7 July 2014 (EDT)

'''Andy''', PetyrB went on a spree to replace every occurrence of "Son of Man" by your "translation". I tried to undo these edits, as I think that the last word on this matter shouldn't be written by someone like him. --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 17:27, 23 July 2014 (EDT)

== George H. W. Bush ==

Are [[George H. W. Bush]] and [[Mike Crapo]] Conservatives or RINOs?--[[User:JoeyJ|JoeyJ]] 05:16, 5 July 2014 (EDT)

:[[George H. W. Bush]] was a [[RINO]]. I don't know enough about [[Mike Crapo]] to say.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 10:44, 5 July 2014 (EDT)
::There was a place in my heart for Bush until he "chucked aside my free market principles" and he came out in support of the banking bailout. Nowadays, I call him George "I chucked my principles" Bush. Without principles, you're not a man at all. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] 22:51, 5 July 2014 (EDT)

== I suggest banning the parodist JamesWilson ==

I suggest banning the parodist JamesWilson or at the very least stripping him of his block rights.

JamesWilson just gave a bizarre definition of fornication. Namely, he claims fornication includes sex within marriage not intended for procreation.[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Fornication&curid=104251&diff=1092465&oldid=854524] Setting aside the morality of sex inside of marriage not intended for procreation, this is certainly not fornication. Merriam-Webster, for example, defines fornication as "consensual sexual intercourse between two persons not married to each other".[http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fornication]

Secondly, he indicated on PetyrB's talk page that he wanted to have private email communications with him when I challenged PetyrB on being Markman the parodist. No doubt to give him suggestions on how to avoid detection as far as being a parodist.

Thirdly, correct me if I am wrong, but I seem to recall that JamesWilson's biggest "contributions" are to Elvis/Little Richard, etc. articles.

Fourthly, he has a penchant of attempting to curry favor with you which was a trait of Bugler, Markman, etc.

Fifthly, I have always suspected JamesWilson to be a parodist and so far my accuracy is 100%. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 15:49, 8 July 2014 (EDT)
:I saw that Conservative deleted and salted JamesWilson's user and user talk pages. However, he neglected to block the account. I don't know whether this was an oversight or an intentional decision. [[User:GregG|GregG]] 20:04, 8 July 2014 (EDT)
::积水之激，至于漂石者，势也。鸷鸟之疾，至于毁折者，节也。 [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 21:36, 8 July 2014 (EDT)
:::I don't understand what you are saying (even with Google translate). Following the [[Conservapedia:Editing article and talk pages]] will help in effective communication on this project. Thanks, [[User:GregG|GregG]] 21:41, 8 July 2014 (EDT)
*As of 05:16, 9 July 2014, JamesWilson has blocked himself. If he can block himself, can he unblock himself? This is getting curiouser and curiouser. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] 01:40, 9 July 2014 (EDT)
::He decided to get a new hobby because his days of being a parodist were effectively over. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 02:08, 9 July 2014 (EDT)

Conservative, given that your accuracy is 100%, what do you think of [[User:Historybuff]]? For me, he takes great efforts to sound like a sock of yours! Would you take action? --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 17:14, 2 August 2014 (EDT)

== Tea Party Crusaders displays scammy advertisements ==

I was visiting the article "The country with second highest amount of abortions in the world decides to impose fines on abortions. Guess which country" on Tea Party Crusaders, linked on our front page. On the right side, there is a scammy advertisement simulating user interface elements, stating "Media content may not display properly. Download a new video content player now. Your system may not be able to play all media content and services available. Install new windows compatible software now." (For the record, my operating is Ubuntu 14.04). I have a screenshot that is available, but I cannot upload images to Conservapedia. <del>I wonder whether Conservapedia should link to sites carrying advertisements that could significantly harm our readers.</del> Many thanks, [[User:GregG|GregG]] 20:18, 8 July 2014 (EDT)
:GregG, please spare us your liberal hysterics. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 21:25, 8 July 2014 (EDT)
::I don't see web security as a partisan issue. Another advertisement I found imitated the Facebook mobile interface with a flashing notifications icon. Clicking the advertisement leads to a survey scam (also using Facebook's trade dress). [[User:GregG|GregG]] 21:46, 8 July 2014 (EDT)
:::GregG, I am not going to wrestle in the internet mud with an unreasonable liberal. You have cried wolf too many times before concerning your various petulant complaints. Game over. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 21:57, 8 July 2014 (EDT)
::::Thank you for your input, Conservative. I will leave the resolution of this issue to Mr. Schlafly (screenshots are also available upon request). [[User:GregG|GregG]] 22:15, 8 July 2014 (EDT)
:::::Against my better judgement, I investigated your complaint using an Opera browser with no advertisement blocker or other types of blocking on the Opera browser and it was a total waste of time. Please stop wasting my time. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 22:27, 8 July 2014 (EDT)
::::::If you have an e-mail address, I can send you the screenshots I took. Note that the scammy advertisements do not appear on every page load. [[User:GregG|GregG]] 22:30, 8 July 2014 (EDT)
::::::The [http://www.appnexus.com/ AppNexus] network delivered the advertisements I mentioned above. There are other ad networks on TPC. [[User:GregG|GregG]] 22:35, 8 July 2014 (EDT)
:::::::You want my email address so you can pesterfest me about nothing at will and waste more of my time whenever you desire. Gehenna will freeze over before that happens. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 22:39, 8 July 2014 (EDT)
*The main Tea Party site is the [http://www.tpnn.com/ Tea Party News Network]. Tea Party Crusaders is a rather obscure site to be getting so much material from. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] 02:11, 9 July 2014 (EDT)
::Alexa ranks the Tea Party Crusaders website about 83,000 in the United States and I like a number of the stories they choose to cover. For example, they recently ran a number of: pro-life stories, Christian stories, anti-Obama stories, a godless Britain story, anti-atheism/evolution stories, pro-gun rights stories, anti-liberal stories, etc. They also chose to run a Christian athlete story recently.

::Unlike many Tea Party websites, they have a strong emphasis on the social issues. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 02:42, 9 July 2014 (EDT)
Here's another probably-fraudulent advertisement I found on TPC tonight: it states "CONGRATULATIONS! THIS IS NOT A JOKE! YOU ARE THE 100.000th VISITOR! Click here" (with the "click here" line in rapidly flashing black and white text). Clicking the advertisement leads to a "free product" scam, notable for requiring significant expense to obtain a nominally-free product (I will not make the obvious political comparison), one of which is a "$500 Unemployment Check", it also includes probably-fraudulent statements that there are only 5 or 6 products left, as well as testimonials of unknown provenance. Screenshots are available upon request. [[User:GregG|GregG]] 21:32, 7 August 2014 (EDT)
:Another ad I found this morning is an imitation of a browser plugin notification stating "This content requires Java 12.3. Would you like to install now?" In fact, there is no version 12.3 of Java. Clicking the advertisement links to a page promoting a video playing application, which, in turn, pops up a fake Windows Vista/Windows 7 dialog stating "Your [software] Download is ready!" Screenshots are available upon request. [[User:GregG|GregG]] 10:02, 8 August 2014 (EDT)

== Is [[User:CraigF2]] a parodist? ==

Dear Mr. Schlafly,

I recently saw some edits of [[User:CraigF2]]. [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Toyota_Prius&diff=1093407&oldid=1093369 This one] in particular makes me believe that the user is a parodist, though I would like a second opinion. Thanks, [[User:GregG|GregG]] 21:22, 16 July 2014 (EDT)

:Your reversion was appropriate, and I don't disagree with your analysis.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 21:25, 16 July 2014 (EDT)
::After reading User:CraigF2's user page recently, I said to myself this editor is probably an atheist posing as a Christian conservative. GregG's pointing out of this recent edit of his, greatly reinforces my suspicion and has cemented it in. Like JamesWilson, CraigF2's parodist career is effectively over as he has been spotted. I am emailing Karajou now. I think it is time for CraigF2 to develop a new hobby to replace his [[Essay: Conservapedia obsessive compulsive disorder|Conservapedia obsessive compulsive disorder]]. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 23:16, 16 July 2014 (EDT)

== Please unprotect my talk page ==

It was protected by [[User:Conservative]] without explanation. Many thanks, [[User:GregG|GregG]] 22:21, 19 July 2014 (EDT)
:UPDATE: the page has been unprotected, but it is still troubling that an admin protected another user's user talk page without that user's request. Hopefully steps will be taken to ensure that a similar abuse of tools does not recur. [[User:GregG|GregG]] 22:32, 19 July 2014 (EDT)

== Animation article and Brian34 ==

You might want to lock the Animation page as it seems the socks of Brian34 et.al. are trying to create a revert war. I suggest you look into this issue. [[User:OraceHay|OraceHay]] 21:13, 20 July 2014 (EDT)

== Common Core ==

Hi there, should a special article be written on Common Core that isn't an essay? I'm asking for approval before I start. Thank you.

(Oh, and thanks for giving me blocking rights!) [[User:Atum|Atum]] 17:28, 22 July 2014 (EDT)

:Yes, a regular entry on Common Core would be great! Thanks in advance for starting one.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 17:36, 22 July 2014 (EDT)

== Republican Politicians ==

Hello there. I said this in an edit summary, but should something be done about the pages for Conservative and Liberal figures? There are all of these pages that are being ridiculously elaborated upon, such as [[Atheism]], yet for some political figures, they're just a few lines long. Anything I need to do about this, as if it's Conservapedia, it's pretty important to know about the politicians. Thank you. [[User:Atum|Atum]] 12:33, 26 July 2014 (EDT)

:More development of the entries about political figures would be terrific!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 12:41, 26 July 2014 (EDT)

::P.S. But politicians tend to be followers of culture and ideas, rather than leaders. The term "political leader" is a bit of an [[oxymoron]].--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 12:42, 26 July 2014 (EDT)
:::Talking of political leaders Andy, what is your opinion on Marco Rubio? He seems to be the leading candidate for the Republican 2016 election at this early stage. He has a lot going for him, his youth will appeal to younger voters and whilst no RINO, he seems more moderate than some so could pull the undecided or swing voters who would not back some other choices. He seems like a good option to me.--[[User:ColinP|ColinP]] 15:16, 26 July 2014 (EDT)

::::[[Marco Rubio]] was brought from obscurity by [[conservatives]] and elected by them. But after he was elected, he made the mistake of thinking he had a brighter future with moderates and [[RINO]]s. It's doubtful he can regain the conservative support he had previously.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 21:07, 27 July 2014 (EDT)

== Orwellian changes of Conservapedia's history ==

[[Conservapedia proven right]] shows numerous examples of predictions made by Conservapedia which became true. What happens when there is a prediction - prominently on display and repeatedly made - which doesn't become reality?

In 2012/2013, we read on the main page of Conservapedia news-items like the following:

{{cquote|50 page Question Evolution! booklet. Question Evolution! Campaign runaway train is going to be released|||[http://web.archive.org/web/20120215050509/http://conservapedia.com/Main_Page Feb 15, 2012]}}

{{cquote|A Question evolution! campaign group now has 3 writers and at least 3 Question Evolution! booklets/books will be coming out. Some of the booklets/books will be designed for young people.|||[http://web.archive.org/web/20120501184006/http://conservapedia.com/Main_Page May 1, 2012]}}

{{cquote|A 15 questions for evolutionists booklet and book for middle school students will soon be coming out and they are going to be heavily promoted and distributed.|||[http://web.archive.org/web/20120619134057/http://www.conservapedia.com/Main_Page Jun 19,2012]}}

{{cquote|SS Evolution! passengers get on your life jackets! A barrage of 100+ page Question evolution! campaign booklet torpedoes is headed your way!|||[http://web.archive.org/web/20120919002949/http://www.conservapedia.com/Main_Page Sep 19, 2012]}}

{{cquote|The Question evolution! book for middle school students, edited by a Christian apologist, gains in popularity. |||[http://web.archive.org/web/20130711205854/http://www.conservapedia.com/Main_Page Jul 11, 2013]}}

{{cquote|Canadian teacher at a Christian school will be serving as a science editor of the Question evolution! campaign book for middle school students.|||[http://web.archive.org/web/20130718204401/http://www.conservapedia.com/Main_Page Jul 18, 2013]}}

And many more...

Two and a half years later, this book hasn't been published. This is a prediction boldly made by Conservapedia on its main page (without any qualifiers) which just was wrong. But instead of owning up to it, gritting your teeth and admitting that such things happen, another way was chosen: I had to link to the news-items using the [http://web.archive.org internet archive], as every mentioning of this book was erased from the history of the main page and even from discussions on the archives of the main talk page! Though the "book for the middle school" was announced (according to my memory at least) on many talk-pages, User talk pages and even articles, now, you just find deleted revisions.

This reminds me of the erasure of [[Leon Trotsky]] from all documents and even photographs in the Soviet Union! But alas, such an attempt to change history will always be incomplete, and thereby counterproductive: How do you reply to someone who says "Obviously they are right at [[Conservapedia proven right]], but that is not surprising, as they erase all the cases when they are wrong."

I'm aware that you, Andy, probably won't react to this problem - and I'm afraid that this is something your sysops count on. As [[User:Conservative]] said in another deleted revision to [[User:GregG]]:

{{cquote|GregG, if you have any concerns or complaints about this matter, I/we would recommend that you take them to the owner of the website godspeed. I/we predict that you will get the "Schlafly ignore" - AGAIN! |||[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 14:14, 20 July 2014 (EDT)}}{{unsigned|AugustO}}
AugustO, evolutionists claim that truly astounding things can happen given enough time. Why do you doubt the cited news stories you indicated were on the main page? It has only been 2 1/2 years according to you. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 19:51, 27 July 2014 (EDT)

:Sorry, missed my signature - I - [[User:AugustO]] wrote the text above. --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 19:55, 27 July 2014 (EDT)

*I don't doubt that the stories once could be read on the main page, and that these stories were discussed on various talk-pages, though great efforts were taken to make every mentioning of the booklet disappear.
*Could you please try for once to stand by your announcements and your actions? Did you mean by ''soon''
::#in a million of years
::#in a couple of years
::#soon
*No Sun-Tzu, no weaseling, no ''I call you back, but I'm very busy now'', no ''you don't know who of my split persona made these announcements''. Please, please, please, talk the talk AND walk the walk. --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 09:42, 2 August 2014 (EDT)

While you're waiting for a little booklet, how about a task from you, AugustO: prove evolution to be a fact using empirical evidence. What I have seen during the past few years is a deliberate attempt by critics to ''kill the message by killing the messenger.'' So what if a mere booklet cannot be produced; they've been trying to shut up Conservative since before this website was created, and they don't care that evidence has been presented which shows them to be completely and totally wrong (am I correct in saying that, Horace?). So here's the thing: if anyone does not like what we are saying about evolution; if anyone does not like what we are proving about evolution; if anyone does not like the fact that we are supporting GOD and His creation according to the Bible, that is just too bad. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 12:26, 2 August 2014 (EDT)

:*Thank you, Karajou, for taking an interest in this exchange! I think that it is very important that the older and more experienced administrators share their experience with the younger ones, who - like Conservative - are high-school students, but nevertheless have quite a bit of responsibility here at Conservapedia. I've said it before: I think that it is a good idea to make pupils an integral part of the administration of this website BUT these pupils shouldn't be left alone; they should be guided by Andy and others.
:*Normally, the (non-)existence of a "mere" booklet is a non-event, but during 2012 and 2013, there was no other item of news more extensively covered at the main-page than this "Question Evolution! campaign booklet" and the "Project 200+" - so, not I'm the one who blew this thing out of proportion!
:*And then, suddenly, it became taboo, the histories of pages were deleted and even archives containing announcements for the booklet were altered, creating the impression (at least here at Conservapedia), that no one has ever heard of this book. This is absurd!
:*I hope that you agree that such an act of apparent censorship doesn't help to maintain idea of a "trustworthy encyclopedia"!
:*A minor may think that it is a brilliant tactic to yell "just kidding" when an elaborate stunt has misfired, and to sweep any evidence under the carpet. I think it is the task of those to whom he is looking up, not to indulge him and to discourage such a behavior, as it is unbecoming for an adult.
:*I'm not trying to shut Conservative up, but I criticize some of his actions. And taking responsibility for your actions (and not hiding behind Chinese quotes, or a sudden influx of work...) is an important lesson in the school of life.
:--[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 13:33, 2 August 2014 (EDT)
::AugustO, in 2013, Conservapedia reported on an announcement(s) made on another web property that indicated an event would happen "soon" as you indicated above. You also indicated that you don't know when "soon" is. I realize that immature people are often impatient. Aren't you making a tempest in a teapot? [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 17:43, 2 August 2014 (EDT)
AugustO, the root of your problem is that you cannot satisfactorily answer the [http://creation.com/15-questions 15 questions] of the [[Question evolution! campaign]] and it upsets you. Prominent evolutionists have indicated that the origin of life is part of the evolutionary paradigm. [http://creation.com/origin-of-life] Of course, this means that the Question evolution! campaign stumped evolutionists with its very first question! [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 18:25, 2 August 2014 (EDT)

:::@Conservative:
:::#The news item doesn't read ''"Some obscure blog made announced that a Question Evolution! campaign booklet for middle school pupils will be published soon"''. In fact it reads like any other prediction in [[Conservapedia proven right]].
:::#Do you think that any reader of these news-items has read "soon" meaning anything other but "in the near future", or worst "in a couple of months time"? If you wanted to indicate with "soon" "during the next few millenia", the whole situation gets worse: you were misleading your readers! Please take a look at the upper left corner: "CONSERVAPEDIA - THE TRUSTWORTHY ENCYCLOPEDIA".
:::#When you flooded the main-page with announcements about this booklet, you created the tempest. Please, don't try to deflect from this fact.
:::#What do you think of [[User:Historybuff]]? Please take a look at [[#I suggest banning the parodist JamesWilson]]. I hope that you prove immune against flattering edits!
:::@Karajou:
:::I don't think that one should encourage weaseling. Sadly, Conservative's comment above is an example of ''evading responsibility'', and not ''taking responsibility''.
:::--[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 18:22, 2 August 2014 (EDT)
AugustO, you had an opportunity to go up against the biology major [[VivaYehshua]] in an audio recorded debate relative to the 15 questions for evolutionists that would have been broadcast by the popular YouTube Christian channel [[Shockofgod]] with over 20,000 subscribers. You wimped out. Your comment about "evading" rings rather hollow.

AugustO, if only you had taken up the debate offer. Then you would be taken more seriously. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 01:10, 3 August 2014 (EDT)

:Even if I were the biggest wimp in the universe, I'd still see that you didn't address any of the points #1 - #4 above. Such an action is known as ''changing the topic'' or ''evading the question''. --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 02:34, 3 August 2014 (EDT)

== Sissel upheld by D.C. Cir. ==

Dear Mr. Schlafly,

I wonder how the D.C. Circuit's [http://www.scotusblog.com/2014/07/appeals-court-rejects-new-test-of-health-care-mandate/ recent upholding] of the dismissal in ''Sissel v. HHS'' is going to affect ''Hotze''. Also, I found a [http://www.larryjoseph.com/_Dockets/Hotze-v-Sebelius.html website] hosting the briefs in ''Hotze'' online, so I was wondering how to go about writing a comprehensive Conservapedia article on the case (as well as, if copyright law permits, hosting the full text of the briefs on Conservapedia). Thanks, [[User:GregG|GregG]] 21:49, 29 July 2014 (EDT)

:Great comment, Greg. The Sissel decision ruled on the Origination Clause, but did not address all of the arguments on that Clause that have been presented in the Hotze case. Maybe I can write and post an analysis.

:As to briefs, I'm not sure what (if any) copyright issues exist. Presumably as long as you give credit, the doctrine of [[fair use]] would apply.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 22:14, 29 July 2014 (EDT)

== The latest Obama attack on arbitration ==

[http://www.usnews.com/news/politics/articles/2014/07/30/obama-order-to-expand-labor-rights-for-contractors Here]. Perhaps it can be featured on our main page. Thanks, [[User:GregG|GregG]] 20:16, 30 July 2014 (EDT)

:That is an interesting erosion of arbitration! "The president's order will also prohibit companies pursuing government contracts from requiring their workers to agree upfront to mandatory arbitration ...," your link explains.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 23:59, 30 July 2014 (EDT)

==Blacklisted word==
I can understand why the word "b*tcoin" may be associated with spammers, and needs to be blacklisted. However, I justed edited [[Wikimedia Foundation]] and could not save my edit until I replaced the i with an asterisk. Could an admin please go back and correct the spelling? If necessary, suspend the blacklist for a minute. Many thanks, [[User:Wschact|Wschact]] 01:08, 9 August 2014 (EDT)
:On further thought, perhaps "b*tcoin" should be removed from the blacklist. If it were, I would add Seth Meyer's comment to the Reliability section of the main [[Wikipedia]] article and start a separate article on [[b*tcoin]]. It is important to understand the conservative perspective on alternative currencies: 1) a large part of our nation's international influence comes from the role of the US dollar as '''the''' currency of international trade, and 2) alternative currencies are used by criminals, such as Russian identity theft rings and international drug cartels to evade law enforcement. B*tcoin is designed to evade law enforcement, and it undercuts our nation's international influence. Thanks, [[User:Wschact|Wschact]] 11:42, 9 August 2014 (EDT)
::I know that folks are very busy, but I am uncomfortable with the letter i being replaced by an asterisk. Could I please get some assistance on this matter. Many thanks. [[User:Wschact|Wschact]] 07:59, 11 August 2014 (EDT)

:::It should be updated as requested. Thanks for your patience.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 17:47, 11 August 2014 (EDT)
::::I have now corrected the spelling in [[Wikimedia Foundation]] and added the Seth Meyers' quote to [[Wikipedia]]. May I start the bitcoin article as outlined above, or is that a sensitive subject that should be left to a more experienced editor? Many thanks, [[User:Wschact|Wschact]] 19:05, 22 August 2014 (EDT)

:::::An encyclopedic, lawful article about bitcoin would be fine.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 15:01, 23 August 2014 (EDT)

== Conservapedia cited in a prestigious book against atheism ==

On occasion, I butted heads with Roman Catholic, theistic evolutionist editors such as GregG, TK and NKeaton.

I just found out that John J. Pasquini, Th.D., a Roman Catholic priest and scholar, cited my Conservapedia [[atheism]] articles three times in his book'' Atheist Persona: Causes and Consequences'' (the book has 77 footnotes and cites Conservapedia atheism articles in footnotes 34, 64 and 67).[http://books.google.com/books?id=OMRhAwAAQBAJ&pg=PA24&lpg=PA24&dq=conservapedia+atheism&source=bl&ots=XoulnSQ90x&sig=_1xyC3wiZtD9ihYXVljTugA2tGk&hl=en&sa=X&ei=pL_3U72vB4r6oQTGg4HwCQ&ved=0CGsQ6AEwCTgK#v=onepage&q=conservapedia%20atheism&f=false] The book was favorably reviewed by [[Michael Behe]] (a leading proponent of [[intelligent design]] theory), [[Paul Vitz]] and [[Michael Egnor]] (also a proponent of intelligent design) and was published by the academic publisher University Press of America.[http://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/atheist-persona-john-j-pasquini/1117916966?ean=9780761863328]

The book only cited the ''Encyclopedia Britannica'' once. :) [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 14:10, 23 August 2014 (EDT)

:Very good achievement!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 15:02, 23 August 2014 (EDT)
::I read the beginning of the book and its table of contents and he appeared to gain a significant amount of his information from the Conservapedia atheism article. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 15:34, 23 August 2014 (EDT)

== Constitution course and state constitutions ==

Dear Mr. Schlafly,

Have you considered a comparative discussion of state constitutions, either as part of the Constitution course or as a separate course. I think it would be really interesting for students to contrast state constitutions with each other and with the federal Constitution. [[User:GregG|GregG]] 14:00, 30 August 2014 (EDT)

:A great suggestion, Greg, but state constitutions are not really in the same league as the U.S. Constitution in eloquence, brevity, or tremendous design. It would be like teaching a course about the ''Mona Lisa'' along with ... ordinary art. Maybe the contrast would be edifying.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 14:24, 30 August 2014 (EDT)
::I think someone could offer a college level course of "Constitutions and the political process." State Constitutions serve a much more political role than the Federal Constitution because they are easier to amend and the voters only look at them when they are up for amendment. A good example is Virginia. In 2010 over 80% of the voters approved a constitutional amendment authorizing a real property tax exemption for the principle residence of service members with a 100% disability. Politicians favored it because it allowed the state legislators to demonstrate that they are pro-veteran. However, this begs the question as to why the Virginia Constitution is so rigid in its overall treatment of real property tax assessment. (Answer: they don't trust the county-based tax assessors.) So, as soon as the amendment past, people started to ask why there is no exemption for the surviving spouse of a service member killed-in-action? (After all, a dead service member is more than 100% disabled.) So, on the 2014 ballot we will vote on a second very narrow constitutional amendment. This gives politicians a second chance to show that they are pro-veteran. Maybe in 2018 we can do an amendment for veterans currently enrolled in college under the GI-Bill? [[User:Wschact|Wschact]] 01:08, 31 August 2014 (EDT)

== Scam ads, CNAV edition ==

I was viewing a CNAV article, and an ad appeared stating "Update Your Video Plugin [triangle pointing right]: See & Download Your Favorite Videos With [Name of Software] It's Free [checkmark]". Clicking the ad leads to a fake dialog box (in the style of Windows Vista) with title bar "Required Update", dialog title "Recommended Update", and text "The latest version of New Player [note: not the name of software in the ad] with critical security fixes is ready to install now / It wouldn't take too long to upgrade - and you'll get all the latest improvements and fixes." Screenshots available on request. [[User:GregG|GregG]] 21:35, 1 September 2014 (EDT)

Another advertisement for what appears to be the same product has the heading "(4) New Plugin Update !" and a fake title bar, minimize and close buttons, and mouse cursor moving through the ad. [[User:GregG|GregG]] 21:36, 1 September 2014 (EDT)

Another advertisement I found has the text "COME CLOSE to YOUR RUSSIAN AFFAIR"; no further comment needed. [[User:GregG|GregG]] 21:39, 1 September 2014 (EDT)

Meanwhile, on TPC I found headlines in the RevContent sponsored content plugin reading "Hottest Actresses That Bare It All", "Celebs Who Flash More than Their Winning", "Sexiest Celebrity Boobs in Hollywood", and "The Best Bodies on REEF Girls Ever" (the last has a picture of women with extremely skimpy underwear. [[User:GregG|GregG]] 22:02, 1 September 2014 (EDT)

:There are no ads on this website, and this website has no control over off-site ads. But your criticism has been forwarded and I've since been told the off-site ads will improve. Thanks for mentioning this.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 21:36, 2 September 2014 (EDT)
::Thank you very much for looking into this (as well as for continuing to financially and otherwise support this widely-known project without commercial advertisement or pledge drives). I am hopeful that Conservapedia's name can convince news sites that Conservapedia frequently promotes to take steps to ensure all their ads are high quality. [[User:GregG|GregG]] 19:59, 3 September 2014 (EDT)

== Thanks ==

Thank you for expanding my rights.--[[User:JoeyJ|JoeyJ]] 16:03, 20 September 2014 (EDT)

:Your account promotion was well-deserved!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 18:45, 21 September 2014 (EDT)

== Bariatric science ==

Conservapedia ranks in the Google USA top 10 for the search [[Bariatric science]] as can be seen [https://www.google.com/search?q=bariatric+science&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&channel=sb HERE]. Conservapedia: one of the premier web resources for the topic of bariatric science! :) [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 16:38, 27 September 2014 (EDT)

== VargasMilan ==

He and I are having a little argument (see my talk page) over whether he has blocking rights. Did you neglect to congratulate him? [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] 01:38, 28 September 2014 (EDT)

== A request ==

First, thank you for letting me contribute to the Constitution lectures.

Second, I recently came across [http://www.afj.org/multimedia/first-monday-films/films/lost-in-the-fine-print this trailer] for an upcoming film made by one of the principal attackers of arbitration, which from viewing the trailer, is likely to be little more than disparagement of arbitration based on outdated anecdotes and mischaracterizations of arbitration. Given your skill in publicizing Conservapedia, I was hoping that we could write and publicize a rebuttal to the film once it becomes publicly available. (I think something like [http://www.hotcoffeetruth.com/ this] would be what we're after.)

Many thanks,

[[User:GregG|GregG]] 22:52, 2 October 2014 (EDT)

:Greg, your contributions to the Constitution lectures are superb! Thank you.

:I'd be very interested in seeing and reviewing a film against arbitration. I would not think the issue lends itself well to the silver screen.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 09:47, 3 October 2014 (EDT)

== Latin, Hebrew, etc. ==

Thanks for your response and suggestion on the questions page. Unfortunately, I don't exactly know how to "copy from elsewhere". Do you mean "elsewhere on Conservapedia"? Please answer on my [[User_talk:Dataclarifier|Talk page]]. Thanks. --[[User:Dataclarifier|Dataclarifier]] 12:39, 3 October 2014 (EDT)

== Copyright and patent clause ==

Dear Mr. Schlafly,

I saw that you [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=American_Government_and_the_Constitution_Lecture_Two&curid=132247&diff=1109607&oldid=1106752 corrected] the citation for the copyright and patent clause in Lecture Two; however, you neglected to change the clause number in the succeeding explanation. Thanks, [[User:GregG|GregG]] 19:36, 5 October 2014 (EDT)

:Great catch! Corrected the error.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 00:12, 6 October 2014 (EDT)

== Please unprotect [[Quote mining]] ==

Dear Mr. Schlafly,

Could you please unprotect [[Quote mining]]? My arbitration research found an example of Peter Rutledge being quoted out of context by liberals; his rebuttal is found [http://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/121713QFRs-Rutledge.PDF here]. Thanks, [[User:GregG|GregG]] 19:23, 31 October 2014 (EDT)
:GregG, add the example to [[Quoting out of context]]. Problem solved. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 20:06, 31 October 2014 (EDT)

==Hello==
I was wondering if you could tell me if there is some kind of time restriction on editing. I work shifts, and this month I'll be up overnight. I was wondering if I could get access to edit throughout the night. Thanks for your help [[User:DevilDog|DevilDog]] 00:21, 16 December 2014 (EST)

== Question about picture uploading rights ==

Can picture uploading rights be given without making someone an Admin/Sysop? Can MediaWki do this? [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 23:41, 18 December 2014 (EST)

:Yes.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 23:48, 18 December 2014 (EST)

== Holy Ghost ==

Andy, I just had hoped that you had stopped applying your unique idea of translating to the Bible, but you seem to be relentless. In the Gospel of Luke, you are using now "Holy Ghost", "Holy Spirit", "Divine Force", "Spirit of God", "Divine Guidance", "Force of God" for the Greek πνεῦμα - and it is not always clear for the reader of the "translation" which of these phrases refer to the same entity. --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 09:40, 21 December 2014 (EST)

Any ideas? I tried to create some much-need unity at [[Luke_1-8_(Translated)]]. --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 12:39, 16 February 2015 (EST)

== Relativity ==

*At "[[Conservapedia:Community_Portal#two millionth page view for the "Counterexamples to Relativity" page]]", did you really accept the mass-energy-equivalence? Perhaps you should clarify your thoughts: [[amu]] is a unit of mass, not energy :-)
*A couple of months ago, I've posed [[Talk:E=mc²#A few questions for Aschlafly regarding the experiment of Cockcroft and Walton|A few questions for Aschlafly regarding the experiment of Cockcroft and Walton]]. It would be a nice Christmas gift to get well-thought-out answers to those :-)
*You should address [[Talk:Theory_of_relativity#READ_THE_MANUAL]]

--[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 09:52, 21 December 2014 (EST)

:I have responded at: [[Conservapedia:Community_Portal#Two_millionth_page_view_for_the_.22Counterexamples_to_Relativity.22_page]].--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 20:35, 21 December 2014 (EST)

::Your response was:
:::"''You rely on primitive technology used in an 82-year-old experiment. The technology is far better now, and the claim of mass-energy equivalence cannot be verified.''"
::We don't discard Foucault pendulum because it is 150 years old and was performed using a piece of string and a piece of lead. No, it is repeated over and over again. Same is true for Cockcroft and Walton: this experiment is performed routinely in courses on modern physics, using modern technology. But if you wish for some state-of-the-art experiment, take a look at [http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v438/n7071/abs/4381096a.html World Year of Physics: A direct test of E=mc²]...
::And you didn't respond to the second or the thrid point. --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 02:19, 22 December 2014 (EST)

:::But neither Cockcroft, Walton, nor the Noble committee claimed that the experiment demonstrated anything about E=mc2. And the citation to ''Nature'' magazine for a supposed physics breakthrough? Please. ''Nature'' is not a top-tier physics journal. It's popularized science, which is all that the silly E=mc2 formula is.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 09:23, 22 December 2014 (EST)

::::That's just hand-waving! Please answer the question at [[Talk:E=mc²#A few questions for Aschlafly regarding the experiment of Cockcroft and Walton|A few questions for Aschlafly regarding the experiment of Cockcroft and Walton]] - I think they are educational, and will help everybody's understanding of the subject.
::::--[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 08:40, 28 December 2014 (EST)

I removed the blatantly false statement ''The claims of mass-energy equivalence have not been replicated with more advanced modern technology. '' Before you edit the article on [[Cockcroft and Walton Experiment]] again, you should show your knowledge by answering [[Talk:E=mc²#A few questions for Aschlafly regarding the experiment of Cockcroft and Walton|A few questions for Aschlafly regarding the experiment of Cockcroft and Walton]]! --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 02:39, 7 January 2015 (EST)

== Project ==

I put this notice on several active editors talk pages:

Would you like to collaborate with other editors on a wiki project to help Conservapedia be a strong resource for a given topic.

The topic could be decided by the editors participating.

If you are interested, please go to: [http://www.conservapedia.com/Conservapedia:Community_Portal#A_project_for_active_editors_to_collaborate_on The collaborative project]. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 21:58, 25 December 2014 (EST)

== quick note ==

A conservative website that is an Alexa USA top 70,000 is looking for content and so they are featuring some of Conservapedia's most popular articles as far as the first 300 words and then they are providing a link to the Conservapedia article. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 22:13, 29 December 2014 (EST)

== ban ==
Hello Mr. Aschlafly, I would like to discuss my ban (6ebeast), specifically why I was banned. ([[User:WashingtonLincoln|WashingtonLincoln]] 18:58, 31 December 2014 (EST))

==Ayurvedic medicine==
You know me as conservative on social or fiscal issues, but my conservatism reaches its zenith on medicine. I am very dedicated to Western medicine, and run away from "new age" or other fringe medicine approaches. Andy, you have to draw a line here on whether Conservapedia has the expertise and resources to cover Ayurvedic medicine properly. I doubt that we do and should stay away from it completely. Please decide and tell [[User:TheAmericanRedoubt]] you decision. Many thanks for all that you do for the Conservative movement. [[User:Wschact|Wschact]] 21:42, 2 January 2015 (EST)
:[[:Category:Ayurvedic Medicine]] is like an advert for alternative medicine: it has 110 subcategories and is itself in 26 categories:
::[[:Category:Ayurvedic Medicine]]|[[:Category:Tibetan Medicine]]|[[:Category:Complementary Medicine]]|[[:Category:Medicine]]|[[:Category:Health Care]]|[[:Category:Traditional Chinese Medicine]]|[[:Category:Naturopathic Medicine]]|[[:Category:Herbalism]]|[[:Category:Medicinal Plants]]|[[:Category:Herbs]]|[[:Category:Spices]]|[[:Category:Plants used in Traditional Chinese Medicine]]|[[:Category:Plants used in Ayurvedic Medicine]]|[[:Category:Plants used in Western Herbal Medicine]]|[[:Category:Herbalists‎]]|[[:Category:Health]]|[[:Category:Survivalism]]|[[:Category:India]]|[[:Category:Tibet]]|[[:Category:Nepal]]|[[:Category:Mongolia]]|[[:Category:Burma]]|[[:Category:Thailand]]|[[:Category:Sri Lanka]]|[[:Category:Asia]]|[[:Category:Southeast Asia]]|
:That could be a kind of record! --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 02:04, 3 January 2015 (EST)

===Response to [[User:Wschact]] and [[User:AugustO]] Regarding Ayurvedic - Chinese - Western Herbal Medicine on Conservapedia ===
:: Happy New Year [[User:Aschlafly]], [[User:Wschact]], [[User:AugustO]], [[User:Conservapedia]], and [[User:Karajou]]

Thank you for your patience with this detailed point-by-point response.

Like you [[User:Wschact]], I too am a steadfast conservative, but on much more than just social and fiscal issues, as my thousands of conservative point-of-view Conservapedia edits can attest to (Please see my [[User:TheAmericanRedoubt]] for more information). Also like you [[User:Wschact]], I too am very dedicated to Western medicine and work together with a medical doctor with a busy private practice office in a large hospital setting where he and I integrate both modern pharmaceutical based treatment and the use of custom made Ayurvedic-Chinese-Western herbal formulas, nutrition (based on Ayurvedic and Chinese medicine concepts) and acupuncture. He supervises my practice in that setting. Like you [[User:Wschact]], both he and I also run away from the myriad "new age" medicine approaches. However, Ayurvedic medicine, Chinese medicine - Acupuncture and Western herbal medicine are not "new age". Ayurveda and Chinese medicine - Acupuncture have been in continuous use since at least 250 B.C. according to archaeological evidence and extant classic medical texts in both Chinese characters, Tibetan and Sanskrit (which I can read by the way in Devanagari script).

Conservapedia does indeed have the expertise and resources to cover Ayurvedic medicine and Chinese medicine - acupuncture properly since I am contributing as a dedicated regular editor and have joined the [[Wikiproject:Medicine]] to lend my ongoing support editing/categorizing ALL articles in the realm of medicine / anatomy in addition to my other subject matter expertise areas on my User Page / Talk Page.

[[User:PhilH]] has said there is no clinical evidence to support complementary medicine. Not according to the U.S. National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine of the National Institutes of Health who funds clinical trials on herbal medicines effectiveness, not according to medical doctors in America who integrate modern medicine with complementary medicine, not according to numerous conservatives who rely on complementary medicine including Western herbalism, Chinese Medicine, Ayurveda and Acupuncture. Just the fact that there is licensing for acupuncture in most of the U.S. states (majority of states require the licensing examination or certification, and several states allow oriental medicine practitioners to be "primary care providers" for legal and insurance purposes; nineteen states specifically include Chinese herbology instead of just acupuncture). For naturopathic medicine 17 states, five Canadian provinces, the District of Columbia, and the US territories of Puerto Rico and the US Virgin Islands all have laws regulating naturopathic doctors (See map http://aanmc.org/images/LicensureMapBig.jpg -- even very conservative states such as my home state of Idaho in the [[American Redoubt]], along with Montana and Utah license naturopathy).

All of this attests to complementary medicine's broader acceptance, not to mention the size of the herbal market in the U.S. economy: For herbal medicine "overall sales reached $5.6 billion in 2012" "rising from $4.2 billion in 2000" (http://www.nutraingredients-usa.com/Markets/Herbal-supplement-sales-rose-5.5-in-US-in-2012-ABC-says)

There are many conservatives blogs and forums that I follow that have regular articles on complementary medicine and herb usage. Complementary/alternative medicine is not some liberal, hippie or New Age thing. It is even paid for by many insurance companies now. There is worker's comp coverage for it in certain U.S. states.

Regarding evidence in my articles, I will indeed be submitting footnoted hyperlinked clinical evidence from MedLine / PubMed.

Regarding the [[:Category:Ayurvedic Medicine]] having lots of sub-categories: There are many sub-categories in the Ayurvedic medicine category since it is a broad science including many diverse health and disease topics and since I am a very detail oriented person as you can see with my contributions for the firearms categorizations (which formerly were all lumped into just the Category of "Guns"). I am using that [[:Category:Ayurvedic Medicine]] and its temporarily numerous subcategories as a way of '''temporarily''' getting a broad view and tracking ability of ALL of the medicine-anatomy categories and articles in order to update them all over the coming months. I promise that I will pare that category down in the next 60 days to something smaller once I have updated-edited-expanded '''ALL''' of the medicine/anatomy related articles to follow a consistent yet detailed categorization scheme. I always start first with detailed Wiki categories in order to flesh out the scope-breadth-depth and a logical structure for the articles I will submit. I am doing the same detailed categorization for Firearms and other areas.

[[User:Conservative]] has been "mentoring" me as to what I should and shouldn't post. I have been following this for guidance as well: [[Conservapedia:Editorial_authority]]. I also received advice from [[User:Karajou]] on Sat, 26 Apr 2014 23:15:17 by e-mail (conservapedia AT zoho.com) who said, "Try your hand at writing complete articles. Conservapedia is not just something containing conservative thought; it is also intended to be a family encyclopedia, so it has to have info on planes, trains, automobiles, animals, sports teams, camera systems, or whatever else comes to mind. So, if you happen to be an expert on - say, rowboats - write an article on rowboats. Karajou".

Thus, following Karajou's advice above and oversight from [[User:Conservative]], I am writing "whatever comes to mind" on what I "happen to be an expert on". Thus, I have be developing a lot of detailed articles and their categorizations for my 6 areas of specialization (in order of my depth of subject matter expertise): 1. Medicine, 2. Computer networks (17 years professional experience), 3. [[Preparedness]]-Survivalism, 4. [[Firearm]]s, 5. [[Permaculture]] [[gardening]], 6. [[Radio communication technologies]] - [[Amateur radio]]. Being a staunch American conservative libertarian "prepper" [[gun enthusiast|"gun nut"]], I obviously write/edit from that perspective.

For these and many other reasons, I don't see a reason for Conservapedia to stay away from complementary medicine completely as you suggest [[User:Wschact]]. Thus, I will continue to contribute such works to Conservapedia until I am told to stop by any of the CP Administrators such as [[User:Aschlafly]], [[User:Conservative]], or user [[User:Karajou]].

Thank you to you all for your work for our Conservative movement. Godspeed. [[User:TheAmericanRedoubt|TheAmericanRedoubt]] 06:57, 3 January 2015 (EST)

:Technical hint: If you read ''edit conflict'', by going on without checking for it you will delete someone else's comment. --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 07:02, 3 January 2015 (EST)
'''Andy, we await your guidance on this important issue.''' Many thanks, [[User:Wschact|Wschact]] 00:22, 4 January 2015 (EST)
::The National Institute of Health website has two introductory articles on this topic [http://nccam.nih.gov/health/ayurveda/introduction.htm HERE] and [http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2996577/ HERE].

::No matter what health treatment you choose for an ailment, it is best to take a caveat emptor (Let the buyer beware) approach and do your due diligence. There are plenty of quacks/frauds/incompetents in all branches of medicine/health care (My doctor called out another doctor for his fraudulent study in front of other doctors and this ruffled some feathers. Fraud is rampant in medicine). You have to weigh the benefits/costs of any treatment/provider and an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.

::Robert Louis Stevenson's ''Treasure Island'' character Long John Silver said, "Doctors is all swabs...". :) Medicine is still a science/art. That is why they say doctors practice medicine. :)[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 01:21, 4 January 2015 (EST)
The [[History of science|history of science]] shows many examples where the medical science community consensus was in error, was scientifically unsound, or had little or no empirical basis. For example, [[bloodletting]] was practiced from antiquity and still had many practitioners up until the late 1800s.[http://www.bcmj.org/premise/history-bloodletting] In his essay, ''A Paradigm Shift: Are We Ready?'' , Niranjan Kissoon, M.D. wrote: "...history is rife with examples in which our best medical judgment was flawed. The prestigious'' British Medical Journal'' begun in 1828 chose the name'' Lancet'' to signal its scholarly intent and cutting edge therapy."(''A Paradigm Shift: Are We Ready?'' , Niranjan Kissoon, M.D.).

In a 1991 [[BMJ]] (formerly called the British Medical Journal) article, Richard Smith (editor of BMJ at the time) wrote: "There are 30,000 biomedical journals in the world...Yet only about 15% of medical interventions are supported by solid scientific evidence, [[David Eddy]] professor of health policy and management at [[Duke University]], told a conference in Manchester last week. This is partly because only 1% of the articles in medical journals are scientifically sound and partly because many treatments have never been assessed at all."[http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=AbstractPlus&list_uids=1932964&query_hl=6&itool=pubmed_docsum] [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 01:39, 4 January 2015 (EST)

:Out of curiosity, I did a bit of research on the life expectancies of the populations USA, China and Japan. I am guessing in China that traditional Chinese medicine is used a lot based on past conversations with my Chinese friends, but they also use Western medicine too. A National Institute Health (NIH) article by Nobutaka Suzuki indicates: "The situation in Japan should be of much interest, since Japan is unique as a country in which highly advanced modern Western medicine coexists with traditional Asian medicine."[http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC516460/]

:The life expectancy of the USA is about 78 years. The life expectancy in China is not much different and is about 75 years. The Japanese are more health conscious than both China/USA and their life expectancy is about 83 years (Preventative medicine is still by far the best medicine. Too many Western doctors are overweight and provide a poor example to their patients). [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 02:19, 4 January 2015 (EST)

Our mutual goal is for everyone to live a healthy and happy life. Our CP community is working toward that goal by providing reliable information to people in the form of an on-line encyclopedia. Every family faces health challenges, and when someone in my family needs health care, we turn to Western medicine. I do not provide medical advice, but with several doctors and RNs in my extended family, there is no shortage of Western medicine expertise in my family. With that background, I wish to respond to the above points. I agree that Western medicine has its deficiencies, doctors can misdiagnose patients, and cures are not guaranteed. However, there are serious issues with Ayurvedic medicine and much of it has not been proven by controlled clinical trials.

A dedicated group of volunteers have written articles and a hierarchy of categories at a level suitable for a homeschooled high school student on a wide variety of subjects. Some scientific subjects may be tangentially related to Ayurvedic medicine. Putting a "see also" or Ayurvedic medicine category reference on all such tangential articles puts CP in the position of promoting Ayurvedic medicine over western medicine. CP would never add "See also Anacin" to the article on [[headache]] because we don't do advertising here, and most CP editors do not have the expertise to recommend Anacin over other headache cures. Wikipedia has the following legal disclaimer:
:"WIKIPEDIA DOES NOT GIVE MEDICAL ADVICE

:"Wikipedia contains articles on many medical topics; however, no warranty is made that any of the articles are accurate. There is absolutely no assurance that any statement contained or cited in an article touching on medical matters is true, correct, precise, or up-to-date. The overwhelming majority of such articles are written, in part or in whole, by nonprofessionals. Even if a statement made about medicine is accurate, it may not apply to you or your symptoms.

:"The medical information provided on Wikipedia is, at best, of a general nature and cannot substitute for the advice of a medical professional (for instance, a qualified doctor/physician, nurse, pharmacist/chemist, and so on). Wikipedia is not a doctor."<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Medical_disclaimer</ref> Wikipedia also has special rules as to what sources can be used in a medical article there.

We should not give undue weight to Ayurvedic medicine on CP. I can understand having a half dozen articles on the subject which contain objective descriptions of the theory and treatment approaches, but homeschooled students should be able to read an article about a human body part without being steered toward Ayurvedic medicine over Western medicine. I think that the Mayo Clinic is one of the best hospitals in America, but I should not be allowed to add "See also Mayo Clinic" to every article about a disease.

What is the cost or risk of promoting Ayurvedic medicine on CP? Well, if a user follows our advice and uses an Ayurvedic medicine treatment instead of a Western treatment, there is the potential of tort liability. As a secondary matter, if CP comes across as a Ayurvedic medicine spam site, we will lose readers and credibility as an encyclopedia. Finally, if the Ayurvedic medicine articles are copy and pasted from copyrighted websites, there is copyright liability.

I don't have the time or expertise to supervise the expansion of CP into the realm of Ayurvedic medicine and I question whether [[User:Aschlafly]] or [[User:Conservative]] have the time or expertise either. There is so much that we can do as the best of the public to serve our readers in our current scope that I recommend that we retain our current focus. But I understand that this is a big decision that is above my pay grade and I await Andy's decision. Many thanks! [[User:Wschact|Wschact]] 04:13, 4 January 2015 (EST)

:My two cents and then I will bow out of the conversation: When it come to health care choices, the three most important criteria are efficacy (cure rate, time to cure, etc.), toxicity/side effects and price. Because of this, there is often no one size fits all in terms of treatment. Why? Because some people are bigger risk takers and will push the efficacy envelope despite increased risks (for example, Excedrin is stronger and works faster than Tylenol but it also has more side effects). Also, some people cannot afford the very best treatments but wealthy people can go to the very best in their specialty and even travel to do so. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 05:58, 4 January 2015 (EST)

::Thank you for the reply. Please clarify whether you are willing to mentor [[User:TheAmericanRedoubt]] and check that he does an objective job adding Ayurvedic medicine to articles without copy and pasting from other websites. Many thanks. [[User:Wschact|Wschact]] 09:27, 4 January 2015 (EST)

::: I truly appreciate both of your thoughtful and detailed replies to [[User_talk:Aschlafly#Response_to_User:Wschact_and_User:AugustO_Regarding_Ayurvedic_-_Chinese_-_Western_Herbal_Medicine_on_Conservapedia]].

:::[[User:Wschact]], don't worry, I promise you I will not make the CPP site a big advertisement for Ayurvedic and Chinese medicine. Regarding your Tort law concerns, that is why I created [[Template:Medical_Notice]]. Regarding the number of proposed articles on Ayurvedic herbs, it is because many of them are also commonly used in Western herbology so are quite familiar to Westerners such as [[turmeric]], [[ginger]], [[cardamom]], [[garlic]], [[cloves]], [[cinnamon]], etc.

:::Speaking of the Mayo Clinic that you mentioned, that renowned and respected clinic has found in their research, according to my M.D. colleague I work with, that taking a particular daily 3x dosage of [[turmeric]] is as effective as the leading anti-arthritic pharmaceutical in treating certain types of [[arthritis]], yet without any [[side effect]]s. [[User:TheAmericanRedoubt|TheAmericanRedoubt]] 13:21, 4 January 2015 (EST)

Dear Andy: We are still awaiting your judgment on Conservapedia's approach to alternative medicine in general and Ayurvedic medicine in particular. We also need your views on {{tl|Medical Notice}}. Many thanks! [[User:Wschact|Wschact]] 13:08, 8 January 2015 (EST)

== User:Conservative's sock(s) ==

I understand that some administrators have various accounts for obvious reasons (e.g., [[User:Joaquín Martínez]] and his dummy [[User:JMR10]]), and I'm fine with it - it is for the sake of the project.

But [[User:Conservative]] created a sock-puppet account [[User:Historybuff]] without being honest about it: its whole ''raison d'être'' was to appear as an independent agent in a discussion at [[Talk:Conservapedia proven wrong]] and to agree with [[User:Conservative]]'s position (see http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk:Conservapedia_proven_wrong&oldid=1096931 ).

You don't have to trust how I reasoned three months later that [[User:Historybuff]] was indeed a sock of [[User:Conservative]] (see [[Talk:Main_Page#.C3.80_propos_resolutions_and_announcements]]) - I request that you use checkuser to verify this accusation.

I'm disappointed that an administrator uses sock(s) to deceive fellow editors, and I think that [[User:Conservative]]'s behavior while discussing this sordid affair is even worse: while the [[Conservapedia:Guidelines]] clearly state that ''Conservapedia does not allow "sockpuppet" accounts or unaccountable anonymous proxy use.'', he claims that his actions are covered by a remark at [[Conservapedia:Sockpuppet]] (''Some Administrators may use Sockpuppets occasionally or Single Purpose Accounts. ''). This remark was introduced to the article by a now disgraced editor ([[User:RobSmith]]) without any discussion - and I doubt that even he meant to cover the use of socks in such a misleading way...

I'd ask you to make it clear that you don't approve the use of sock puppets - even for administrators - if these sockpuppets are there to pretend to be other, independent persons.

'''I really appreciate an answer of you on this topic''' --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 06:57, 3 January 2015 (EST)
:AugustO, you offered up a dead link as evidence of something. Before you engage in wiki lawyering, first get your ducks in a row!

:A conservative wiki doesn't operate on mob rule/groupthink/consensus. This wiki is not Wikipedia. Why would the User: Conservative account feel a need to get someone to publicly agree with a position? Liberals are fond of the bandwagon fallacy, not conservatives! And if the User: Conservative account consists of more than one editor, then why would the User: Conservative account need to show another person agreeing about a matter?

:AugustO, the edit made through the historybuff account clearly rattled you in some way. It's time to compose yourself. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 07:54, 3 January 2015 (EST)

::Sigh. I linked to a now deleted revision. Andy and you both are able to retrieve the content. Here, for your convenience, the contributions of [[User:Historybuff]] to the page [[Talk:Conservapedia proven wrong]]:
::{|class="wikitable"
|'''October 26, 2012'''

The [http://questionevolution.blogspot.com/2013/10/mit-technology-review-decline-of.html October 26, 2014 event] was described as a clandestine event by a creationist blog and subsequently reported by Conservapedia as a news event.[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Template:Mainpageright&diff=1068741&oldid=1068732] Why would we expect the mainstream news media and other media outlets to report on a clandestine event? Historians don't use the absence of evidence as evidence of absence in terms of events occurring or not occurring in history and AugustO is practicing bad historiography.

Most of the population growth in the world today is happening in the developed world and a large percentage of these people [[Desecularization|are from creationist families]] and grow up to be creationists. October 26, 2012 was a terrible day for Darwinism as is today. Darwinists can hide from this trend, but they cannot hide! [[User:Historybuff|Historybuff]]
|-
|'''re: book'''

When asking a historical question to frame a historical investigation, a historian [http://amorebeautifulquestion.com/historians-view-of-questioning/ must be both explicit and precise]. The word "soon" is not explicit and precise. The meaning of "soon" varies depending on a person's culture and personal disposition.

Therefore, as far as this 2013 announcement made on another website which Conservapedia reported on, AugustO's accusation cannot be sustained. [[User:Historybuff|Historybuff]] 17:04, 2 August 2014 (EDT)
|}

::Your sock [[User:Historybuff]] gave the impression of an independent commentator who was just in total agreement with you, thereby supporting your position - something worse than a [[claqueur]]. Do you deny that such an action is dishonest?
::--[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 08:33, 3 January 2015 (EST)
:::Does the User: Conservative account merely consist of one editor? Did User: Karajou tell you that the User: Conservative consist of merely one editor (Something I highly doubt since he was privately told that the User: Conservative account consists of more than one editor). How long will you continue this Pickett's Charge? You remind me of the WWII German evolutionists who kept fighting after America entered the war (The creationist Dwight D. Eisenhower certainly outfoxed the German evolutionists! [http://www.icr.org/article/presidential-support-for-creationism/]).

:::By the way, why is what the historybuff account posted to you so upsetting to you? [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 15:43, 3 January 2015 (EST)

::::*Here, I'm talking about your ''socks'', not about your version of a split personality.
::::*The content of [[User:Historybuff]]'s edits isn't upsetting - the fact that you saw the need to hide behind a dummy to make these points is disturbing. (That you don't see that this tactic is dishonest even more so.)
::::--[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 15:54, 3 January 2015 (EST)

AugustO, do you believe that one person largely wrote the [[homosexuality]] and the [[Atheist actions against homosexuals]] article (the title of the article was originally Atheist persecution against homosexuals" if memory serves, but one editor within "User: Conservativedom" objected to this title) and that one person wrote both articles. The article [[Atheist actions against homosexuals]] was a shock to those obsessed with the User: Conservative account and the footnoting style is different than the [[homosexuality]] article as well. What are your thoughts on this matter?

AugustO, it appears to irritate you to no end that you cannot prove that historybuff was an editor who also edited using the User: Conservative account. Stealthy American creationists no doubt irritated German evolutionists when American creationists landed on the beaches of Normandy!

微乎微乎，至于无形；神乎神乎，至于无声；故能为敌之司命。 [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 16:07, 3 January 2015 (EST)
: come on ken we all know it's you. stop this silly game. with love, --[[User:TimothyT1|TimothyT1]] 18:14, 3 January 2015 (EST)
::Solve [[Atheist actions against homosexuals|the mystery]]!! Much to his dismay, AugustO certainly cannot!! Clearly, the term [[Atheist actions against homosexuals|"LGBTQ community"]] lacks machismo! Does it not? :) [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 18:28, 3 January 2015 (EST)
:::By the way AugustO, if German evolutionists are so adamantly opposed to stealth, then why did you guys use so many U-boats in WWII? [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 20:20, 3 January 2015 (EST)
==References==
<references/>

==The Liberals smear campaign Won -- I now retire from editing Conservapedia==
I must say that the liberal smear campaign and relentless edits/deletions from 5 very loud CP liberal trolls / RINOs (besides the vociferous [[User:Wschact]], you know who you are and will be happy to know you have won) has been no fun. I am sad to say, it is much worse edit wars and liberal reverts than ''anything'' I contributed over the years to Wikipedia. Sorry [[User:Aschlafly]], [[User:Conservative]], [[User:Karajou]] and [[User:Jpatt]], but I have lost the enthusiasm to continue contributing to CP in the face of this much liberal opposition. Thank you 4 for what you do for the conservative movement. I strongly suspect that the frequent sock puppet hacker-vandalist accounts were [[User:Wschact]] or one his friends using a VPN since all the vandals edits were directed to things he was revert warring with me over. God bless. [[User:TheAmericanRedoubt|TheAmericanRedoubt]] 02:26, 9 January 2015 (EST)

Dear Karajou, feel free to contact me on my e-mail if you wish. You were the one who encouraged me to contribute articles:
http://www.conservapedia.com/Conservapedia:Community_Portal#Response_to_User:SamHB.2C_User:PhilH_and_User:AugustO_Regarding_Ayurvedic_-_Chinese_-_Western_Herbal_Medicine_on_Conservapedia

"I also received advice from User:Karajou on Sat, 26 Apr 2014 23:15:17 by e-mail (conservapedia AT zoho.com) who said, "Try your hand at writing complete articles. Conservapedia is not just something containing conservative thought; it is also intended to be a family encyclopedia, so it has to have info on planes, trains, automobiles, animals, sports teams, camera systems, or whatever else comes to mind. So, if you happen to be an expert on - say, rowboats - write an article on rowboats. Karajou". Thus, following Karajou's advice above and oversight from User:Conservative, I am writing "whatever comes to mind" on what I "happen to be an expert on". Thus, I have be developing a lot of detailed articles and their categorizations for my 6 areas of specialization (in order of my depth of subject matter expertise): 1. Medicine, 2. Computer networks (17 years professional experience), 3. Preparedness-Survivalism, 4. Firearms, 5. Permaculture gardening, 6. Radio communication technologies - Amateur radio. Being a staunch American conservative libertarian "prepper" "[[gun enthusiast|gun nut]]", I obviously write/edit from that perspective."

Sadly, I no longer have the enthusiasm to contribute in the face of such ''''strong'''' opposition from 5 very vociferous liberal/RINO editors. It's more of an uphill battle than it was on Wikipedia, I am very disappointed to say. Godspeed in all you do. [[User:TheAmericanRedoubt|TheAmericanRedoubt]] 02:26, 9 January 2015 (EST)

:Andy, congratulations, you solved another problem by just ignoring it ([http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=User_talk:Aschlafly&diff=1129051&oldid=1129047 quite actively]). The drawback of your approach to management:
:*If [[User:TheAmericanRedoubt]] was a parodist - as I believe - then Conservapedia is burdened with hundreds of potentially toxic edits (like [[transformer]]), and a totally messed up system of categories.
:*If he was a honest editor - [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=User_talk%3ATheAmericanRedoubt&action=historysubmit&diff=1130520&oldid=1130517 as [[User:Conservative]] think(s)] - you did him a disservice, and his complaints are justified.
:It is just a lose-lose-situation. Perhaps you could learn from this episode and answer my question above about [[#User:Conservative's sock(s)]]? --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 11:17, 9 January 2015 (EST)
Stonewalling opponents!!! [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 16:43, 9 January 2015 (EST)
::Have we reached the point where an effort to enforce our rules about copy and paste and the Style Manual gets reduced to name calling questioning [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Conservapedia:Community_Portal&diff=1129896&oldid=1129895 whether someone is an "American"] or a "RINO" or a "liberal" or a "parodist"? Everyone gave him polite and reasonable advice but TAR would not listen. I think TAR's retirement message was a direct response to [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Conservapedia%3ADesk%2FMiscellany&action=historysubmit&diff=1130492&oldid=1109475 this important copyright concern] and I left a response on his talk page. Thanks, [[User:Wschact|Wschact]] 12:00, 9 January 2015 (EST)

==User:Wschact's Stubborn Hounding: 72% of his edits over a period of 24 days are about my work out of 179 edits, 129 concern my edits ==

Between December 16 and January 8, out of 179 edits made by Wschact, 129 concern either Wschact rapidly changing my edits soon after I complete them / reverting them or complaining to the Community/Admins about my contributions. That is to say, 72% of his edits over a period of 24 days are about my work. That is a good example of being tenaciously hounded by strong opposition. Source: http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&limit=500&target=Wschact

I didn't really want to put this part about Wschact on CP Talk pages or Community Portal since I don't want to further alienate him from me or make him more dogged in his pursuit of editing/patrolling/trolling my contributions. But his recent remarks to my "Retirement" posting, made me decide to mention these 72% statistics and to come out of "retirement". [[User:TheAmericanRedoubt|TheAmericanRedoubt]] 19:42, 9 January 2015 (EST)

===Inspired by Karajou and User:Conservative to Not Retire due to User:Wschact' Dogged Hounding===
Dear Admins Karajou and Conservative

My biggest concern, that finally '''temporarily''' "took the wind out of my sails" and prompted me to '''temporarily''' retire as a contributor, is Wschact, who makes my Conservapedia contributions the subject of 72% of his edits over a 24 day period, as I will show below.

My biggest concern isn't SamHB who explained himself well here:http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:SamHB#.22Troll.22_Editing_by_User:SamHB_of_Numerous_articles_I_am_Working_on_.2F_Editing_.2F_Contributing, saying that "I promised that I would revert your things only once, and I mean it."

Nor is my concern AlanE's presumptuously slanderous race baiting comment here:
I first said to AlanE: "Please better to stop the "Revert War" (unless it is by an American CP administrator) and instead make comments and suggestions on this talk page for editing the material. "Free state" is a big topic in the American Conservative, Libertarian and Christian circles. The old meaning of Antebellum south is rarely used except among historians. I would be willing to move some of it to an essay, however, the majority of it matches conservative values. Please discuss in a civil way without using words like hideous, offensive, etc like User:SamHB used for the previous revert." TheAmericanRedoubt 02:57, 17 December 2014 (EST)

Alan rudely Ad hominem responded to me:
"Excuse the following...but I am cross, and Sam is I know to be a reasonable and intelligent man - and a friend.... Obviously I can't win against someone who probably sits at his computer for hours on end with an assault rifle beside him with one eye out the window just hoping that some one who is black or jewish or liberal will put a foot onto his property so that he can shoot them. What larks!! (Pip old chap)). I won't go on because I see you are like those I occasionally met in the old days in Outback pubs who felt naked without their firearms and were usually relieved of their ammunition before the publican would serve them a beer. Cheers mate." AlanE 04:06, 17 December 2014 (EST)" Source: http://www.conservapedia.com/Talk:Free_state
I decided to simply ignore AlanE since that was the last I heard of him.

What finally '''temporarily''' took the remaining "wind out of my sails" is Wschact’s almost month-long dogged efforts:
I assert that between December 16 and January 8, out of 179 edits made by Wschact, 129 concern either Wschact rapidly changing my edits soon after I complete them / reverting them or complaining to the Community/Admins about my contributions. That is to say, 72% of his edits over a period of 24 days are about my work. That is a good example of being tenaciously hounded by strong opposition. Source: http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&limit=500&target=Wschact

Here http://www.conservapedia.com/Conservapedia:Desk/Miscellany#Interpretation_of_copyright_policy
Wschact doesn't even know the difference between 7.62x51mm NATO cartridge/ammunition and a "7.62x51mm NATO rifle" and hence wrongly insisting that the Admins move 7.62x51mm NATO to "7.62x51mm NATO rifle". And the so-called copyright issues he brings are been handled by MLA citations/references/bibliography and [[fair use]].

I made more than 1000+ small edits on CP for several months before contributing much of anything original to be sure that I got a feel for the actual format, content, categories, see also's, stubs or lack of stubs, politics, guidelines, etc. I also wanted to make sure that my edits proved to the CP admins that I am sincere and trustworthy, not a troll or parodist. Then in late November when my sabbatical began I begin much more extensive CP contributions. That was when on December 16 I can on the Wschact radar scope.

I was asked by one JoeyJ (http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=User_talk:TheAmericanRedoubt&oldid=1130110#Orphaned_Pages) to deorphan pages which I then began to do. But the edits I make to de-ophan them by adding them appropriately to a See Also or a wiki link within the article were getting frequently deleted by Wschact. This happened a lot. He would keep saying I am violating the CP policy.

Over the next few months while I am taking a sabbatical from my work, I have a lot of time/energy/knowledge to contribute to CP generating new content. Alas, at the moment I am feeling too harassed by their constant rapid nit-picking and having to 10/90 Talk Page explain my every step versus doing 90/10 actual article work. I've never experienced this before in an online Wiki or forum community, I am sad to say. Even on Wikipedia, I would get at least a few days to a week to perfect a short article or a contribution to one before the liberal vultures would swoop in to eat it up (if they did even). Because CP is a much smaller community of editors, they give me no time to improve upon my work before they come in and revert/delete. It's truly demoralizing/intimidating for a new editor. I don't know what else to say. I feel CP is an amazing voice for our American conservative movement, but I didn't know it would have so many fast-moving critics/deleters/reverters against anything I contribute in the realm of firearms or survivalism/preparedness articles. Yet they were against much on complementary medicine and amateur radio as well.

It's funny, the ONLY contributions of mine that the liberal/RINO editors didn't touch were the Buddhist articles. I think that is because most liberals like Buddhism. Although Catholic, I formally studied comparative religions and CP's Buddhist and Hindu articles are very slim at the moment, so I have much to add there as well. But again, at the moment, I am becoming "gun shy" with their liberal/RINO sights all aimed at me now, especially on http://www.conservapedia.com/Conservapedia:Community_Portal.

[[Persistence]] is a virtue, as Calvin Coolidge said:

:"Nothing in the world can take the place of persistence.
:Talent will not; nothing is more common than unsuccessful men with talent.
:Genius will not; unrewarded genius is almost a proverb.
:Education will not; the world is full of educated derelicts. Persistence and determination alone are omnipotent.
:The slogan Press On! has solved and always will solve the problems of the human race."

Thank you for listening. Any advice or encouragement would be appreciated.

[[User:TheAmericanRedoubt|TheAmericanRedoubt]] 19:42, 9 January 2015 (EST)
:Dear Andy: If TAR is saying that he is making a disproportionate amount (72%) of the problem edits that required correction, I am willing to accept his number, although I have no memory of first looking to see who was the originator of each problem. The problem is that we have someone who does not understand CP style and policy seeking to add a massive amount of material that has a lot of copy and paste problems, including copy and pasting into many articles from a common set of "See also" references instead of writing new ones for each article.

:Karajou, Conservative and I have each suggested that TAR slow down and try to write complete articles instead of rushing through copy and pasted new stubs. If TAR wants to "de-orphan" an article, perhaps he should add a sentence to a related article instead of plunk a link into the "see also" section of an unrelated article. I would also suggest watching how TAR pipes his links. A pipe should direct the reader to the article represented by the linked phrase, not to something different.

:Finally, I would suggest that Conservapedia would be better served by '''cooperation''' that combines our "talents", our "genius" and our "educational" backgrounds rather than having one person show blind "persistence" in the face of cautionary comments of others. So, I don't think that TAR's Calvin Coolidge quote captures the spirit of Conservapedia. Please review the links [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Conservapedia:Community_Portal&diff=1130583&oldid=1128180 here and decide for yourself]. Many thanks, [[User:Wschact|Wschact]] 20:34, 9 January 2015 (EST)
::I think the main reason why Wschact is bent out of shape about TheAmericanRedoubt is his material on traditional/alternative medicine. I pointed out that Japan is unique as a country because highly advanced modern Western medicine coexists with traditional Asian medicine.[http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC516460/] The Japanese have a life expectancy that is 5 years greater than American's life expectancy. It seems reasonable to believe that thousands of years of trial and error has caused there to be some efficacy in traditional/folk medicine. I have found that turmeric/ginger works great to prevent/mitigate post workout soreness for example. It's a cheap and safe method too. I realize that traditional/folk medicine has its problems and one has to exercise discretion, but so does Western medicine.

::At the same time, I do think it is better to create reasonable length articles one at a time then create a lot of stub articles. Readers don't really care for stub articles. That is why the major search engines don't rank stub articles highly in their search results. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 00:32, 10 January 2015 (EST)
:::Thanks, Cons. By the way, TAR had me go back and count my edits since Dec 16, and I edited 139 times related to mentoring TAR and 72 times unrelated to TAR, for a ratio of 65%. I would suggest some longer comprehensive articles and if TAR needs help with categories, he should feel free to just ask. [[User:Wschact|Wschact]] 01:12, 10 January 2015 (EST)

== Kind Advice from Conservative and Karajou and my Response - No more Survivalism-Guns-AltMed-Permaculture-HamRadio, just Indian Philosophy articles from me now==

If Wschact acts unreasonably in order to protect liberal sacred cows or acts in a petty way due to you adding conservative content that he does not like, please contact User: Karajou and/or User: JPatt. On the other hand, please be judicious about this matter. If Wschact offers useful input, please take it.

I did solve the SamHB issue for you though. Should SamHB return, I suspect he will be far less truculent due to it being pointed out that masses of people are leaving his unfree state of Massachusetts each year. Obviously, people leave a sinking unfree ship of state and not a successful freedom loving flagship state. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 03:20, 11 January 2015 (EST)
::By the way, don't ever get frustrated and quit. Stand your ground and if necessary call in the cavalry of Karajou and Jpatt. :) [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 03:26, 11 January 2015 (EST)
:::I reopened my user talk page mailbox. However, please please contact Karajou/Jpatt first as they may be more active than me at CP in the foreseeable future. I did make some promises to people to assist them with off wiki projects so Karajou/JPatt may act more quickly for you. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 03:36, 11 January 2015 (EST)

:: Sorry fellow Conservatives, but Wschact (and all the really vociferous "libs"/RINOS here) finally won with their bullying. Washact and the five others, but especially Washact, have tired me out, calling me a parodist, a hijacker, etc, etc. The ''''only'''' thing Wshact didn't immediately edit are my Buddhist and Indian philosophy article contributions [[:Category:Indian Philosophy]] and [[:Category:Buddhism]]. It's simply too much of an uphill battle here with these loud-mouthed five, especially wshact. It's just too demoralizing even for an energetic contributor like me. As long as he is hounding me on ''''every'''' edit and template, it's just not worth it to me.

:: I can contribute my time and high energy elsewhere for the Conservative cause, where there is a slightly longer "pérennité" (as the French say) / durability to my contributions. I am sad to say my similar veined edits actually stayed visible on Wikipedia much longer before the vultures swooped in than they did here. At least over at Wikipedia I can contribute complementary medicine/herbology material without having it immediately deleted/reverted. Numerous items I contributed at Wikipedia lasted sometimes for weeks at a time, not just a few minutes or hours before deletion/reverting. And they usually put up a top of the page Admin template flag on it first for a couple days to weeks rather than just remove/revert it instantly like weshact is doing.

:: I think I will return back to the Conservative/Preparedness Forums from which I came. From now on you will only see on CP the occasional Buddhist, Hindu, Indian philosophy article I may perhaps continue to contribute since Comparative Religions/Philosophy was one of my past formal study areas in college.

: I sent you Karajou and User:Conservative a private e-mail about it.

::Be strong. Be of good courage. God bless America. Long live the Republic.
[[User:TheAmericanRedoubt|TheAmericanRedoubt]] 05:50, 11 January 2015 (EST)

----
This template [[Template:Second Amendment topics]] and it's Backup [[User:TheAmericanRedoubt/Second Amendment topics]] is my last contribution for the Second Amendment-RKBA-Firearms-Survivalism-Prepping. It says it all. [[User:TheAmericanRedoubt|TheAmericanRedoubt]] 06:17, 11 January 2015 (EST)
{{User:TheAmericanRedoubt/Second Amendment topics}}
----

== Conservative recommended contacting you ==

Mr. Schlafly, peace be with you. '''Conservative''' recommended I request night editing rights pursuant to problem detailed briefly on this '''[[Conservapedia:Community Portal#Window of opportunity for editing seems to be closing. What's going on?|Community Portal (link).]]''' ''Thank you for all your hard work''. --[[User:Dataclarifier|Dataclarifier]] 11:10, 9 January 2015 (EST)
:Andy, Dataclarifier wants night editing rights. I think you should grant this. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 16:19, 9 January 2015 (EST)

== Please restore my user and talk pages ==

::''I am also sending Andy private email about this.''

Cons had absolutely no authority to delete them. People say they are going to be inactive all the time. (In fact, TAR did so just a few days ago.) My understanding is that user and talk pages are only deleted when a user has been inactive for a long period of time. In fact, I got into an argument with JoeyJ on that point a few months ago. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] 16:17, 10 January 2015 (EST)

:[[User:Conservative]]'s actions are very troubling. --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 17:52, 10 January 2015 (EST)
::SamHB, if you hadn't been rude to TAR and rather chose to engage in constructive dialogue with him, I wouldn't have deleted your user page and talk page. I felt you were a stuffed shirt who was acting unreasonably and you deserved a comeuppance. And the state which you were defending via illegitimate means (namely argument by outrage/"I'm offended") is nothing to write home about and that is why masses of people are leaving your state each year.

::Nevertheless, people do change their mind about editing Conservapedia so I decided to restore your user page and talk page upon further deliberation and not delete it, but instead give you the 3-4 year time of user inactivity (which Mr. Schlafly indicated was a reasonable before user page deletion in my discussion with him). [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 20:13, 11 January 2015 (EST)

== Three actions requested==
Andy, I am respectfully requesting the following relief:

1) <s>That my IP address be unblocked</s> [done]

2) That [[User:TheAmericanRedoubt]]'s (TAR) blocking rights be removed

3) That you impose reasonable editing restrictions on TAR's future editing

[[User:Conservative]] (Cons) and I have been trying to mentor TAR, who has established a very expansive goals for himself and he has expressed that he feels pressured and under stress to accomplish a great amount in a short time frame. This was triggered by a misunderstanding of the scope of Conservapedia categories (e.g., he thinks that each US Constitutional Amendment should have a separate category) and by criticism about his creating so many new red links to non-existent articles. Cons, I and others urged him to write longer articles rather than copy and pasting single sentence articles.

At first, TAR was responsive and promised to change and to correct past errors, but he did not.

TAR also has a strange sense of "ownership". He creates articles with an edit summary of "rough draft" and complains if anyone else make changes to his articles, even to fix technical problems. He created new categories and made them subcategories of themselves or of their own subcategories. He created long category pages like [[:Category:Pro Second Amendment]] and then populated it with 29 subcategories and 164 articles. He would add the category to articles in cases where there was nothing in the article discussing attitudes toward the Second Amendment. I find that such labeling to be sloppy and a detriment to the usability of Conservapedia.

A number of editors either repaired his mistakes or posted contemporaneous talk page comments. We tried to avoid getting into revert wars with him. Looking through the article histories, some other editors did come along and repeated some of my edits after TAR reverted them, but I was not aware of this at the time.

All of this made TAR frustrated and he announced that he was leaving Conservapedia, denouncing "liberal/RINO" editors. A number of editors such as JoeyJ [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Computer&diff=prev&oldid=1130553 began to clean up the mess that TAR left behind.] A few hours later, TAR decide to return to editing. I started [[Template talk:Second Amendment groups]] to express concerns with POV pushing and other technical flaws in that template. Rather than following the normal chronological organization of a talk page, TAR copied over it with the template itself. [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Template_talk%3ASecond_Amendment_groups&action=historysubmit&diff=1130852&oldid=1130842] and then later rearrange the page to put a statement of his "ownership" and his ideas on top and burried my discussion after a transclusion of the template.[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Template_talk%3ASecond_Amendment_groups&action=historysubmit&diff=1130883&oldid=1130881] We did a bit of reverting back and forth until I could establish that both our views would be presented as a traditional talk page. I pointed out clear violations of Conservapedia Commandment #5.

Last night, TAR decided that another dramatic move was needed, so he posted a message on the talk page of the dozens of items he felt he "owned" (and created a new talk page when necessary) essentially making a personal attack against me as a "liberal/RINO" and stating that because of me, he would confine his future editing to [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk%3ARawles_on_Retreats_and_Relocation&action=historysubmit&diff=1131061&oldid=1129847 "the occasional Buddhist, Hindu, Indian philosophy article I may perhaps continue to contribute"]. I was alarmed by this over-reaction and left what was intended to be a conciliatory message on his talk page clarifying that I was not trying to confine the scope of his effort, but rather recommending that he write longer articles instead of one sentence articles. [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=User_talk%3ATheAmericanRedoubt&action=historysubmit&diff=1131111&oldid=1131108] a few minutes later, he blocked me ("09:27, 11 January 2015 TheAmericanRedoubt (Talk | contribs) blocked Wschact (Talk | contribs) with an expiry time of infinite (account creation disabled) ‎ (Sockpuppet/Abusing multiple accounts)"). There is no reason to believe that I am using multiple accounts and I am not sure that TAR understands what that means.

Perhaps Cons was not aware that TAR had blocked me because 5 minutes later, he left a message on my talk page about how he would like to move forward. These edits were later rev/del'ed, but you can still see them. He later posted a version on Jpatt, Karajou and TAR's talk pages.

Anyone who has struggled to understand how talk pages work, how templates work, how categories work should not be authorized to block on the basis of Sockpuppet allegations. TAR does not have the technical competence to hold the Block right, and I respectfully request that you remove it.

I think that TAR has a lot of energy, but lacks the skill set to achieve his ambitious goals. We need to contain any unintended fallout from his sweeping work. I leave it to you to fashion a remedy, but I would suggest that he write articles on a user subpage and then have another editor/mentor review them before the article is moved into the main article space. If you look at [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Conservapedia%3ACommunity_Portal&action=historysubmit&diff=1131025&oldid=1128180 the Community Portal] or the specific article talk pages, you can see the variety of problem edits involved. With utmost respect, [[User:Wschact|Wschact]] 17:01, 11 January 2015 (EST)
=== A reply to Wschact ===

TheAmericanRedoubt (TAR) expressed concerns that the Wschact account was using multiple individuals from different geographic areas to team up on him. Using checkuser, I looked at the IP addresses and it appeared to be suspicious. Edits from multiple states within the United States all using the same Wschact account.

Since Karajou has greater experience with the checkuser function, I wrote him and Karajou wrote:

"In response to user Conservative's question "Is Wschact multiple,,,editors?", I'm going to have to give a "yes" answer to it. First, there's the allegation of hounding against TAR. Looking at Wschact's previous edits, it looks like he's following TAR's every move with a counter-move. This is part-and-parcel to what happens inside Wikipedia, when an editor who has nothing better to do forces himself into the mix, acts like the first author is doing everything wrong, seeks to make "corrections", and everything ends up with the first author booted out under allegations of being uncooperative.

Second, in direct answer to Conservative's question, here's Wschact's IP's:

[A LIST OF IP ADDRESSES]

If you look closely at the dates, some over-lap. For instance, of the two at the bottom, in the first he's in [STATE A] using a cell phone, with the second he's in [STATE B] using a company ISP. In the IP second from the top, he's on a cell phone in [STATE C]; the top one he's back in [STATE B].

And there's more. Look at that second IP. There's three total users, but only two under Wschact. The third belongs to someone who called himself "GibsMuhDat".... This individual used the following IPs from the [STATE D] area....As above, the second IP is a cell phone, possibly the same phone, but in [A DIFFERENT PLACE IN STATE D]. Unless this guy gets around a lot, I tend to agree with Conservative that there are several individuals operating under one name in the site, and using Wikipedia tactics against someone else."

Wsacht, I see a pattern of you hounding THeAmericanRedoubt in order to make him angry. The suspicious IP address editing pattern combined with the hounding is troubling.

I also see THeAmericanRedoubt (TAR) having a spirit of wanting to get along and also willing to compromise (TAR has agreed to not create additional ayurvedic medicine articles at this time). I wish I could say the same thing about the Wsacht account, but I cannot. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 18:36, 11 January 2015 (EST)
===Final thoughts===
:Cons, thank you for allowing me to understand the nature of the evidence, which apparently TAR did '''not''' have when he blocked me. I recommend that only admins be allowed to block people for "Sockpuppet" because they have access to the data. The data will show that I indeed have been traveling around the country starting at Thanksgiving and returning on Monday, January 6. Each time, I logged in and used my single Conservapedia account. I have not lent my password to anyone else. I have been trying to mentor TAR, not to make him angry. Both Cons and I have gone out of our way to explain things to him, but I agree some other editors were a bit more testy when they also noticed the problem edits. People should only be granted the Block right if they show maturity and experience. This week we have had two threats from TAR to retire dramatically -- it is worthy of [[Charles de Gaulle]].

:As for compromise, I have given TAR wide latitude as to what and when he edits and also tried leaving him talk messages instead of just stepping in a making corrections myself. I also honored his various requests to hold off for a couple of weeks to clean up various problems himself. But he does not go back and make the promised clean ups. I can understand compromise over content, but where is compromise involved in saving a template mistakenly on the template talk page? The people patrolling his edits should not approve them without first making sure that they are not creating unintended harm to the project. Many thanks! [[User:Wschact|Wschact]] 19:14, 11 January 2015 (EST)

=== Second reply to Wschact ===

President Lincoln wrote about people often having two natures. A more noble nature guided by conscience and a more base nature as well.

TheAmericanRedoubt (TAR) and I have no problem with the more noble Dr. Jekyll part of your nature which deals with stylistic issues. I communicated with TAR today via phone and he clearly understands the rationale behind the various stylistic issues now. He is a fast learner and very cooperative. It is often much easier to communicate via phone. He is going to create longer articles (he only created stub articles to fill in the red links that AlanE complained about) which don't have long "see also" sections.

On the other hand Wschacht, there is an element of personal animus that you displaying towards TheAmericanRedoubt due to his approach to health care (he agreed to not write ayurvedic medicine articles at this time) and his very conservative political beliefs (anti-gun control, advocacy of moving out of liberal states, etc. etc.). In short, there is a Mr. Hyde nature that you are displaying towards TAR. The sheer volume of your counter edits is a problem. In addition, some of your counter edits appear to be in response his conservative ideology.

TheAmericanRedoubt doesn't appear to hold a grudge towards you. He only blocked you due to the IP address issue and the hounding. You need to dial back the hounding. I don't think it is necessary - especially given my recent communication/coaching with him and his ability to learn fast. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 19:50, 11 January 2015 (EST)

:Andy has to decide. If TAR felt "pressure" and "hounded" (when '''everyone''' was saying there was no need to hurry), he should not be the one to make the Block decision, and does not have the temperament to hold the Block bit. I was bending over backwards to be [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=User_talk%3ATheAmericanRedoubt&action=historysubmit&diff=1131111&oldid=1131108 kind] and 5 minutes later, he blocks me indefinitely. Thanks, [[User:Wschact|Wschact]] 20:18, 11 January 2015 (EST)
::Wschact, I suggest communicating with [[User: Karajou]] at this point about this matter if anything further needs to be resolved. TAR and Karajou have decided to work together to resolve this issue should the matter need further attention (they have exchanged emails, etc.). [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 23:37, 11 January 2015 (EST)

== Deuteronomy 25:13-15 ==

''13You shall not have in your bag two kinds of weights, a large and a small. 14You shall not have in your house two kinds of measures, a large and a small. 15A full and fair weight you shall have, a full and fair measure you shall have, that your days may be long in the land that the Lord your God is giving you.''

#When an administrator creates a sock to deceive, it gets ignored - while usually, this is an offense which is harshly punished.
#When [[User: Wschact]] voices his concerns, but offers help, this is called ''hounding'' - when [[User: Wschact]] gets blocked for a wrong reason, this is ignored.
#When I restore a section on your talk page, [[User:Conservative]] blocks me for two days - block reason: ''"untrimming Andy's talk page. A talk page is a user's castle!"''. When [[User:Conservative]] deletes the talk-page of a longtime editor against his expressed wishes, nothing happens.
#When longtime members of this wiki ask for your input, they are ignored (rather rudely). And then, [[User:TheAmericanRedoubt]] is informed that ''"the owner of Conservapedia would like to talk to you this week if you are available to talk to him. He wants the website to be a welcoming place for new editors."''
#[[User:TheAmericanRedoubt]] performs an unjustified 90/10 block on [[User:AugustO]], but [[User:AugustO]] is [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=User_talk:AugustO&diff=1132509&oldid=1132488 threatened with the loss of his blocking-rights.]

--[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 19:28, 15 January 2015 (EST)

== Prayer in public schools ==

"It's illegal for Christians to pray in public school, according to the U.S. Supreme Court. But in Michigan, Muslims are being given special prayer privileges by school administrators, raising questions as about due process, equal protection, and freedom of speech for followers of the faith of America's Founding Fathers."[http://www.christianpost.com/news/should-muslims-be-allowed-to-pray-in-public-schools-michigan-says-yes-98695/]

Were you aware of this matter? [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 07:06, 15 January 2015 (EST)

== Obama says the newspaper exercised bad judgment and brought this upon themselves. ==

[[User:TheAmericanRedoubt]] writes in his [[Essay:France Pays Dearly - Liberal Gun Control Laws and Gun Free Zones that Welcome Terrorists]] on [[Charlie Hebdo]] that "''Obama says the newspaper exercised bad judgment and brought this upon themselves"''. [[User:EJamesW]] asked for a citation for this claim, [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Essay:France_Pays_Dearly_-_Liberal_Gun_Control_Laws_and_Gun_Free_Zones_that_Welcome_Terrorists&diff=1131801&oldid=1131418 I did so too]. Unfortunately, [[User:TheAmericanRedoubt]] hasn't shared his sources with us yet - and I haven't found any source stating something similar...

You are the lawyer, Andy, you know what counterfactual claims are called.

--[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 15:21, 15 January 2015 (EST)

== New Direction ==

Andy, in 2007 you [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Essay:Uses_of_Wikipedia&oldid=149629 wrote]:
{{cquote|Wikipedia is useful for watching how a website attempts to boost traffic based on the search algorithms employed by Google. Overuse of linking, which is distracting to readers, helps boost placement in its search engines. As only a small percentage of Wikipedia users go there first to look for information, Wikipedia (unlike Conservapedia) is overwhelmingly dependent on search engine referrals. }}
The last couple of days showed that Conservapedia is heading in the same direction! It would be nice to get your public endorsement of this new policy: is Conservapedia to be centered around the ideas of survivalists, which start to penetrate every article, instead of being a encyclopedic resource aimed at high-school pupils? Or do you prefer to wait-and-see, just to follow the trends instead of leading the enterprise?

At the moment, I try to maintain the standards of Conservapedia as given in [[Conservapedia:Commandments]], [[Conservapedia:Guidelines]] and [[Conservapedia:Manual of Style]]. If you just declare that these standards don't apply to the new survivalist editors, I can save much time and effort!

--[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 05:02, 16 January 2015 (EST)
:That sounds like a lot of mumbo jumbo about the search engines. The search engines largely use common sense approaches from what I read. That overlinking on web pages to boost the rankings of the web page sounds like antiquated hogwash. When I Google various subjects I don't see web pages assaulting me with links. We are no longer at the dawn of the internet and search engines. The search engines are pretty sophisticated nowadays now that hardware and processing cost are much cheaper and computers are more powerful. From what I have seen, the search engine results have been getting better over time.

:I added some material to the manual of style to defang the category tag gestapo of Wsacht and AugustO. Lots of excellent wikis have a fair number of category tags at the bottom of their pages. There is no reason why category tags have to be a big source of contention at this wiki. Less than 1% of web visitors use them on pages from what I have seen. Category tags are at the bottom of the page and many readers never even get to the bottom of most web pages. AugustO and Wsacht are creating tempests in teapots when it comes to category tags.

:AugustO, your "chicken little" like warnings about survivalism material is overblown. The sky is not falling. A lot of conservatives live in rural areas where they place a greater importance on being not overly dependent on others. And that is true of conservatives as a whole. And get used to gun rights articles. It's part of conservatism. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 05:54, 16 January 2015 (EST)
::From what I have seen, Wsachat and AugustO would have dismissed John the Baptist as some kind of "mountain man" nut because he was a religious conservative who lived in a rural area and subsisted on locusts and honey!!!! Let's have some tolerance gentlemen. Why is it that the most intolerant people are often the most liberal! [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 06:09, 16 January 2015 (EST)

::*Other than you, [[User:Conservative]], I wouldn't call Andy's observations ''mumbo jumbo''.
::*I've no problem with gun-rights articles, etc. I've a problem with seeing everything from the viewpoint of the coming apocalypse: just look at the [[:category:Nuclear Target Structures]].
::*I don't ''dismiss'' survivalists, etc - but it should be just one aspect of Conservapedia, not the domineering one.
::*The sky is not falling, but the direction is changing...
::--[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 06:16, 16 January 2015 (EST)
:::"And behold, I am coming quickly". - Jesus. "This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come." - The Apostle Paul. "Be prepared." - USA Boy Scouts. I hope this clarifies matters! :) [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 06:23, 16 January 2015 (EST)
I looked at the nuclear target structures material. The developed world and some developing countries have spent a considerable amount of funds on nuclear weapons. And the number of countries getting nuclear weapons appears to be headed towards an increase. It is natural that people would have some thoughts on nuclear target structures. Please endeavor to be less critical of others articles. Nobody ever built a monument to a critic. Instead of creating endless disputes, use some of that energy to create more content instead of slowing down others as far as creating content. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 06:38, 16 January 2015 (EST)

:*I haven't deleted or changed the content of [[User:TheAmericanRedoubt]]'s (or [[User:OGSMEDIA]]'s) articles
:*I'm just trying to maintain Conservapedia's traditions and standards with regard to red links and categories. I said it before: it is annoying that such a menial task takes so much effort - even to take [[Attack on Perl Harbor]] from [[:category:Nuclear Target Structures]] was resisted!
:*Andy, if you wish to have these rules overhauled and year-old traditions disregarded by new-comers, please just say so!
:--[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 07:03, 16 January 2015 (EST)
:--[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 07:03, 16 January 2015 (EST)
::Tradition... Category tags.... You certainly have a fanatical and pharisaical devotion to hair-splitting about category tags. Man was not created for category tags. Category tags were created for men! I abridged the manual of style when it comes to category tags. Your reign of category tag tyranny is over! [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 07:41, 16 January 2015 (EST)

== Blocking rights ==

User:Conservative informed me that he has asked you to strip me of my blocking rights. Here my 2 cents:

:It will be very ironic to be punished for something which should be so uncontroversial as the first rule of categorization: ''nothing should be in a category and one of its (direct) super/sub-categories.'' Andy often emphasizes the importance of logic for this site, so it is very surprising that he'll enforce (as you, [[User:Conservative]] imply) illogical categorization!

:It is really not rocket-science: R. Heinlein was an author who wrote science-fiction - thereby he belongs into [[:category:Science Fiction Authors]]. He doesn't belong into [[:category:Science Fiction]], as any reader who looks at [[:category:Science Fiction]] will be surprised that he obviously doesn't fit in a subcategory....

:OTOH [[:category:Best Selling Authors]] should not be a sub-category of [[:category:Science Fiction Authors]] (as it is now), as it includes authors like Glenn Beck and Agatha Christie... [[:category:Best Selling Authors]] is also at the moment a sub-category of [[:category:Liberal Authors]], implying that all best sellers are written by liberals...

:New editors should understand logic, too! So, please, show a little bit more logic, and a little less aggression. --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 07:34, 16 January 2015 (EST)

===Weighing in; cleaning the slate===
[[File:Category Template.jpg|right|200px]]
The current bone of contention has to do with the large amount of differing categories - many of which are not needed and/or useless - by TAR. I talked to him about it, and he's agreeable to be more sensitive to this issue. I am guessing here (I could be wrong) that TAR doesn't know how to properly categorize articles. This needs correcting here, but I don't think such correction involves petty fights from any of us. I also don't think AugustO needs blocking rights removed; he gets frustrated at things like any of us. I got frustrated with Wschact for overly-stalking TAR, Tar got frustrated with Joey, and Conservative got frustrated with his washing machine. He hates Maytag. What I think is needed is a plan for the various categories that we have, so each article is properly filed and easy to find for the avereage reader. The included image is an example, and I based it on the layout of a set by Britannica called ''Great Books of the Western World''. What we need to do is wipe the slate, and get back on track with what needs to happen. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 09:43, 16 January 2015 (EST)

:*That looks very promising. Often pictures work better than wordy explanations - even when repeated too often :-) Categorization is like the [[:File:Koeln_(Cologne)_Germany.jpg|Dome of Cologne]], it will never be finished - and it will never please everyone. But obvious errors should be avoided.
:*Yes, I get frustrated: I'm performing a menial - but not unimportant - task which should be totally uncontroversial, and I even explain my edits on the talk-pages. Then, I'm called a "''Category Tag Nazi''", "''Category Gestapo''", "''petty and contentious''", etc. I get threatened (''"Back off!"'', my favorite: ''"A cat only has so many lives. I think you are on your 8th. But in all of the excitement lately, maybe its your 9th. Do you fell lucky?"''), and then indeed, I get blocked (for one day only , but with an obviously invalid block-reason: "''90/10 rule: excess of talk rather than edits to substantive entries''") Does anyone commutes this obviously wrong block? Is the blocking editor admonished? Or at least does anyone explain to him what the "90/10" rule entails? No, to put the cherry on top, I'm the one threatened with losing my blocking-rights! ''Shouldn't I fell bullied?''
:*I know that I won't get an apology for being insulted or wrongly blocked: those are reserved for administrators. The best I can hope for is something along the line: "well, we didn't get you ''this'' time...". Frustrating is quite an apt description.
:--[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 11:02, 16 January 2015 (EST)
::The [[creationism]] and [[communism]] articles have both received about 190,000 page views respectively. The creationism and communism category tags have both received about 7,000 page views. So about 3.5% of people who went to creationism/communism main articles also clicked the category tags of the various articles relating to creationism/communism. Conservapedia has a big selection of communism related articles with communism category tags on them and a decent size amount of creationism articles with creationism related tags on them.

::There you have it. A very small percentage of people click category tags.

::On the other hand, Conservapedia has a small active editor base and TheAmericanRedoubt is the only "power editor" in terms of creating a lot of new content.

::Next, I have seen various reviews of wikis. Not once did they mention a wikis category tags.

::Content is king on the internet and a strong website creates a lot of it. Category tags are not even close to being king.

::So from a cost/benefit analysis, focusing on category tags with a new user and doing it in an aggressive way that aggravated someone creating a lot of new content doesn't make sense. On top of this, the new editor had editors acting in petty ways unrelated to category tags which made him less open to hearing them about their category complaints. In addition, I thought that a percentage of their category complaints were petty.

::With that being said, hopefully the matter is resolved and Karajou's diagram will be helpful to new editors. Personally, I don't think the matter is resolved - at least in a satisfactory/optimal way. For example, the amount of new content that TheAmericanRedoubt created today is a fraction of his usual amount. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 20:23, 16 January 2015 (EST)
:::You can't deduce that 3.5% of people who visited those pages clicked on that category just because it has 3.5% the page views of each of those pages--people could have viewed that pages from other categories, or by being linked in externally. 7500 views is also far from insignificant--that's potentially thousands of people. You don't want thousands of people to be confused by irrelevant categories. Where do we draw the line to this approach to categories? Should [[Communism]] and [[Creationism]] both get the categories "Words that start with the letter C", "Words that start with C and end with M", etc? These two wildly different topics fit into both of those categories, but it's clear that those categories shouldn't go on those pages because there's no real value gained by adding them. We shouldn't excuse this practice just because an editor creates a lot of content. We should all strive to be better editors, recognize we aren't perfect, and accept advice from others. Just because someone brings a large quantity of content here doesn't mean they should get a pass on quality.--[[User:JonY|JonY]] 21:30, 16 January 2015 (EST)
JonY, show me a website linking to Conservapedia's communism/creationism category web pages. I don't believe you can do so.

Content is still king. Category pages are not. A website's text content and pictures receive reviews, press, social media shares, etc.

Tonight I am going to a restaurant. I am not going to rate the restaurant on whether or not they offer the McCormick brand of pepper on the table. That would be like focusing on category tags! :) Believe it or not. I am going to focus on the quality of food the waitress/waiter brings to the table and not their brand of pepper they offer patrons. :) [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 21:49, 16 January 2015 (EST)

:I followed [[User:TheAmericanRedoubt]]'s example ("''[[Conservapedia:Community_Portal#User:Wschact's Stubborn Hounding: 72% of his edits over a period of 24 days are about my work out of 179 edits, 129 concern my edits]]''" and "''[[User talk:AugustO#In 19 Months AugustO submits 2 New 1 Paragraph Articles, 13 New Talk Pages; in 2 weeks 83 Related to TheAmericanRedoubt]]''") and took a closer look at his [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&dir=prev&limit=500&target=TheAmericanRedoubt user contributions]:
:#[[User:TheAmericanRedoubt]] isn't a new editor: he started in early April 2014, and in December 2014 had already made many more than 1000 edits.
:#Then, he mainly added categories(!) to articles, created "see also"-sections, and inserted internal wiki-links. Looking at some of his edits, there isn't much unusual to them (other perhaps that he ''links to categories''(!) in the "see also"-sections.) Generally, he avoids creating red links by piping (<nowiki>[[duty|basic purpose]]</nowiki>) - but I just looked at a small sample of his edits, and while they seem to be excessive some times, they are not too controversial.
:#Coming December 2014, he seemingly loses this piping-ability, and red links start to spread (e.g., [[Cleon Skousen]]). He increases the number of categories he adds to articles, too.
:It seems that [[User:TheAmericanRedoubt]] is well aware of the way a wiki works. He shouldn't have a problem to follow the rules and guidelines of Conservapedia. --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 02:37, 17 January 2015 (EST)
::AugustO, the TAR issues with formatting/coding/harassment at a wiki appear to have been solved or at least largely solved. My apologies for overreacting.

::In recent times, I am usually pretty unflappable and am working on being more unflappable. In addition, I have been spending less time on talk pages and I plan on spending less time on talk pages in the future. In the future, my editing and reading of CP will largely/exclusively be focused on editing the main page and article pages. There is no sense in spending excessive time trying to reason with liberals who tend to be very unreasonable (this is especially true in the political realm).

::I incorporated Karajou's diagram into the manual of style. So some good did come out of this thankfully. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 15:22, 17 January 2015 (EST)

:::*Thanks for the apology: it was a nice surprise!
:::*I cannot share your optimism: ''issues with formatting/coding/harassment at a wiki'' haven't been solved at all:
:::*Take a look at [[Special:UnusedCategories]], [[Special:MostLinkedCategories]], and [[Special:MostCategories]]. Here, you can see what an impact [[User:TheAmericanRedoubt]] had over the last months. E.g., he added 14 categories to [[Ronald Wilson Reagan]], some of them unnecessary (like ''conservatism'' and ''libertarianism'', as Reagan was already classified as ''conservative'' and ''libertarian'' - or ''1960s'', ''1970s'', ''1980s''!) , some plainly wrong and misleading ([[:category:Veterans]] and [[:category:Oath Keepers]])!
:::*"''some good did come out of this thankfully. ''" Unfortunately, much bad did come out of it: may I remind you that '''[[User:Wschact]] is still being blocked?'''
:::*''"In the future, my editing and reading of CP will largely/exclusively be focused on editing the main page and article pages. "'' Another announcement. Well, I'm inclined to make a prediction myself: in a couple of days you will be back to your ''normal'' self, chattering on talk-pages about incoming successes, and amusing us with your "I am many" - routine.
:::--[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 06:34, 18 January 2015 (EST)
I went over the web traffic numbers relating to category tags with TAR. He now understands that a tiny portion of web traffic comes via category tags. So it doesn't make sense to overdo the category tags. In short, it is best to keep the category tags about the same number that popular wikis have at the bottom of their web articles.

Someone recently highly praised me off wiki with many kind praises. But the person said that sometimes I could be a "grouchy bear". :) I do endeavor to have a positive attitude and be patient. I don't always succeed, but I am getting better. I keep in mind that Moses never saw the promised land because he struck the rock twice.

Lastly, I know I razzed you about some of the shortcomings of the German people. But I do admire their time management skills. I have a lot to do and cannot waste time on talk pages. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 08:32, 18 January 2015 (EST)

:Don't sweat it - such sweeping allegations are common for those who don't travel abroad. I find them quite amusing, as they tell so much more abut you than about the German people! But perhaps the American public schools are to blame for you having to rely on "Hogan's Heroes" for your historical education.
:You should only be careful not to call German officials "Nazi" or "Gestapo", or you vill find out how humorless ve really are...
:PS: could you unblock [[User:Wschact]], please?
:--[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 08:59, 18 January 2015 (EST)
::Since you are familiar with "Hogan's Heroes", Herr Wsacht has yet to serve all his required days in the "cooler". :) Second, as part of my education, I took two courses on Nazi Germany. As a Protestant though, I admire much of the work that [[Martin Luther]] did. :) [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 09:09, 18 January 2015 (EST)
:::I am back, but we need to clarify whether we want consistency for usability, or whether we will tolerate editors ignoring the rules and the falsely accusing everyone who disagrees with them as being "liberals." We need a rule that people should not use the blocking rights when they are in the middle of a content dispute. [[User:Wschact|Wschact]] 14:23, 20 January 2015 (EST)

== Spamming links to external sites ==

"Spamming links to external sites" once was a blockable offense. So, what is Conservapedia's current policy regarding the new [[User:OGSMEDIA]] (get it: OGS Media) advertising the site http://offgridsurvival.com/, where all kinds of outdoor equipment is advertised and sold? (See: http://offgridsurvival.com/store/ ) --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 07:07, 18 January 2015 (EST)

== Five questions ==

#When do you think user TheAmericanRedoubt will realize that the crude vandalism for which he blocked EJamesW at 19:16 today, with comment "Inserting pornography/vulgarity into pages: http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Nuclear_target_structures&diff=prev&oldid=1133449" (warning: extremely crude) was actually made by user ArtWilbur? EJamesW has never made any edits that could by any stretch of the imagination be considered pornographic.
#When do you think he will rescind that block and apologize for same?
#When do you think he will stop his insulting name-calling, like "British Atheist Liberal Evolutionist User:EJamesW"?
#When do you think you will find it necessary to admonish him on his generally destructive behavior?
#When do you think you will find it necessary to revoke his sysop rights and permanently ban him?
[[User:SamHB|SamHB]] 22:21, 19 January 2015 (EST)
:Wrong person blocked accidentally blocked. Unblocked EJamesW.

:Second, I am glad you consider the labels "evolutionist", "atheist" and "liberal" to be insults. No person serious about science belongs to those camps!!! :) [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 23:15, 19 January 2015 (EST)

::*I assume that one of the editors will address this problem with [[User:TheAmericanRedoubt]] in one of their next conversations. I'm afraid it will have as much effect as earlier attempts to reign in red-links or improve categorization. It is hard to imagine the block of [[User:EJamesW]] as an accident: [[User:TheAmericanRedoubt]] had already blocked the vandal responsible for the edits (a certain [[User:ArtWilbur]].) He included the following reason for the block of EJamesW:
:::::''Inserting pornography/vulgarity into pages: http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Nuclear_target_structures&diff=prev&oldid=1133449
::*''TheAmericanRedoubt'''s own link shows that EJamesW was innocent. Obviously, ''TheAmericanRedoubt'' abuses his blocking rights or at least, he cannot handle his rights diligently. As they won't be taken way (cannot snub him, can we), you have to school him - I'm certain he will promise to improve...
::*Sysops of this site may think that the can harness the overabundance of his energy for good and therefore try to appease him, even by annoying other editors. I'm less optimistic: see e.g., [[Tinospora cordifolia]] - this article was edited Jan 3-4 by [[User:TheAmericanRedoubt]], but has not been touched for more than two weeks. For short, it's a wreck, riddled with red-links and useless (if even existent) categories!
::--[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 04:34, 20 January 2015 (EST)

A compromise with User: Wsacht was offered/reached. TheAmericanRedoubt would not create anymore articles on traditional/alternative medicine for now. Feel free to de-red link the article [[Tinospora cordifolia]] if the red links are unbearable to you and giving you sleepless nights.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 04:40, 20 January 2015 (EST)

:::I would be happy to complete all of the red links for the complementary medicine articles and submit 50 news ones particularly for all of the common cooking [[herb]]s (such as [[turmeric]], [[cardamom]], [[ginger]], [[basil]], [[cumin]], [[coriander]], [[fennel]], [[fenugreek]], [[black pepper]], [[piper longum]], [[anise]], [[galanga]], [[cinnamon]], etc.). However, as part of the compromise that [[User:Conservative]] kindly mediated between User:Wsacht (who is back in "The Cooler" for 14 days thanks to [[User:Conservative]] - [[Talk:Robert_Richardson#Wschact_Again_Biased_Targeting_Survivalism_Articles]]), I will not create anymore articles on traditional/alternative medicine ''for now'' until I am told otherwise by the Admins such as User:Conservative. As soon as I get the go-ahead from the Admins, I will gladly resume my contributions in that area, thus hopefully "curing" the red-link [[insomnia]] of [[User:AugustO]]. :-) [[User:TheAmericanRedoubt|TheAmericanRedoubt]] 19:38, 20 January 2015 (EST)

:I won't put my name on anything like this. And what about [[Essay:Systems of support]], [[Oath Keepers]], [[Essay:State Firearms Laws Ranking]], or [[Glock]]? These show all similar problems. There are many more, just take a look at [[Special:MostCategories]].
:--[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 04:54, 20 January 2015 (EST)

The sky is not falling. The red links will be filled in. Aschlafly does not appear to be worried about it and it is his wiki in case you forgot that. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 05:24, 20 January 2015 (EST)

== Template:Outdated ==

*copied from [[Conservapedia:Community Portal#Template:Outdated|here]]
When I peruse [[Special:Random]], I often encounter articles displaying information which is quite out of date (e.g, [[Stewart Bradley]] or [[Anne Arundel County, MD]]). Sometimes I'm able to update it, but at other times, it isn't in my field of special knowledge (or interest). I hope that I haven't overstepped my bounds, but
#I created the [[:Category:Outdated Articles]] for such pages
#I made the [[Template:Outdated]]: this will put a small warning on top of a page and put the page in the category. See [[Anne Arundel County, MD]] for an example.
I'd appreciate if someone would check the template and approve of it. Thanks --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 08:25, 18 January 2015 (EST)

== I have a question. ==

I have added good faith, family friendly information to the [[bladder]] page. However, some of the sources I cited may link to family unfriendly content, and I couldn't find alternative sources. Is it okay to keep the sources for now? [[User:JaylesHowler|JaylesHowler]] 15:16, 25 January 2015 (EST)

:Please provide an example link here.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 16:28, 25 January 2015 (EST)
::One of the sources I added was [http://www.netdoctor.co.uk/womenshealth/sui/bladder_005149.htm],which links to some pages about sex.

:::This isn't really my business, but I don't see any problem with the cited page. It's clinical about bodily functions, but nothing that the students that CP is aimed at can't handle. I didn't follow any outbound links from it, and it may well be that some of these links go to places that aren't student-friendly. But the internet is like that, unfortunately. If you click around, you're always going to be able to get to some nasty stuff. (You can get to some pretty nasty stuff by following links from the CP main page!) I think it would be perfectly OK to keep this material. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] 00:38, 27 January 2015 (EST)

== The [[Spur of the moment]] page ==

::''A copy of this has been sent privately to ASchlafly.''

We (Cons, AugustO, EJamesW, and I) are having a bit of a dust-up on [[User_talk:EJamesW|EJW's talk page]] over the "Spur of the moment" article. EJamesW created it, and '''Cons deleted it''', apparently over an issue of whether it is too short. EJamesW has made some other pages in the "idioms" category, like "Preaching to the choir" and "blowing your own horn".

I think that articles explaining idioms like this are (a) very useful, (b) not really gathered well on the internet (you can always Google a phrase, of course), but gathered very well on the "idioms" category page, and (c) in no need of being lengthy. Hmmmm. "Dust-up". Another idiom. And I can think of a few more, but there's no point in creating pages for these if they will be deleted. I'm "shaking in my boots" over Cons's "reverse psychology." :-)

Would you please restore this, or instruct Cons to do so? [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] 00:38, 27 January 2015 (EST)

::''Cons posted a rather lengthy and wide-ranging reply to this, which he subsequently oversighted. I will not repost it, but I did read it and this is my reply.''

Cons, you have no right to speculate on the motives or emotions of people writing pages, especially in the personally insulting manner that you did. Furthermore, much of what you wrote was about religion and EJamesW's religious views, which are '''completely irrelevant to the topic at hand.'''

Now it's true that EJamesW's inspiration for the topic "spur of the moment" may have arisen from a dispute with you on his talk page, on the subject of some of your edits. But a person's thoughts at the moment they decide to write an article is unrelated to the quality of the article. I read that article (I don't have an exact copy) and I thought it was reasonable. It carried no hint of upset, depression, or bitterness toward you.

By the way, I'm planning another article on an idiom, the idea for which came out of this discussion. It will be a good, albeit fairly short, article. The connection with this discussion will not be mentioned in the article. I'll let you figure it out—I know you like mysteries. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] 12:20, 27 January 2015 (EST)

::Having heard no objections to my just going ahead and recreating the page, I have done so. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] 20:31, 31 January 2015 (EST)
==Policy decisions==
Dear Andy,
As noted above, recent events have raised serious policy concerns which I have asked you to address. We need your guidance and leadership so that we can move forward with reasonable harmony.

1) As a matter of policy, editors with blocking rights should not block other editor when they are in a reasonable dispute. Specifically, [[User:TheAmericanRedoubt]] overreacted in an emotional manner (with overly-dramatic talk page messages on numerous articles and well as individual talk pages) to civil mentoring and coaching regarding CP's Manual of Style.

2) Article "ownership" is a serious flaw at Wikipedia, and I hope that we can avoid that pitfall here at Conservapedia. When people write here, it is with the understanding that others can come after them and edit or change what they have written without intending any personal offense, nor should the editor take it as an affront. [[User:TheAmericanRedoubt]] has left comments at the top of articles and also on article talk pages claiming his exclusive territory -- that is not the Conservapedia way. Such notices should be removed. While it is impolite to follow behind an editor and quickly make changes before the first editor has finished, I have tried to give other editors space to complete their own changes. When I find an article that has been untouched for 7 days, I feel that it is appropriate to edit that article without other editors feeling "hounded."

3) CP's policies on that essays need to be clarified. While I think that long-standing editors should be allowed to write opinion pieces on matters of wide-spread interest, we should establish some cut-off so that our essay policy is not a loop-hole to our anti-spam policy. I would suggest that someone must be an active editor for at least one year before the can write personal essays. Otherwise, someone could get a CP signon, make a few random edits and then leave incoherent walls-of-text or bullet lists to deploy a link spam farm on Conservapedia as an "Essay."

I have enjoyed working on this project, but I believe that all of the work we have done to date, and the credibility that we have built up with our readers requires us to fix the above problems.

Andy, please let me know your views on these suggestions. Respectfully, [[User:Wschact|Wschact]] 17:08, 3 February 2015 (EST)

:I would say earlier "reasonable disputes" were veiled attempts to target The American Redoubt, and that these requests to Andy are simply an extension of this targeting! The broad areas of editing technique where The American Redoubt has fallen short have already been identified and are already being dealt with, as shown by Recent Changes, without the need of further picking apart through the minutae of "helpful" editing criticism or suggesting sweeping policy changes with the sole purpose of trying to pull the rug from under The American Redoubt.

:And before you accuse The American Redoubt of shortcomings, you should attend to your own first. Are you aware that Karajou identified you as the originator of a nuisance sockpuppet that was introduced before your block was over?

:The American Redoubt, if you happen to read this, I would encourage you not to become demoralized by this kind of hostile criticism, but to continue contributing under the guidance of those editors who have been friendly to you in the way that you feel would best build up Conservapedia. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] 18:59, 3 February 2015 (EST)
::I was not aware of any "nuisance sockpuppet." I have not edited CP for two weeks. It sounds like some gossipy game of label X as an "enemy of the state." I am still the same solid contributor that I was prior to TheAmericanRedoubt's arrival. Let's keep this on a policy level without discussing individuals. There are three areas: 1) don't block when you are angry, 2) no article "ownership", and 3) wait a year to earn the right to leave essays. People should come here to work to build an encyclopedic learning resource, not to publicize some other website or product. Our essays should reflect our team not somebody else. Thanks, [[User:Wschact|Wschact]] 21:38, 3 February 2015 (EST)

==Super Bowl==
Dear Andy: Could you please unprotect [[Template:SuperBowl]]? Many thanks! [[User:Wschact|Wschact]] 17:40, 3 February 2015 (EST)
:I want to bring the template up to 2016, so please unprotect. Thanks, [[User:Wschact|Wschact]] 12:24, 5 February 2015 (EST)
::Template has been updated through 2016, but I recommend that we keep it unprotected for future changes. It is a low risk, low visibility template. Thanks, [[User:Wschact|Wschact]] 06:25, 6 February 2015 (EST)
==Medical Warning Template==
Dear Andy: Could you please review the wording of [[Template:Medical Notice]]? I don't understand the skull graphic. If you must have a graphic, why not upload one from this [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hazard_symbol page]? Should the third word be "liability" or something else? If you approve the template, we should put it on articles more consistently. If not, we should remove it from the dozen articles where it is currently used. Many thanks for all that you do, [[User:Wschact|Wschact]] 06:25, 6 February 2015 (EST)

== Correction ==

I noticed the Main Page scripture should be changed to Revelation 22:12-13. It is listed as chapter 12. Thanks for the great website. Kennywillb

== The Hounding of User:Wschact ==

[[User:Wschact]] should be unblocked: See [[Talk:Pickle#Erroneous block of User:Wschact|here]]. --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 06:04, 4 February 2015 (EST)
:Although I have been unblocked, we are all waiting for guidance from you as to which direction you have chosen for leading Conservapedia forward. Should we clean up the articles edited by TAR? Please see my questions above. Thanks, [[User:Wschact|Wschact]] 23:09, 6 February 2015 (EST)
==And alcoholism‎==
You are a good and reasonable man Andy so why on earth do you let this obsessive, quite frankly disturbing behavior continue?--[[User:CliffordC|CliffordC]] 01:49, 7 February 2015 (EST)
:Believe me, I myself care more for your interests than the author(s) of these articles.--[[User:CliffordC|CliffordC]] 01:51, 7 February 2015 (EST)
::I think you should stop crying in your beer. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 02:05, 7 February 2015 (EST)
:::The atheist/agnostic [http://www.conservapedia.com/Talk:Main_Page/Archive_index/113 JHunter] who was an evolutionist and biologist said he would debate the biology student [[VivaYehshua]] on the [http://creation.com/15-questions 15 questions for evolutionists], but he didn't show up in order to debate because he said he was drunk. Another time he was kicked out of [[Shockofgod]]'s chat room for drunken disorderly conduct if memory serves (and I think it does). Coincidence? [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 18:22, 8 February 2015 (EST)

==SCOTUS Picture==
I was wondering if it would be possible to get a new picture of the Supreme Court justices?
The current picture is this one from the SCOTUS page:
[[Image:SCOTUS.jpg|200px|left|thumb]]
The picture was taken in 2007 and is out of date. Souter and Stevens, as I'm sure you're aware, are no longer on the bench and were replaced by Sotomayor and Kagen respectively.

It would be very helpful to get an updated picture on the article. There are many freely available ones out there, including this [http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/43/Supreme_Court_US_2010.jpg/1280px-Supreme_Court_US_2010.jpg one on wikipedia]. Thank you. [[User:ScottH35|ScottH35]] 14:58, 9 February 2015 (EST)

:Go for it! You do not need upload rights, or any other special permission, to place a picture on a Conservapedia page, if that picture is already hosted at an existing site. Especially a site, like Wikimedia Commons, that isn't about to disappear. As they say at Wikipedia, "be bold".

:You know how to do this, right? Open the Supreme Court page and edit the place where the picture is referenced. Be sure the caption is updated properly, the size and location on the page are correct, etc. Use the "preview" button—this is especially important for pictures; there are many embarrassing things that can go wrong. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] 15:18, 9 February 2015 (EST)

::Oops, sorry. I '''thought''' I knew how to do this, and that it worked at CP. It certainly worked at AW. But I can't find any examples of it here. It may be that CP has a technical safeguard in place that prevents references to images at other sites. If so, someone with upload rights needs to grab that picture and import it into CP. Anyone out there? I know you people read this page.

::Sorry about misleading you. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] 15:43, 9 February 2015 (EST)

:::I uploaded a more current photo. Thanks for mentioning this.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 16:47, 9 February 2015 (EST)

::::Thanks for the upload, I've updated the description for the picture. [[User:ScottH35|ScottH35]] 16:53, 9 February 2015 (EST)

::::I was wondering if it would be possible to create some kind of portal where pictures needing to be uploaded could be submitted in some format? This could be done though linking to the image and providing the permissions, etc. It would make it really easy. That way there would be a consistent, easy process for users who request pics. It would still require approval/authorization from an admin. [[User:ScottH35|ScottH35]] 17:07, 9 February 2015 (EST)

== vandal attack ==

I hope someone with block powers is paying attention. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] 00:09, 12 February 2015 (EST)

== Thank you ==

Thanks for blocking user RSM. I tried my best but he wouldn't give up. Cheers, Carlos.

== ConsMovies ==

Hello. I have made this account for communicating with admins about my ban. I will not use the account for any other purpose.

The account that was banned was ConsMovies with a block id of #193504. It was banned by one of the users of the User:Conservative account, and I think I know which one. I think it was whichever one I politely disagreed with about halal meat on a talk page, and I think the ban is personal. The reason given for the ban was "desperate parodist" and seemed to immediately follow the addition of the movie ''Evolution'' to [[Essay:Greatest Conservative Movies]].

I can see that a case could be made for the movie actually having no message, and me reading too much into it. In that case it could have been reverted and the reason why posted to the Essay Talk page. It doesn't seem like a reason to block a contributor with a history of constructive edits and revert almost everything they did.

Many edits were then reverted by this particular user of the User:Conservative account simply because they had my name attached to them.

Robocop for example. Anyone who doesn't think that my description of what is wrong with that film is accurate has obviously only seen the poster and not the actual movie. From the title and tagline it looks like harmless silly action but it is silly in a far less harmless way than that.

The user who reverted my edits even reverted my italicization of movie titles in [[Essay:Greatest Conservative Movies]] in line with the convention adopted by the rest of the article's table entries. What could he or she have against italics except for the presence of my name in the edit log?

Additionally, my addition to [[Mystery:Why Do Non-Conservatives Exist?]] was reverted. I can't see what problem anyone is supposed to have with the addition, other than my name on the edit log.

As you can see my ban was personal and nothing to do with proper running of the encyclopedia. I waited to see if the other users of the [[User:Conservative]] account would have a word with the errant one but they remain silent! Clearly they are a tight-knit group, and while that is not a bad thing in itself it should not take precedence over the correct running of Conservapedia.

[[User:ConsMoviesAppeal|ConsMoviesAppeal]] 11:04, 3 March 2015 (EST) (ConsMovies)
:ConsMoviesAppeal, create 10 solid new articles that are at least 2,400 words in length to show good faith. The articles must be articles that need to be written for the [[Conservapedia:Atheism Project|Conservapedia atheism project]].

:Given your British IP address (a British atheist from London is obsessed with me) and your parodist type edits, I doubt you will take me up on this offer. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 00:12, 4 March 2015 (EST)
::I have reconsidered. If he does an article on [[Lee Rigby]] and creates 2 new articles for the [[Conservapedia:Atheism Project|Conservapedia atheism project]] of at least 2,400 words in length and are of good quality, he can edit Conservapedia for the foreseeable future barring any subsequent ill-behavior. This is my final offer and no counter offers will be accepted. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 11:04, 4 March 2015 (EST)
:::Conservative, I came here not to appease you, but to warn the other admins and other users of your account about you. I assume I am speaking to the same user who blocked me, who did so for personal reasons, and who can apparently do whatever he or she wants with the User:Conservative account while the other users of that account turn a blind eye.
:::I have made no "parodist type edits." As I said, you reverted the edit where I fixed the italics in an article. Why? I can see no reason other than my name being on the edit.
:::Also, you have failed to explain why you reverted my edits to the article [[Mystery:Why Do Non-Conservatives Exist?]].
:::Additionally, have you actually seen Robocop?
:::Anyone could be forgiven for thinking that the true conservative members of the group that uses the User:Conservative account are in fact no longer here, and that you are the parodist/parodists.
:::[[User:ConsMoviesAppeal|ConsMoviesAppeal]] 14:47, 7 March 2015 (EST)
::::Conservative, rather than answer my questions, which you can not do, you blocked me again. You can't explain the reverts that you did. You reverted good edits only because you have a personal grudge. And you call yourself a conservative! [[User:ConsMoviesAppeal2|ConsMoviesAppeal2]] 13:01, 10 March 2015 (EDT)

===From SamHB===
Andy: A serious case of abuse has unfolded just above on this talk page. It refers to the block, by Cons, of the user "ConsMovies", apparently relating to some edits made to the [[Essay:Greatest Conservative Movies]] page.

I'm not going to support or oppose those edits, as I don't watch many movies, and have probably not seen any of the movies involved. But, whatever the merits of the actual edits, Cons's actions are utterly inexcusable. They appear to be some kind of emotional outburst, the reason for which I don't understand (and I know Cons well.) He also seems to have reverted all of ConsMovies' edits, based entirely on the fact that they were made by ConsMovies and without regard to the actual substance. He even reverted some italicization of a few movie titles. The convention appears to be that movie titles are supposed to be in italics. A few were not, and ConsMovies fixed that. Cons reverted even that change. That can't be simply an accident; ConsMovies brought up that very issue in the section above, and Cons still took no action. I would have fixed it myself, but the page is locked.

Cons's actions constitute a blatant abuse of his administrative powers. He is carrying out a brutish personal vendetta against someone for reasons that I don't understand. ConsMovies' edits may be worthy of a revert—I can't judge—but this is simply an abuse of power.

A rather disturbing aspect of this has been the discussion that you can see in the section above. ConsMovies created a new account to appeal the block (against the rules, but there is no other way to do it, so it's a good thing that that rule is not enforced), and Cons issued some demands that are nothing but an abusive power trip. He demanded that ConsMovies write 10 articles, meeting certain demands on size, and '''demanding that they must be on a specified topic!''' In all my time here I have never seen a demand of that type. Furthermore, the demand was couched in particularly abusive terms—"This is my final offer and no counter offers will be accepted" that are reminiscent of the Postsdam Declaration of World War 2.

But perhaps the most disturbing aspect of this is Cons's demands that the articles (which of course ConsMovies couldn't create in any case since he is blocked) be in a topic category that is of particular interest to Cons. (The "Atheism Project", which is essentially owned by Cons.) Cons is effectively demanding that ConsMovies do his bidding, as a condition for being allowed to edit at Conservapedia.

There are some very crude contemporary slang terms that are sometimes used to describe the relationship that Cons is demanding that ConsMovies enter into. I don't endorse the language at all, but one of the terms I can think of relates to a female canine, and the others relate to an extremely old profession.

I have been trying to work with Cons both on his writing style and on his efforts to interact with others in a straightforward and sensible manner (see my talk page), but have made only slight headway. You need to intervene. Please unblock ConsMovies, and admonish Cons on acceptable standards of behavior for an administrator.

Sincerely, [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] 17:52, 12 March 2015 (EDT)
:Hi, I'm a new editor here. I just wanted to let you know that I think [[User:Conservative]] is completely innocent. Thanks. [[User:ZDean|ZDean]] 19:24, 12 March 2015 (EDT)

::You seem awfully new to be jumping into such a complicated issue. I assume you are familiar with the many dozens of controversies that Cons has been involved in over the years, many of which I am very familiar with. I also assume that, in what you wrote just above, that you were specifically referring just to the "ConsMovies" incident. And that you are aware that it is a more isolated and simple issue than many of the others. Why don't you, off the top of your head, render your opinions on some of the others?

::Or perhaps you would like us to believe that you are another member of Cons's fictional "collective". You must know that that is not his ''modus operandi''.

::Andy: Please don't delete ZDean's comment (or mine) above. People need to see this kind of stuff.
::[[User:SamHB|SamHB]] 22:36, 12 March 2015 (EDT)
:::Whenever a liberal cannot pin anything on a conservative (or conservative organization), often they resort to calling the person/organization "controversial" (see: [[Liberal Style]]).

:::Given SamHB's/Conservmoviesappeal's high words/substance ratio, I doubt Mr. Schlafly read their long screeds. At most, he skimmed them. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 00:18, 13 March 2015 (EDT)
::::Before I had even posted on Conservapedia I had contacted Andy by email to get his advice on anti-abortion and pro-life topics for setting up a pro-life project of my own. Andy invited me to post here and advised me, and I paraphrase "Do not take much notice about what is said on talk pages". Since then I have been blocked twice by Conservative simply for disagreeing with him, despite being told I would not be blocked. As I had misplaced Andy's email address I had no way of contacting him for advice I really did need. I have come to the conclusion that Conservative is always right, never bullies or intimidates people and never uses a high word to substance ratio despite publishing dozens of atheism articles, many of which are close facsimiles of each other based on one Barna Group report many years ago. Conservative holds the axe here and there is no point in opposing him if you do not want it to be bought down on your neck.--[[User:Tomqua|Tomqua]] 10:22, 13 March 2015 (EDT)
:::::To illustrate my point look at the deletion of my talk page[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:Tomqua]. You will see that despite my posts being accepted and me showing some contrition I was still blocked. It does not show it here but after I had written "Ok, but so far my posts have been accepted" the next line was , again I paraphrase "You were warned". followed by the block. I can only conclude the real reason for the block was spite.--[[User:Tomqua|Tomqua]] 10:50, 13 March 2015 (EDT)
Tomqua, are you an atheist? Your past complaints at this wiki would indicate you are an atheist.

Conservapedia is never going to whitewash atheism. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 14:13, 13 March 2015 (EDT)
:My religious views are not your concern.--[[User:Tomqua|Tomqua]] 15:58, 13 March 2015 (EDT)
::Given the [[Atheist population and immorality|folly and shamefulness]] of the [[atheist worldview]], I can understand your reluctance to admit you are an atheist. Many atheists are closet atheists and find it difficult to support their [[Atheism is a religion|atheist religion]] (see: [[Atheism and cowardice]]).

::Jesus set the highest moral standards (Sermon on the mount, etc.) and there is an abundance of [[Christian apologetics websites|evidence supporting Christianity]], so there no reason for a Christian to be ashamed of being a Christian. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 16:17, 13 March 2015 (EDT)
:::It has nothing to do with cowardice. Think along the lines of your past record of bullying and belittling not just atheism but any form Christianity you find too liberal, see [[Liberal Christianity and marital infidelity]].--[[User:Tomqua|Tomqua]] 16:35, 13 March 2015 (EDT)
::::I find that a strange remark, for a number of reasons. Only one of which being that the article doesn't strike me as a particularly vivid example of the point you were professing to demonstrate. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] 17:01, 13 March 2015 (EDT)

== Key articles and traffic ==

Andy,

Based on our discussion yesterday, I fixed the sidebar taking the various matters we talked about into account.

If you and/or others would format/improve the [[abortion articles]] page so it is more organized and has some pictures that would be much appreciated. If you want an example of this via another "articles page", please see: [[Atheism articles]].

I also created a few more abortion articles. Some of the footnoting is messed up for some of those articles, but I had to attend to some matters this morning, so I didn't have time to fix the footnoting for those articles. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 07:48, 7 March 2015 (EST)

== The Son of God ==

Andy, I've joined Conservapedia four years ago. I've invested quite a bit of time in the [[CBP]], mainly to curb the most egregious abominations. I'm very bothered that time after time some random insights trumped scholarship and knowledge. You chided me for ''"a pedantic word-for-word approach to translation''", but at least I'm able to do so: after these four years I'm convinced that you are lacking any skills in Greek beside recognizing the alphabet and browsing various translations. This becomes ample clear reading your article on the [[Son of Man]]. E.g., take your comment:
{{cquote|Matthew 5:45 has "πατρὸς ὑμῶν τοῦ ἐν οὐρανοῖς." This is translated as "your Father who is in heaven" or, more concisely, "your Father, in heaven." Likewise "ὁ υἱὸς τοὺ ἀνθρώπου" should be "The Son who is a human being" or, more concisely, "The Son, a human being."--Andy Schlafly 18:51, 24 June 2014 (EDT) }}

Here you showed that you are not able to parse a Greek sentence, but that you are only try to match patterns at a very basic level (see [[Talk:Son_of_Man#.22Son_of_Man.22]] for details). It is very disappointing, that your knowledge hasn't improved over the last four years, if anything, it seems to deteriorate. I urge you to stop pretending to translate the Bible!

As [[User:Conservative]] observed, even such a short passage may have been to wordy for your taste. Therefore:

'''tl;dr: Andy, you don't have any Greek. Stop recreating the Bible in your image.'''

--[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 15:40, 15 March 2015 (EDT)

== New User ==

Hey Andy I Just want to say I Look up to you and your interest in History. As a new user I am a little unfamiliar on how this site works and wat is the proper content to put up. Can you tell me where i can find help? God bless! Kl3m3ntin3.

== Martyrs to the faith ==

Could you please move [[Martyrs to the faith]] to [[Protestant martyrs to the faith]]? It seems to be odd that this title is reserved for Protestant Christians ("''The martyrs to the faith are the Protestants who were executed by Roman Catholics during the Reformation of the 16th century. ''"). In fact, this list and some articles created by [[User:WKirkwood]] in 2008 (like [[George Wishart]]) have an anti-catholic tendency and try to deny that Catholics are Christians, too ("'''Walter Myln''' was a Scottish [[Christian]] and the last [[martyr]] of the [[faith]] who was murdered by [[Roman Catholic]]s in 1558 by burning at the stake in [[St Andrews]]. ") --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 16:33, 20 March 2015 (EDT)

:Fixed. See: [[Protestant martyrs]]. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 15:17, 21 March 2015 (EDT)

== Conservapedia is not displaying right ==

Lately, in about 33-50% of the cases, Conservapedia is not displaying right. The right sidebar is blank or the bottom of pages is blank. I tried two browsers in order to see if it was related to a particular browser and with both browsers I had this same problem.

Do you know what is causing this problem? [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 15:09, 21 March 2015 (EDT)

:I'm not seeing this on Firefox on Windows or Linux, or Internet Explorer on Windows. You know what they always say--reboot and try again. Aren't computers wonderful? [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] 16:31, 21 March 2015 (EDT)
::I am having this problem with both Firefox and a speedy clone of Google chrome. I don't think this is related to my computer as I have used this computer for years without trouble as far as Conservapedia and I am using the same operating system that I have been using for months.

::In addition, rebooting the computer did not fix the problem. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 16:53, 21 March 2015 (EDT)

:::Don't know what to say. You're pretty computer-savvy, so you know all about resetting your router, taking your computer to a wifi spot in some local restaurant or whatever, having a friend bring his/her computer to your place, etc. etc.
:::But everything works just fine for me. Except of course for this "atheism and donuts" nonsense all over RC.
:::Your computer isn't an atheist by any chance, is it? :-) Maybe it just wants a donut! [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] 18:48, 21 March 2015 (EDT)
I am not going to mess with my router and I am pretty much staying inside while I overcome my flu induced acute bronchitis (it is getting better each day).

Second, the problem is manageable, but annoying.

Third, it is donuts vs. atheism and not atheism and donuts. Donuts are clearly winning and successfully attacking the soft underbelly of atheism! [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 19:05, 21 March 2015 (EDT)

:I'm sorry to hear that you are unwell. Get plenty of rest, drink fluids, and all that "mom" stuff. And lay off the donuts. :-) The weather in this part of the country has not been conducive to getting outside and getting fresh air and all that, but the forecast is for 44 degrees and no precipitation (but cloudy) on Thursday. I hope you will be well enough to go for a long walk and get fresh air by then. I will do the same. I expect no edits from you on that day, OK? I will do my part by not provoking you.

:Donuts vs. atheism? Atheism and donuts? Is there really a difference? Aren't conflicts like this symmetrical? In any case, I'm very glad to hear that you perceive that donuts are winning this war. But don't eat too many of them! I don't want you to develop a "soft underbelly". I myself am neutral (one might even say "agnostic"!) on this issue. As I said on the other page, I'm not aware of any "culture war" here.

:[[User:SamHB|SamHB]] 00:29, 22 March 2015 (EDT)

Get well soon! BTW: It's quite amusing that whenever you are confronted with troubles in the real world (illness, computer problems), your multiple personalities collapse into one! --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 03:35, 22 March 2015 (EDT)
:Touché! I hadn't noticed that. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] 11:49, 22 March 2015 (EDT)
:::AugustO, you still haven't address the content/style differences related to the [[Atheism and the persecution of homosexuals]] and the [[homosexuality]]/atheism/evolution articles and the articles most recent title change battle.

:::SamHB, unlike many overweight atheists, I am committed to not eating processed sugar! [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 14:48, 22 March 2015 (EDT)
Have you cleared a browser's cache? On more than one occasion, cross-browser problems have been cured for me by clearing the cache or, in extreme cases, cache and cookies. Although browsers don't share caches, plug-ins can and a corrupted plug-in cache can manifest itself in unpredictable ways. [[User:MelH|MelH]] 12:54, 22 March 2015 (EDT)
:Clearing the browsing history via the browser, logging in/out does offer a degree of relief and so does the cache clearing software package CCleaner which is quite thorough. But they do not solve the problem completely.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 13:00, 22 March 2015 (EDT)
::After clearing my cache via the browser and using the cache clearing software CCleaner, Conservapedia just retained my log in status even after I had logged out before doing this cache clearing procedure. This is very strange. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 14:37, 22 March 2015 (EDT)
:::The problem stopped. I changed my antivirus protection recently. Maybe that was the problem. Or perhaps it was my internet provider. Tough to say. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 11:31, 24 March 2015 (EDT)

==Requesting Ability To Upload Files==
Dear Mr Schlafly

May I request the ability to upload files? I would like to reupload images after losslessly compressing them, to save space on the servers.

Regards, 
--[[User:KennethAlberty|KennethAlberty]] 14:46, 2 April 2015 (EDT)

== Picture Upload Request ==

I was wondering if we could get a picture of [[David Perdue|Senator Perdue]] for his page? [http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/53/David_Perdue_official_Senate_photo.jpg/220px-David_Perdue_official_Senate_photo.jpg This picture would be great]. Thanks. [[User:ScottH35|ScottH35]] 18:52, 13 April 2015 (EDT)

:Picture uploaded as requested: [[File:DavidPerdue2015.jpg]].--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 00:06, 14 April 2015 (EDT)

Thank you for the picture of Senator Perdue. Could we now get one for [[Joe Heck]]? It is amazing how few pictures of our elected officials are on this site! [http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/6e/Joe_Heck%2C_Official_Portrait%2C_112th_Congress.jpg/640px-Joe_Heck%2C_Official_Portrait%2C_112th_Congress.jpg This picture would be great].[[User:ScottH35|ScottH35]] 15:57, 20 April 2015 (EDT)

:Most, if not all portrait photos of U.S. Senators and U.S. Representatives are available from their respective government Web pages while they are in office and can be republished without restriction, as they are works of United States federal government employees who made them as part of their official duties. Grab them while they are current, because if they get voted out of office, their Web page disappears. — [[User:Dave Wilcox|Dave Wilcox]] ([[User talk:Dave Wilcox|talk]]) 13:09, June 15, 2021 (EDT)

== Robert Dicke ==

Andy, you think that Robert Dicke is the greatest American physicists.
*Dicke had no problems with [[E=mc²]] - he thought that it would be "unlikely" that this equation doesn't hold as it fits the experimental observations (see, e.g., Robert Dicke "The Theoretical Significance of Experimental Relativity")
*The Brans-Dicke theory resembles Einstein's Theory much more than Newton's. It doesn't allow for your [[action at a distance]].
*He worked extensively on the equivalence principle, something with which you [[Talk:Biblical_scientific_foreknowledge#GUT|had problems in the past]].
So, why don't you read up on his work, and honor him by understanding his ideas?
--[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 10:03, 7 May 2015 (EDT)

Have you any evidence - besides your gut-feeling - that Dicke was denied the Nobel prize because of his ideas regarding the General Theory of Relativity? It could be that the committee took umbrage because he rather belatedly acknowledged the work of Gamov, Alpher, and Herman:
{{cquote|"There is one unfortunate and embarrassing aspect of our work on the fire-ball radiation. We failed to make an adequate literature search and missed the more important papers of Gamow, Alpher and Herman. I must take the major blame for this, for the others in our group were too young to know these old papers. In ancient times I had heard Gamow talk at Princeton but I had remembered his model universe as cold and initially filled only with neutrons." |||Robert Dicke, in ''The Discoveries: Great Breakthroughs in 20th-Century Science'', by Alan Lightman, ISBN-13: 9780375713453}}
--[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 18:32, 14 May 2015 (EDT)

== All non-administrators are blocked from editing Conservapedia ==

Andy,

All non-administrators are blocked from editing Conservapedia. I confirmed this matter via a non-adminstrator account that I set up months ago and used for one edit as an experiment.

AugustO recently told me this and another editor as well.

Can you please fix this problem? [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 05:19, 8 May 2015 (EDT)
=Labor Party is humiliated=
This headline needs changing, sorry to say this but it looks sloppy. It is "The Labour Party", a proper noun. "The Conservative Party", again a proper noun with a capital C. The 20 year old in question was a "Scottish National Party" candidate and not Scottish Independence which was not on the agenda at this election. Sorry to sound picky but it is important to get the semantics correct.--[[User:CuthbertA|CuthbertA]] 10:58, 8 May 2015 (EDT)
:I put the word "The" in the headline. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 11:38, 9 May 2015 (EDT)
::Thank you Conservative. You are right, Labour were trounced. Outside the major urban areas in England and South Wales they have practically no support. Labour needs to carry Scotland to win and Scotland has deserted them.--[[User:CuthbertA|CuthbertA]] 12:00, 9 May 2015 (EDT)

== Hotze ==

So I heard that the 5th Circuit decided ''Hotze v. Burwell'' on April 24, 2015, vacating the decision of the district court and determining that the plaintiffs lacked standing. I was wondering whether you were planning on filing a cert petition or instead starting over with a new plaintiff on the merits of the Origination Clause challenge. Thanks, [[User:GregG|GregG]] 00:43, 23 May 2015 (EDT)

:Greg, thanks for your comment about this! Actually, I plan to file a petition for rehearing ''en banc'' before the full [[Fifth Circuit]], and I need to start working on it soon! My deadline is 45 days after the decision was rendered (ordinarily the deadline is only 14 days, but it is the longer 45 days when the federal government is a party, as in this case).--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 00:57, 23 May 2015 (EDT)

== Rob Smith ==

I agree with User: Conservative about wanting Rob Smith to have admin rights again. --[[User:Joaquín Martínez|Joaquín Martínez]] 07:45, 27 May 2015 (EDT)

== Counterexamples to Relativity ==

Andy, please discuss the Biblical counterexamples at [[Talk:Counterexamples_to_Relativity#Action-at-a-distance_according_to_the_Bible]] before putting them back into the article! --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 05:33, 7 June 2015 (EDT)

== Template:Cquote problem ==

Hi Andy, there's a problem with Template:Cquote that I brought up at [[Conservapedia:Community Portal]]. The template is showing up in [[:Category:Speedy deletion candidates]], but the template hasn't been edited since 2012, so it's a puzzle why it would suddenly show up there. Conservative couldn't figure it out, and he suggested I notify you. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] 20:40, 10 June 2015 (EDT)

:cquote works, right? I use it often:
{{cquote|Here is an example.}}--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 20:45, 10 June 2015 (EDT)
::Yes, as far as I know. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] 21:18, 10 June 2015 (EDT)

:::That is a bizarre mystery why it is showing up in that category now. I cannot explain it. Obviously cquote should not be deleted.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 21:33, 10 June 2015 (EDT)

Try to delete <nowiki><noinclude>{{lorem ipsum}}</noinclude></nowiki> from the template: could be the reason... --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 01:41, 11 June 2015 (EDT)
::::AugustO, thanks. I fixed the problem using your suggestion. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 02:00, 11 June 2015 (EDT)

Talk:Mystery:Why Do Non-Conservatives Exist?

2021-06-15T16:55:41Z

Dave Wilcox: remove spurious delimiters

==A matter of perspective==

The page begins with "Conservative principles are based on reason. So why do non-conservatives still exist?" But as an independent (at least, that's what I consider myself to be), I'd like to point out that such a statement is from a conservative perspective. Coming from an independent, couldn't I say, "Independent principles are based on reason. So why do non-independents still exist?" Of course, many conservative ideas have merit, but I also find that some liberal ideas also do. If one calls those subscribing to liberal ideology "inherently irrational," would that mean that I am partially irrational? I think it is just a matter of perspective or opinion, and while one side may have the superior reasoning on one issue or the other, this article seems to me like a gross simplification.

By the way, I'm a new editor here, so please excuse me about where talk pages are supposed to go (do they go on the top, bottom, alphabetical order, etc.?)

:[[Conservative]]s adhere to reason more than [[liberal]]s do. There's no reason to expect different groups to treat reason in an identical manner. Indeed, it would be illogical to argue that.

:A liberal is far more likely to take a view because it suits what he likes, what he's done, or what he wants to do. That's not based on reason, but on personal preference.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 17:34, 4 December 2010 (EST)

::But how can you say that with such certainty, and be absolutely sure that you are correct? Don't mistake me for a liberal here, I am an independent and have both a Wikipedia account (the more liberal-leaning encyclopedia) and a Conservapedia account (the more conservative-leaning encyclopedia) for good balance. And as an independent, I sometimes find myself in agreement with the more liberal-leaning opinions on certain issues. However, I do not feel that I hold those opinions because "it suits what [I like], what [I have] done, or what [I want] to do, but rather because I genuinely believe that those views represent what is in the best interests of the nation. By extension, couldn't at least ''some'' (not just 1 or 2, but a substantial minority, if not a majority) of liberals genuinely feel the same way, that their beliefs are actually what is best for the nation? Once again, I'm not saying that they are, just that it is possible that they ''could'' be. --[[User:JamesCartwright|James Cartwright]] 14:06, 26 December 2010 (EST)

:::What you need to do to get some answers to your questions is to read the various news items which are linked to the main page, as well as some of the hot-button articles (abortion, atheism, evolution, etc) that we have here. In a nutshell, conservatives believe in the rule of law and order, good morals, self-discipline, and so on; liberals today believe in a "free-for-all", with no restraints on anything except those people who don't agree with them. The results of what they say is "good for the country" is the following: millions of unborn children murdered through abortion; violence in public schools directly stemming from a loud-mouthed atheist forcing the removal of the Bible and prayer from those schools in 1960; continual battles to remove any trace of religion - specifically Christianity - from the public sphere; the annual wars against Christmas and what they believe its meaning should be; the votes in Congress to increase the public's tax burden, as typified by the Carter, Clinton, and Obama administrations; the destruction of our military through attrition, reduction of readiness, and turning it into a "social experiment"; the assistance of the planting of several Islamic mosques in the country over public objections to them, especially near Ground Zero in New York City; the trashing of the environment, despite what they actually say [http://www.conservapedia.com/File:1915b7ec753fa9d0352885dc23da4469.jpg]; the pushing of psuedosciences such as global warming in order to grab American money for leftist causes; and so on, ''ad nauseum''. No, we will never adhere to much of these liberal beliefs, because the end results are destruction and catastrophe. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 14:41, 26 December 2010 (EST)

::::To be honest, the soundness of your statements is reduced by so greatly overstating the consequences of liberalism. One could argue that adherence to more liberal-leaning policies are better or worse for the nation (you would obviously say worse, as also would I) than adherence to more conservative-leaning policies, but that "destruction and catastrophe" would result is simply absurd. --[[User:JamesCartwright|James Cartwright]] 15:23, 26 December 2010 (EST)

::::: James, I wonder which adjectives you'd use to describe the wasteland of abandoned homes caused by liberal policies in Detroit, to take just one example.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 15:43, 26 December 2010 (EST)

::::::Sad and unfortunate would be some. Destructive and catastrophic would not. It is almost fearmongering (something which both Democrats and Republicans are both guilty of) to describe a political matter in the manner in which one would describe a heinous crime (Obama: "hostage taking") or an act of God (as Karajou did).
:::::::James, I made no mention of an act of God. This is "cause and effect" here. The image that I linked above is something you can easily study, as it pertains to one subject in liberals' hearts: environmentalism. There are laws on the books right now which demand heavy fines or prison time for trashing the environment, all placed on the books by liberals, and to have these same people treat the National Mall on Obama's inauguration day like it was their personal dumpster begs the question: do you want these people to be in charge? They were in charge of Detroit for over 4 decades, and just look at the place. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 17:55, 26 December 2010 (EST)
::::::::I was referring to your usage of the phrase "destruction and catastrophe". That image is the inevitable result of assembling thousands of people together, and littering occurs during every Presidential inauguration, those of both Democrats and Republicans. Also, you seem to speak of environmentalism in a very condescending manner, by associating it with a group that you obviously find distasteful. However, it is absolutely no reason to be condescending towards a group which "advocates or works to protect the air, water, animals, plants, and other natural resources from pollution or its effects" (Random House Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2011). To be honest, I would rather have them in charge of the environment than you and like-minded people. As an independent, however, I would prefer authorities that are entirely non-politically-affiliated, but given the regrettably partisan state of American politics, that won't happen.--[[User:JamesCartwright|James Cartwright]] 22:15, 5 January 2011 (EST)
:::::::As far as the use of the word "catastrophe" goes, take a good look at what is happening to California today. That state is on the verge of bankruptcy. There has been in influx of people increasing the state's population over the past 20 years, but with no change to the energy structure needed to support the increase, resulting in several power blackouts. The state used to have a money surplus, now they're deep in debt. They have written laws which burden the people with needless regulation; they have increased personal taxes. They have shut off the water to the San Joaquin Valley, resulting in a catastrophic loss to farmers amounting to over $1.15 billion dollars, and all because a stupid fish was more important than people's lives and livelihoods. Just who's been in charge of California the past 20 years? A bunch of liberals. This is evidence, James, that we don't need a bunch of fools to rule over us. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 14:09, 27 December 2010 (EST)
::::::::Having read this, I've come to the conclusion that we differ too much ideologically to have a meaningful discussion. You certainly make good points and have a good argument, I do not deny that. I only mean to say that we disagree initially so much to the extent that we will not be able to convince each other of anything significant. Perhaps that is just human weakness. In any case, I feel similarly about my interactions with many other Conservapedia editors and I do not believe that it is worthwhile anymore for me or others that I continue to be on this site. I wish you all the best. Farewell.--[[User:JamesCartwright|James Cartwright]] 22:30, 5 January 2011 (EST)

==Mind Altering Drugs==
The suggestion may (or may not) have been made with parodic intent, but I had been thinking along similar lines. It is well-known that use of drugs - 'even' marijuana, which Liberals pretend is less harmful than candy - causes a range of psychiatric illnesses (which may also be hereditary); and I think that maybe between us we could come up with an acceptable form of words. [[User:Bugler|Bugler]] 15:50, 13 December 2008 (EST)
:I agree: that's why in my reversion I suggested that the original contributor expand to put the claim on a firmer foundation. How about, "use of mind-altering drugs, which encourages one to become a liberal to reconcile the cognitive dissonance, or dulls mental acuity resulting in mindless conformity," or something like that.-[[User:AlexanderM|AlexanderM]] 15:52, 13 December 2008 (EST)
::That sounds good to me. [[User:Bugler|Bugler]] 15:54, 13 December 2008 (EST)
:::Thanks! Done.-[[User:AlexanderM|AlexanderM]] 15:56, 13 December 2008 (EST)

Lots of insights in this list. I wonder if it would be possible to estimate percentages for each reason.--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 15:59, 13 December 2008 (EST)
:Thanks! I expect media/school bias, along with [[liberal friendship]] & mindless rebellion, are some of the biggest contributors.-[[User:AlexanderM|AlexanderM]] 16:09, 13 December 2008 (EST)
::::Any estimates would probably be just a guess so I suggest a data gathering exercise. If someone could set up a sub-page with a list of the options then we could all think of the non-conservatives that we are familiar with at school, work or in some cases even at home. Then we could just give one point for the reason that we would estimate for each person. I think the demographic diversity here should be sufficient to build a fairly accurate picture. This sort of thing wouldn't be allowed at WP with their dogmatic No Original Research mantra. So it highlights a real difference between us and WP in that we can generate new insights through a group effort as it would give almost everyone the opportunity to contribute. [[User:BrianCo|BrianCo]] 16:55, 13 December 2008 (EST)
:::::Applying clear numbers to it is probably impossible, since many of the causes effect any individual. Everyone is subject to the bias in media, academia, etc..., while only some have the poor thinking skills, innate naivete, and simply, pure delusion that creates the radicals members of the far left whom we all love and tolerate. [[User:RodWeathers|- Rod Weathers]] 17:00, 13 December 2008 (EST)
:: Probably so. But note that even the most powerful bias requires something extra to close the mind as well. Of course aging seems to have an effect of closing the mind automatically for many.--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 16:12, 13 December 2008 (EST)

Mental endowments are certainly a key reason (see ''[[The Liberal Mind: The Psychological Causes of Political Madness]]''). A certain demographic is inherently irrational and childlike. [[User:RodWeathers|- Rod Weathers]] 16:14, 13 December 2008 (EST)
:I saw that on WND: I'll try to find time to read it over the break.[[User:AlexanderM|AlexanderM]] 16:16, 13 December 2008 (EST)

== Organization ==

I've tried to compact and organize it, to make it easier to grasp. Please improve. [[User:RodWeathers|- Rod Weathers]] 16:27, 13 December 2008 (EST)

: Great point. I think we need prioritized sections, like "Main Reasons", separated from "Other Reasons." Feel free to improve.--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 16:35, 13 December 2008 (EST)
::Great job Rod!-[[User:AlexanderM|AlexanderM]] 18:01, 13 December 2008 (EST)

==Wow==
Okay, if this isn't a parody, then it's just scary. It makes multiple errors in it's assumptions, characterizes liberals as "weak-minded" or just unthinkingly "rebellious", and heavily insists that being Non-conservative is "wrong", and that if you're not a conservative, then you are brainwashed simple thinker. Does the author realize that there are opposing views to conservatism that are not liberal? Does he realize that some liberals are quite intelligent, and have reasons for being liberal that are based on logic? I like to think of myself as a moderate conservative, but the reasons highlighted in this list serve only to make me ashamed of that. [[User:ShawnJ|ShawnJ]] 16:37, 13 December 2008 (EST)
:Shawn, the tenor and content of your rant (and it is 'its assumptions', not 'it's assumptions') lead us to suppose that you are very far from being a Conservative of any hue. If you held sincere beliefs, you would not be ashamed of them because of third party actions. And if you were one of those mythical 'quite intelligent liberals', you might be capable of opening up your mind to new ideas, rather than rejecting them out of hand. [[User:Bugler|Bugler]] 16:44, 13 December 2008 (EST)

::Right, Bugler. ShawnJ's talk lack substance. But perhaps it can be analyzed: why isn't ShawnJ a real conservative? His reference to liberals being "quite intelligent" suggests he aspires to be considered likewise. I sense the public school rationales at work here: the "A+" went to the liberal positions, and either ShawnJ received a few himself and cannot let go of the illusion, or he's a wannabee.--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 18:57, 13 December 2008 (EST)

::: Bugler, I consider myself a conservative because I was raised in a strictly conservative family, and while I don't agree with all of their positions, I still do agree with many of them. Hence me considering myself a "moderate" conservative. My whole issue with this article is it reads as an attack on non-conservatives, in no small way calling them worse people. It is a complete error to refer to all liberals as stupid, or unthinking, or ignorantly rebellious. It's the same flaw that racism and all forms of bigotry share. Trying to apply absolutes to beliefs and personalities simply doesn't hold up under closer inspection. Perhaps if you were secure in your conservative beliefs, you might be capable of opening up your mind to new ideas, instead of rejecting them because they come from someone with different political views than your own. Aschlafly, I addressed most of your argument in my reply to Bugler, but for the record, most of my "A+"s went to Math and Physics. It's really hard to put a political spin on calculations and numbers. [[User:ShawnJ|ShawnJ]] 19:52, 13 December 2008 (EST)

:::: ShawnJ, take a look at our new statistical portion of the entry. Which category do you fall into, or should there be a new one? For example, did you hear about conservative principles and the logic behind them only ''after'' you made up your mind? Do you have liberal friends whose acceptance you value?

:::: If you got "A+"s in school, regardless of subject, then your self-esteem is likely tied to approval by the very liberal education establishment. You'd have to feel embarrassment if your teachers learned that you might become a real conservative. And your self-esteem would not permit that, right?--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 20:37, 13 December 2008 (EST)
::::::Wait a sec--you're saying that people who get "A"s in school tend to be liberal? So would that make the converse true--that conservatives would tend to get low(er) grades? That can't be right...--[[User:RossC|RossC]] 22:18, 13 December 2008 (EST)
:::::::Ooooh, SO close, but no cigar! The arguments is that liberals know that professors are liberal - see [[professor values]] - and conform their behavior & values deliberately to the professor's to get better grades not for substance, but because they agree with the professor's worldview. It's not that they're smart; they're just playing the game.-[[User:AlexanderM|AlexanderM]] 22:22, 13 December 2008 (EST)

:::: I gotta say, my personal experiences negate any of the categories in the statistical portion. I simply realized, over time, that conservatism didn't hold all the answers. That, surprise, there was no perfect school of political thought. All this talk about the "liberal education system" is funny to me, because, honestly, I couldn't give you the political leanings of ANY of my teachers/professors. Who they did/would vote for, their stances on gun control, abortion, homosexuality, government, it simply never came up. I'm sure there was some rule on the books preventing teachers from discussing such things, and they were followed. The military upbringing put me in many different schools in various parts of the country, domestic and abroad, and not a single one broke that rule. Granted, I never sought out my instructors political beliefs, but the never volunteered them either. They were there do their job of teaching me, and I was there to do mine of learning.

:::: As far as my friends go, they fall much into the same boat. I hang out with them to relax after work. Watch a game, play a game, maybe throw a party, whatever, not to have heated arguments that won't resolve anything.[[User:ShawnJ|ShawnJ]] 23:36, 13 December 2008 (EST)

::::: ShawnJ, you probably vote and so do your friends and teachers; you adhere to certain values and so do your friends and teachers; and you make statements of a political nature just as your friends and teachers do. I'm sure you've taken courses in economics, history, government, English literature, and science, and it is impossible to teach or learn those topics without forming opinions that affirm or deny conservative principles. Perhaps you were unaware of it at the time, but with an open mind you can reconsider it now.

::::: Your teachers voted overwhelmingly for [[Barack Obama]], to take just one example, and they taught you things consistent with their view. I'd guess that 50% of what you learned in school was false, and those of who care about the truth embark on a path to revisit and reconsider all of it. I encourage you to join us.--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 10:43, 14 December 2008 (EST)

== Ohkay......... ==

Erm, i understand the bit about all those TV shows and the media in general, but mind-altering drugs?, isn't that just taking it a bit too far (i mean in terms of accusations, how the heck would Obama put drugs in everyone's cookies, i mean, he's busy enough as it is dealing with conniving madmen like the governor from Illinois with the weird name (apologies for the long sentence)--[[User:PhilipV|[[User:PhilipV|PhilipV]]]] 17:14, 13 December 2008 (EST)
:Who is talking about Obama here? The effects of drug abuse are well known. [[User:Bugler|Bugler]] 17:33, 13 December 2008 (EST)
::I think he meant Blagovejich :)-[[User:AlexanderM|AlexanderM]] 18:00, 13 December 2008 (EST)
:::PhilipV's comments are bizarre. But why is PhilipV a non-conservative, do you think?--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 18:59, 13 December 2008 (EST)
::::Sounds like he's trying to apologize for drug use.-[[User:AlexanderM|AlexanderM]] 19:02, 13 December 2008 (EST)

::::: Alex, I find that accusation offensive! ----[[User:PhilipV|PhilipV]][[User talk:PhilipV|'' I Support our Troops!'']] 12:28, 14 December 2008 (EST)

::::::Come to think of it, how on earth is that an apology for drug use/abuse/misuse? if i had used such works of the devil (which they are) i would probably have voted Democrat so that i could have continued using illegal drugs - but no - i voted republcan this year and my political compass test says that im a right-wing authoritarian.----[[User:PhilipV|PhilipV]][[User talk:PhilipV|'' I Support our Troops!'']] 12:28, 14 December 2008 (EST)

== Seriously? ==
Hmmm... in this article I see Liberal Style 21. Why must we try to make liberals seem less intelligent than conservatives? If the positions of Conservatism are much more logical than the positions of Liberalism... shouldn't that be self-evident? Why do we need to bash down liberals, calling them sheeple? And since when were issues like race and poverty "simple"? [[User:DM|DM]] 17:44, 13 December 2008 (EST)

: You seem to be bothered by the intelligence issue also, like another above. Please see my comments above.

: Race and poverty are easier-to-grasp issues than globalism. There's no denying that.--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 19:05, 13 December 2008 (EST)

:: Let us tackle race, firstly. What race is President Obama? Black? No, he's not black. He's African-American. Now what's the difference? I would consider someone who is African-American to be an American who immigrated from Africa or is of African descent. Now who is Black? Black people are the descendants of Africans who were kidnapped and brought to the New World to work as slaves. Now, Barack Obama is descended from an African man. Thus, he can be called African-American. But he is not a descendant of Africans who were slaves, thus he is not Black. Is this just a difference of their places in history? No. Black people are of West African descent exclusively. They didn't sail to the other side of Africa to kidnap slaves. President Obama is of East African descent. Hmmm.

:: So is race a simple issue? [[User:DM|DM]] 23:56, 13 December 2008 (EST)

::: It is extremely simple to millions of non-conservatives, who do not care one bit about the distinctions you attempt to draw in your comments.--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 10:46, 14 December 2008 (EST)

::::Race CAN be complex. I don't think we're arguing that it's not. However, globalism & the global economy, as well as the complex relationship between taxes & economic growth, can be harder to grasp for some liberals. That's all we're arguing (please correct me if I'm wrong Aschlafly).-[[User:AlexanderM|AlexanderM]] 10:56, 14 December 2008 (EST)

== Morally depraved nature ==

Why do sinners sin? It is because they have a sinful nature. I think this mystery article totally lacks a greater focus on man's sinful nature apart from God and also neglects to mention the grace and redemptive work of Christ and the Holy Spirit. I think this is rather odd for a encyclopedia which [http://www.conservapedia.com/Conservapedia:Articles_mentioning_Conservapedia prominently features an article by the Christian Post through its main page which states that Conservapedia favors Christianity]. [[User:Conservative|conservative]] 22:16, 13 December 2008 (EST)

:I think perhaps this article doesnt talk about the sinful nature of man because it is about political affiliation rather than religious. Or are you pointing out that all non-conservatives are innately sinful?

::I think "political affiliation" is slightly off the mark. This is not about party affiliation. This article is about one's outlook as expressed in political terminology, which of course is highly correlated with how one votes.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 11:55, 5 July 2009 (EDT)

== Statistical Analysis ==
Ok I know this is a mystery and not an encyclopedic article but could we please get one or two cites for the statistical analysis section since it would be very interesting to read the studies that that was based off of --[[User:WillB|WillB]] 22:47, 13 December 2008 (EST)
:good wuestion WillB! how were these statistics compiled?
:Agreed. It definitely does not look good at its present state where these numbers have nothing to back them up -- even if listed as estimates. --[[User:SJames|SJames]] 18:20, 14 December 2008 (EST)

:: It's an estimate, and a work in progress. Do you doubt its truth? Perhaps you're simply saying that a liberal newspaper would not admit this, and you'd be right about that. But the truth is not constrained by what liberals will admit.--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 18:29, 14 December 2008 (EST)

::: I was just stating my curiosity -- one that I believe most readers share -- as to how those numbers came about. As to its validity, I have no way of knowing but based on my own encounters, those numbers look about right for the most part, except for one group that I believe is missing on that list. I know quite a few non-conservatives who, with an open mind, simply weighed conservative values against non-conservative values and decided that they identified more with non-conservative values. Their values usually gravitate towards "freedom of choice", as defined by themselves. (Obviously we disagree with it)
Examples include: Freedom to choose abortion, freedom to choose religion, freedom to choose a "lifestyle", etc. You might say that these people fall into the ''10%: refuse to rise above their personal temptations, often self-destructive, and refuse to accept conservative values that conflict with their personal desires like irresponsible sexual promiscuity'' -- and that's true for some, but not for others. Some non-conservatives aren't interested in engaging in sexual promiscuity, dwelling in person temptation and self-destruction; they simply believe that it should be up to each individual if they choose to do so. --[[User:SJames|SJames]] 21:42, 14 December 2008 (EST)

:::As I said it would be interesting to read how these estimates were arrived at. I have no idea what the percentages should be and would love to see the data but I know that since this is an essay that a cite is not required and my not be possible to get in any case. --[[User:WillB|WillB]] 18:41, 14 December 2008 (EST)

Aschlafly asks "Do you doubt its [the statistics'] truth?" To which I respond, yes, I do doubt it, but more importantly I doubt very much that these "statistics" should be referred to as such. I, further, dispute WillB's claim that because this is an essay Aschlafly is not obligated to provide citations or data to support his claim.

My basic issue here is that absent any sort of supporting documentation these "estimates" are nothing of the sort and are, instead, simply guesses. A guess is not the same as a statistical estimate. To understand why, consider ASchlafly's first cited reason, "Did not hear about conservative principles...", which I will refer to as Claim A. Now, in theory Claim A is true of some portion of the population (A "population" being defined as the set of things we're interested in studying. In this case, for the sake of argument, we'll assume the population is American citizens or legal residents). This value is known as a population parameter and we will refer to it as "Mu", following the common statistical practice of referring to true population values with Greek symbols. Now, the difficulty is that the population is too large for us to assess as a whole. To deal with this, we take a sample of the population- for example, a random sample. Now, the composition of a true random sample is determined by its parent population. So, for example, if Claim A is true of 40% of the population, as ASchlafly asserts, then a true random sample will- in theory- contain the same proportion of persons for whom Claim A is true. The quantity in the sample for whom Claim A is true will be referred to as X-bar, a symbol used to refer to the arithmetic mean of a sample, and is not written in Greek as it refers to an estimate or "statistic" rather than to a true population parameter. So, if our random sample is perfect Mu should equal x-bar.

Now, this is true in theory, but in practice things get tricky. While a true random sample is the ideal, it is also the case that larger samples provide better estimates (i.e. more accurate values of x-bar) than smaller samples. Thus, it is almost always the case that Mu does not equal x-bar but rather is only approximately equal to x-bar. The relation between a particular value of x-bar and the value of Mu is determined using two things: the estimated [[standard deviation]] of a distribution of means and a [[confidence interval]]. The distribution of means is a mathematical construct that indicates how often we ought to see the x-bar of a sample of a given size, n, vary by a certain amount from the value of Mu. For our purposes we would estimate it using sample information by dividing the sample variance by n (i.e the sample size) and then taking the square root. We will refer to this as SDm (i.e. the standard deviation of the distribution of means). We would then use this value to construct a confidence interval. A confidence interval is a range of scores within which we are certain to a specific probability that we will find Mu. Put differently, it is like saying, "The true population value is x-bar plus or minus y amount, with a certainty of 95%." Confidence intervals are almost always included with point estimates (i.e. estimates of a specific value, such as x-bar) because statisticians are well aware that x-bar almost never precisely equals Mu. We would construct our confidence interval by taking x-bar and then adding, and subtracting, the value of the product of SDm and a t-value corresponding to our desired level of certainty and degrees of freedom (i.e. x-bar + (SDm)(t-value) and x-bar - (SDm)(t-value)). A t-value is a score taken from the t-distribution, which is an approximation of the [[normal distribution]] used when a smaller sample size produces non-normality. The t-distribution asymptotically approximates the normal distribution, so with large sample sizes you can essentially use the normal distribution instead. The degrees of freedom in this case are equal to n-1. So, if we drew a sample of 101 people and wanted to be 99% sure that our confidence interval included Mu then we would use a t-value of 2.626. So, in summation, using the sample information we can compute not simply an estimate of the value of Mu (i.e. x-bar) but also an interval within which we can be confident (e.g. 99% certain) that the true value of Mu lies. Obviously, the smaller the confidence interval, the more exact our estimate of Mu is likely to be and, if we assume that the sample x-bar is derived from is a perfect random sample, then the quality of our estimate is based entirely on sample size. Further, the relationships discussed above are well-documented empirically and have been proven out by mathematicians and statisticians since about the turn of the century.

The reality, of course, is that samples are rarely if ever perfectly random. Sampling error inevitably creeps in and, as a result, confidence intervals often have to be adjusted for this added error. If we cannot determine the extent of the sampling error's influence on our statistics then there is no mathematical adjustment possible and we, instead, have to assess the robustness of our estimates against the probable size of the error. And what all this means is that something is a statistical estimate rather than an offhand guess precisely because it includes not only a point estimate (e.g. 40% of the population subscribes to Claim A) but also a confidence interval around that point estimate (e.g. plus or minus 10%). Moreover, the point estimates as well as the confidence intervals are produced using a set of established procedures that are rooted in the mathematical characteristics of both population/sample relationships and the estimators (i.e. the computations used to produce the point estimates). Given that this is the case, point estimates are almost always provided with confidence intervals or standard errors and, additionally, information must be provided in order to allow others to assess the likely accuracy of the estimates.

ASchlafly has provided a set of point estimates generated in an unknown manner from unknown data. He has included no confidence intervals and no indication of the degree of accuracy in these estimates. As a result they are not statistical estimates and in no way should be referred to as the product of "statistical analysis". They are, to the contrary, nothing more or less than offhand guesses and should be referred to as such. On the other hand, if ASchlafly has some basis for these point estimates he should indicate where the data derive from and provide- at a bare minimum- the confidence intervals around these estimates as well as an outline indicating how he produced those intervals.

The point of statistics is not simply to compute an answer (e.g. a point estimate) but to produce along with it an estimate of the degree or error contained in that estimate. No human, after all, is perfect and it is in the nature of statistics to honestly quantify that imperfection. Absent confidence intervals or standard errors, and some understanding of how the data were gathered the appropriate response to the question "Do you doubt its truth" from anyone who is marginally competent in statistics must be "yes." Moreover, if ASchlafly wishes to label these assertions as "statistical estimates" then it is his responsibility to justify them in the manner accepted by statisticians. Otherwise, they should be (correctly) labeled as guesses.

Understand, the substance of my objection has nothing to do with whether or not ASchlafly's claims are correct but, rather, with the appropriateness of their presentation and treatment. -Drek
:Any reasonable argument should be capable of being put in two or three concise paragraphs, Drek. Your lengthy and confused screed doesn't add any light to this matter, I'm afraid. [[User:Bugler|Bugler]] 12:07, 16 December 2008 (EST)
::No sweat: ASchlafly's "statistics" are not statistics but guesses. He can demonstrate to the contrary by providing adequate citations to his data source as well as indicating the techniques used to generate the point estimates as well as confidence intervals and/or standard errors. Until he does so, referring to his guesses as "statistical analysis" is, at best, an exaggeration. Leaving this essay as-is saps credibility from both Conservapedia generally and ASchlafly particularly. See the above "confused screed" for a detailed explanation of my concerns. It's good to be succinct, but if Conservapedia is meant as an educational resource- and the criticism of Wikipedia for not offering courses lends support to that notion- then it's even better to be sufficiently thorough for students to follow the dispute. Or, as Beatrice Wright puts it, "You must learn to write in such a way that it will be as easy as possible for your critics to know why they disagree with you." -Drek
:::Andrew Schlafly is a qualified and experienced statistician and I'd certainly trust his judgement; not to sound suspicious, but in what way are you qualified to make such sweeping statements about this aricle? Also, you can be sure that his analyses and his estimates are based on a mature and thorough understanding of the issue being examined. Proper statistics is not just bare number crunching: it is an informed process that requires a full understanding of context. [[User:Bugler|Bugler]] 12:58, 16 December 2008 (EST)
::::"Proper statistics is not just bare number crunching: it is an informed process that requires a full understanding of context." Exactly right, and as you will notice, I am asking for a disclosure of that context so that we can all assess the accuracy and reliability of ASchlafly's claims for ourselves. If he is, indeed, a "...qualified and experienced statistician..." as you assert and his numbers are based on good data and appropriate techniques, this should be trivially easy. I also appreciate that you trust his judgment but statistics aren't about trusting someone's judgment, they are about verifiable results. Whether you or I view ASchlafly as a competent statistician has no bearing on the fact that he has not, at present, provided any justification whatsoever for the figures presented. Asking about my qualifications is something of an ad hominem since I have presented a lengthy explanation of why I question ASchlafly's claims. Rather than ask how I know what I do, why not respond substantively to my points? Regardless, while I have no expectation that you will take my word for it, I have been teaching statistics in an American four-year university for six years. -Drek
:::::I'm sorry you take it as an ad hom; I'm sure you appreciate that in such an environment a certain caution about people's claimed expertise is perhaps excusable. And I certainly accept your word as to your post and experience. But this is more than a pure, abstract, mathematical, dare I say professorial treatment of statistics. This is the application of statistics in the real world, down and dirty, relying also upon a knowledge of human nature, and in particular the nature of the Liberal-minded human, which is an additional layer of expertise which possibly you do not have - although, to be fair, working in a university (is it a public funded institution?) you would very likely be exposed daily to all kinds of Liberal nonsense. [[User:Bugler|Bugler]] 13:19, 16 December 2008 (EST)
::::::"This is the application of statistics in the real world, down and dirty, relying also upon a knowledge of human nature..." The thing is, Bugler, that statistics are an applied branch of mathematics. Their express purpose is to allow us to extract certainty from the vapor of possibility or, less metaphorically, to allow us to derive useful knowledge from messy research situations. Indeed, multivariate methods like regression are often used when the purity of experimental control is unattainable. Statistics can only provide this service reliably, however, when there is a full disclosure of how they are obtained. If the data are valid, the procedures appropriate, and the necessary mathematical assumptions not grievously violated, then the conclusions may be trusted to a particular degree of certainty. That ASchlafly's statistics are being used to asses the "...nature of the Liberal-minded human..." is effectively irrelevant. I do not ask that ASchlafly produce perfect statistics, but unless and until he provides a basis for judging his numbers, they cannot be regarded as anything more than his personal opinion. I appreciate your accepting my claimed expertise on my word, however. I have worked at both public and private universities and you will understand that the various strains of "nonsense" that I have encountered from a variety of ideological camps underlies my interest in seeing that statistical methods are not abused. If statistics are to be used to adjudicate between rival claims, then we must emphasize the need for them to be performed correctly. More simply, the extent to which I agree or disagree with the outcome of an analysis has no bearing on whether or not it was done correctly. And, as a side note, I have enjoyed our chat, but will probably be away from my computer for the next day or so for travel. If I do not respond to further comments, please understand it is not out of rudeness. -Drek
:::::::: of course. ''Bon voyage!'' [[User:Bugler|Bugler]] 13:37, 16 December 2008 (EST)

:::::::: Drek, you really "take the cake" for the most long-winded liberal rant in recent memory here. The field of statistics does include estimates, and no one doubts that that there are percentages for each category listed. Are the estimates off slightly? Perhaps, but be specific about which one you think may be off.--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 13:48, 16 December 2008 (EST)

::::::::::Mr. Schlafly,

::::::::::It has taken me a long time to respond to your more or less final remarks on this subject. This has been due to travel during the Christmas holidays so that my wife and I would be with family as well as a desire to take my time in thinking before responding. I will attempt to answer each of your remarks directly.

::::::::::First, I am sorry that you regard my concerns as a "liberal rant." I am not interested in the politics of this article but only in the legitimacy of labeling your estimates with the heading of "Statistical Analysis." Labeling my arguments "liberal" does nothing to refute them.

::::::::::Second, I never claimed that statistics do not include estimates. Indeed, in the second paragraph of my original comments I remarked, "...it refers to an estimate or "statistic" rather than to a true population parameter." Your response to me that "The field of statistics does include estimates..." has nothing to do with what I said. Do I think your estimates off "slightly"? Without question- all estimates can safely be said to deviate from the true population values by at least a small amount. This is a statistical reality. As to which I think may be off- I regard all of them suspect as you have provided no information about where these estimates derive from.

::::::::::Except, that isn't really true. In a response to FernoKlump at 21:22 on December 16, 2008 you remark that, "Like any estimate, it's based on experience and logic." This is the only time you have ever provided anything even approximating a citation for these estimates. Unfortunately, it does nothing to alay my fears. In regards to "experience," as I know you are familiar with the common statistical saying "Correlation does not equal causation," allow me to remind you of another common statistical saying: "The plural of 'anecdote' is not 'data.'" That is to say, no individual's experiences- no matter how reasonable and observant they are- can substitute for properly gathered information. The reason is simple: the world is a large place and we are, individually, very small. We only perceive the small slice of reality that we ourselves occupy and fail to observe the world from any other position. As such, even if we suppose that there are no biases in our perceptions whatsoever (a superhuman claim) it is vanishingly unlikely that those perceptions match perfectly with observable reality. In regards to "logic" I can only remind you that logic is a poor guide if one has flawed information. If we believe that ill health is caused by imbalances in the humors of the body, it is perfectly logical to treat a variety of disorders with bloodletting. Yet, if we evaluate this practice scientifically we find that in most cases it does more harm than good. Good logic is no substitute for good data.

::::::::::I suspect that you will not find my arguments above compelling, so please allow me to present a handful of additional points. The 2006 edition of the American Heritage Dictionary defines "statistics" as: "1. The mathematics of the collection, organization, and interpretation of numerical data, especially the analysis of population characteristics by inference from sampling. 2. Numerical data." WordNet 3.0 defines it as, "a branch of applied mathematics concerned with the collection and interpretation of quantitative data and the use of probability theory to estimate population parameters." The American Heritage Science Dictionary defines it as, "1. The branch of mathematics that deals with the collection, organization, analysis, and interpretation of numerical data. Statistics is especially useful in drawing general conclusions about a set of data from a sample of the data. 2. Numerical data." Finally, if we examine Conservapedia's own article on statistics we find this in the first paragraph: "Statistics is the application of mathematics to the understanding of data. It involves all stages of data collection and processing from the initial collection, to the analysis and ultimately to the conclusions and interpretations of the data." You will note the primacy of data in all of these definitions. Nowhere do any of these sources refer to "experience" or "logic" with the same emphasis as they do to "data." Likewise, I can review my books on statistics as long as you like and will never find a term in any equation where "experience" is to be added, while all deal in one way or another with data.

::::::::::At this point I consider that you have finally revealed that as these estimates are based on "experience and logic" rather than data, you have conceded that they are not the product of statistical analysis. I do not object to your referring to them as estimates, but do object in the strongest terms to your labeling them "statistical analysis." Your estimates are not the product of statistics. You can accuse me of producing another liberal rant, but that does not make me wrong. You can scold people for "carping," but that does not make your estimates reliable. This is not politics, this is mathematics. -Drek

::::::::: He's not claiming the statistics are wrong, he's saying that they are meaningless if the method of finding them is withheld. '''[[user:FernoKlump|FernoKlump]]'''[[User:FernoKlump/petition|Mr. Schlafly! Look at this petition!]] 20:09, 16 December 2008 (EST)

:::::::::: Like any estimate, it's based on experience and logic. Instead of carping, please contribute.--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 21:22, 16 December 2008 (EST)

I have a quick question for Aschlafly. I notice that the percentages in the Statistical analysis section add up to exactly 100. I find this a little confusing as I don't see any reason that the events listed should be mutually exclusive. Surely a person could be a liberal for many of the reasons given? [[User:AndyJM|AndyJM]] 11:43, 31 December 2008 (EST)

: They refer to the ''primary'' reasons.--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 12:13, 31 December 2008 (EST)

:: Hmmm, I suppose that could work. However in this instance it could be very difficult to define what we mean by the primary reason. Typically in such analysis one could self-reporting, however I doubt that would work in this case :) [[User:AndyJM|AndyJM]] 12:37, 31 December 2008 (EST)
Do these percentages refer to percentages of individuals in the population, or percentages of what brings about non-conservatism within individuals? E.g. one individual could be a non-conservative mostly because of resentment but also partly because of wanting to fit in with peers. So then, do we add up those percentages of motives within individuals to produce the total for the population as a whole; so that if the whole population consists of individuals whose motives for being non-conservative are 50% due to resentment, but none of whom is motivated 100% by resentment, then we would still count it as 50% for the whole population?

I would also question, by the way, whether people who don't even necessarily harbor a truly non-conservative opinion or who may be politically apathetic, should even be counted as bona fide non-conservatives if they're just acting non-conservative to meet a social expectation, any more than a person who goes to church just to be counted as a churchgoer should be considered a Christian. [[User:Dhdidnac|Dhdidnac]] 17:14, 7 January 2014 (EST)

== My political alignment ==

Ahem, I am a conservative (just see some of my userboxes, and i am against abortion, and i support classroom prayer too) and another thing, my comments were somewhat misguided. When you said mind-altering drugs, i thought you were implying that Obama and company were putting drugs of some sort into everyone's food. ----[[User:PhilipV|PhilipV]][[User talk:PhilipV|'' I Support our Troops!'']] 12:24, 14 December 2008 (EST)
:But why on earth would you suspect any such thing was implied? Surely it is clear that it meant voluntarily-ingested illegal drugs? [[User:Bugler|Bugler]] 12:30, 14 December 2008 (EST)

Evidently not - case closed.---- [[Image:50 star flag.png|14px]] [[User:PhilipV|PhilipV]][[User talk:PhilipV|'' I Support our Troops!'']] 10:18, 1 January 2009 (EST)

==question==
Are you honestly that arrogant that you wonder why people might not think exactly like you? sounds like mindless confomity to me.

==A further suggestion==
It struck me that denial of Conservative principles could be a result of incipient or presenting mental illness. Just as it has been widely demonstrated that Liberal beliefs can lead to psychiatric conditions (per http://www.conservapedia.com/Mystery:Do_Liberal_Teachings_Cause_Mental_Illness%3F ), so there might also be a reciprocal effect. [[User:Bugler|Bugler]] 11:19, 15 December 2008 (EST)

== "Abstract" principles ==

I don't define "more guns, less crime" and "less taxes, more revenue" as abstract characteristics. There are statistics to back up both claims, as there are statistics to support a counter-claim to either. Those statements are based off of concrete observations and statistics. [[User:JLauttamus|Jeffrey W. Lauttamus]][[User_talk:JLauttamus|Discussion]] 12:18, 16 December 2008 (EST)

: The observation "more guns, less crime" does entail a slight abstraction, and there are people who may have trouble understanding. Statistics confirm it, as does logic.--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 13:50, 16 December 2008 (EST)

::I don't doubt that people may have trouble understanding. However if it is statistically confirmed, where is the abstraction? [[User:JLauttamus|Jeffrey W. Lauttamus]][[User_talk:JLauttamus|Discussion]] 13:55, 16 December 2008 (EST)

::: You can always find someone to dispute statistics, as your own posting demonstrates. The real obstacle to some is grasping the abstraction of the logic.--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 14:03, 16 December 2008 (EST)

::::I think we're arguing for the same side here, Andy. I'm not disputing any statistics; that's my point. The statistics are there ''plain as day'' that an armed citizenry opposes crime. I would say it's just blind ignorance (or faulty logic) to believe otherwise as opposed to an abstraction. [[User:JLauttamus|Jeffrey W. Lauttamus]][[User_talk:JLauttamus|Discussion]] 14:27, 16 December 2008 (EST)

::::: I don't think someone having, to use popular terminology, an IQ of less than 100 can easily understand the truth of "more guns, less crime." Abstractions become more difficult to understand the lower the intelligence. Frankly, this abstraction strikes many highly intelligent people as wrong at first glance, before thinking more abstractly.--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 21:11, 16 December 2008 (EST)

==Tweaking the Statistics==
With all due deference to Andy's knowledge on the subject, I believe that it would be beneficial to consider reweighting the estimates for why people choose to remain liberal, despite superior arguments for conservatism, as follows:

:* 25%: did not hear about conservative principles and the logic behind them until ''after'' they made up their mind, perhaps due to pervasive societal bias, and refuse to reconsider;
:* 25%: refuse to rise above their personal temptations, often self-destructive, and refuse to accept conservative values that conflict with their personal desires like sexual promiscuity;
:* 20%: were told off or disciplined once by a conservative, often a parent, and refuse to rise above the animosity;
:* 10%: refuse to let go of their past, or let go of their desire for a sense of acceptance by liberal friends or teachers;
:* 10%: mistakenly feel that conservative values and benefits are available only to those who are from an intact family, not realizing the availability and benefits to all, including children of divorced parents;
:* 5%: bitterly unemployed, or having a salary or benefits that conservatives would reduce, such as public school teachers, and a refusal to rise above self-interest; and
:* 5%: like an anarchist, genuinely want to believe in and propagate destructive ideas.

The largest reason that people remain liberal is clearly their desire to have their immoral and atheistic actions become more socially acceptable so that they can justify such lifestyles to themselves and others. Being disciplined by conservatives goes hand in hand with this - liberals do not like people pointing out that their lifestyle choices are wrong and detrimental to the country as a whole. It is primarily conservatives who are willing to call a spade a spade and chastise immoral conduct. I decreased the point about hearing about conservative principles later in life because the vast majority of United States citizens are raised in Christian churches and are taught the Bible's conservative principles from a young age. It is only once they are school-aged that liberal indoctrination can begin.--[[User:Laches|Laches]] 14:48, 16 December 2008 (EST)

: Good insights, but American kids get indoctrinated by public schools and television at young ages prior to (and during) their formation of their views.--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 21:23, 16 December 2008 (EST)

:: Just one question: You are claiming that no liberal has ever taken that position through logical thought? (Usual disclaimers apply)
:: Okay, two questions: I would still like to see a source for those statistics. "Experience and logic" isn't enough; show me the data.
:::(The silence that will likely follow a response to the second question will not necessarily indicate acceptance of the argument it presents; more likely, it will mean that I believe a response won't add anything.)
::-[[User:CSGuy|CSGuy]] 18:02, 17 December 2008 (EST)

::: The more logical a liberal is the less likely he will remain a liberal. Liberals do better in gaining adherents by avoiding logic. If you have a logical argument for a liberal position, then I'd love to hear it.

::: References are being added to the entry. Feel free to add some yourselves, unless you think that liberals never become conservatives (which is demonstrably false).--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 21:56, 17 December 2008 (EST)

::::You didn't answer my first question. Are you claiming that no liberal has ever taken that position through logical thought? (I'm just looking for a yes or a no, not an essay.) -[[User:CSGuy|CSGuy]] 22:38, 17 December 2008 (EST)

::::: Your question is incoherent. What does "that position" refer to? Are you referring to a specific position (e.g., gun control), or a general ideology (e.g., being a liberal)?

::::: In general, liberal views are not based on logic. There are examples of superficial liberal appeal to logic (e.g., to believe that banning guns will reduce crime), but it doesn't take long to show the error in the logic. Many liberals make superficially logical arguments simply to mislead others who are not bright enough to see the flaw.--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 22:49, 17 December 2008 (EST)

::::::Given that I didn't mention anything other than liberalism, it seems obvious that's what I'm referring to. I'll ask again: Are you arguing that no liberal has ever become a liberal through logical thought? "Yes" or "no" will do. -[[User:CSGuy|CSGuy]] 23:14, 17 December 2008 (EST)

::::::: No one has become a liberal through ''truthful'' logical thought.--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 23:25, 17 December 2008 (EST)

Dennis Prager is one of my favorite thinkers, and took this up at length, proving what Andy says is true.
<blockquote>
"With the decline of the authority of Judeo-Christian values in the West, many people stopped looking to external sources of moral standards in order to decide what is right and wrong. Instead of being guided by God, the Bible and religion, great numbers -- in Western Europe, the great majority -- have looked elsewhere for moral and social guidelines.

For many millions in the twentieth century, those guidelines were provided by Marxism, Communism, Fascism or Nazism. For many millions today, those guidelines are "feelings". With the ascendancy of leftist values that has followed the decline of Judeo-Christian religion, ''personal feelings have supplanted universal standards''. In fact, feelings are the major unifying characteristic among contemporary liberal positions.

Aside from reliance on feelings, how else can one explain a person who believes, let alone proudly announces on a bumper sticker, that "War is not the answer"? I know of no comparable conservative bumper sticker that is so demonstrably false and morally ignorant. Almost every great evil has been solved by war -- from slavery in America to the Holocaust in Europe. Auschwitz was liberated by soldiers making war, not by pacifists who would have allowed the Nazis to murder every Jew in Europe." [http://www.orthodoxnet.com/archives/religious_articles.shtml Does religion make people better or worse, Dennis Prager - 24 columns on topic]

</blockquote>
--[[User:TK|'''₮K''']][[User_Talk:TK|/Talk!]] 00:27, 18 December 2008 (EST)

==TV Shows==

How about some citations or examples for South Park, Family Guy, and Hannah Montana? Well, the first two are somewhat political anyway I guess. But Hannah Montana? Please, example or citation. Did you know Billy Ray Cyrus is with Sean Hannity on the Freedom Concert, and Miley Cyrus is a strong Christian? [[User:AddisonDM]] 28 December 2008

: I don't watch TV, so I hope someone else can help out here!--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 20:07, 28 December 2008 (EST)

Hannah Montana is a kid's show. I don't watch it often but it does not seem to be ether conservative or liberal. I think it should be removed from the list of liberal TV shows. --[[User:AmeliaJ|AmeliaJ]] 14:49, 31 December 2008 (EST)

Don't say South Park pushes liberal values. Matt Stone and Trey Parker are both libertarians. For example in a certain episode, a one Mr. Reiner tries to take down the local tobacco company, and in the end he is portrayed as ridiculous, out of touch, and the townspeople rally around the tobacco company. --[[User:Snotbowst|Snotbowst]] 14:20, 4 January 2009 (EST)

: [[Libertarians]] are socially [[liberal]]. You could benefit from our entries on both. Thanks and Godspeed.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 14:33, 4 January 2009 (EST)

::I know what socially liberal and libertarian are defined as. What I am gettng at is that the show is wrongly heaped. Another example could be the show's mockery of the attempt to ban the N word through an entire episode. Besides it's crassness, the show is one the most balanced on TV and it handles issues with maturity while throwing a mask of fart jokes to add some comic relief.
As for The Simpsons, the show does lean leftward, but gives both sides a say. For instance, the show makes scatig comments about neo-hippies, President Carter, and President Clinton. Ned Flanders is often a set up but the jokes are never hugely inflammatory (to put it in perspective if someone made jokes about my POV at that level, I'd let it slide, maybe even let a smile crack through). And if you can't laugh at yourself, you don't deserve to be taken seriously. --[[User:Snotbowst|Snotbowst]] 21:12, 4 January 2009 (EST)

By the way I'm glad Hannah Montana is off the list. I don't think it is really liberal, and there are definitely more harmful shows that could be listed instead. [[User:AddisonDM]] 6 January 2009

== Statistics ==

Where did the author of the various statistics get their information? It looks to me like the information was fabricated from thin air. In fact, the entire article makes the conservative movement look bad because we come off as extremely arrogant. This is no way to convince liberals to see reason; it only solidifies their belief that we are unable to see any side but our own. This article will make us more enemies than friends.
[[User:WilliamBeason|WilliamBeason]] 14:57, 31 December 2008 (EST)

: The estimates are based on experience and available articles. More citations can be added and I encourage you to do so. Is there a particular statement that you dispute?--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 16:07, 31 December 2008 (EST)

::My problem is that the entire article in general is committing the logical fallacy known as "poisoning the well". Rather than directly confronting liberal ideas, it uses weighted phrases inclusively describing ''all'' liberals as: "close-minded", "irrational", having "poor abstract thinking", and having "arrogance" to create a view that makes all liberals to seem like horrible people. The article seethes with hypocrisy from these statements. If we should seek to show liberals that their views are incorrect, we should combat on '''issues''', not participate in labeling a person simply based off of their political views.
::The article should be rewritten following the '''title'''. As it asks the question "Why do Non-Conservatives Exist?", it should cover more than just liberalism, as there are many political movements ''other than'' conservatism and liberalism. To name a few other major movements: libertarianism, federalism, and marxism. Followers of each political movement have different reasons for existing (be they world events, nationality, socioeconomic class, etc.)
::But to summarize an ideal article under this topic: non-conservatives exist because humans think differently. Because there is such a staggeringly large number of ideologies, sub-ideologies, and other ways to view the world, one would be hard-pressed to find two people who thought that the world should exist in the exact same way. To further compound this, there is no easily definable line that separates one ideology from another because many people take their beliefs from a ''variety'' of political movements.
::Thank you for reading this, and best regards for the new year!
::[[User:WilliamBeason|WilliamBeason]] 23:15, 31 December 2008 (EST)

::: Your comments are thoughtful, and thought-provoking. Thank you. But there are some insights in this entry worth developing. Liberals do try to keep conservative ideas from reaching people. Why? Because many people are liberal simply because they haven't heard conservative principles with an open mind. If they are liberal for long enough, then the mind is closed and will not reconsider.

::: Politics is a battle for control of the future. Liberals know how to play the game to serve their purposes. The percentages might be tweaked a bit, but just watch how the liberals themselves behave. They censor and demonize conservatives, for example, and this entry explains why. Just look at the beginning of the entry by [[Wikipedia]] on Conservapedia and you can see the liberal strategy in action.--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 23:27, 31 December 2008 (EST)

:::: You are correct in saying that liberals try to keep conservative ideals from spreading. However, when looking at the scheme of things from a larger perspective, it quickly becomes noticeable that ''all'' political movements attempt to hinder those that are (or even simply those that they see to be) opposed to themselves. The Romans tried to hinder Christians; Catholics hindered heliocentrism; atheists hinder theists; and ''theists hinder atheists''. Censoring and demonizing opposition is not a new method developed by liberals for hindering conservatives: it has been a tool of politics for ages. But even so, is this article currently not a monument to demonizing liberals? ''Even though'' '''some''' liberals demonize us, ''it does not make it right for us to demonize them.'' We need to show that we are above that. We need to show that the conservative movement is above pointing the finger and telling nasty stories like schoolchildren.

:::: To add some further perspective: read your previous post. In your mind replace "conservative" with "liberal" and "liberal" with "conservative". Does it make the post any less true? ''Have we removed the plank from our own eye?''

:::: Thank you for taking the time to read this with an open mind. [[User:WilliamBeason|WilliamBeason]] 18:54, 1 January 2009 (EST)

::::: William, the tactics used by liberals are not used by conservatives whatsoever. They censor school prayer, we don't censor the teaching of Evolution. Also, we don't require students to write that God exists on tests like they do with Evolution or Global Warming. [[User:Dford|Dford]] 12:12, 30 May 2010 (EDT)

===Percentages===
It is possible for 20% of one group of people to also be in the 15% of another group of people. It's a type of "inclusive clause" -- I'm not sure of the proper term for it. Here's a math problem from a while ago...
:There are 1000 students in a school. 35% like math, 60% like history, and 75% like both (disregard the existence of other subjects). How many students only like history? (I messed up on the quoting of the problem, but you can figure out what I'm trying to convey) 
You did not need to readjust the percentages because a new item was added to the "Statistical" list. [[User:ZacharyM|ZacharyM]] 00:21, 13 October 2009 (EDT)
::Good point, but untrue when listing the ''primary'' reasons (or favorite courses).--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 00:26, 13 October 2009 (EDT)

== Christianity ==

I would like to point out that also a lot of people become '''liberal''' on conversion to Christianity as they feel that liberalism is more consistent with the Bible than conservatism. My personal belief is that both are very inconsistent on different points, and I've voted both ways. --[[User:Trinity123|Trinity123]] 10:11, 9 February 2009 (EST)

:If somebody thinks that the Bible supports liberal ideologies then they are incorrect. The Holy Bible is quite clearly Conservative in nature to the point where their values are almost identical. [[User:Dford|Dford]] 12:23, 30 May 2010 (EDT)

== Definitions ==

Surely the answer to this question is self-evident. Conservative is a relative term as is liberal. To put it simply, conservatives exist because liberals do. If everyone had exactly the same views on all issues then there would be no need for a word to describe them. Although as the usage here implies, they are now used as set terms to describe a set of views, it must be remembered that there is a spectrum of political views. As such the word conservative is best used as a relative term, as is the case with liberal. [[User:RobertWDP|RobertWDP]] 12:59, 27 February 2009 (EST)

==Agreed==

I agree with you that most liberals are liberals due to some sort of social pressure, whether it be a liberal family, being surrounded by [[liberal bias]] in the classroom and mainstream media or believing the demonisation of conservatives because they are afraid to think otherwise. [[User:Dford|Dford]] 12:12, 30 May 2010 (EDT)

Just thought I'd share this study that came out earlier this year.[http://www.cell.com/current-biology/abstract/S0960-9822%2811%2900289-2] Seems relevant to the page. [[User:Ayzmo|Ayzmo :)]] 18:25, 19 October 2011 (EDT)

== Redirect ==

Shouldn't this redirect to [[problem of evil]]? [[User:Dhdidnac|Dhdidnac]] 11:51, 7 January 2014 (EST)

:Evil contributes to the reasons why non-conservatives exist, but more specificity is also enlightening.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 16:22, 7 January 2014 (EST)

== God's judgment ==

God sends judgment on those who love sin and lies more than [[Gospel]] truth, insuring their fate in the form of a deluding influence so that they continue to believe what is false. It is not just any delusion but a "strong delusion" (2 Thessalonians 2:11). Further, the heathen are not only wicked but also "unreasonable" (2 Thessalonians 3:2). By definition, [[delusion]]s are beliefs held with strong conviction despite superior evidence to the contrary. Is it any wonder, then, that we have trouble reasoning with them and getting them to recognize the fallacies and factual inaccuracies on which their ideologies are based?

The Greek word for "delusion", ρλάνη, means fraudulence or a straying from orthodoxy. It is the feminine version of ρλάνος, meaning roving (as a tramp). It is no mystery, then, why the intellectually loose heathen accept any ideology that comes along, if they are offered enough of an inducement. This harlotry has been going on for thousands of years, and will continue until judgment has been fully executed.

If, by means of a false ideology, the forces of evil can undermine the wisdom and prudence upon which a Godly kingdom or republic depends for its prosperity, then the country is exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within. In this way, the heathen can overcome the country's defenses and enslave the people until such time as they repent and pray for deliverance. This has happened several times during the course of history. [[User:Dhdidnac|Dhdidnac]] 18:26, 7 January 2014 (EST)

:Indeed it is supposed to happen. God allowed entire cities to turn to crap, only to obliterate them, and this was in the days when a city was a nation in its own right. Now it is happening again, but with a global civilization rather than a city state. This may seem like overenthusiastic extrapolation, but it looks to me like Conservapedia will eventually come to serve as kind of an Ark - perhaps one of several - when it is time for God to start the whole humanity thing again. This is a natural cycle that the Mayans had some primitive inkling of, even though they missed the point of it. There are already stores of valuable plant seeds being prepared, and that is a different kind of Ark, perhaps more directly analogous to the original. Even though the maintainers of such arks do not know their true purpose and may even be atheists in some cases, they are serving God through dedication to their work. They are the new Noahs. [[User:JamesWS|JamesWS]] 09:55, 22 February 2014 (EST)

== The Simpsons ==

I don´t think that [[The Simpsons]] inject liberal beliefs and mock conservative values. Although there are many liberal themes like supporting gay marriage, many episodes have a strong church focus like "Homer the Heretic". It also criticizes public schools.--[[User:JoeyJ|JoeyJ]] 08:19, 30 June 2014 (EDT)
:I believe that the program has liberal and conservative writers and does a better job mocking both sides such as the atrocious ''Family Guy''. It does a very good job satirizing the American public school system, and the Democratic Party, for instance. --[[User:JamesWilson|James Wilson]] 08:24, 30 June 2014 (EDT)

== Mystery:Why Do Non-Conservatives Exist? ==

Honestly, this is the most arrogant question I've seen in a long while. If this is not a joke, and it probably isn't, the question amounts to saying: We are in possession of the whole truth and everybody else is just deluded. I'd recommend a trip to a psychiatrist to the one who came up this idea. He'll probably be diagnosed with megalomania, and as I understand it, that is not a Christian value. [[User:Sorte Slyngel|Sorte Slyngel]] ([[User talk:Sorte Slyngel|talk]]) 17:00, 24 August 2015 (EDT)

:Isn't there a better answer to the question than that??--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 17:32, 24 August 2015 (EDT)

::Andy, you gave a sensible and respectful answer to that guy. Even though his remarks were provocative. I applaud you for that, and note that it seems to be consistent with the more tolerant attitude that I have noticed here lately. And I applaud you for not blocking him, also consistent with the more tolerant attitude. But not everyone "got the memo". You see, Sorte Slyngel (really stupid name, but that's not for me to judge!) got blocked shortly after you wrote your reply. Please unblock him, and see that everyone gets the memo. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 20:31, 24 August 2015 (EDT)
:::He broke the Conservapedia commandment "Thou shall not engage in 90/10 behavior. You shall surely be blocked". No need for a memo. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 20:38, 24 August 2015 (EDT)
::::But if Andy extended the courtesy of replying to him, he must not have thought Sorte's thoughts were worthless, or pointless arguing, "last wordism", or any of those things that sysops quite rightfully object to. For Vargas to ban this person was rude and disrespectful to Andy. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 23:01, 24 August 2015 (EDT)
:::Note the assumptions and consequences of the word "must". Perhaps Andy was asking a rhetorical question like "Will no man rid me of this meddlesome priest?" addressed to all except Sorte. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) 01:34, 25 August 2015 (EDT)
:::I was following Andy's example of blocking someone because of the 90/10 article edit/talk edit ratio rule, as he did recently (though the edits were probably lost in the 6-day data deletion that even removed all of the discussion on this section of this page) as Sorte had made more than nine talk page edits with no main space edits (that is, edits to articles). [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) 15:05, 28 August 2015 (EDT)

== Need of an opposite. ==

Maybe non-conservatives exist because every idea has those who follow and those who disagree

[[User:Borkhue|Borkhue]] [[Talk]] 9/26/2019 17:58 CST

== Article move recommendation ==
This article should be moved from "[[Mystery:Why Do Non-Conservatives Exist?]]" to "[[Mystery: Why Do Non-Conservatives Exist?]]" (add space after colon). Who at Conservapedia has mover rights? — [[User:Dave Wilcox|Dave Wilcox]] ([[User talk:Dave Wilcox|talk]]) 12:50, June 15, 2021 (EDT)

Talk:Mystery:Why Do Non-Conservatives Exist?

2021-06-15T16:50:59Z

Dave Wilcox: /* /* Article move recommendation */ */ new section

==A matter of perspective==

The page begins with "Conservative principles are based on reason. So why do non-conservatives still exist?" But as an independent (at least, that's what I consider myself to be), I'd like to point out that such a statement is from a conservative perspective. Coming from an independent, couldn't I say, "Independent principles are based on reason. So why do non-independents still exist?" Of course, many conservative ideas have merit, but I also find that some liberal ideas also do. If one calls those subscribing to liberal ideology "inherently irrational," would that mean that I am partially irrational? I think it is just a matter of perspective or opinion, and while one side may have the superior reasoning on one issue or the other, this article seems to me like a gross simplification.

By the way, I'm a new editor here, so please excuse me about where talk pages are supposed to go (do they go on the top, bottom, alphabetical order, etc.?)

:[[Conservative]]s adhere to reason more than [[liberal]]s do. There's no reason to expect different groups to treat reason in an identical manner. Indeed, it would be illogical to argue that.

:A liberal is far more likely to take a view because it suits what he likes, what he's done, or what he wants to do. That's not based on reason, but on personal preference.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 17:34, 4 December 2010 (EST)

::But how can you say that with such certainty, and be absolutely sure that you are correct? Don't mistake me for a liberal here, I am an independent and have both a Wikipedia account (the more liberal-leaning encyclopedia) and a Conservapedia account (the more conservative-leaning encyclopedia) for good balance. And as an independent, I sometimes find myself in agreement with the more liberal-leaning opinions on certain issues. However, I do not feel that I hold those opinions because "it suits what [I like], what [I have] done, or what [I want] to do, but rather because I genuinely believe that those views represent what is in the best interests of the nation. By extension, couldn't at least ''some'' (not just 1 or 2, but a substantial minority, if not a majority) of liberals genuinely feel the same way, that their beliefs are actually what is best for the nation? Once again, I'm not saying that they are, just that it is possible that they ''could'' be. --[[User:JamesCartwright|James Cartwright]] 14:06, 26 December 2010 (EST)

:::What you need to do to get some answers to your questions is to read the various news items which are linked to the main page, as well as some of the hot-button articles (abortion, atheism, evolution, etc) that we have here. In a nutshell, conservatives believe in the rule of law and order, good morals, self-discipline, and so on; liberals today believe in a "free-for-all", with no restraints on anything except those people who don't agree with them. The results of what they say is "good for the country" is the following: millions of unborn children murdered through abortion; violence in public schools directly stemming from a loud-mouthed atheist forcing the removal of the Bible and prayer from those schools in 1960; continual battles to remove any trace of religion - specifically Christianity - from the public sphere; the annual wars against Christmas and what they believe its meaning should be; the votes in Congress to increase the public's tax burden, as typified by the Carter, Clinton, and Obama administrations; the destruction of our military through attrition, reduction of readiness, and turning it into a "social experiment"; the assistance of the planting of several Islamic mosques in the country over public objections to them, especially near Ground Zero in New York City; the trashing of the environment, despite what they actually say [http://www.conservapedia.com/File:1915b7ec753fa9d0352885dc23da4469.jpg]; the pushing of psuedosciences such as global warming in order to grab American money for leftist causes; and so on, ''ad nauseum''. No, we will never adhere to much of these liberal beliefs, because the end results are destruction and catastrophe. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 14:41, 26 December 2010 (EST)

::::To be honest, the soundness of your statements is reduced by so greatly overstating the consequences of liberalism. One could argue that adherence to more liberal-leaning policies are better or worse for the nation (you would obviously say worse, as also would I) than adherence to more conservative-leaning policies, but that "destruction and catastrophe" would result is simply absurd. --[[User:JamesCartwright|James Cartwright]] 15:23, 26 December 2010 (EST)

::::: James, I wonder which adjectives you'd use to describe the wasteland of abandoned homes caused by liberal policies in Detroit, to take just one example.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 15:43, 26 December 2010 (EST)

::::::Sad and unfortunate would be some. Destructive and catastrophic would not. It is almost fearmongering (something which both Democrats and Republicans are both guilty of) to describe a political matter in the manner in which one would describe a heinous crime (Obama: "hostage taking") or an act of God (as Karajou did).
:::::::James, I made no mention of an act of God. This is "cause and effect" here. The image that I linked above is something you can easily study, as it pertains to one subject in liberals' hearts: environmentalism. There are laws on the books right now which demand heavy fines or prison time for trashing the environment, all placed on the books by liberals, and to have these same people treat the National Mall on Obama's inauguration day like it was their personal dumpster begs the question: do you want these people to be in charge? They were in charge of Detroit for over 4 decades, and just look at the place. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 17:55, 26 December 2010 (EST)
::::::::I was referring to your usage of the phrase "destruction and catastrophe". That image is the inevitable result of assembling thousands of people together, and littering occurs during every Presidential inauguration, those of both Democrats and Republicans. Also, you seem to speak of environmentalism in a very condescending manner, by associating it with a group that you obviously find distasteful. However, it is absolutely no reason to be condescending towards a group which "advocates or works to protect the air, water, animals, plants, and other natural resources from pollution or its effects" (Random House Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2011). To be honest, I would rather have them in charge of the environment than you and like-minded people. As an independent, however, I would prefer authorities that are entirely non-politically-affiliated, but given the regrettably partisan state of American politics, that won't happen.--[[User:JamesCartwright|James Cartwright]] 22:15, 5 January 2011 (EST)
:::::::As far as the use of the word "catastrophe" goes, take a good look at what is happening to California today. That state is on the verge of bankruptcy. There has been in influx of people increasing the state's population over the past 20 years, but with no change to the energy structure needed to support the increase, resulting in several power blackouts. The state used to have a money surplus, now they're deep in debt. They have written laws which burden the people with needless regulation; they have increased personal taxes. They have shut off the water to the San Joaquin Valley, resulting in a catastrophic loss to farmers amounting to over $1.15 billion dollars, and all because a stupid fish was more important than people's lives and livelihoods. Just who's been in charge of California the past 20 years? A bunch of liberals. This is evidence, James, that we don't need a bunch of fools to rule over us. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 14:09, 27 December 2010 (EST)
::::::::Having read this, I've come to the conclusion that we differ too much ideologically to have a meaningful discussion. You certainly make good points and have a good argument, I do not deny that. I only mean to say that we disagree initially so much to the extent that we will not be able to convince each other of anything significant. Perhaps that is just human weakness. In any case, I feel similarly about my interactions with many other Conservapedia editors and I do not believe that it is worthwhile anymore for me or others that I continue to be on this site. I wish you all the best. Farewell.--[[User:JamesCartwright|James Cartwright]] 22:30, 5 January 2011 (EST)

==Mind Altering Drugs==
The suggestion may (or may not) have been made with parodic intent, but I had been thinking along similar lines. It is well-known that use of drugs - 'even' marijuana, which Liberals pretend is less harmful than candy - causes a range of psychiatric illnesses (which may also be hereditary); and I think that maybe between us we could come up with an acceptable form of words. [[User:Bugler|Bugler]] 15:50, 13 December 2008 (EST)
:I agree: that's why in my reversion I suggested that the original contributor expand to put the claim on a firmer foundation. How about, "use of mind-altering drugs, which encourages one to become a liberal to reconcile the cognitive dissonance, or dulls mental acuity resulting in mindless conformity," or something like that.-[[User:AlexanderM|AlexanderM]] 15:52, 13 December 2008 (EST)
::That sounds good to me. [[User:Bugler|Bugler]] 15:54, 13 December 2008 (EST)
:::Thanks! Done.-[[User:AlexanderM|AlexanderM]] 15:56, 13 December 2008 (EST)

Lots of insights in this list. I wonder if it would be possible to estimate percentages for each reason.--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 15:59, 13 December 2008 (EST)
:Thanks! I expect media/school bias, along with [[liberal friendship]] & mindless rebellion, are some of the biggest contributors.-[[User:AlexanderM|AlexanderM]] 16:09, 13 December 2008 (EST)
::::Any estimates would probably be just a guess so I suggest a data gathering exercise. If someone could set up a sub-page with a list of the options then we could all think of the non-conservatives that we are familiar with at school, work or in some cases even at home. Then we could just give one point for the reason that we would estimate for each person. I think the demographic diversity here should be sufficient to build a fairly accurate picture. This sort of thing wouldn't be allowed at WP with their dogmatic No Original Research mantra. So it highlights a real difference between us and WP in that we can generate new insights through a group effort as it would give almost everyone the opportunity to contribute. [[User:BrianCo|BrianCo]] 16:55, 13 December 2008 (EST)
:::::Applying clear numbers to it is probably impossible, since many of the causes effect any individual. Everyone is subject to the bias in media, academia, etc..., while only some have the poor thinking skills, innate naivete, and simply, pure delusion that creates the radicals members of the far left whom we all love and tolerate. [[User:RodWeathers|- Rod Weathers]] 17:00, 13 December 2008 (EST)
:: Probably so. But note that even the most powerful bias requires something extra to close the mind as well. Of course aging seems to have an effect of closing the mind automatically for many.--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 16:12, 13 December 2008 (EST)

Mental endowments are certainly a key reason (see ''[[The Liberal Mind: The Psychological Causes of Political Madness]]''). A certain demographic is inherently irrational and childlike. [[User:RodWeathers|- Rod Weathers]] 16:14, 13 December 2008 (EST)
:I saw that on WND: I'll try to find time to read it over the break.[[User:AlexanderM|AlexanderM]] 16:16, 13 December 2008 (EST)

== Organization ==

I've tried to compact and organize it, to make it easier to grasp. Please improve. [[User:RodWeathers|- Rod Weathers]] 16:27, 13 December 2008 (EST)

: Great point. I think we need prioritized sections, like "Main Reasons", separated from "Other Reasons." Feel free to improve.--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 16:35, 13 December 2008 (EST)
::Great job Rod!-[[User:AlexanderM|AlexanderM]] 18:01, 13 December 2008 (EST)

==Wow==
Okay, if this isn't a parody, then it's just scary. It makes multiple errors in it's assumptions, characterizes liberals as "weak-minded" or just unthinkingly "rebellious", and heavily insists that being Non-conservative is "wrong", and that if you're not a conservative, then you are brainwashed simple thinker. Does the author realize that there are opposing views to conservatism that are not liberal? Does he realize that some liberals are quite intelligent, and have reasons for being liberal that are based on logic? I like to think of myself as a moderate conservative, but the reasons highlighted in this list serve only to make me ashamed of that. [[User:ShawnJ|ShawnJ]] 16:37, 13 December 2008 (EST)
:Shawn, the tenor and content of your rant (and it is 'its assumptions', not 'it's assumptions') lead us to suppose that you are very far from being a Conservative of any hue. If you held sincere beliefs, you would not be ashamed of them because of third party actions. And if you were one of those mythical 'quite intelligent liberals', you might be capable of opening up your mind to new ideas, rather than rejecting them out of hand. [[User:Bugler|Bugler]] 16:44, 13 December 2008 (EST)

::Right, Bugler. ShawnJ's talk lack substance. But perhaps it can be analyzed: why isn't ShawnJ a real conservative? His reference to liberals being "quite intelligent" suggests he aspires to be considered likewise. I sense the public school rationales at work here: the "A+" went to the liberal positions, and either ShawnJ received a few himself and cannot let go of the illusion, or he's a wannabee.--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 18:57, 13 December 2008 (EST)

::: Bugler, I consider myself a conservative because I was raised in a strictly conservative family, and while I don't agree with all of their positions, I still do agree with many of them. Hence me considering myself a "moderate" conservative. My whole issue with this article is it reads as an attack on non-conservatives, in no small way calling them worse people. It is a complete error to refer to all liberals as stupid, or unthinking, or ignorantly rebellious. It's the same flaw that racism and all forms of bigotry share. Trying to apply absolutes to beliefs and personalities simply doesn't hold up under closer inspection. Perhaps if you were secure in your conservative beliefs, you might be capable of opening up your mind to new ideas, instead of rejecting them because they come from someone with different political views than your own. Aschlafly, I addressed most of your argument in my reply to Bugler, but for the record, most of my "A+"s went to Math and Physics. It's really hard to put a political spin on calculations and numbers. [[User:ShawnJ|ShawnJ]] 19:52, 13 December 2008 (EST)

:::: ShawnJ, take a look at our new statistical portion of the entry. Which category do you fall into, or should there be a new one? For example, did you hear about conservative principles and the logic behind them only ''after'' you made up your mind? Do you have liberal friends whose acceptance you value?

:::: If you got "A+"s in school, regardless of subject, then your self-esteem is likely tied to approval by the very liberal education establishment. You'd have to feel embarrassment if your teachers learned that you might become a real conservative. And your self-esteem would not permit that, right?--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 20:37, 13 December 2008 (EST)
::::::Wait a sec--you're saying that people who get "A"s in school tend to be liberal? So would that make the converse true--that conservatives would tend to get low(er) grades? That can't be right...--[[User:RossC|RossC]] 22:18, 13 December 2008 (EST)
:::::::Ooooh, SO close, but no cigar! The arguments is that liberals know that professors are liberal - see [[professor values]] - and conform their behavior & values deliberately to the professor's to get better grades not for substance, but because they agree with the professor's worldview. It's not that they're smart; they're just playing the game.-[[User:AlexanderM|AlexanderM]] 22:22, 13 December 2008 (EST)

:::: I gotta say, my personal experiences negate any of the categories in the statistical portion. I simply realized, over time, that conservatism didn't hold all the answers. That, surprise, there was no perfect school of political thought. All this talk about the "liberal education system" is funny to me, because, honestly, I couldn't give you the political leanings of ANY of my teachers/professors. Who they did/would vote for, their stances on gun control, abortion, homosexuality, government, it simply never came up. I'm sure there was some rule on the books preventing teachers from discussing such things, and they were followed. The military upbringing put me in many different schools in various parts of the country, domestic and abroad, and not a single one broke that rule. Granted, I never sought out my instructors political beliefs, but the never volunteered them either. They were there do their job of teaching me, and I was there to do mine of learning.

:::: As far as my friends go, they fall much into the same boat. I hang out with them to relax after work. Watch a game, play a game, maybe throw a party, whatever, not to have heated arguments that won't resolve anything.[[User:ShawnJ|ShawnJ]] 23:36, 13 December 2008 (EST)

::::: ShawnJ, you probably vote and so do your friends and teachers; you adhere to certain values and so do your friends and teachers; and you make statements of a political nature just as your friends and teachers do. I'm sure you've taken courses in economics, history, government, English literature, and science, and it is impossible to teach or learn those topics without forming opinions that affirm or deny conservative principles. Perhaps you were unaware of it at the time, but with an open mind you can reconsider it now.

::::: Your teachers voted overwhelmingly for [[Barack Obama]], to take just one example, and they taught you things consistent with their view. I'd guess that 50% of what you learned in school was false, and those of who care about the truth embark on a path to revisit and reconsider all of it. I encourage you to join us.--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 10:43, 14 December 2008 (EST)

== Ohkay......... ==

Erm, i understand the bit about all those TV shows and the media in general, but mind-altering drugs?, isn't that just taking it a bit too far (i mean in terms of accusations, how the heck would Obama put drugs in everyone's cookies, i mean, he's busy enough as it is dealing with conniving madmen like the governor from Illinois with the weird name (apologies for the long sentence)--[[User:PhilipV|[[User:PhilipV|PhilipV]]]] 17:14, 13 December 2008 (EST)
:Who is talking about Obama here? The effects of drug abuse are well known. [[User:Bugler|Bugler]] 17:33, 13 December 2008 (EST)
::I think he meant Blagovejich :)-[[User:AlexanderM|AlexanderM]] 18:00, 13 December 2008 (EST)
:::PhilipV's comments are bizarre. But why is PhilipV a non-conservative, do you think?--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 18:59, 13 December 2008 (EST)
::::Sounds like he's trying to apologize for drug use.-[[User:AlexanderM|AlexanderM]] 19:02, 13 December 2008 (EST)

::::: Alex, I find that accusation offensive! ----[[User:PhilipV|PhilipV]][[User talk:PhilipV|'' I Support our Troops!'']] 12:28, 14 December 2008 (EST)

::::::Come to think of it, how on earth is that an apology for drug use/abuse/misuse? if i had used such works of the devil (which they are) i would probably have voted Democrat so that i could have continued using illegal drugs - but no - i voted republcan this year and my political compass test says that im a right-wing authoritarian.----[[User:PhilipV|PhilipV]][[User talk:PhilipV|'' I Support our Troops!'']] 12:28, 14 December 2008 (EST)

== Seriously? ==
Hmmm... in this article I see Liberal Style 21. Why must we try to make liberals seem less intelligent than conservatives? If the positions of Conservatism are much more logical than the positions of Liberalism... shouldn't that be self-evident? Why do we need to bash down liberals, calling them sheeple? And since when were issues like race and poverty "simple"? [[User:DM|DM]] 17:44, 13 December 2008 (EST)

: You seem to be bothered by the intelligence issue also, like another above. Please see my comments above.

: Race and poverty are easier-to-grasp issues than globalism. There's no denying that.--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 19:05, 13 December 2008 (EST)

:: Let us tackle race, firstly. What race is President Obama? Black? No, he's not black. He's African-American. Now what's the difference? I would consider someone who is African-American to be an American who immigrated from Africa or is of African descent. Now who is Black? Black people are the descendants of Africans who were kidnapped and brought to the New World to work as slaves. Now, Barack Obama is descended from an African man. Thus, he can be called African-American. But he is not a descendant of Africans who were slaves, thus he is not Black. Is this just a difference of their places in history? No. Black people are of West African descent exclusively. They didn't sail to the other side of Africa to kidnap slaves. President Obama is of East African descent. Hmmm.

:: So is race a simple issue? [[User:DM|DM]] 23:56, 13 December 2008 (EST)

::: It is extremely simple to millions of non-conservatives, who do not care one bit about the distinctions you attempt to draw in your comments.--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 10:46, 14 December 2008 (EST)

::::Race CAN be complex. I don't think we're arguing that it's not. However, globalism & the global economy, as well as the complex relationship between taxes & economic growth, can be harder to grasp for some liberals. That's all we're arguing (please correct me if I'm wrong Aschlafly).-[[User:AlexanderM|AlexanderM]] 10:56, 14 December 2008 (EST)

== Morally depraved nature ==

Why do sinners sin? It is because they have a sinful nature. I think this mystery article totally lacks a greater focus on man's sinful nature apart from God and also neglects to mention the grace and redemptive work of Christ and the Holy Spirit. I think this is rather odd for a encyclopedia which [http://www.conservapedia.com/Conservapedia:Articles_mentioning_Conservapedia prominently features an article by the Christian Post through its main page which states that Conservapedia favors Christianity]. [[User:Conservative|conservative]] 22:16, 13 December 2008 (EST)

:I think perhaps this article doesnt talk about the sinful nature of man because it is about political affiliation rather than religious. Or are you pointing out that all non-conservatives are innately sinful?

::I think "political affiliation" is slightly off the mark. This is not about party affiliation. This article is about one's outlook as expressed in political terminology, which of course is highly correlated with how one votes.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 11:55, 5 July 2009 (EDT)

== Statistical Analysis ==
Ok I know this is a mystery and not an encyclopedic article but could we please get one or two cites for the statistical analysis section since it would be very interesting to read the studies that that was based off of --[[User:WillB|WillB]] 22:47, 13 December 2008 (EST)
:good wuestion WillB! how were these statistics compiled?
:Agreed. It definitely does not look good at its present state where these numbers have nothing to back them up -- even if listed as estimates. --[[User:SJames|SJames]] 18:20, 14 December 2008 (EST)

:: It's an estimate, and a work in progress. Do you doubt its truth? Perhaps you're simply saying that a liberal newspaper would not admit this, and you'd be right about that. But the truth is not constrained by what liberals will admit.--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 18:29, 14 December 2008 (EST)

::: I was just stating my curiosity -- one that I believe most readers share -- as to how those numbers came about. As to its validity, I have no way of knowing but based on my own encounters, those numbers look about right for the most part, except for one group that I believe is missing on that list. I know quite a few non-conservatives who, with an open mind, simply weighed conservative values against non-conservative values and decided that they identified more with non-conservative values. Their values usually gravitate towards "freedom of choice", as defined by themselves. (Obviously we disagree with it)
Examples include: Freedom to choose abortion, freedom to choose religion, freedom to choose a "lifestyle", etc. You might say that these people fall into the ''10%: refuse to rise above their personal temptations, often self-destructive, and refuse to accept conservative values that conflict with their personal desires like irresponsible sexual promiscuity'' -- and that's true for some, but not for others. Some non-conservatives aren't interested in engaging in sexual promiscuity, dwelling in person temptation and self-destruction; they simply believe that it should be up to each individual if they choose to do so. --[[User:SJames|SJames]] 21:42, 14 December 2008 (EST)

:::As I said it would be interesting to read how these estimates were arrived at. I have no idea what the percentages should be and would love to see the data but I know that since this is an essay that a cite is not required and my not be possible to get in any case. --[[User:WillB|WillB]] 18:41, 14 December 2008 (EST)

Aschlafly asks "Do you doubt its [the statistics'] truth?" To which I respond, yes, I do doubt it, but more importantly I doubt very much that these "statistics" should be referred to as such. I, further, dispute WillB's claim that because this is an essay Aschlafly is not obligated to provide citations or data to support his claim.

My basic issue here is that absent any sort of supporting documentation these "estimates" are nothing of the sort and are, instead, simply guesses. A guess is not the same as a statistical estimate. To understand why, consider ASchlafly's first cited reason, "Did not hear about conservative principles...", which I will refer to as Claim A. Now, in theory Claim A is true of some portion of the population (A "population" being defined as the set of things we're interested in studying. In this case, for the sake of argument, we'll assume the population is American citizens or legal residents). This value is known as a population parameter and we will refer to it as "Mu", following the common statistical practice of referring to true population values with Greek symbols. Now, the difficulty is that the population is too large for us to assess as a whole. To deal with this, we take a sample of the population- for example, a random sample. Now, the composition of a true random sample is determined by its parent population. So, for example, if Claim A is true of 40% of the population, as ASchlafly asserts, then a true random sample will- in theory- contain the same proportion of persons for whom Claim A is true. The quantity in the sample for whom Claim A is true will be referred to as X-bar, a symbol used to refer to the arithmetic mean of a sample, and is not written in Greek as it refers to an estimate or "statistic" rather than to a true population parameter. So, if our random sample is perfect Mu should equal x-bar.

Now, this is true in theory, but in practice things get tricky. While a true random sample is the ideal, it is also the case that larger samples provide better estimates (i.e. more accurate values of x-bar) than smaller samples. Thus, it is almost always the case that Mu does not equal x-bar but rather is only approximately equal to x-bar. The relation between a particular value of x-bar and the value of Mu is determined using two things: the estimated [[standard deviation]] of a distribution of means and a [[confidence interval]]. The distribution of means is a mathematical construct that indicates how often we ought to see the x-bar of a sample of a given size, n, vary by a certain amount from the value of Mu. For our purposes we would estimate it using sample information by dividing the sample variance by n (i.e the sample size) and then taking the square root. We will refer to this as SDm (i.e. the standard deviation of the distribution of means). We would then use this value to construct a confidence interval. A confidence interval is a range of scores within which we are certain to a specific probability that we will find Mu. Put differently, it is like saying, "The true population value is x-bar plus or minus y amount, with a certainty of 95%." Confidence intervals are almost always included with point estimates (i.e. estimates of a specific value, such as x-bar) because statisticians are well aware that x-bar almost never precisely equals Mu. We would construct our confidence interval by taking x-bar and then adding, and subtracting, the value of the product of SDm and a t-value corresponding to our desired level of certainty and degrees of freedom (i.e. x-bar + (SDm)(t-value) and x-bar - (SDm)(t-value)). A t-value is a score taken from the t-distribution, which is an approximation of the [[normal distribution]] used when a smaller sample size produces non-normality. The t-distribution asymptotically approximates the normal distribution, so with large sample sizes you can essentially use the normal distribution instead. The degrees of freedom in this case are equal to n-1. So, if we drew a sample of 101 people and wanted to be 99% sure that our confidence interval included Mu then we would use a t-value of 2.626. So, in summation, using the sample information we can compute not simply an estimate of the value of Mu (i.e. x-bar) but also an interval within which we can be confident (e.g. 99% certain) that the true value of Mu lies. Obviously, the smaller the confidence interval, the more exact our estimate of Mu is likely to be and, if we assume that the sample x-bar is derived from is a perfect random sample, then the quality of our estimate is based entirely on sample size. Further, the relationships discussed above are well-documented empirically and have been proven out by mathematicians and statisticians since about the turn of the century.

The reality, of course, is that samples are rarely if ever perfectly random. Sampling error inevitably creeps in and, as a result, confidence intervals often have to be adjusted for this added error. If we cannot determine the extent of the sampling error's influence on our statistics then there is no mathematical adjustment possible and we, instead, have to assess the robustness of our estimates against the probable size of the error. And what all this means is that something is a statistical estimate rather than an offhand guess precisely because it includes not only a point estimate (e.g. 40% of the population subscribes to Claim A) but also a confidence interval around that point estimate (e.g. plus or minus 10%). Moreover, the point estimates as well as the confidence intervals are produced using a set of established procedures that are rooted in the mathematical characteristics of both population/sample relationships and the estimators (i.e. the computations used to produce the point estimates). Given that this is the case, point estimates are almost always provided with confidence intervals or standard errors and, additionally, information must be provided in order to allow others to assess the likely accuracy of the estimates.

ASchlafly has provided a set of point estimates generated in an unknown manner from unknown data. He has included no confidence intervals and no indication of the degree of accuracy in these estimates. As a result they are not statistical estimates and in no way should be referred to as the product of "statistical analysis". They are, to the contrary, nothing more or less than offhand guesses and should be referred to as such. On the other hand, if ASchlafly has some basis for these point estimates he should indicate where the data derive from and provide- at a bare minimum- the confidence intervals around these estimates as well as an outline indicating how he produced those intervals.

The point of statistics is not simply to compute an answer (e.g. a point estimate) but to produce along with it an estimate of the degree or error contained in that estimate. No human, after all, is perfect and it is in the nature of statistics to honestly quantify that imperfection. Absent confidence intervals or standard errors, and some understanding of how the data were gathered the appropriate response to the question "Do you doubt its truth" from anyone who is marginally competent in statistics must be "yes." Moreover, if ASchlafly wishes to label these assertions as "statistical estimates" then it is his responsibility to justify them in the manner accepted by statisticians. Otherwise, they should be (correctly) labeled as guesses.

Understand, the substance of my objection has nothing to do with whether or not ASchlafly's claims are correct but, rather, with the appropriateness of their presentation and treatment. -Drek
:Any reasonable argument should be capable of being put in two or three concise paragraphs, Drek. Your lengthy and confused screed doesn't add any light to this matter, I'm afraid. [[User:Bugler|Bugler]] 12:07, 16 December 2008 (EST)
::No sweat: ASchlafly's "statistics" are not statistics but guesses. He can demonstrate to the contrary by providing adequate citations to his data source as well as indicating the techniques used to generate the point estimates as well as confidence intervals and/or standard errors. Until he does so, referring to his guesses as "statistical analysis" is, at best, an exaggeration. Leaving this essay as-is saps credibility from both Conservapedia generally and ASchlafly particularly. See the above "confused screed" for a detailed explanation of my concerns. It's good to be succinct, but if Conservapedia is meant as an educational resource- and the criticism of Wikipedia for not offering courses lends support to that notion- then it's even better to be sufficiently thorough for students to follow the dispute. Or, as Beatrice Wright puts it, "You must learn to write in such a way that it will be as easy as possible for your critics to know why they disagree with you." -Drek
:::Andrew Schlafly is a qualified and experienced statistician and I'd certainly trust his judgement; not to sound suspicious, but in what way are you qualified to make such sweeping statements about this aricle? Also, you can be sure that his analyses and his estimates are based on a mature and thorough understanding of the issue being examined. Proper statistics is not just bare number crunching: it is an informed process that requires a full understanding of context. [[User:Bugler|Bugler]] 12:58, 16 December 2008 (EST)
::::"Proper statistics is not just bare number crunching: it is an informed process that requires a full understanding of context." Exactly right, and as you will notice, I am asking for a disclosure of that context so that we can all assess the accuracy and reliability of ASchlafly's claims for ourselves. If he is, indeed, a "...qualified and experienced statistician..." as you assert and his numbers are based on good data and appropriate techniques, this should be trivially easy. I also appreciate that you trust his judgment but statistics aren't about trusting someone's judgment, they are about verifiable results. Whether you or I view ASchlafly as a competent statistician has no bearing on the fact that he has not, at present, provided any justification whatsoever for the figures presented. Asking about my qualifications is something of an ad hominem since I have presented a lengthy explanation of why I question ASchlafly's claims. Rather than ask how I know what I do, why not respond substantively to my points? Regardless, while I have no expectation that you will take my word for it, I have been teaching statistics in an American four-year university for six years. -Drek
:::::I'm sorry you take it as an ad hom; I'm sure you appreciate that in such an environment a certain caution about people's claimed expertise is perhaps excusable. And I certainly accept your word as to your post and experience. But this is more than a pure, abstract, mathematical, dare I say professorial treatment of statistics. This is the application of statistics in the real world, down and dirty, relying also upon a knowledge of human nature, and in particular the nature of the Liberal-minded human, which is an additional layer of expertise which possibly you do not have - although, to be fair, working in a university (is it a public funded institution?) you would very likely be exposed daily to all kinds of Liberal nonsense. [[User:Bugler|Bugler]] 13:19, 16 December 2008 (EST)
::::::"This is the application of statistics in the real world, down and dirty, relying also upon a knowledge of human nature..." The thing is, Bugler, that statistics are an applied branch of mathematics. Their express purpose is to allow us to extract certainty from the vapor of possibility or, less metaphorically, to allow us to derive useful knowledge from messy research situations. Indeed, multivariate methods like regression are often used when the purity of experimental control is unattainable. Statistics can only provide this service reliably, however, when there is a full disclosure of how they are obtained. If the data are valid, the procedures appropriate, and the necessary mathematical assumptions not grievously violated, then the conclusions may be trusted to a particular degree of certainty. That ASchlafly's statistics are being used to asses the "...nature of the Liberal-minded human..." is effectively irrelevant. I do not ask that ASchlafly produce perfect statistics, but unless and until he provides a basis for judging his numbers, they cannot be regarded as anything more than his personal opinion. I appreciate your accepting my claimed expertise on my word, however. I have worked at both public and private universities and you will understand that the various strains of "nonsense" that I have encountered from a variety of ideological camps underlies my interest in seeing that statistical methods are not abused. If statistics are to be used to adjudicate between rival claims, then we must emphasize the need for them to be performed correctly. More simply, the extent to which I agree or disagree with the outcome of an analysis has no bearing on whether or not it was done correctly. And, as a side note, I have enjoyed our chat, but will probably be away from my computer for the next day or so for travel. If I do not respond to further comments, please understand it is not out of rudeness. -Drek
:::::::: of course. ''Bon voyage!'' [[User:Bugler|Bugler]] 13:37, 16 December 2008 (EST)

:::::::: Drek, you really "take the cake" for the most long-winded liberal rant in recent memory here. The field of statistics does include estimates, and no one doubts that that there are percentages for each category listed. Are the estimates off slightly? Perhaps, but be specific about which one you think may be off.--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 13:48, 16 December 2008 (EST)

::::::::::Mr. Schlafly,

::::::::::It has taken me a long time to respond to your more or less final remarks on this subject. This has been due to travel during the Christmas holidays so that my wife and I would be with family as well as a desire to take my time in thinking before responding. I will attempt to answer each of your remarks directly.

::::::::::First, I am sorry that you regard my concerns as a "liberal rant." I am not interested in the politics of this article but only in the legitimacy of labeling your estimates with the heading of "Statistical Analysis." Labeling my arguments "liberal" does nothing to refute them.

::::::::::Second, I never claimed that statistics do not include estimates. Indeed, in the second paragraph of my original comments I remarked, "...it refers to an estimate or "statistic" rather than to a true population parameter." Your response to me that "The field of statistics does include estimates..." has nothing to do with what I said. Do I think your estimates off "slightly"? Without question- all estimates can safely be said to deviate from the true population values by at least a small amount. This is a statistical reality. As to which I think may be off- I regard all of them suspect as you have provided no information about where these estimates derive from.

::::::::::Except, that isn't really true. In a response to FernoKlump at 21:22 on December 16, 2008 you remark that, "Like any estimate, it's based on experience and logic." This is the only time you have ever provided anything even approximating a citation for these estimates. Unfortunately, it does nothing to alay my fears. In regards to "experience," as I know you are familiar with the common statistical saying "Correlation does not equal causation," allow me to remind you of another common statistical saying: "The plural of 'anecdote' is not 'data.'" That is to say, no individual's experiences- no matter how reasonable and observant they are- can substitute for properly gathered information. The reason is simple: the world is a large place and we are, individually, very small. We only perceive the small slice of reality that we ourselves occupy and fail to observe the world from any other position. As such, even if we suppose that there are no biases in our perceptions whatsoever (a superhuman claim) it is vanishingly unlikely that those perceptions match perfectly with observable reality. In regards to "logic" I can only remind you that logic is a poor guide if one has flawed information. If we believe that ill health is caused by imbalances in the humors of the body, it is perfectly logical to treat a variety of disorders with bloodletting. Yet, if we evaluate this practice scientifically we find that in most cases it does more harm than good. Good logic is no substitute for good data.

::::::::::I suspect that you will not find my arguments above compelling, so please allow me to present a handful of additional points. The 2006 edition of the American Heritage Dictionary defines "statistics" as: "1. The mathematics of the collection, organization, and interpretation of numerical data, especially the analysis of population characteristics by inference from sampling. 2. Numerical data." WordNet 3.0 defines it as, "a branch of applied mathematics concerned with the collection and interpretation of quantitative data and the use of probability theory to estimate population parameters." The American Heritage Science Dictionary defines it as, "1. The branch of mathematics that deals with the collection, organization, analysis, and interpretation of numerical data. Statistics is especially useful in drawing general conclusions about a set of data from a sample of the data. 2. Numerical data." Finally, if we examine Conservapedia's own article on statistics we find this in the first paragraph: "Statistics is the application of mathematics to the understanding of data. It involves all stages of data collection and processing from the initial collection, to the analysis and ultimately to the conclusions and interpretations of the data." You will note the primacy of data in all of these definitions. Nowhere do any of these sources refer to "experience" or "logic" with the same emphasis as they do to "data." Likewise, I can review my books on statistics as long as you like and will never find a term in any equation where "experience" is to be added, while all deal in one way or another with data.

::::::::::At this point I consider that you have finally revealed that as these estimates are based on "experience and logic" rather than data, you have conceded that they are not the product of statistical analysis. I do not object to your referring to them as estimates, but do object in the strongest terms to your labeling them "statistical analysis." Your estimates are not the product of statistics. You can accuse me of producing another liberal rant, but that does not make me wrong. You can scold people for "carping," but that does not make your estimates reliable. This is not politics, this is mathematics. -Drek

::::::::: He's not claiming the statistics are wrong, he's saying that they are meaningless if the method of finding them is withheld. '''[[user:FernoKlump|FernoKlump]]'''[[User:FernoKlump/petition|Mr. Schlafly! Look at this petition!]] 20:09, 16 December 2008 (EST)

:::::::::: Like any estimate, it's based on experience and logic. Instead of carping, please contribute.--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 21:22, 16 December 2008 (EST)

I have a quick question for Aschlafly. I notice that the percentages in the Statistical analysis section add up to exactly 100. I find this a little confusing as I don't see any reason that the events listed should be mutually exclusive. Surely a person could be a liberal for many of the reasons given? [[User:AndyJM|AndyJM]] 11:43, 31 December 2008 (EST)

: They refer to the ''primary'' reasons.--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 12:13, 31 December 2008 (EST)

:: Hmmm, I suppose that could work. However in this instance it could be very difficult to define what we mean by the primary reason. Typically in such analysis one could self-reporting, however I doubt that would work in this case :) [[User:AndyJM|AndyJM]] 12:37, 31 December 2008 (EST)
Do these percentages refer to percentages of individuals in the population, or percentages of what brings about non-conservatism within individuals? E.g. one individual could be a non-conservative mostly because of resentment but also partly because of wanting to fit in with peers. So then, do we add up those percentages of motives within individuals to produce the total for the population as a whole; so that if the whole population consists of individuals whose motives for being non-conservative are 50% due to resentment, but none of whom is motivated 100% by resentment, then we would still count it as 50% for the whole population?

I would also question, by the way, whether people who don't even necessarily harbor a truly non-conservative opinion or who may be politically apathetic, should even be counted as bona fide non-conservatives if they're just acting non-conservative to meet a social expectation, any more than a person who goes to church just to be counted as a churchgoer should be considered a Christian. [[User:Dhdidnac|Dhdidnac]] 17:14, 7 January 2014 (EST)

== My political alignment ==

Ahem, I am a conservative (just see some of my userboxes, and i am against abortion, and i support classroom prayer too) and another thing, my comments were somewhat misguided. When you said mind-altering drugs, i thought you were implying that Obama and company were putting drugs of some sort into everyone's food. ----[[User:PhilipV|PhilipV]][[User talk:PhilipV|'' I Support our Troops!'']] 12:24, 14 December 2008 (EST)
:But why on earth would you suspect any such thing was implied? Surely it is clear that it meant voluntarily-ingested illegal drugs? [[User:Bugler|Bugler]] 12:30, 14 December 2008 (EST)

Evidently not - case closed.---- [[Image:50 star flag.png|14px]] [[User:PhilipV|PhilipV]][[User talk:PhilipV|'' I Support our Troops!'']] 10:18, 1 January 2009 (EST)

==question==
Are you honestly that arrogant that you wonder why people might not think exactly like you? sounds like mindless confomity to me.

==A further suggestion==
It struck me that denial of Conservative principles could be a result of incipient or presenting mental illness. Just as it has been widely demonstrated that Liberal beliefs can lead to psychiatric conditions (per http://www.conservapedia.com/Mystery:Do_Liberal_Teachings_Cause_Mental_Illness%3F ), so there might also be a reciprocal effect. [[User:Bugler|Bugler]] 11:19, 15 December 2008 (EST)

== "Abstract" principles ==

I don't define "more guns, less crime" and "less taxes, more revenue" as abstract characteristics. There are statistics to back up both claims, as there are statistics to support a counter-claim to either. Those statements are based off of concrete observations and statistics. [[User:JLauttamus|Jeffrey W. Lauttamus]][[User_talk:JLauttamus|Discussion]] 12:18, 16 December 2008 (EST)

: The observation "more guns, less crime" does entail a slight abstraction, and there are people who may have trouble understanding. Statistics confirm it, as does logic.--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 13:50, 16 December 2008 (EST)

::I don't doubt that people may have trouble understanding. However if it is statistically confirmed, where is the abstraction? [[User:JLauttamus|Jeffrey W. Lauttamus]][[User_talk:JLauttamus|Discussion]] 13:55, 16 December 2008 (EST)

::: You can always find someone to dispute statistics, as your own posting demonstrates. The real obstacle to some is grasping the abstraction of the logic.--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 14:03, 16 December 2008 (EST)

::::I think we're arguing for the same side here, Andy. I'm not disputing any statistics; that's my point. The statistics are there ''plain as day'' that an armed citizenry opposes crime. I would say it's just blind ignorance (or faulty logic) to believe otherwise as opposed to an abstraction. [[User:JLauttamus|Jeffrey W. Lauttamus]][[User_talk:JLauttamus|Discussion]] 14:27, 16 December 2008 (EST)

::::: I don't think someone having, to use popular terminology, an IQ of less than 100 can easily understand the truth of "more guns, less crime." Abstractions become more difficult to understand the lower the intelligence. Frankly, this abstraction strikes many highly intelligent people as wrong at first glance, before thinking more abstractly.--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 21:11, 16 December 2008 (EST)

==Tweaking the Statistics==
With all due deference to Andy's knowledge on the subject, I believe that it would be beneficial to consider reweighting the estimates for why people choose to remain liberal, despite superior arguments for conservatism, as follows:

:* 25%: did not hear about conservative principles and the logic behind them until ''after'' they made up their mind, perhaps due to pervasive societal bias, and refuse to reconsider;
:* 25%: refuse to rise above their personal temptations, often self-destructive, and refuse to accept conservative values that conflict with their personal desires like sexual promiscuity;
:* 20%: were told off or disciplined once by a conservative, often a parent, and refuse to rise above the animosity;
:* 10%: refuse to let go of their past, or let go of their desire for a sense of acceptance by liberal friends or teachers;
:* 10%: mistakenly feel that conservative values and benefits are available only to those who are from an intact family, not realizing the availability and benefits to all, including children of divorced parents;
:* 5%: bitterly unemployed, or having a salary or benefits that conservatives would reduce, such as public school teachers, and a refusal to rise above self-interest; and
:* 5%: like an anarchist, genuinely want to believe in and propagate destructive ideas.

The largest reason that people remain liberal is clearly their desire to have their immoral and atheistic actions become more socially acceptable so that they can justify such lifestyles to themselves and others. Being disciplined by conservatives goes hand in hand with this - liberals do not like people pointing out that their lifestyle choices are wrong and detrimental to the country as a whole. It is primarily conservatives who are willing to call a spade a spade and chastise immoral conduct. I decreased the point about hearing about conservative principles later in life because the vast majority of United States citizens are raised in Christian churches and are taught the Bible's conservative principles from a young age. It is only once they are school-aged that liberal indoctrination can begin.--[[User:Laches|Laches]] 14:48, 16 December 2008 (EST)

: Good insights, but American kids get indoctrinated by public schools and television at young ages prior to (and during) their formation of their views.--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 21:23, 16 December 2008 (EST)

:: Just one question: You are claiming that no liberal has ever taken that position through logical thought? (Usual disclaimers apply)
:: Okay, two questions: I would still like to see a source for those statistics. "Experience and logic" isn't enough; show me the data.
:::(The silence that will likely follow a response to the second question will not necessarily indicate acceptance of the argument it presents; more likely, it will mean that I believe a response won't add anything.)
::-[[User:CSGuy|CSGuy]] 18:02, 17 December 2008 (EST)

::: The more logical a liberal is the less likely he will remain a liberal. Liberals do better in gaining adherents by avoiding logic. If you have a logical argument for a liberal position, then I'd love to hear it.

::: References are being added to the entry. Feel free to add some yourselves, unless you think that liberals never become conservatives (which is demonstrably false).--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 21:56, 17 December 2008 (EST)

::::You didn't answer my first question. Are you claiming that no liberal has ever taken that position through logical thought? (I'm just looking for a yes or a no, not an essay.) -[[User:CSGuy|CSGuy]] 22:38, 17 December 2008 (EST)

::::: Your question is incoherent. What does "that position" refer to? Are you referring to a specific position (e.g., gun control), or a general ideology (e.g., being a liberal)?

::::: In general, liberal views are not based on logic. There are examples of superficial liberal appeal to logic (e.g., to believe that banning guns will reduce crime), but it doesn't take long to show the error in the logic. Many liberals make superficially logical arguments simply to mislead others who are not bright enough to see the flaw.--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 22:49, 17 December 2008 (EST)

::::::Given that I didn't mention anything other than liberalism, it seems obvious that's what I'm referring to. I'll ask again: Are you arguing that no liberal has ever become a liberal through logical thought? "Yes" or "no" will do. -[[User:CSGuy|CSGuy]] 23:14, 17 December 2008 (EST)

::::::: No one has become a liberal through ''truthful'' logical thought.--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 23:25, 17 December 2008 (EST)

Dennis Prager is one of my favorite thinkers, and took this up at length, proving what Andy says is true.
<blockquote>
"With the decline of the authority of Judeo-Christian values in the West, many people stopped looking to external sources of moral standards in order to decide what is right and wrong. Instead of being guided by God, the Bible and religion, great numbers -- in Western Europe, the great majority -- have looked elsewhere for moral and social guidelines.

For many millions in the twentieth century, those guidelines were provided by Marxism, Communism, Fascism or Nazism. For many millions today, those guidelines are "feelings". With the ascendancy of leftist values that has followed the decline of Judeo-Christian religion, ''personal feelings have supplanted universal standards''. In fact, feelings are the major unifying characteristic among contemporary liberal positions.

Aside from reliance on feelings, how else can one explain a person who believes, let alone proudly announces on a bumper sticker, that "War is not the answer"? I know of no comparable conservative bumper sticker that is so demonstrably false and morally ignorant. Almost every great evil has been solved by war -- from slavery in America to the Holocaust in Europe. Auschwitz was liberated by soldiers making war, not by pacifists who would have allowed the Nazis to murder every Jew in Europe." [http://www.orthodoxnet.com/archives/religious_articles.shtml Does religion make people better or worse, Dennis Prager - 24 columns on topic]

</blockquote>
--[[User:TK|'''₮K''']][[User_Talk:TK|/Talk!]] 00:27, 18 December 2008 (EST)

==TV Shows==

How about some citations or examples for South Park, Family Guy, and Hannah Montana? Well, the first two are somewhat political anyway I guess. But Hannah Montana? Please, example or citation. Did you know Billy Ray Cyrus is with Sean Hannity on the Freedom Concert, and Miley Cyrus is a strong Christian? [[User:AddisonDM]] 28 December 2008

: I don't watch TV, so I hope someone else can help out here!--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 20:07, 28 December 2008 (EST)

Hannah Montana is a kid's show. I don't watch it often but it does not seem to be ether conservative or liberal. I think it should be removed from the list of liberal TV shows. --[[User:AmeliaJ|AmeliaJ]] 14:49, 31 December 2008 (EST)

Don't say South Park pushes liberal values. Matt Stone and Trey Parker are both libertarians. For example in a certain episode, a one Mr. Reiner tries to take down the local tobacco company, and in the end he is portrayed as ridiculous, out of touch, and the townspeople rally around the tobacco company. --[[User:Snotbowst|Snotbowst]] 14:20, 4 January 2009 (EST)

: [[Libertarians]] are socially [[liberal]]. You could benefit from our entries on both. Thanks and Godspeed.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 14:33, 4 January 2009 (EST)

::I know what socially liberal and libertarian are defined as. What I am gettng at is that the show is wrongly heaped. Another example could be the show's mockery of the attempt to ban the N word through an entire episode. Besides it's crassness, the show is one the most balanced on TV and it handles issues with maturity while throwing a mask of fart jokes to add some comic relief.
As for The Simpsons, the show does lean leftward, but gives both sides a say. For instance, the show makes scatig comments about neo-hippies, President Carter, and President Clinton. Ned Flanders is often a set up but the jokes are never hugely inflammatory (to put it in perspective if someone made jokes about my POV at that level, I'd let it slide, maybe even let a smile crack through). And if you can't laugh at yourself, you don't deserve to be taken seriously. --[[User:Snotbowst|Snotbowst]] 21:12, 4 January 2009 (EST)

By the way I'm glad Hannah Montana is off the list. I don't think it is really liberal, and there are definitely more harmful shows that could be listed instead. [[User:AddisonDM]] 6 January 2009

== Statistics ==

Where did the author of the various statistics get their information? It looks to me like the information was fabricated from thin air. In fact, the entire article makes the conservative movement look bad because we come off as extremely arrogant. This is no way to convince liberals to see reason; it only solidifies their belief that we are unable to see any side but our own. This article will make us more enemies than friends.
[[User:WilliamBeason|WilliamBeason]] 14:57, 31 December 2008 (EST)

: The estimates are based on experience and available articles. More citations can be added and I encourage you to do so. Is there a particular statement that you dispute?--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 16:07, 31 December 2008 (EST)

::My problem is that the entire article in general is committing the logical fallacy known as "poisoning the well". Rather than directly confronting liberal ideas, it uses weighted phrases inclusively describing ''all'' liberals as: "close-minded", "irrational", having "poor abstract thinking", and having "arrogance" to create a view that makes all liberals to seem like horrible people. The article seethes with hypocrisy from these statements. If we should seek to show liberals that their views are incorrect, we should combat on '''issues''', not participate in labeling a person simply based off of their political views.
::The article should be rewritten following the '''title'''. As it asks the question "Why do Non-Conservatives Exist?", it should cover more than just liberalism, as there are many political movements ''other than'' conservatism and liberalism. To name a few other major movements: libertarianism, federalism, and marxism. Followers of each political movement have different reasons for existing (be they world events, nationality, socioeconomic class, etc.)
::But to summarize an ideal article under this topic: non-conservatives exist because humans think differently. Because there is such a staggeringly large number of ideologies, sub-ideologies, and other ways to view the world, one would be hard-pressed to find two people who thought that the world should exist in the exact same way. To further compound this, there is no easily definable line that separates one ideology from another because many people take their beliefs from a ''variety'' of political movements.
::Thank you for reading this, and best regards for the new year!
::[[User:WilliamBeason|WilliamBeason]] 23:15, 31 December 2008 (EST)

::: Your comments are thoughtful, and thought-provoking. Thank you. But there are some insights in this entry worth developing. Liberals do try to keep conservative ideas from reaching people. Why? Because many people are liberal simply because they haven't heard conservative principles with an open mind. If they are liberal for long enough, then the mind is closed and will not reconsider.

::: Politics is a battle for control of the future. Liberals know how to play the game to serve their purposes. The percentages might be tweaked a bit, but just watch how the liberals themselves behave. They censor and demonize conservatives, for example, and this entry explains why. Just look at the beginning of the entry by [[Wikipedia]] on Conservapedia and you can see the liberal strategy in action.--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 23:27, 31 December 2008 (EST)

:::: You are correct in saying that liberals try to keep conservative ideals from spreading. However, when looking at the scheme of things from a larger perspective, it quickly becomes noticeable that ''all'' political movements attempt to hinder those that are (or even simply those that they see to be) opposed to themselves. The Romans tried to hinder Christians; Catholics hindered heliocentrism; atheists hinder theists; and ''theists hinder atheists''. Censoring and demonizing opposition is not a new method developed by liberals for hindering conservatives: it has been a tool of politics for ages. But even so, is this article currently not a monument to demonizing liberals? ''Even though'' '''some''' liberals demonize us, ''it does not make it right for us to demonize them.'' We need to show that we are above that. We need to show that the conservative movement is above pointing the finger and telling nasty stories like schoolchildren.

:::: To add some further perspective: read your previous post. In your mind replace "conservative" with "liberal" and "liberal" with "conservative". Does it make the post any less true? ''Have we removed the plank from our own eye?''

:::: Thank you for taking the time to read this with an open mind. [[User:WilliamBeason|WilliamBeason]] 18:54, 1 January 2009 (EST)

::::: William, the tactics used by liberals are not used by conservatives whatsoever. They censor school prayer, we don't censor the teaching of Evolution. Also, we don't require students to write that God exists on tests like they do with Evolution or Global Warming. [[User:Dford|Dford]] 12:12, 30 May 2010 (EDT)

===Percentages===
It is possible for 20% of one group of people to also be in the 15% of another group of people. It's a type of "inclusive clause" -- I'm not sure of the proper term for it. Here's a math problem from a while ago...
:There are 1000 students in a school. 35% like math, 60% like history, and 75% like both (disregard the existence of other subjects). How many students only like history? (I messed up on the quoting of the problem, but you can figure out what I'm trying to convey) 
You did not need to readjust the percentages because a new item was added to the "Statistical" list. [[User:ZacharyM|ZacharyM]] 00:21, 13 October 2009 (EDT)
::Good point, but untrue when listing the ''primary'' reasons (or favorite courses).--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 00:26, 13 October 2009 (EDT)

== Christianity ==

I would like to point out that also a lot of people become '''liberal''' on conversion to Christianity as they feel that liberalism is more consistent with the Bible than conservatism. My personal belief is that both are very inconsistent on different points, and I've voted both ways. --[[User:Trinity123|Trinity123]] 10:11, 9 February 2009 (EST)

:If somebody thinks that the Bible supports liberal ideologies then they are incorrect. The Holy Bible is quite clearly Conservative in nature to the point where their values are almost identical. [[User:Dford|Dford]] 12:23, 30 May 2010 (EDT)

== Definitions ==

Surely the answer to this question is self-evident. Conservative is a relative term as is liberal. To put it simply, conservatives exist because liberals do. If everyone had exactly the same views on all issues then there would be no need for a word to describe them. Although as the usage here implies, they are now used as set terms to describe a set of views, it must be remembered that there is a spectrum of political views. As such the word conservative is best used as a relative term, as is the case with liberal. [[User:RobertWDP|RobertWDP]] 12:59, 27 February 2009 (EST)

==Agreed==

I agree with you that most liberals are liberals due to some sort of social pressure, whether it be a liberal family, being surrounded by [[liberal bias]] in the classroom and mainstream media or believing the demonisation of conservatives because they are afraid to think otherwise. [[User:Dford|Dford]] 12:12, 30 May 2010 (EDT)

Just thought I'd share this study that came out earlier this year.[http://www.cell.com/current-biology/abstract/S0960-9822%2811%2900289-2] Seems relevant to the page. [[User:Ayzmo|Ayzmo :)]] 18:25, 19 October 2011 (EDT)

== Redirect ==

Shouldn't this redirect to [[problem of evil]]? [[User:Dhdidnac|Dhdidnac]] 11:51, 7 January 2014 (EST)

:Evil contributes to the reasons why non-conservatives exist, but more specificity is also enlightening.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 16:22, 7 January 2014 (EST)

== God's judgment ==

God sends judgment on those who love sin and lies more than [[Gospel]] truth, insuring their fate in the form of a deluding influence so that they continue to believe what is false. It is not just any delusion but a "strong delusion" (2 Thessalonians 2:11). Further, the heathen are not only wicked but also "unreasonable" (2 Thessalonians 3:2). By definition, [[delusion]]s are beliefs held with strong conviction despite superior evidence to the contrary. Is it any wonder, then, that we have trouble reasoning with them and getting them to recognize the fallacies and factual inaccuracies on which their ideologies are based?

The Greek word for "delusion", ρλάνη, means fraudulence or a straying from orthodoxy. It is the feminine version of ρλάνος, meaning roving (as a tramp). It is no mystery, then, why the intellectually loose heathen accept any ideology that comes along, if they are offered enough of an inducement. This harlotry has been going on for thousands of years, and will continue until judgment has been fully executed.

If, by means of a false ideology, the forces of evil can undermine the wisdom and prudence upon which a Godly kingdom or republic depends for its prosperity, then the country is exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within. In this way, the heathen can overcome the country's defenses and enslave the people until such time as they repent and pray for deliverance. This has happened several times during the course of history. [[User:Dhdidnac|Dhdidnac]] 18:26, 7 January 2014 (EST)

:Indeed it is supposed to happen. God allowed entire cities to turn to crap, only to obliterate them, and this was in the days when a city was a nation in its own right. Now it is happening again, but with a global civilization rather than a city state. This may seem like overenthusiastic extrapolation, but it looks to me like Conservapedia will eventually come to serve as kind of an Ark - perhaps one of several - when it is time for God to start the whole humanity thing again. This is a natural cycle that the Mayans had some primitive inkling of, even though they missed the point of it. There are already stores of valuable plant seeds being prepared, and that is a different kind of Ark, perhaps more directly analogous to the original. Even though the maintainers of such arks do not know their true purpose and may even be atheists in some cases, they are serving God through dedication to their work. They are the new Noahs. [[User:JamesWS|JamesWS]] 09:55, 22 February 2014 (EST)

== The Simpsons ==

I don´t think that [[The Simpsons]] inject liberal beliefs and mock conservative values. Although there are many liberal themes like supporting gay marriage, many episodes have a strong church focus like "Homer the Heretic". It also criticizes public schools.--[[User:JoeyJ|JoeyJ]] 08:19, 30 June 2014 (EDT)
:I believe that the program has liberal and conservative writers and does a better job mocking both sides such as the atrocious ''Family Guy''. It does a very good job satirizing the American public school system, and the Democratic Party, for instance. --[[User:JamesWilson|James Wilson]] 08:24, 30 June 2014 (EDT)

== Mystery:Why Do Non-Conservatives Exist? ==

Honestly, this is the most arrogant question I've seen in a long while. If this is not a joke, and it probably isn't, the question amounts to saying: We are in possession of the whole truth and everybody else is just deluded. I'd recommend a trip to a psychiatrist to the one who came up this idea. He'll probably be diagnosed with megalomania, and as I understand it, that is not a Christian value. [[User:Sorte Slyngel|Sorte Slyngel]] ([[User talk:Sorte Slyngel|talk]]) 17:00, 24 August 2015 (EDT)

:Isn't there a better answer to the question than that??--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 17:32, 24 August 2015 (EDT)

::Andy, you gave a sensible and respectful answer to that guy. Even though his remarks were provocative. I applaud you for that, and note that it seems to be consistent with the more tolerant attitude that I have noticed here lately. And I applaud you for not blocking him, also consistent with the more tolerant attitude. But not everyone "got the memo". You see, Sorte Slyngel (really stupid name, but that's not for me to judge!) got blocked shortly after you wrote your reply. Please unblock him, and see that everyone gets the memo. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 20:31, 24 August 2015 (EDT)
:::He broke the Conservapedia commandment "Thou shall not engage in 90/10 behavior. You shall surely be blocked". No need for a memo. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 20:38, 24 August 2015 (EDT)
::::But if Andy extended the courtesy of replying to him, he must not have thought Sorte's thoughts were worthless, or pointless arguing, "last wordism", or any of those things that sysops quite rightfully object to. For Vargas to ban this person was rude and disrespectful to Andy. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 23:01, 24 August 2015 (EDT)
:::Note the assumptions and consequences of the word "must". Perhaps Andy was asking a rhetorical question like "Will no man rid me of this meddlesome priest?" addressed to all except Sorte. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) 01:34, 25 August 2015 (EDT)
:::I was following Andy's example of blocking someone because of the 90/10 article edit/talk edit ratio rule, as he did recently (though the edits were probably lost in the 6-day data deletion that even removed all of the discussion on this section of this page) as Sorte had made more than nine talk page edits with no main space edits (that is, edits to articles). [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) 15:05, 28 August 2015 (EDT)

== Need of an opposite. ==

Maybe non-conservatives exist because every idea has those who follow and those who disagree

[[User:Borkhue|Borkhue]] [[Talk]] 9/26/2019 17:58 CST

== /* Article move recommendation */ ==

This article should be moved from "[[Mystery:Why Do Non-Conservatives Exist?]]" to "[[Mystery: Why Do Non-Conservatives Exist?]]" (add space after colon). Who at Conservapedia has mover rights? — [[User:Dave Wilcox|Dave Wilcox]] ([[User talk:Dave Wilcox|talk]]) 12:50, June 15, 2021 (EDT)

Talk:Concern troll

2021-06-15T16:35:00Z

Dave Wilcox: Created page with /* Needs context and references */

== Needs context and references ==
I've been active on the World Wide Web since about 1995 and I've never encountered the term "concern troll". Is this really a thing, or is the creator of the article inventing something out of whole cloth? Some references would help; at present the article has none. — [[User:Dave Wilcox|Dave Wilcox]] ([[User talk:Dave Wilcox|talk]]) 12:35, June 15, 2021 (EDT)

Talk:DuckDuckGo

2021-06-15T16:16:31Z

Dave Wilcox: Wiki syntax

== Advantages of DuckDuckGo ==
The main advantage of Duck Duck Go is the claimed better search. A secondary aspect is that it does not follow user searches to present customized advertising like Google.

Duck Duck Go has as much access as does Google to user data, but Duck Duck Go promises to not misuse it. Google's terms of service negate any customer expectation of privacy. [[User:Wschact|Wschact]] 23:57, 7 January 2015 (EST)

== Deletion of contributions ==
I see no reason for the deletion of my contributions and categories and see also. So I have reverted them back to my original contributions. [[User:TheAmericanRedoubt|TheAmericanRedoubt]] 01:48, 8 January 2015 (EST)

== Article move ==
This article should be moved from "Duck Duck Go" to "DuckDuckGo" to conform to the actual name of the search engine and its parent company. — [[User:Dave Wilcox|Dave Wilcox]] ([[User talk:Dave Wilcox|talk]]) 12:15, June 15, 2021 (EDT)

Talk:DuckDuckGo

2021-06-15T16:15:54Z

Dave Wilcox: Article move

== Advantages of DuckDuckGo ===
The main advantage of Duck Duck Go is the claimed better search. A secondary aspect is that it does not follow user searches to present customized advertising like Google.

Duck Duck Go has as much access as does Google to user data, but Duck Duck Go promises to not misuse it. Google's terms of service negate any customer expectation of privacy. [[User:Wschact|Wschact]] 23:57, 7 January 2015 (EST)

== Deletion of contributions ==
I see no reason for the deletion of my contributions and categories and see also. So I have reverted them back to my original contributions. [[User:TheAmericanRedoubt|TheAmericanRedoubt]] 01:48, 8 January 2015 (EST)

== Article move ==
This article should be moved from "Duck Duck Go" to "DuckDuckGo" to conform to the actual name of the search engine and its parent company. — [[User:Dave Wilcox|Dave Wilcox]] ([[User talk:Dave Wilcox|talk]]) 12:15, June 15, 2021 (EDT)

DuckDuckGo

2021-06-15T16:11:06Z

Dave Wilcox: grammar

'''DuckDuckGo''' is a general-purpose internet [[search engine]] with a focus on user privacy and experience, founded by the company [[Chief Executive Officer|CEO]], Gabriel Weinberg.<ref>[http://duckduckgo.com/Gabriel_Weinberg Duck Duck Go (Founder and CEO)]</ref> DuckDuckGo company headquarters are located in [[Valley Forge]], [[Pennsylvania]]. The company business plan is to allow users to find the most relevant information related to their search topic, faster, and without all the "garbage" of search result pages found in other search engines.<ref>CJ. [http://www.scienceforseo.com/search-engines/duck-duck-go/ Duck Duck Go!], ''Science for SEO'', March 2009.</ref> The search engine also does not track its users, thereby respecting their search privacy.

==Search Vision and Goals==
According to Gabriel Weinberg, DuckDuckGo's vision is to provide "Superior search experience and great privacy at the same time."<ref name=interview>[http://www.intego.com/mac-security-blog/intego-interviews-gabriel-weinberg-founder-ceo-duckduckgo/ Interview with Gabriel Weinberg on Search Privacy], [[Intego]], March 5, 2015.</ref> The primary goal of DuckDuckGo is to give users the information they're looking for faster and with less mental effort. The second goal is to help users find related information they might not otherwise have thought of. DuckDuckGo offers links to related topics, and it also has category pages that group topics with similar concepts.<ref name=pandia>[http://www.pandia.com/sew/1596-duck-duck-go.html New search engine Duck Duck Go has less spam and more content], pandia.com.</ref>

==Uniqueness==
The Pennsylvania-based search startup boasts "less garbage" than the big search engines, and better at avoiding dead-end links.<ref name=fast>Chris Dannen. [http://www.fastcompany.com/blog/chris-dannen/techwatch/skip-google-and-try-these-search-engines Skip Google, and Try These Search Engines], ''Fast Company'', April 14, 2009.</ref>

===DuckDuckGo vs Google===
The biggest difference between DuckDuckGo and other search engines is that DuckDuckGo does not track its users; it doesn't store search history or record any data that could be used to identify user computers.<ref name=interview/> Other major differences between DuckDuckGo and its primary competitors, [[Google]], [[Bing]], and [[Yahoo!]], include variations in each User Interface, and the algorithms the corporations use to 'fetch' information from the Internet. DuckDuckGo includes ''Zero-click Information'', Category Pages, ambiguous keyword detection, simpler links, topic detection, and overall much less spam; DuckDuckGo provides relevant information, faster. This information includes topic summaries, images, and related topics, and often answers search queries directly.<ref name=differences>[http://www.differencebetween.net/technology/difference-between-google-and-duckduckgo/ Difference Between Google and DuckDuckGo]</ref>

===Search result innovations===
The ''Zero-click Info'' section, following a search term request, displays a snippet of information from the top result for each specific search. It's intended to provide users the ability to learn about a search topic without having to click the link.<ref name=pandia/>

Other unique features include "Category Pages," which group topics about similar concepts, and "[[Disambiguation]] Pages" in front of search result pages where applicable. An ambiguous search term with many meanings (for example, "[[apple]]"), DuckDuckGo asks the user what meaning they want, and then displays results (and ''Zero-click Info'') that is more targeted to that particular topic. For searches that contain topics within it, DuckDuckGo will detect those topics and similarly adjust search results to target them in particular.<ref name=differences/>

===Spam solution===
DuckDuckGo attempts to identify [[spam]] and parked domains in search results, and omits them. The search engine also uses human policed sources like [[Wikipedia]] and [[Conservapedia]], placing links from these sources (note not just to them, but from them), above algorithmically generated links. The CEO, Gabriel Weinberg, explained, "We've gone out and found entries in about a hundred other human-powered sites that are policed for spam. We use their APIs and extract the info. [...] As a result, our links are doubly controlled for spam."<ref name=fast/>

==Criticisms==
Despite its dedication to user privacy, [[One America News Network]] claimed that, through cookies and targeted advertising, the search engine may be tracking users after all, contrary to its claims and despite its innovations.<ref>https://www.oann.com/watch-private-browser-duckduckgo-may-be-giving-your-data-to-google/</ref> 
The platform has also been criticized for not encrypting search terms, which would be complex to implement but should be possible. However, they do offer an optional setting to send search terms by POST, which helps conceal them.<ref>https://duckduckgo.com/settings#privacy</ref> Additionally, some have pointed out that using DuckDuckGo still leaves traces on the local computer, such as which terms were searched and which results were viewed. However, this is the case with any web browser, for any website or search engine. This information can be manually purged from the browser, or a private browsing mode (if offered) can automatically delete this information.<ref>https://dzone.com/articles/duckduckgo-has-a-privacy-problem</ref> 
It is also important to keep in mind that DuckDuckGo is not, and can not be, a complete privacy solution. For example, the service still knows its user's IP addresses and browser fingerprints, [[Internet service provider|ISPs]] can see what websites their users are connecting with, and to some extent, determine what they are doing. It is best to consider this, and any privacy-centric search engine, as one of several parts to securing one's privacy online.

== References ==
{{reflist}}

==External links==
* [http://duckduckgo.com/ Official Site]
* [http://duckduckgo.com/blog/ Duck Duck Blog]

[[Category:Internet]]
[[Category:Search Engines]]

Pi

2021-06-15T15:17:23Z

Dave Wilcox: /* Recreation */ malapropism, punctuation

'''Pi''', or '''[[Archimedes]]' constant''', is perhaps the most important number in all of [[mathematics]] and engineering. It is defined as the [[ratio]] of the [[circumference]] of a [[circle]] to its [[diameter]], and represented by the Greek letter '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>'''. It was first used with its current meaning in 1706 by a Welsh mathematician, William Jones,<ref name="hist">{{cite web
| url = http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/history/HistTopics/Pi_through_the_ages.html
| title = A history or Pi
| accessdate = 2012-02-11}}</ref> who selected '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' because it is the first letter of the Greek word for [[perimeter]] (''περίμετρος''), i.e. the circumference of a circle is its perimeter. A Swiss mathematician, [[Leonhard Euler]], brought the concept into general use in 1737.

<big><math>\pi</math></big> is referenced in the [[Bible]], literature, and even as the title of a movie. It is central to the most famous identity in all of mathematics: [[Euler's Formula|Euler's Identity]].

The value of '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' is approximately 3.1416, or 22/7. The exact value cannot be expressed as a [[fraction]] or as a [[decimal]] number, regardless of how many [[digit]]s are used. Johann Heinrich Lambert proved this in 1761 by showing that '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' is an [[irrational number]], which means that it can't be expressed as a fraction.<ref>{{cite web
| url = http://turnbull.mcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Biographies/Lambert.html
| title = Biography of Johann Heinrich Lambert
| accessdate = 2012-02-12}}</ref> In 1882, Carl Louis Ferdinand von Lindeman proved that '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' is also a [[transcendental number]], which means that it can't be expressed as the solution to any simple [[equation]].<ref>{{cite web
| url = http://turnbull.mcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Biographies/Lindemann.html
| title = Biography of Carl Louis Ferdinand von Lindemann
| accessdate = 2012-02-12}}</ref>

==History==
Mathematicians have worked for centuries to calculate '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' to more and more decimal places. To some extent, the progress of mathematics, or at least of computation, can be gauged by the progress in the number of digits to which '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' has been calculated.

Some ancients expressed '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' by using fractional approximations. The Rhind, or Ahmes Papyrus (''c.'' 1650 B.C.)<ref>http://www.math.buffalo.edu/mad/Ancient-Africa/mad_ancient_egyptpapyrus.html</ref><ref>https://www.math.tamu.edu/~don.allen/history/egypt/node3.html</ref> has shown that the [[ancient Egypt]]ians had determined the value for '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' to be 3.1605. The [[Babylonia]]n value from the same era was 3 1/8 = 3.125.<ref>Boyer, ''A History of Mathematics'', 2nd edition</ref>, coming to within 1 percent accuracy for both<ref>https://www.maa.org/press/periodicals/convergence/mathematical-treasure-old-babylonian-area-calculation</ref>.

[[Archimedes]] of Syracuse (287-212 BC) carried out "the first theoretical calculation" of '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''',<ref>[http://veling.nl/anne/templars/Pi_through_the_ages.html Pi through the ages]</ref> using regular polygons with a total of 96 sides, within and circumscribing a circle, and in about 225 B.C. he came up with a formula between the folowing numbers:
<center><math>3 \dfrac {1} {7} < \pi < 3 \dfrac {10} {71}</math></center>

This is ten times better than the Egyptian and Babylonian values, and it is within 0.04 percent of the correct value. The German-Dutch mathematician Ludolph Van Ceulen used Archimedes's formula to calculate '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' to 32 digits in 1615. He was so proud of his achievement that he had the digits engraved on his tombstone<ref>https://www.ams.org/publicoutreach/math-history/hap-6-pi.pdf</ref>.

Towards the end of the 17th century mathematical analysis had new methods of making calculations, and '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' was no exception. Brilliant mathematicians had made individual calculations for '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' in a variety of ways. In 1593 [[François Viète]] (1540-1603) wrote the expression:

<center><math>\pi = 2 \times \dfrac 2 {\sqrt 2} \times \dfrac 2 {\sqrt {2 + \sqrt 2} } \times \dfrac 2 {\sqrt {2 + \sqrt {2 + \sqrt 2} } } \times \dfrac 2 {\sqrt {2 + \sqrt {2 + \sqrt {2 + \sqrt 2 } } } } \times \cdots</math></center>

[[John Wallis]] (1616-1703) made his expression 1655, proving that:
<center><math>\frac{\pi}{2} = \frac21\cdot\frac23\cdot\frac43\cdot\frac45\cdot\frac65\cdot\frac67\cdots</math></center>

[[William Brouncker]] (1620-1684) discovered the continued fraction in 1658:
<center><math>
\frac \pi 4 = \cfrac{1}{1+\cfrac{1^2}{2+\cfrac{3^2}{2+\cfrac{5^2}{2+\cfrac{7^2}{2+\cfrac{9^2}{2+\ddots}}}}}}
</math></center>

During the plague of 1665-1666, [[Isaac Newton]] was confined to the English village of Woolsthorpe. There he calculated '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' to 16 digits.

<center><math>\pi = \dfrac {3 \sqrt 3} 4 + 24 \left({\dfrac 1 {12} - \dfrac 1 {5 \times 2^5} - \dfrac 1 {28 \times 2^7} - \dfrac 1 {72 \times 2^9} - \cdots}\right)</math></center>

Unlike Van Ceulen, Newton did not consider his calculations to be an achievement. "I am ashamed to tell you to how many figures I carried these computations, having no other business at the time," he wrote.<ref>Beckmann, Petr (2015-01-06). ''A History of Pi'' (Kindle Locations 2249-2250). St. Martin's Press. Kindle Edition.</ref>

[[Gottfried Leibniz|Gottfried Wilhelm von Leibniz]] (1646-1716) published a series for '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' in 1673, coming up with the formulas:
<center><math>\dfrac \pi 4 = 1 - \dfrac 1 3 + \dfrac 1 5 - \dfrac 1 7 + \dfrac 1 9 - \cdots \approx 0.78539 \, 81633 \, 9744 \ldots</math><ref>https://oeis.org/A003881</ref></center>

<center><math>\displaystyle \pi = 4 \sum_{k \mathop \ge 0} \left({-1}\right)^k \frac 1 {2 k + 1}</math></center>

Brouncker's convergents are related to the [[Leibniz formula for pi]]: for instance
<center><math>
\frac{1}{1+\frac{1^2}{2}} = \frac{2}{3} = 1 - \frac{1}{3}
</math>
and
:<math>
\frac{1}{1+\frac{1^2}{2+\frac{3^2}{2}}} = \frac{13}{15} = 1 - \frac{1}{3} + \frac{1}{5}.
</math></center>

In 1706, John Machin, secretary of [[England]]'s Royal Society, developed a quickly converging formula for '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' and used it to calculate the first 100 digits. In 1844, the idiot savant Johann Dase of [[Hamburg]] used Machin's formula to calculate 200 digits in less than two months.<ref>Beckmann</ref> In contrast, William Shanks spent twenty years calculating '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' to 707 places, a task he completed in 1873. In 1945, it was discovered that only the first 527 of Shanks' digits were correct.

ENIAC, the first electronic [[computer]], took seventy hours to calculate 2,037 digits in 1949. In 2008, the first million digits of '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' were published on [[Project Gutenberg]].<ref>Hemphill, Scott, ''[https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/50 Pi to 1,000,000 places]''.</ref> In 2014, the anonymous programmer Houkouonchi calculated the first 13.3 trillion digits of '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' in 208 days.<ref>Yee, Alexander, "[http://www.numberworld.org/y-cruncher/ y-cruncher - A Multi-Threaded Pi-Program]"</ref> This result has not been published.

=='''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' in mathematics==
It's impossible to overestimate the importance of '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' (and ''[[e]]'') for mathematics. These values are tied by [[Euler's Formula|Euler's identity]]:

:<math>e^{\pi \imath} +1 = 0</math>.

'''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' may be used to determine the area of a circle:<ref>{{cite web
| url = http://www.worsleyschool.net/science/files/circle/area.html
| title = The Circle Area Formula
| accessdate = 2012-02-13}}</ref>

:<big><math>Area= \pi r^{2}</math></big>

==Recreation==
Memorizing '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' is a challenge that appeals to some people. Mnemonics have been devised. Counting the letters in each word of the phrase "Now I want a drink—alcoholic, of course" gives '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' to seven places (which is more than enough for all ordinary purposes). Numerous other mnemonics of this kind have been devised; in 1995, Michael Keith wrote one titled ''[http://users.aol.com/s6sj7gt/mikerav.htm Near a Raven]'' which simultaneously parodies [[Edgar Allen Poe]]'s poem ''The Raven'' while encoding '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' to 740 places.

March 14 marks [[Pi Day]], a holiday on which the mathematical constant is celebrated. The date, 3/14, comes from the first three digits of '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>'''. Some people begin their celebration at 1:59 p.m., derived from the following three digits.

Pi Approximation Day is a similar holiday, celebrated on 22 July (from the approximation 22/7).<ref>[https://www.usatoday.com/tech/science/mathscience/2007-03-14-pi-day_N.htm USA Today (3/14/2007) - Pi-day]</ref>

The value of pi is approximately:

{{quotebox|
3.14159265358979323846264338327950288419716939937510582097494459230781640628620899862803482534211706798214808651328230664709384460955058223172535940812848111745028410270193852110555964462294895493038196442881097566593344612847564823378678316527120190914564856692...}}

==Does the Bible attempt to define pi?==
Virtually all serious students of the [[Bible]] say no. Still, critics frequently claim that the Bible contains an incorrect value for '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''', and the question is raised frequently enough to earn mention in the [[Skeptics Annotated Bible]].

The claim is based on a verse in the [[I Kings|first book of Kings]]:
{{bible quote|He made the Sea of cast metal, circular in shape, measuring ten [[cubit]]s from rim to rim and five cubits high. It took a line of thirty cubits to measure around it.|book=1_Kings|chap=7|verses=23|version=NIV}} Thus, critics say, the Bible claims that the value of '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' is three, and is therefore in error. However, there are a number of assumptions in this claim, any of which might invalidate the argument if wrong:

* That the tools and system of measurement available to the builders were sufficiently accurate to distinguish between three and '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>'''.
* That the phrase translated as "circular in shape" means perfectly circular, not simply "round" as an ellipse is round.
* That the Bible is trying to provide a value for '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''', and not merely describing the historical event of building this object.<ref name="math">{{cite web
| url = http://mathforum.org/library/drmath/view/52573.html
| title = Discussion re rounding Pi
| accessdate = 2012-02-10}}</ref>
* That a value is ''wrong'' simply because it depends on imprecisely expressed divisors. The ratio that is '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' can be derived completely accurately for a whole range of values<ref name="math" /> even if the Sea is taken as a perfect circle, namely when, before rounding to the nearest [[whole number]], the diameter is known to be greater than 9.5 and less than about 9.708, and the circumference greater than about 29.845 and less than 30.5, it being quite common at the time to round to whole numbers.<ref name="jph">{{cite web
| url = http://www.tektonics.org/lp/piwrong.html
| title = Is the Bible wrong about pi?
| accessdate = 2012-02-10}}</ref>
* That both the [[diameter]] and the [[circumference]] are measuring the same edges. Since the sides of any practical vessel have thickness, it is possible that the diameter is an outside measurement and the circumference is an inside measurement.<ref name="jph" />
* That both the diameter and the circumference are measuring the same part of the object. The object is also described as having an outward-turned rim. The easiest places to measure the diameter would be across the wider rim, and the easiest place to measure the circumference would be around the body below the rim.<ref>{{cite web
| url = http://creationontheweb.com/content/view/1731/
| title = Does the Bible say Pi equals 3.0?
| accessdate = 2012-02-10}}</ref>

Common sense and a rudimentary knowledge of the Bible should cause one to question whether it sets out to define mathematical concepts. The creation of a "sea of cast metal" by human beings in ancient times, without modern construction tools and measuring equipment, does not require nor could it utilize a precise value for '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>'''. An even more fundamental objection is that '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' is an [[irrational number]], and therefore has an infinite number of digits. (A "closed form" of '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' does exist, but requires mathematical notation that was invented many centuries later.) A decimal expression of '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' could not "fit" in the Bible, or in any other finite text.<ref name="math" />

==References==
<references/>

==See also==
*[[Pi Day]]
*[http://yacas.sourceforge.net/Algochapter5.html#c5s5 Calculation of pi with computers]

[[Category:Mathematics]]

Pi

2021-06-15T15:11:53Z

Dave Wilcox: /* History */ punctuation

'''Pi''', or '''[[Archimedes]]' constant''', is perhaps the most important number in all of [[mathematics]] and engineering. It is defined as the [[ratio]] of the [[circumference]] of a [[circle]] to its [[diameter]], and represented by the Greek letter '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>'''. It was first used with its current meaning in 1706 by a Welsh mathematician, William Jones,<ref name="hist">{{cite web
| url = http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/history/HistTopics/Pi_through_the_ages.html
| title = A history or Pi
| accessdate = 2012-02-11}}</ref> who selected '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' because it is the first letter of the Greek word for [[perimeter]] (''περίμετρος''), i.e. the circumference of a circle is its perimeter. A Swiss mathematician, [[Leonhard Euler]], brought the concept into general use in 1737.

<big><math>\pi</math></big> is referenced in the [[Bible]], literature, and even as the title of a movie. It is central to the most famous identity in all of mathematics: [[Euler's Formula|Euler's Identity]].

The value of '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' is approximately 3.1416, or 22/7. The exact value cannot be expressed as a [[fraction]] or as a [[decimal]] number, regardless of how many [[digit]]s are used. Johann Heinrich Lambert proved this in 1761 by showing that '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' is an [[irrational number]], which means that it can't be expressed as a fraction.<ref>{{cite web
| url = http://turnbull.mcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Biographies/Lambert.html
| title = Biography of Johann Heinrich Lambert
| accessdate = 2012-02-12}}</ref> In 1882, Carl Louis Ferdinand von Lindeman proved that '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' is also a [[transcendental number]], which means that it can't be expressed as the solution to any simple [[equation]].<ref>{{cite web
| url = http://turnbull.mcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Biographies/Lindemann.html
| title = Biography of Carl Louis Ferdinand von Lindemann
| accessdate = 2012-02-12}}</ref>

==History==
Mathematicians have worked for centuries to calculate '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' to more and more decimal places. To some extent, the progress of mathematics, or at least of computation, can be gauged by the progress in the number of digits to which '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' has been calculated.

Some ancients expressed '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' by using fractional approximations. The Rhind, or Ahmes Papyrus (''c.'' 1650 B.C.)<ref>http://www.math.buffalo.edu/mad/Ancient-Africa/mad_ancient_egyptpapyrus.html</ref><ref>https://www.math.tamu.edu/~don.allen/history/egypt/node3.html</ref> has shown that the [[ancient Egypt]]ians had determined the value for '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' to be 3.1605. The [[Babylonia]]n value from the same era was 3 1/8 = 3.125.<ref>Boyer, ''A History of Mathematics'', 2nd edition</ref>, coming to within 1 percent accuracy for both<ref>https://www.maa.org/press/periodicals/convergence/mathematical-treasure-old-babylonian-area-calculation</ref>.

[[Archimedes]] of Syracuse (287-212 BC) carried out "the first theoretical calculation" of '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''',<ref>[http://veling.nl/anne/templars/Pi_through_the_ages.html Pi through the ages]</ref> using regular polygons with a total of 96 sides, within and circumscribing a circle, and in about 225 B.C. he came up with a formula between the folowing numbers:
<center><math>3 \dfrac {1} {7} < \pi < 3 \dfrac {10} {71}</math></center>

This is ten times better than the Egyptian and Babylonian values, and it is within 0.04 percent of the correct value. The German-Dutch mathematician Ludolph Van Ceulen used Archimedes's formula to calculate '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' to 32 digits in 1615. He was so proud of his achievement that he had the digits engraved on his tombstone<ref>https://www.ams.org/publicoutreach/math-history/hap-6-pi.pdf</ref>.

Towards the end of the 17th century mathematical analysis had new methods of making calculations, and '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' was no exception. Brilliant mathematicians had made individual calculations for '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' in a variety of ways. In 1593 [[François Viète]] (1540-1603) wrote the expression:

<center><math>\pi = 2 \times \dfrac 2 {\sqrt 2} \times \dfrac 2 {\sqrt {2 + \sqrt 2} } \times \dfrac 2 {\sqrt {2 + \sqrt {2 + \sqrt 2} } } \times \dfrac 2 {\sqrt {2 + \sqrt {2 + \sqrt {2 + \sqrt 2 } } } } \times \cdots</math></center>

[[John Wallis]] (1616-1703) made his expression 1655, proving that:
<center><math>\frac{\pi}{2} = \frac21\cdot\frac23\cdot\frac43\cdot\frac45\cdot\frac65\cdot\frac67\cdots</math></center>

[[William Brouncker]] (1620-1684) discovered the continued fraction in 1658:
<center><math>
\frac \pi 4 = \cfrac{1}{1+\cfrac{1^2}{2+\cfrac{3^2}{2+\cfrac{5^2}{2+\cfrac{7^2}{2+\cfrac{9^2}{2+\ddots}}}}}}
</math></center>

During the plague of 1665-1666, [[Isaac Newton]] was confined to the English village of Woolsthorpe. There he calculated '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' to 16 digits.

<center><math>\pi = \dfrac {3 \sqrt 3} 4 + 24 \left({\dfrac 1 {12} - \dfrac 1 {5 \times 2^5} - \dfrac 1 {28 \times 2^7} - \dfrac 1 {72 \times 2^9} - \cdots}\right)</math></center>

Unlike Van Ceulen, Newton did not consider his calculations to be an achievement. "I am ashamed to tell you to how many figures I carried these computations, having no other business at the time," he wrote.<ref>Beckmann, Petr (2015-01-06). ''A History of Pi'' (Kindle Locations 2249-2250). St. Martin's Press. Kindle Edition.</ref>

[[Gottfried Leibniz|Gottfried Wilhelm von Leibniz]] (1646-1716) published a series for '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' in 1673, coming up with the formulas:
<center><math>\dfrac \pi 4 = 1 - \dfrac 1 3 + \dfrac 1 5 - \dfrac 1 7 + \dfrac 1 9 - \cdots \approx 0.78539 \, 81633 \, 9744 \ldots</math><ref>https://oeis.org/A003881</ref></center>

<center><math>\displaystyle \pi = 4 \sum_{k \mathop \ge 0} \left({-1}\right)^k \frac 1 {2 k + 1}</math></center>

Brouncker's convergents are related to the [[Leibniz formula for pi]]: for instance
<center><math>
\frac{1}{1+\frac{1^2}{2}} = \frac{2}{3} = 1 - \frac{1}{3}
</math>
and
:<math>
\frac{1}{1+\frac{1^2}{2+\frac{3^2}{2}}} = \frac{13}{15} = 1 - \frac{1}{3} + \frac{1}{5}.
</math></center>

In 1706, John Machin, secretary of [[England]]'s Royal Society, developed a quickly converging formula for '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' and used it to calculate the first 100 digits. In 1844, the idiot savant Johann Dase of [[Hamburg]] used Machin's formula to calculate 200 digits in less than two months.<ref>Beckmann</ref> In contrast, William Shanks spent twenty years calculating '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' to 707 places, a task he completed in 1873. In 1945, it was discovered that only the first 527 of Shanks' digits were correct.

ENIAC, the first electronic [[computer]], took seventy hours to calculate 2,037 digits in 1949. In 2008, the first million digits of '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' were published on [[Project Gutenberg]].<ref>Hemphill, Scott, ''[https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/50 Pi to 1,000,000 places]''.</ref> In 2014, the anonymous programmer Houkouonchi calculated the first 13.3 trillion digits of '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' in 208 days.<ref>Yee, Alexander, "[http://www.numberworld.org/y-cruncher/ y-cruncher - A Multi-Threaded Pi-Program]"</ref> This result has not been published.

=='''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' in mathematics==
It's impossible to overestimate the importance of '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' (and ''[[e]]'') for mathematics. These values are tied by [[Euler's Formula|Euler's identity]]:

:<math>e^{\pi \imath} +1 = 0</math>.

'''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' may be used to determine the area of a circle:<ref>{{cite web
| url = http://www.worsleyschool.net/science/files/circle/area.html
| title = The Circle Area Formula
| accessdate = 2012-02-13}}</ref>

:<big><math>Area= \pi r^{2}</math></big>

==Recreation==
Memorizing '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' is a challenge that appeals to some people. Mnemonics have been devised. Counting the letters in each word of the phrase "Now I want a drink—alcoholic, of course" gives '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' to seven places (which is more than enough for all ordinary purposes). Numerous other mnemonics of this kind have been devised; in 1995, Michael Keith wrote one entitled [http://users.aol.com/s6sj7gt/mikerav.htm Near a Raven] which simultaneously parodies [[Edgar Allen Poe]]'s poem ''The Raven,'' while encoding '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' to 740 places.

March 14 marks [[Pi Day]], a holiday on which the mathematical constant is celebrated. The date, 3/14, comes from the first three digits of '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>'''. Some people begin their celebration at 1:59 pm, derived from the following three digits.

Pi Approximation Day is a similar holiday, celebrated on 22 July (from the approximation 22/7).<ref>[https://www.usatoday.com/tech/science/mathscience/2007-03-14-pi-day_N.htm USA Today (3/14/2007) - Pi-day]</ref>

The value of pi is approximately:

{{quotebox|
3.14159265358979323846264338327950288419716939937510582097494459230781640628620899862803482534211706798214808651328230664709384460955058223172535940812848111745028410270193852110555964462294895493038196442881097566593344612847564823378678316527120190914564856692...}}

==Does the Bible attempt to define pi?==
Virtually all serious students of the [[Bible]] say no. Still, critics frequently claim that the Bible contains an incorrect value for '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''', and the question is raised frequently enough to earn mention in the [[Skeptics Annotated Bible]].

The claim is based on a verse in the [[I Kings|first book of Kings]]:
{{bible quote|He made the Sea of cast metal, circular in shape, measuring ten [[cubit]]s from rim to rim and five cubits high. It took a line of thirty cubits to measure around it.|book=1_Kings|chap=7|verses=23|version=NIV}} Thus, critics say, the Bible claims that the value of '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' is three, and is therefore in error. However, there are a number of assumptions in this claim, any of which might invalidate the argument if wrong:

* That the tools and system of measurement available to the builders were sufficiently accurate to distinguish between three and '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>'''.
* That the phrase translated as "circular in shape" means perfectly circular, not simply "round" as an ellipse is round.
* That the Bible is trying to provide a value for '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''', and not merely describing the historical event of building this object.<ref name="math">{{cite web
| url = http://mathforum.org/library/drmath/view/52573.html
| title = Discussion re rounding Pi
| accessdate = 2012-02-10}}</ref>
* That a value is ''wrong'' simply because it depends on imprecisely expressed divisors. The ratio that is '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' can be derived completely accurately for a whole range of values<ref name="math" /> even if the Sea is taken as a perfect circle, namely when, before rounding to the nearest [[whole number]], the diameter is known to be greater than 9.5 and less than about 9.708, and the circumference greater than about 29.845 and less than 30.5, it being quite common at the time to round to whole numbers.<ref name="jph">{{cite web
| url = http://www.tektonics.org/lp/piwrong.html
| title = Is the Bible wrong about pi?
| accessdate = 2012-02-10}}</ref>
* That both the [[diameter]] and the [[circumference]] are measuring the same edges. Since the sides of any practical vessel have thickness, it is possible that the diameter is an outside measurement and the circumference is an inside measurement.<ref name="jph" />
* That both the diameter and the circumference are measuring the same part of the object. The object is also described as having an outward-turned rim. The easiest places to measure the diameter would be across the wider rim, and the easiest place to measure the circumference would be around the body below the rim.<ref>{{cite web
| url = http://creationontheweb.com/content/view/1731/
| title = Does the Bible say Pi equals 3.0?
| accessdate = 2012-02-10}}</ref>

Common sense and a rudimentary knowledge of the Bible should cause one to question whether it sets out to define mathematical concepts. The creation of a "sea of cast metal" by human beings in ancient times, without modern construction tools and measuring equipment, does not require nor could it utilize a precise value for '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>'''. An even more fundamental objection is that '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' is an [[irrational number]], and therefore has an infinite number of digits. (A "closed form" of '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' does exist, but requires mathematical notation that was invented many centuries later.) A decimal expression of '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' could not "fit" in the Bible, or in any other finite text.<ref name="math" />

==References==
<references/>

==See also==
*[[Pi Day]]
*[http://yacas.sourceforge.net/Algochapter5.html#c5s5 Calculation of pi with computers]

[[Category:Mathematics]]

Pi

2021-06-15T15:09:48Z

Dave Wilcox: /* History */ spelling

'''Pi''', or '''[[Archimedes]]' constant''', is perhaps the most important number in all of [[mathematics]] and engineering. It is defined as the [[ratio]] of the [[circumference]] of a [[circle]] to its [[diameter]], and represented by the Greek letter '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>'''. It was first used with its current meaning in 1706 by a Welsh mathematician, William Jones,<ref name="hist">{{cite web
| url = http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/history/HistTopics/Pi_through_the_ages.html
| title = A history or Pi
| accessdate = 2012-02-11}}</ref> who selected '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' because it is the first letter of the Greek word for [[perimeter]] (''περίμετρος''), i.e. the circumference of a circle is its perimeter. A Swiss mathematician, [[Leonhard Euler]], brought the concept into general use in 1737.

<big><math>\pi</math></big> is referenced in the [[Bible]], literature, and even as the title of a movie. It is central to the most famous identity in all of mathematics: [[Euler's Formula|Euler's Identity]].

The value of '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' is approximately 3.1416, or 22/7. The exact value cannot be expressed as a [[fraction]] or as a [[decimal]] number, regardless of how many [[digit]]s are used. Johann Heinrich Lambert proved this in 1761 by showing that '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' is an [[irrational number]], which means that it can't be expressed as a fraction.<ref>{{cite web
| url = http://turnbull.mcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Biographies/Lambert.html
| title = Biography of Johann Heinrich Lambert
| accessdate = 2012-02-12}}</ref> In 1882, Carl Louis Ferdinand von Lindeman proved that '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' is also a [[transcendental number]], which means that it can't be expressed as the solution to any simple [[equation]].<ref>{{cite web
| url = http://turnbull.mcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Biographies/Lindemann.html
| title = Biography of Carl Louis Ferdinand von Lindemann
| accessdate = 2012-02-12}}</ref>

==History==
Mathematicians have worked for centuries to calculate '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' to more and more decimal places. To some extent, the progress of mathematics, or at least of computation, can be gauged by the progress in the number of digits to which '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' has been calculated.

Some ancients expressed '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' by using fractional approximations. The Rhind, or Ahmes Papyrus (''c.'' 1650 B.C.)<ref>http://www.math.buffalo.edu/mad/Ancient-Africa/mad_ancient_egyptpapyrus.html</ref><ref>https://www.math.tamu.edu/~don.allen/history/egypt/node3.html</ref> has shown that the [[ancient Egypt]]ians had determined the value for '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' to be 3.1605. The [[Babylonia]]n value from the same era was 3 1/8 = 3.125.<ref>Boyer, ''A History of Mathematics'', 2nd edition</ref>, coming to within 1 percent accuracy for both<ref>https://www.maa.org/press/periodicals/convergence/mathematical-treasure-old-babylonian-area-calculation</ref>.

[[Archimedes]] of Syracuse (287-212 BC) carried out "the first theoretical calculation" of '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>'''.<ref>[http://veling.nl/anne/templars/Pi_through_the_ages.html Pi through the ages]</ref>, using regular polygons with a total of 96 sides, within and circumscribing a circle, and in about 225 B.C. he came up with a formula between the folowing numbers:
<center><math>3 \dfrac {1} {7} < \pi < 3 \dfrac {10} {71}</math></center>

This is ten times better than the Egyptian and Babylonian values, and it is within 0.04 percent of the correct value. The German-Dutch mathematician Ludolph Van Ceulen used Archimedes's formula to calculate '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' to 32 digits in 1615. He was so proud of his achievement that he had the digits engraved on his tombstone<ref>https://www.ams.org/publicoutreach/math-history/hap-6-pi.pdf</ref>.

Towards the end of the 17th century mathematical analysis had new methods of making calculations, and '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' was no exception. Brilliant mathematicians had made individual calculations for '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' in a variety of ways. In 1593 [[François Viète]] (1540-1603) wrote the expression:

<center><math>\pi = 2 \times \dfrac 2 {\sqrt 2} \times \dfrac 2 {\sqrt {2 + \sqrt 2} } \times \dfrac 2 {\sqrt {2 + \sqrt {2 + \sqrt 2} } } \times \dfrac 2 {\sqrt {2 + \sqrt {2 + \sqrt {2 + \sqrt 2 } } } } \times \cdots</math></center>

[[John Wallis]] (1616-1703) made his expression 1655, proving that:
<center><math>\frac{\pi}{2} = \frac21\cdot\frac23\cdot\frac43\cdot\frac45\cdot\frac65\cdot\frac67\cdots</math></center>

[[William Brouncker]] (1620-1684) discovered the continued fraction in 1658:
<center><math>
\frac \pi 4 = \cfrac{1}{1+\cfrac{1^2}{2+\cfrac{3^2}{2+\cfrac{5^2}{2+\cfrac{7^2}{2+\cfrac{9^2}{2+\ddots}}}}}}
</math></center>

During the plague of 1665-1666, [[Isaac Newton]] was confined to the English village of Woolsthorpe. There he calculated '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' to 16 digits.

<center><math>\pi = \dfrac {3 \sqrt 3} 4 + 24 \left({\dfrac 1 {12} - \dfrac 1 {5 \times 2^5} - \dfrac 1 {28 \times 2^7} - \dfrac 1 {72 \times 2^9} - \cdots}\right)</math></center>

Unlike Van Ceulen, Newton did not consider his calculations to be an achievement. "I am ashamed to tell you to how many figures I carried these computations, having no other business at the time," he wrote.<ref>Beckmann, Petr (2015-01-06). ''A History of Pi'' (Kindle Locations 2249-2250). St. Martin's Press. Kindle Edition.</ref>

[[Gottfried Leibniz|Gottfried Wilhelm von Leibniz]] (1646-1716) published a series for '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' in 1673, coming up with the formulas:
<center><math>\dfrac \pi 4 = 1 - \dfrac 1 3 + \dfrac 1 5 - \dfrac 1 7 + \dfrac 1 9 - \cdots \approx 0.78539 \, 81633 \, 9744 \ldots</math><ref>https://oeis.org/A003881</ref></center>

<center><math>\displaystyle \pi = 4 \sum_{k \mathop \ge 0} \left({-1}\right)^k \frac 1 {2 k + 1}</math></center>

Brouncker's convergents are related to the [[Leibniz formula for pi]]: for instance
<center><math>
\frac{1}{1+\frac{1^2}{2}} = \frac{2}{3} = 1 - \frac{1}{3}
</math>
and
:<math>
\frac{1}{1+\frac{1^2}{2+\frac{3^2}{2}}} = \frac{13}{15} = 1 - \frac{1}{3} + \frac{1}{5}.
</math></center>

In 1706, John Machin, secretary of [[England]]'s Royal Society, developed a quickly converging formula for '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' and used it to calculate the first 100 digits. In 1844, the idiot savant Johann Dase of [[Hamburg]] used Machin's formula to calculate 200 digits in less than two months.<ref>Beckmann</ref> In contrast, William Shanks spent twenty years calculating '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' to 707 places, a task he completed in 1873. In 1945, it was discovered that only the first 527 of Shanks' digits were correct.

ENIAC, the first electronic [[computer]], took seventy hours to calculate 2,037 digits in 1949. In 2008, the first million digits of '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' were published on [[Project Gutenberg]].<ref>Hemphill, Scott, ''[https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/50 Pi to 1,000,000 places]''.</ref> In 2014, the anonymous programmer Houkouonchi calculated the first 13.3 trillion digits of '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' in 208 days.<ref>Yee, Alexander, "[http://www.numberworld.org/y-cruncher/ y-cruncher - A Multi-Threaded Pi-Program]"</ref> This result has not been published.

=='''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' in mathematics==
It's impossible to overestimate the importance of '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' (and ''[[e]]'') for mathematics. These values are tied by [[Euler's Formula|Euler's identity]]:

:<math>e^{\pi \imath} +1 = 0</math>.

'''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' may be used to determine the area of a circle:<ref>{{cite web
| url = http://www.worsleyschool.net/science/files/circle/area.html
| title = The Circle Area Formula
| accessdate = 2012-02-13}}</ref>

:<big><math>Area= \pi r^{2}</math></big>

==Recreation==
Memorizing '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' is a challenge that appeals to some people. Mnemonics have been devised. Counting the letters in each word of the phrase "Now I want a drink—alcoholic, of course" gives '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' to seven places (which is more than enough for all ordinary purposes). Numerous other mnemonics of this kind have been devised; in 1995, Michael Keith wrote one entitled [http://users.aol.com/s6sj7gt/mikerav.htm Near a Raven] which simultaneously parodies [[Edgar Allen Poe]]'s poem ''The Raven,'' while encoding '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' to 740 places.

March 14 marks [[Pi Day]], a holiday on which the mathematical constant is celebrated. The date, 3/14, comes from the first three digits of '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>'''. Some people begin their celebration at 1:59 pm, derived from the following three digits.

Pi Approximation Day is a similar holiday, celebrated on 22 July (from the approximation 22/7).<ref>[https://www.usatoday.com/tech/science/mathscience/2007-03-14-pi-day_N.htm USA Today (3/14/2007) - Pi-day]</ref>

The value of pi is approximately:

{{quotebox|
3.14159265358979323846264338327950288419716939937510582097494459230781640628620899862803482534211706798214808651328230664709384460955058223172535940812848111745028410270193852110555964462294895493038196442881097566593344612847564823378678316527120190914564856692...}}

==Does the Bible attempt to define pi?==
Virtually all serious students of the [[Bible]] say no. Still, critics frequently claim that the Bible contains an incorrect value for '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''', and the question is raised frequently enough to earn mention in the [[Skeptics Annotated Bible]].

The claim is based on a verse in the [[I Kings|first book of Kings]]:
{{bible quote|He made the Sea of cast metal, circular in shape, measuring ten [[cubit]]s from rim to rim and five cubits high. It took a line of thirty cubits to measure around it.|book=1_Kings|chap=7|verses=23|version=NIV}} Thus, critics say, the Bible claims that the value of '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' is three, and is therefore in error. However, there are a number of assumptions in this claim, any of which might invalidate the argument if wrong:

* That the tools and system of measurement available to the builders were sufficiently accurate to distinguish between three and '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>'''.
* That the phrase translated as "circular in shape" means perfectly circular, not simply "round" as an ellipse is round.
* That the Bible is trying to provide a value for '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''', and not merely describing the historical event of building this object.<ref name="math">{{cite web
| url = http://mathforum.org/library/drmath/view/52573.html
| title = Discussion re rounding Pi
| accessdate = 2012-02-10}}</ref>
* That a value is ''wrong'' simply because it depends on imprecisely expressed divisors. The ratio that is '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' can be derived completely accurately for a whole range of values<ref name="math" /> even if the Sea is taken as a perfect circle, namely when, before rounding to the nearest [[whole number]], the diameter is known to be greater than 9.5 and less than about 9.708, and the circumference greater than about 29.845 and less than 30.5, it being quite common at the time to round to whole numbers.<ref name="jph">{{cite web
| url = http://www.tektonics.org/lp/piwrong.html
| title = Is the Bible wrong about pi?
| accessdate = 2012-02-10}}</ref>
* That both the [[diameter]] and the [[circumference]] are measuring the same edges. Since the sides of any practical vessel have thickness, it is possible that the diameter is an outside measurement and the circumference is an inside measurement.<ref name="jph" />
* That both the diameter and the circumference are measuring the same part of the object. The object is also described as having an outward-turned rim. The easiest places to measure the diameter would be across the wider rim, and the easiest place to measure the circumference would be around the body below the rim.<ref>{{cite web
| url = http://creationontheweb.com/content/view/1731/
| title = Does the Bible say Pi equals 3.0?
| accessdate = 2012-02-10}}</ref>

Common sense and a rudimentary knowledge of the Bible should cause one to question whether it sets out to define mathematical concepts. The creation of a "sea of cast metal" by human beings in ancient times, without modern construction tools and measuring equipment, does not require nor could it utilize a precise value for '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>'''. An even more fundamental objection is that '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' is an [[irrational number]], and therefore has an infinite number of digits. (A "closed form" of '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' does exist, but requires mathematical notation that was invented many centuries later.) A decimal expression of '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' could not "fit" in the Bible, or in any other finite text.<ref name="math" />

==References==
<references/>

==See also==
*[[Pi Day]]
*[http://yacas.sourceforge.net/Algochapter5.html#c5s5 Calculation of pi with computers]

[[Category:Mathematics]]

Pi

2021-06-15T15:06:57Z

Dave Wilcox: punctuation

'''Pi''', or '''[[Archimedes]]' constant''', is perhaps the most important number in all of [[mathematics]] and engineering. It is defined as the [[ratio]] of the [[circumference]] of a [[circle]] to its [[diameter]], and represented by the Greek letter '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>'''. It was first used with its current meaning in 1706 by a Welsh mathematician, William Jones,<ref name="hist">{{cite web
| url = http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/history/HistTopics/Pi_through_the_ages.html
| title = A history or Pi
| accessdate = 2012-02-11}}</ref> who selected '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' because it is the first letter of the Greek word for [[perimeter]] (''περίμετρος''), i.e. the circumference of a circle is its perimeter. A Swiss mathematician, [[Leonhard Euler]], brought the concept into general use in 1737.

<big><math>\pi</math></big> is referenced in the [[Bible]], literature, and even as the title of a movie. It is central to the most famous identity in all of mathematics: [[Euler's Formula|Euler's Identity]].

The value of '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' is approximately 3.1416, or 22/7. The exact value cannot be expressed as a [[fraction]] or as a [[decimal]] number, regardless of how many [[digit]]s are used. Johann Heinrich Lambert proved this in 1761 by showing that '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' is an [[irrational number]], which means that it can't be expressed as a fraction.<ref>{{cite web
| url = http://turnbull.mcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Biographies/Lambert.html
| title = Biography of Johann Heinrich Lambert
| accessdate = 2012-02-12}}</ref> In 1882, Carl Louis Ferdinand von Lindeman proved that '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' is also a [[transcendental number]], which means that it can't be expressed as the solution to any simple [[equation]].<ref>{{cite web
| url = http://turnbull.mcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Biographies/Lindemann.html
| title = Biography of Carl Louis Ferdinand von Lindemann
| accessdate = 2012-02-12}}</ref>

==History==
Mathematicians have worked for centuries to calculate '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' to more and more decimal places. To some extent, the progress of mathematics, or at least of computation, can be gauged by the progress in the number of digits to which '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' has been calculated.

Some ancients expressed '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' by using fractional approximations. The Rhind, or Ahmes Papyrus (''c.'' 1650 B.C.)<ref>http://www.math.buffalo.edu/mad/Ancient-Africa/mad_ancient_egyptpapyrus.html</ref><ref>https://www.math.tamu.edu/~don.allen/history/egypt/node3.html</ref> has shown that the [[ancient Egypt]]ians had determined the value for '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' to be 3.1605. The [[Babylonia]]n value from the same era was 3 1/8 = 3.125.<ref>Boyer, ''A History of Mathematics'', 2nd edition</ref>, coming to within 1 percent accuracy for both<ref>https://www.maa.org/press/periodicals/convergence/mathematical-treasure-old-babylonian-area-calculation</ref>.

[[Archimedes]] of Syracuse (287-212 BC) carried out "the first theoretical calculation" of '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>'''.<ref>[http://veling.nl/anne/templars/Pi_through_the_ages.html Pi through the ages]</ref>, using regular polygons with a total of 96 sides, within and circumscribing a circle, and in about 225 B.C. he came up with a formula between the folowing numbers:
<center><math>3 \dfrac {1} {7} < \pi < 3 \dfrac {10} {71}</math></center>

This is ten times better than the Egyptian and Babylonian values, and it is within 0.04 percent of the correct value. The German-Dutch mathematician Ludolph Van Ceulen used Archimedes's formula to calculate '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' to 32 digits in 1615. He was so proud of his achievement that he had the digits engraved on his tombstone<ref>https://www.ams.org/publicoutreach/math-history/hap-6-pi.pdf</ref>.

Towards the end of the 17th century mathematical analysis had new methods of making calculations, and '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' was no exception. Brilliant mathematicians had made individual calculations for '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' in a variety of ways. In 1593 [[François Viète]] (1540-1603) wrote the expression:

<center><math>\pi = 2 \times \dfrac 2 {\sqrt 2} \times \dfrac 2 {\sqrt {2 + \sqrt 2} } \times \dfrac 2 {\sqrt {2 + \sqrt {2 + \sqrt 2} } } \times \dfrac 2 {\sqrt {2 + \sqrt {2 + \sqrt {2 + \sqrt 2 } } } } \times \cdots</math></center>

[[John Wallis]] (1616-1703) made his expression 1655, proving that:
<center><math>\frac{\pi}{2} = \frac21\cdot\frac23\cdot\frac43\cdot\frac45\cdot\frac65\cdot\frac67\cdots</math></center>

[[William Brouncker]] (1620-1684) discovered the continued fraction in 1658:
<center><math>
\frac \pi 4 = \cfrac{1}{1+\cfrac{1^2}{2+\cfrac{3^2}{2+\cfrac{5^2}{2+\cfrac{7^2}{2+\cfrac{9^2}{2+\ddots}}}}}}
</math></center>

During the plague of 1665-1666, [[Isaac Newton]] was confined to the English village of Woolsthorpe. There he calculated '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' to 16 digits.

<center><math>\pi = \dfrac {3 \sqrt 3} 4 + 24 \left({\dfrac 1 {12} - \dfrac 1 {5 \times 2^5} - \dfrac 1 {28 \times 2^7} - \dfrac 1 {72 \times 2^9} - \cdots}\right)</math></center>

Unlike Van Ceulen, Newton did not consider his calculations to be an achievement. "I am ashamed to tell you to how many figures I carried these computations, having no other business at the time," he wrote.<ref>Beckmann, Petr (2015-01-06). ''A History of Pi'' (Kindle Locations 2249-2250). St. Martin's Press. Kindle Edition.</ref>

[[Gottfried Leibniz|Gottfried Wilhelm von Leibniz]] (1646-1716) published a series for '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' in 1673, coming up with the formulas:
<center><math>\dfrac \pi 4 = 1 - \dfrac 1 3 + \dfrac 1 5 - \dfrac 1 7 + \dfrac 1 9 - \cdots \approx 0.78539 \, 81633 \, 9744 \ldots</math><ref>https://oeis.org/A003881</ref></center>

<center><math>\displaystyle \pi = 4 \sum_{k \mathop \ge 0} \left({-1}\right)^k \frac 1 {2 k + 1}</math></center>

Brouncker's convergents are related to the [[Leibniz formula for pi]]: for instance
<center><math>
\frac{1}{1+\frac{1^2}{2}} = \frac{2}{3} = 1 - \frac{1}{3}
</math>
and
:<math>
\frac{1}{1+\frac{1^2}{2+\frac{3^2}{2}}} = \frac{13}{15} = 1 - \frac{1}{3} + \frac{1}{5}.
</math></center>

In 1706, John Machin, secretary of [[England]]'s Royal Society, developed a quickly converging formula for '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' and used it to calculated the first 100 digits. In 1844, the idiot savant Johann Dase of [[Hamburg]] used Machin's formula to calculate 200 digits in less than two months.<ref>Beckmann</ref> In contrast, William Shanks spent twenty years calculating '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' to 707 places, a task he completed in 1873. In 1945, it was discovered that only the first 527 of Shanks's digits were correct.

ENIAC, the first electronic [[computer]], took seventy hours to calculate 2,037 digits in 1949. In 2008, the first million digits of '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' were published on [[Project Gutenberg]].<ref>Hemphill, Scott, ''[https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/50 Pi to 1,000,000 places]''.</ref> In 2014, the anonymous programmer Houkouonchi calculated the first 13.3 trillion digits of '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' in 208 days.<ref>Yee, Alexander, "[http://www.numberworld.org/y-cruncher/ y-cruncher - A Multi-Threaded Pi-Program]"</ref> This result has not been published.

=='''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' in mathematics==
It's impossible to overestimate the importance of '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' (and ''[[e]]'') for mathematics. These values are tied by [[Euler's Formula|Euler's identity]]:

:<math>e^{\pi \imath} +1 = 0</math>.

'''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' may be used to determine the area of a circle:<ref>{{cite web
| url = http://www.worsleyschool.net/science/files/circle/area.html
| title = The Circle Area Formula
| accessdate = 2012-02-13}}</ref>

:<big><math>Area= \pi r^{2}</math></big>

==Recreation==
Memorizing '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' is a challenge that appeals to some people. Mnemonics have been devised. Counting the letters in each word of the phrase "Now I want a drink—alcoholic, of course" gives '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' to seven places (which is more than enough for all ordinary purposes). Numerous other mnemonics of this kind have been devised; in 1995, Michael Keith wrote one entitled [http://users.aol.com/s6sj7gt/mikerav.htm Near a Raven] which simultaneously parodies [[Edgar Allen Poe]]'s poem ''The Raven,'' while encoding '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' to 740 places.

March 14 marks [[Pi Day]], a holiday on which the mathematical constant is celebrated. The date, 3/14, comes from the first three digits of '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>'''. Some people begin their celebration at 1:59 pm, derived from the following three digits.

Pi Approximation Day is a similar holiday, celebrated on 22 July (from the approximation 22/7).<ref>[https://www.usatoday.com/tech/science/mathscience/2007-03-14-pi-day_N.htm USA Today (3/14/2007) - Pi-day]</ref>

The value of pi is approximately:

{{quotebox|
3.14159265358979323846264338327950288419716939937510582097494459230781640628620899862803482534211706798214808651328230664709384460955058223172535940812848111745028410270193852110555964462294895493038196442881097566593344612847564823378678316527120190914564856692...}}

==Does the Bible attempt to define pi?==
Virtually all serious students of the [[Bible]] say no. Still, critics frequently claim that the Bible contains an incorrect value for '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''', and the question is raised frequently enough to earn mention in the [[Skeptics Annotated Bible]].

The claim is based on a verse in the [[I Kings|first book of Kings]]:
{{bible quote|He made the Sea of cast metal, circular in shape, measuring ten [[cubit]]s from rim to rim and five cubits high. It took a line of thirty cubits to measure around it.|book=1_Kings|chap=7|verses=23|version=NIV}} Thus, critics say, the Bible claims that the value of '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' is three, and is therefore in error. However, there are a number of assumptions in this claim, any of which might invalidate the argument if wrong:

* That the tools and system of measurement available to the builders were sufficiently accurate to distinguish between three and '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>'''.
* That the phrase translated as "circular in shape" means perfectly circular, not simply "round" as an ellipse is round.
* That the Bible is trying to provide a value for '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''', and not merely describing the historical event of building this object.<ref name="math">{{cite web
| url = http://mathforum.org/library/drmath/view/52573.html
| title = Discussion re rounding Pi
| accessdate = 2012-02-10}}</ref>
* That a value is ''wrong'' simply because it depends on imprecisely expressed divisors. The ratio that is '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' can be derived completely accurately for a whole range of values<ref name="math" /> even if the Sea is taken as a perfect circle, namely when, before rounding to the nearest [[whole number]], the diameter is known to be greater than 9.5 and less than about 9.708, and the circumference greater than about 29.845 and less than 30.5, it being quite common at the time to round to whole numbers.<ref name="jph">{{cite web
| url = http://www.tektonics.org/lp/piwrong.html
| title = Is the Bible wrong about pi?
| accessdate = 2012-02-10}}</ref>
* That both the [[diameter]] and the [[circumference]] are measuring the same edges. Since the sides of any practical vessel have thickness, it is possible that the diameter is an outside measurement and the circumference is an inside measurement.<ref name="jph" />
* That both the diameter and the circumference are measuring the same part of the object. The object is also described as having an outward-turned rim. The easiest places to measure the diameter would be across the wider rim, and the easiest place to measure the circumference would be around the body below the rim.<ref>{{cite web
| url = http://creationontheweb.com/content/view/1731/
| title = Does the Bible say Pi equals 3.0?
| accessdate = 2012-02-10}}</ref>

Common sense and a rudimentary knowledge of the Bible should cause one to question whether it sets out to define mathematical concepts. The creation of a "sea of cast metal" by human beings in ancient times, without modern construction tools and measuring equipment, does not require nor could it utilize a precise value for '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>'''. An even more fundamental objection is that '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' is an [[irrational number]], and therefore has an infinite number of digits. (A "closed form" of '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' does exist, but requires mathematical notation that was invented many centuries later.) A decimal expression of '''<big><math>\pi</math></big>''' could not "fit" in the Bible, or in any other finite text.<ref name="math" />

==References==
<references/>

==See also==
*[[Pi Day]]
*[http://yacas.sourceforge.net/Algochapter5.html#c5s5 Calculation of pi with computers]

[[Category:Mathematics]]

Google

2017-01-31T23:53:42Z

Dave Wilcox: punctuation, white space, orthography

[[File:Google.png|right|250px]]
'''Google''' is a company whose primary business is [[Internet]]-based services, including an extremely popular [[search engine]]. Google is associated with [[liberal]] causes and has been criticized for catering to communist [[China]] in censoring information from the people as requested by dictators:<ref>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/4647398.stm</ref>

: Reporters Without Borders joined others in asking how Google could stand up for US users' freedoms while controlling what Chinese users can search for. Its previous search engine for China's fast-growing market was subject to government blocks. The new site - Google.cn - censors itself to satisfy Beijing. While cooperating with China's government, Google refuses to fulfill requests by the U.S. Department of Justice.<ref>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/4630694.stm , BBC Google defies US over search data, January 20, 2006</ref> Google counsel Nicole Wong said "..we intend to resist their motion vigorously."

Google has also been accused of delisting [[conservative]] news sites from its search engine. As one of many examples, "In February 2005, [[Michelle Malkin]] wrote of the difficulties she was having becoming part of Google News."<ref>http://newsbusters.org/node/5477</ref>

In addition, although claiming to generally avoid getting involved in matters outside their field, Google officially supports the [[liberal]] and social [[libertarian]] cause of so-called "[[same sex marriage]]."<ref>http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2008/09/our-position-on-californias-no-on-8.html , Our position on California's No on 8 campaign</ref> On June 21, 2009, Google displayed a special multicolored line for searches on the word "gay". More troubling, Google recently announced plans to compensate employees to cover taxes paid on their domestic partner's health benefits, but only offers its 'generosity' to homosexual couples.<ref>http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/07/01/google-raises-eyebrows-new-gay-employee-benefit/</ref> Google is also big promoter of [[Charles Darwin]] and atheistic science, even to the point of giving special recognition to the anniversary of Darwin's birthday ("Darwin Day").

Major competitors of Google include [[Yahoo!]], [[Duck Duck Go|DuckDuckGo]], and Microsoft's [[Bing]].

== Corporate Information ==
The CEO of Google since 2001 was [[Eric Schmidt]]. He announced that he was stepping down as CEO in 2011. Google is headquartered in Mountain View, [[California]]. Google was founded on September 7, 1998, by [[Larry Page]] and [[Sergey Brin]]. Since then, it has grown to be the largest Internet search engine in the world. According to Alexa Internet, over 25% of all Internet users visit Google monthly.<ref>[http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_details?url=www.google.com Alexa Traffic Results for Google]</ref>

Google also owns [[YouTube]], the homemade [[video clip]] site. [[Viacom]] is suing YouTube, and thus Google, for a reported $1 billion, arguing that the economic model of YouTube is based on copyright infringement.<ref>[http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/6446193.stm Viacom will sue YouTube for $1bn]</ref>

After much debate about their corporate Code of Conduct, Google's founders settled on the all-encompassing "Don't be evil", saying,"It's built around the recognition that everything we do in connection with our work at Google will be, and should be, measured against the highest possible standards".<ref>[http://investor.google.com/conduct.html Google Code of Conduct]</ref> This Code of Conduct has generated much criticism, saying they have missed that mark badly.

==History==
[[Image:Google2.gif|thumb|right|300px| Google's logo on [[Earth Day]], April 22, 2007.]]

===Founding===
Google was originally a research project, started by Larry Page and Sergey Brin in 1996, when the two attended [[Stanford University]]. The two registered the domain name ''google.stanford.edu'', and the small search engine went online for the first time.<ref>[http://www.google.com/intl/en/corporate/history.html Corporate Information:Google Milestones]</ref>

===Growth===
The year Google was created 1998, it had amassed 26 million unique URLs in their database. By 2000, Google had indexed more than 1 billion pages. As of July 2008, Google has indexed over 1 [[trillion]] pages. Its core service is usually referred to as Google Search. <ref>[http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-9999814-93.html Google reveals scope of Web-crawling task] CNET News, July 25, 2008</ref> Google Search was enhanced with a feature called Google Instant in 2010 which quickly displays suggested search works as the user types. This reveals how the search information is organized in a "semantic Web" and the degree to which is it understood beyond just simple string matching. This feature seems to be further enhanced by the semantic information in [[Knowledge Graph]].

===Competition===
[[Microsoft]] has been aggressively competing with Google for a larger share of the search market. Their latest effort, [[Bing]].com, is a "next generation" search service which has generated praise for its user interface and criticism for its speed and performance in comparison to Google and Yahoo.

==Secular Progressive Culture==
Google's West Coast headquarters hires a majority of left-leaning personalities, explicitly in executive decision-making.<ref>See [http://www.google.com/corporate/execs.html] for a list of board members and senior staff.</ref> Google supports causes that are a radical departure from traditional American views, such as their public support of a 'no' vote for [[California]]'s [[Proposition 8]], which defined marriage as being between a husband and wife. Also in a subtle way, they favor politically-correct global liberalism, championed by secular progressives. They select certain ''days of importance'' for tribute, some of which are controversial. As such, ''Merry Christmas'' is replaced by ''Happy Holidays''. Even though, poll <ref>[http://www.prweb.com/releases/2008/11/prweb1670824.htm Wish Me A Merry Christmas Campaign Crusades to Change Retail Culture] PRWeb, November 26, 2008</ref> after poll <ref>[http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/lifestyle/general_lifestyle/68_prefer_merry_christmas_to_happy_holidays 68% Prefer “Merry Christmas” to “Happy Holidays”] Rasmussen, November 27, 2008</ref> after poll <ref>[http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/12/20/poll.season/ Poll: More Americans prefer 'Merry Christmas' greeting] CNN, December 20, 2005</ref> shows the public prefers 'Merry Christmas'. The problem may be that Google doesn't respect traditional [[Christian]] holidays, in favor of a 'culturally-correct' approach. In addition, Google accepts the [[Theory of Evolution]] by [[Charles Darwin]] as fact, promotes Darwin on their homepage with a Google Doodle logo.<ref>[Scientists unveil fossil of Darwinius masillae]</ref>

Google often honors Russia with their logo of Sputnik and for composer Igor Stravinsky. Google based their [[Independence Day]] logo on ‘This Land Is Your Land’ as an ode to leftism. Woody Guthrie wrote the lyrics and also wrote for ''[[The Daily Worker]],'' a [[Marxist]] newspaper.<ref>[http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/07/04/Google-chooses-this-land-is-your-land Google Chooses Communist-Oriented ‘This Land Is Your Land’ July 4th Theme, Breitbart.com, July 4, 2012]</ref>

=== Google versus Conservatives ===
* Many instances whereby [[information]] is comprised ideologically and displayed for the masses. Watchdog Web site NewsBusters.org published that Google had in fact labeled [[conservative]] [[American Spectator]] as "This site may harm your computer." <ref>[http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2007/12/28/google-claims-american-spectator-site-may-harm-your-computer Google Claims Conservative Website ‘May Harm Your Computer’] December 28, 2007</ref>
* Google once blocked pro-family Web site [http://www.massresistance.org/ MassResistance]. Some people complained his organization promotes hatred towards homosexuals. Google gave the standard legal trash as an excuse "'Users may not publish material that promotes hate towards groups based on race, ethnic origin, religion, disability, gender, age, veteran status, and sexual orientation/gender identity.'" MassResistance replied "Of course we are not promoting hate against anybody." <ref>[http://www.onenewsnow.com/Culture/Default.aspx?id=603372 Accusation: Google targets, blocks pro-family Web site again OneNewsNow.com, July 15,2009]</ref>
* [[YouTube]] owner, Google continues to protect [[Planned Parenthood]] by removing undercover videos exposing abortion clinic law-breaking.<ref>[http://www.christiannewswire.com/news/7416111014.html YouTube Bans Student Group's Video Showing Abuse at Planned Parenthood Christian News Wire, July 21, 2009]</ref>
* Without any prior explanation or notice, Google had been terminating its News relationships with conservative e-zines and Web journals.<ref>[http://newsbusters.org/node/5477 Is Google Purging Conservative News Sites? NewsBusters, May 22, 2006]</ref>
* Google attempted to minimize global awareness of the [[ClimateGate]] emails and the truth about the [[anthropogenic global warming theory]], whence the term "[[Climategate#Googlegate|Googlegate]]" gained recognition across the [[Web]]. Non-coincidentally, [[Al Gore]] is on the Google advisory board.
* Curiously, leading up to [[Restoring Honor 8-28|Restoring Honor 8-28-10]]—on Google Maps—the [[Lincoln Memorial]] was being misplaced in favor of the [http://www.pcworld.com/zoom?id=204373&page=1&zoomIdx=1 Franklin D. Roosevelt Memorial], which is a good half a mile south of the more famous memorial.<ref>Sarah Jacobsson Purewal. [http://www.pcworld.com/article/204373/google_maps_misplaces_lincoln_memorial.html Google Maps Misplaces Lincoln Memorial], ''PC World'', Aug 28, 2010.</ref> This may have been an ongoing, known problem or bug in Google Maps that hadn't been fixed yet; or, Google is censoring search results; or, Google is playing with searches for political power and gain.
* As of August 15, 2016, a Google search for "The Murder of Seth Rich" Conservapedia, yields no results, likewise a search by "The Murder of Seth Rich" Site: Conservapedia.com. But a Yahoo search brings up the Conservapedia article.
* During the 2016 Presidential campaign Google filtered emails from [[Donald Trump]] into Gmail users spam boxes.<ref>[http://dailycaller.com/2016/06/23/users-claim-google-is-putting-trump-emails-in-their-spam-box/ Users Claim Google Is Putting Trump Emails In Their Spam Box], Alex Pfeiffer, ''Daily Caller'', 8:19 AM 06/23/2016</ref>

=== Google versus Anti- Obama Blogs ===
The question immediately raised, "Did Google Silence [[Barack Obama]] critics?" It turns out, no they did not. A group of separate blogs were targeted by their spam filter as a result of manipulating the 'flag' feature. This caused a temporary blockage for five days. Sites affected were Hillary supporters and all anti-Obama. They include http://bluelyon.blogspot.com, http://comealongway.blogspot.com, http://hillaryorbust.blogspot.com and http://mccaindemocrats.blogspot.com and their main associate JustSayNoDeal.com <ref>[http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/06/30/google-and-the-anti-obama-bloggers/ Google and the Anti-Obama Bloggers] NYTimes June 30, 2008</ref>

=== Google sensitive to Islam ===
In 2010, it was noted that Google's search suggestions for the world's various religions would bring up many negative results for [[Christianity]], Judaism, Hinduism and Buddhism. Typing a search for "Christianity is..." the results would be "Christianity is a lie," or "Judaism is..." would be "Judaism is a cult." Google removed negative search suggestions when typing "Islam is...",<ref>[http://thenextweb.com/2010/01/05/google-blocking-negative-search-recommendations-islam/ Google Blocking Negative Search Recommendations On Islam – Why?, The Next Web, May 1, 2010]</ref> however it seems that Google has reverted this, as the current first suggestion when typing "islam is..." is "Islam is evil".

=== Google versus Vladmir Putin ===
On the day of Olympic Winter Games in Russia, Google created a homepage icon, that supports the [[homosexual agenda]]. It shows a rainbow-coloured group of athletes. The background is [[Putin]]'s position on Homosexuality.<ref>http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26080047</ref>

== Google bombing ==
Perhaps the most innovative contribution Google has made to Internet searching is its '''PageRank''' algorithm. This system works by counting the number of sites that link to another site; the more links pointing to a page, the higher that page will be ranked. The engine also takes note of how often the page is updated. Due to this, [[Wikipedia]] is consistently ranked very highly by Google, due to its constant updating and heavy linkage. More recently, Internet-savvy Googlers have discovered ways to game the system; creating massive numbers of pages with links pointing to one page to form what is known as a "Google Bomb". Some examples can be found below.<ref>[http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20040614/news_mz1b14google.html Dropping 'Google-bombs']</ref>

*'''"Miserable Failure"''': For nearly two years, typing "miserable failure" (or even just "miserable", or "failure") and then clicking "I'm Feeling Lucky" in the Google search engine would return the [http://www.whitehouse.gov/president/biography.html White House Biography] of [[George W. Bush]].<ref>[http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3298443.stm 'Miserable failure' links to Bush]</ref> This was orchestrated by [[Democratic]] Party supporters in late 2003,<ref>[http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2004/01/26/BUG3M4GVDS1.DTL In October, Johnson, a Democrat, added the phrase "miserable failure" to his Web site, Old Fashioned Patriot. He then linked the site to the online White House biography of President Bush and asked others to follow his lead]</ref> as part of the 2004 Presidential election. However, at times, [[Conservative]] supporters were able to shift the phrase to [[Jimmy Carter]], [[Hillary Clinton]] and [[Michael Moore]].
*''''"Great President"''': returns the [http://www.whitehouse.gov/president/biography.html White House Biography] of [[George W. Bush]].
*'''"Jew"''': The first result used to be the home page for "Jew Watch", a racist, anti-Semitic hate group. As of September 2012, Jew Watch is the 4th result, although it has now shown even lower in the result list.
*'''"Waffles"''': Also as part of the 2004 Presidential election, Conservative supporters managed to link the term "waffles" to the official Web site of [[John Kerry]].
*'''"French Military Victories"''': Hitting "I'm Feeling Lucky" for this term directs you to a fake Google page (in reality, it is an AlbinoBlackSheep.com page, styled to look exactly like a Google page, [http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/text/victories.html here]) giving no matches, and asking if you meant "French military defeats?".
*'''"Weapons of Mass Destruction"''' would bring up a similar page with the error message 'not found.'
*'''"[Rick] Santorum"''': Homosexual activist [[Dan Savage]] created a Web site with an obscene definition for the word "santorum" because politician [[Rick Santorum]] opposes same-sex marriage. This page was number one on Google for several years when people searched for his last name (and at times, his full name as well). Once Santorum began to campaign for President, his campaign Web site eventually made it up to the top spot, but as of September 2012, the [[Wikipedia]] [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Campaign_for_%22santorum%22_neologism page] about Savage's actions is currently the top result, followed by the Wikipedia page for Santorum. Savage's site has fallen to the third spot. Santorum's presidential campaign Web site has fallen to number four, since Santorum is no longer in the race.

On January 25, 2007, Google claimed to have modified their PageRank algorithm to lessen the likelihood of future Google bombs<ref>[http://boingboing.net/2007/01/26/bush_no_longer_miser.html Bush no longer "miserable failure": Google tackles googlebombs]</ref>

== Controversy ==
=== Tax Dodging ===
A report by Bloomberg News has Google setting up offshore banks accounts to avoid paying taxes on foreign profits. More than $3.9 billion have made it to [[Bermuda]] bank accounts over the last several years. Google has cut its effective tax rate abroad to just 2.4%. The practice is common and [[George Soros]] has been known to place his billions of dollars in Cayman Island banks. This costs the U.S. government more than $60 billion in revenue.<ref>[http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/After-news-of-Google-tax-dodges-Obama-raises-money-with-Google-execs-105513473.html#ixzz13LE2lg1F After news of Google tax dodges, Obama raises money with Google execs, Washington Examiner, October 22, 2010]</ref>

=== Privacy Concerns===
Google has been criticized by privacy activists and others. Recently, Google chief executive Eric Schmidt said, "We cannot even answer the most basic questions because we don’t know enough about you. That is the most important aspect of Google’s expansion." <ref>http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/c3e49548-088e-11dc-b11e-000b5df10621,dwp_uuid=e8477cc4-c820-11db-b0dc-000b5df10621.html</ref> Google has attempted to "remedy" this situation by storing search information, in effect, keeping tabs on people for two years after they search. This has led Google critic [[Daniel Brandt]] to create "Scroogle.org", which runs Google searches that users conduct through his organization's personal servers to prevent Google from being able to connect any personal information to the searchers.<ref>http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55935</ref>

=== Hypocrisy on Net neutrality ===
Neil Stevens of Redstate.com notes that Google says one thing and does another, tarnishing their reputation in the process. He lists where Google emphasizes support then does what they want in regards to shutting down access.<ref>[http://www.redstate.com/neil_stevens/2009/08/23/google-undermines-the-internet/ Google undermines the Internet, RedState.com, August 23, 2009]</ref>

=== Benghazi attack ===
After the [[Benghazi attack]], Hillary's State Department was in contact with Google. Hillary publicly claimed a controversial video was the source of a 'spontaneous' riot which proved to be a knowingly false statement. Google participated in the ruse by agreeing to block the video even after President Obama admitted it was a pre-planned terrorist attack. Copies of the email were forwarded to Denis McDonough, [[Cheryl Mills]], Patrick F Kennedy, Jake Sullivan and [[John Brennan]]. The email also contains contact information for Google CEO Afternoon (Larry) Page and [[YouTube]] CEO Salar Kamangar including their mobile and office phone numbers.<ref>[https://wikileaks.org/clinton-emails/emailid/16800 UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04841 Doc No. C05739829 STATE DEPT]. wikileaks.org</ref>

=== Relationship with the Hillary Clinton campaign ===
It was discovered Google was manipulating autocomplete [[search engine]] results to favor Hillary Clinton.<ref>[http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-06-10/must-see-video-how-google-manipulates-search-results-favor-hillary-clinton How Google Manipulates Search Results In Favor Of Hillary Clinton], by Tyler Durden, Jun 10, 2016. zerohedge.com</ref> Autocomplete returns the most popular trending search queries.
<ref>[http://freebeacon.com/politics/here-are-10-more-examples-of-google-search-results-favorable-to-hillary/ Here Are 10 More Examples of Google Search Results Favorable to Hillary], Tech giant accused of whitewashing autocomplete results, Brent Scher and Elizabeth Harrington, ''Washington Free Beacon'', June 10, 2016</ref> When a user types in ''Hillary Clinton cri'' to query about the criminal investigation into Mrs. Clinton for example, the Google results do not match at all popular trends on all other major search engines.<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PFxFRqNmXKg Did Google Manipulate Search for Hillary?], Matt Lieberman, SourceFed, Jun 9, 2016. UPDATE: Friday June 10. youtube.com</ref>

Supporters of [[Bernie Sanders]] complained throughout the 2016 primary season Google had inflated Hillary's delegate count by adding unelected [[Superdelegate]]s who, by rule, were to remain unpledged until the convention.<ref>[http://www.snopes.com/sanders-vs-clinton-delegate-count/ Failing Delegate Math], A popular [[meme]] detailing the actual delegate count between Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton in May 2016 is mostly accurate. Kim LaCapria, ''Snopes'', May 10, 2016</ref> Some in late primary states considered this another form of voter suppression.<ref>[http://thebernreport.com/superdelegate-system-has-been-used-as-a-form-of-voter-supression/ Superdelegate System Has Been Used as a Form of Voter Suppression], Posted by G.A. Casebeer, ''The Bern Report'', May 23, 2016</ref>

In an article titled ''How Google Could Rig the 2016 Election'' in August 2015 ''Politico'' warned Google "can easily shift the voting preferences of undecided voters by 20 percent or more—up to 80 percent in some demographic groups—with virtually no one knowing they are being manipulated... In the United States, half of our presidential elections have been won by margins under 7.6 percent".<ref>[http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/08/how-google-could-rig-the-2016-election-121548 How Google Could Rig the 2016 Election], Google has the ability to drive millions of votes to a candidate with no one the wiser, By Robert Epstein, ''Politico'', August 19, 2015</ref>

Billionaire Eric Schmidt, [[CEO]] of Google's parent company Alphabet funded a startup company called The Groundwork to ensure Hillary has the engineering talent needed to win the election.<ref>[http://qz.com/520652/groundwork-eric-schmidt-startup-working-for-hillary-clinton-campaign/ THE GROUNDWORK The stealthy, Eric Schmidt-backed startup that’s working to put Hillary Clinton in the White House], Adam Pasick & Tim Fernholz, ''Quartz'', October 09, 2015. qz.com</ref> Schmidt and Google are both donors to the Clinton Foundation.

When Googling, '''Hillary Clinton's he-''' 
Google yielded,
*Hillary Clinton's headquarters
*Hillary Clinton's health plan
*Hillary Clinton's healthcare plan

Search results on Bing return the suggestions
*Hillary Clinton's health
*Hillary Clinton's health issues
*Hillary Clinton's health and weight

Search results on Yahoo return the suggestions
*Hillary Clinton's health problems
*Hillary Clinton's health
*Hillary Clinton's health issues

=== Relationship with the Obama Administration ===
Consumer Watchdog crafted a 32-page report detailing how Google has inappropriately benefited from its close ties to the Obama Administration. [[NASA]]'s Moffett Airfield has been turned into a taxpayer-subsidized private airport for Google executives used for corporate junkets. NASA's Moffett Airfield is a short distance from Google's world headquarters. The report details, ''"A growing fleet of jets and helicopters stand ready to ferry the company's top executives near or far, for business or pleasure, for vacations or schmoozing, including at least three wintertime trips to the [[Caribbean]] and a trip by Google chief executive Eric Schmidt to the Cannes Film Festival."'' <ref>[http://www.redorbit.com/news/technology/1983792/consumer_watchdog_sends_issas_oversight_committee_google_report_showing_inappropriate/index.html Consumer Watchdog Sends Issa's Oversight Committee Google Report Showing Inappropriate Relationship with Obama Administration, RedOrbit.com, January 24, 2011]</ref>

===Homosexual agenda===
As was already mentioned, Google has been actively blocking certain Web sites ans services which oppose sodomy (homosexuality). They also speak out in support of the homosexual movement, and promote search results which do the same.<ref>https://blog.google/topics/causes-community/transvoices</ref><ref>http://money.cnn.com/2012/07/08/technology/google-legalize-love/index.htm</ref><ref>https://winteryknight.com/2012/07/09/google-starts-wordlwide-campaign-to-legalize-gay-marriage-target-donates-to-gay-rights-groups</ref><ref>https://onetoday.google.com</ref> They also donate to some other organizations which do the same, as well and politicians who seek the same goal.

==International Agitation==
Google's Map service is responsible for escalating tensions between foreign nations by radically misleading versions of current borders.

Google has been labeled "professionally irresponsible" for disseminated [[Cambodia]] territory, which is embroiled in a bitter diplomatic row with Thailand over the demarcation of the frontier.<ref>[http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/02/05/cambodia-google-idUSSGE61406G20100205 Cambodia blasts Google map of disputed Thai border, Reuters, February 5, 2010]</ref>

[[Costa Rica]] took offense to Google Maps version showing that a specific area of encampment was on Nicaraguan soil. The dispute that had ensued over Google's version of the Nicaragua-Costa Rica border has became rather serious. So much so that the secretary general of the [[Organization of American States]] had to intervene.<ref>[http://news.cnet.com/8301-17852_3-20021977-71.html Envoy to solve latest Google Maps border dispute? CNET, November 5, 2010]</ref><ref>[http://spectregroup.wordpress.com/2010/11/12/google-maps-blamed-for-border-dispute/ GOOGLE MAPS BLAMED for BORDER DISPUTE, Spectre Footnotes, November 11, 2010]</ref>

Google Maps was busy fixing another error in its map program of a port city that reignited border tensions between [[Germany]] and The Netherlands.<ref>[http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/02/21/google-maps-slipup-sparks-diplomatic-crisis/ Google Maps Blunder Reignites Centuries Old Border Dispute, Fox News, February 21, 2011]</ref>

===Egyptian Uprising===
Google executive Wael Ghonim helped with protesting [[Egypt]]'s rule of [[Hosni Mubarak]], calling for him to step down and organizing protests. He was detained by authorities and released after two weeks. Ghonim is credited as being a major factor in sparking Egypt's uprising. Google CEO Eric Schmidt said that Google is "very, very proud" of Wael Ghonim.<ref>[http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/technology/2011/02/google-ceo-eric-schmidt-says-company-is-proud-of-wael-ghonim-in-egypt.html Google CEO Eric Schmidt says company is 'very proud' of Egypt's Wael Ghonim, LA Times, February 15, 2011]</ref>

=== Syrian Civil War ===
Newly released emails from [[Hillary Clinton]]'s State Department shows Google coordinating the overthrow of Bashar Assad in Syria.<ref>[http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/clinton-email-reveals-google-sought-overthrow-of-syrias-assad/article/2586300 Clinton email reveals: Google sought overthrow of Syria's Assad, Washington Examiner, March 19, 2016]</ref>

===Wi-Fi Snooping===
Google collected information from [[Wi-Fi]] networks as its street-view vans cruised neighborhoods around the globe, raising issues in more than 30 countries. The information Google gathered included e-mail fragments and passwords, alarming politicians and privacy and security advocates in Germany, France, and [[Spain]].<ref>[http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/07/22/national-security-google-wi-fi-spy-scandal/ Is National Security Behind Google's Wi-Fi Spying?, Fox News, July 23, 2010]</ref> It was noted that Google supplies special mapping and search products to the U.S. military and intelligence community, with some Google employees enjoying Top Secret clearance to work with the government. Google said it was "accidental" data gathering. Rep. Joe Barton of Texas, a senior [[Republican]] lawmaker, suggested that Google's data collection wasn't accidental and that it was "something to look at." Under the Democrat leadership, the [[FCC]] investigated, but dropped further inquiry, coincidently, just before a Google [[Democrat]] fundraiser was held. Many groups have been calling on Republican [[Darrell Issa]] to investigate Google's cozy relationship with the [[Obama administration]].<ref>[http://www.nlpc.org/stories/2010/11/10/congress-must-investigate-google-obama-ties Congress Must Investigate Google-Obama Ties, National Legal and Policy Center, November 10, 2010]</ref>

*France: Privacy watchdog CNIL awarded its largest fine to date with a judgement of $141,300 against Google in relation to snooping.<ref>[http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2011/03/21/general-broadcasting-amp-entertainment-eu-france-google-fined_8366482.html France fines Google for Street View privacy breach, Forbes, March 21, 2011]</ref>

==See also==
* [[Bing]]
* [[Censorability]]
* [[Censorship]]
* [[Duck Duck Go]]
* [[Evolutionist censorship]]
* [[Fairness Doctrine]]
* [[Liberal censorship]]
* [[Media censorship]]
* [[Tools of censorship]]
* [[Yahoo]]

== External links ==
* [http://www.google-watch.org/ Google Watch] (German)
* [http://www.scroogled.com/ A campaign to save the privacy of google-user] (now forwarded to Microsoft site)

== References ==
{{reflist|2}}

[[Category:United States Businesses]]
[[Category:Search Engines]]
[[Category:Google]]
[[Category:Websites]]
[[Category:Homosexual Agenda]]
[[Category:Internet]]
[[Category:Liberal Companies]]
[[Category:Anti Second Amendment]]

Google

2017-01-31T23:44:34Z

Dave Wilcox: syntax

[[File:Google.png|right|250px]]
'''Google''' is a company whose primary business is [[Internet]]-based services, including an extremely popular [[search engine]]. Google is associated with [[liberal]] causes and has been criticized for catering to communist [[China]] in censoring information from the people as requested by dictators:<ref>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/4647398.stm</ref>

: Reporters Without Borders joined others in asking how Google could stand up for US users' freedoms while controlling what Chinese users can search for. Its previous search engine for China's fast-growing market was subject to government blocks. The new site - Google.cn - censors itself to satisfy Beijing. While cooperating with China's government, Google refuses to fulfill requests by the U.S. Department of Justice.<ref>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/4630694.stm , BBC Google defies US over search data, January 20, 2006</ref> Google counsel Nicole Wong said "..we intend to resist their motion vigorously."

Google has also been accused of delisting [[conservative]] news sites from its search engine. As one of many examples, "In February 2005, [[Michelle Malkin]] wrote of the difficulties she was having becoming part of Google News."<ref>http://newsbusters.org/node/5477</ref>

In addition, although claiming to generally avoid getting involved in matters outside their field, Google officially supports the [[liberal]] and social [[libertarian]] cause of so-called "[[same sex marriage]]."<ref>http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2008/09/our-position-on-californias-no-on-8.html , Our position on California's No on 8 campaign</ref> On June 21, 2009, Google displayed a special multicolored line for searches on the word "gay". More troubling, Google recently announced plans to compensate employees to cover taxes paid on their domestic partner's health benefits, but only offers its 'generosity' to homosexual couples.<ref>http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/07/01/google-raises-eyebrows-new-gay-employee-benefit/</ref> Google is also big promoter of [[Charles Darwin]] and atheistic science, even to the point of giving special recognition to the anniversary of Darwin's birthday ("Darwin Day").

Major competitors of Google include [[Yahoo!]], [[Duck Duck Go|DuckDuckGo]], and Microsoft's [[Bing]].

== Corporate Information ==

The CEO of Google since 2001 was [[Eric Schmidt]]. He announced that he was stepping down as CEO in 2011. Google is headquartered in Mountain View, [[California]]. Google was founded on September 7, 1998, by [[Larry Page]] and [[Sergey Brin]]. Since then, it has grown to be the largest internet search engine in the world. According to Alexa Internet, over 25% of all Internet users visit Google monthly.<ref>[http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_details?url=www.google.com Alexa Traffic Results for Google]</ref>

Google also owns [[YouTube]], the homemade [[video clip]] site. [[Viacom]] is suing YouTube, and thus Google, for a reported $1 billion, arguing that the economic model of YouTube is based on copyright infringement.<ref>[http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/6446193.stm Viacom will sue YouTube for $1bn]</ref>

After much debate about their corporate Code of Conduct, Google's founders settled on the all-encompassing "Don't be evil", saying,"It's built around the recognition that everything we do in connection with our work at Google will be, and should be, measured against the highest possible standards".<ref>[http://investor.google.com/conduct.html Google Code of Conduct]</ref> This Code of Conduct has generated much criticism, saying they have missed that mark badly.

==History==
[[Image:Google2.gif|thumb|right|300px| Google's logo on [[Earth Day]], April 22, 2007.]]

===Founding===

Google was originally a research project, started by Larry Page and Sergey Brin in 1996, when the two attended [[Stanford University]]. The two registered the domain name ''google.stanford.edu'', and the small search engine went online for the first time.<ref>[http://www.google.com/intl/en/corporate/history.html Corporate Information:Google Milestones]</ref>

===Growth===

The year Google was created 1998, it had amassed 26 million unique URLs in their database. By 2000, Google had indexed more than 1 billion pages. As of July 2008, Google has indexed over 1 [[trillion]] pages. Its core service is usually referred to as Google Search. <ref>[http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-9999814-93.html Google reveals scope of Web-crawling task] CNET News, July 25, 2008</ref> Google Search was enhanced with a feature called Google Instant in 2010 which quickly displays suggested search works as the user types. This reveals how the search information is organized in a "semantic web" and the degree to which is it understood beyond just simple string matching. This feature seems to be further enhanced by the semantic information in [[Knowledge Graph]].

===Competition===
[[Microsoft]] has been aggressively competing with Google for a larger share of the search market. Their latest effort, [[Bing]].com, is a "next generation" search service which has generated praise for its user interface and criticism for its speed and performance in comparison to Google and Yahoo.

==Secular Progressive Culture==

Google's West Coast headquarters hires a majority of left-leaning personalities, explicitly in executive decision-making.<ref>See [http://www.google.com/corporate/execs.html] for a list of board members and senior staff.</ref> Google supports causes that are a radical departure from traditional American views, such as their public support of a 'no' vote for [[California]]'s [[Proposition 8]], which defined marriage as being between a husband and wife. Also in a subtle way, they favor politically-correct global liberalism, championed by secular progressives. They select certain ''days of importance'' for tribute, some of which are controversial. As such, ''Merry Christmas'' is replaced by ''Happy Holidays''. Even though, poll <ref>[http://www.prweb.com/releases/2008/11/prweb1670824.htm Wish Me A Merry Christmas Campaign Crusades to Change Retail Culture] PRWeb, November 26, 2008</ref> after poll <ref>[http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/lifestyle/general_lifestyle/68_prefer_merry_christmas_to_happy_holidays 68% Prefer “Merry Christmas” to “Happy Holidays”] Rasmussen, November 27, 2008</ref> after poll <ref>[http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/12/20/poll.season/ Poll: More Americans prefer 'Merry Christmas' greeting] CNN, December 20, 2005</ref> shows the public prefers 'Merry Christmas'. The problem may be that Google doesn't respect traditional [[Christian]] holidays, in favor of a 'culturally-correct' approach. In addition, Google accepts the [[Theory of Evolution]] by [[Charles Darwin]] as fact, promotes Darwin on their homepage with a Google Doodle logo.<ref>[Scientists unveil fossil of Darwinius masillae]</ref>

Google often honors Russia with their logo of Sputnik and for composer Igor Stravinsky. Google based their [[Independence Day]] logo on ‘This Land Is Your Land’ as an ode to leftism. Woody Guthrie wrote the lyrics and also wrote for ''[[The Daily Worker]],'' a [[Marxist]] newspaper.<ref>[http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/07/04/Google-chooses-this-land-is-your-land Google Chooses Communist-Oriented ‘This Land Is Your Land’ July 4th Theme, Breitbart.com, July 4, 2012]</ref>

=== Google versus Conservatives ===

* Many instances whereby [[information]] is comprised ideologically and displayed for the masses. Watchdog website NewsBusters.org published that Google had in fact labeled [[conservative]] [[American Spectator]] as "This site may harm your computer." <ref>[http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2007/12/28/google-claims-american-spectator-site-may-harm-your-computer Google Claims Conservative Website ‘May Harm Your Computer’] December 28, 2007</ref>

* Google once blocked pro-family website [http://www.massresistance.org/ MassResistance]. Some people complained his organization promotes hatred towards homosexuals. Google gave the standard legal trash as an excuse "'Users may not publish material that promotes hate towards groups based on race, ethnic origin, religion, disability, gender, age, veteran status, and sexual orientation/gender identity.'" MassResistance replied "Of course we are not promoting hate against anybody." <ref>[http://www.onenewsnow.com/Culture/Default.aspx?id=603372 Accusation: Google targets, blocks pro-family website again OneNewsNow.com, July 15,2009]</ref>

* [[YouTube]] owner, Google continues to protect [[Planned Parenthood]] by removing undercover videos exposing abortion clinic law-breaking.<ref>[http://www.christiannewswire.com/news/7416111014.html YouTube Bans Student Group's Video Showing Abuse at Planned Parenthood Christian News Wire, July 21, 2009]</ref>

* Without any prior explanation or notice, Google had been terminating its News relationships with conservative e-zines and web journals.<ref>[http://newsbusters.org/node/5477 Is Google Purging Conservative News Sites? NewsBusters, May 22, 2006]</ref>

* Google attempted to minimize global awareness of the [[ClimateGate]] emails and the truth about the [[anthropogenic global warming theory]], whence the term "[[Climategate#Googlegate|Googlegate]]" gained recognition across the [[Web]]. Non-coincidentally, [[Al Gore]] is on the Google advisory board.

* Curiously, leading up to [[Restoring Honor 8-28|Restoring Honor 8-28-10]]—on Google Maps—the [[Lincoln Memorial]] was being misplaced in favor of the [http://www.pcworld.com/zoom?id=204373&page=1&zoomIdx=1 Franklin D. Roosevelt Memorial], which is a good half a mile south of the more famous memorial.<ref>Sarah Jacobsson Purewal. [http://www.pcworld.com/article/204373/google_maps_misplaces_lincoln_memorial.html Google Maps Misplaces Lincoln Memorial], ''PC World'', Aug 28, 2010.</ref> This may have been an ongoing, known problem or bug in Google Maps that hadn't been fixed yet; or, Google is censoring search results; or, Google is playing with searches for political power and gain.

* As of August 15, 2016, a Google search for "The Murder of Seth Rich" Conservapedia, yields no results, likewise a search by "The Murder of Seth Rich" Site: Conservapedia.com. But a Yahoo search brings up the Conservapedia article.

* During the 2016 Presidential campaign Google filtered emails from [[Donald Trump]] into Gmail users spam boxes.<ref>[http://dailycaller.com/2016/06/23/users-claim-google-is-putting-trump-emails-in-their-spam-box/ Users Claim Google Is Putting Trump Emails In Their Spam Box], Alex Pfeiffer, ''Daily Caller'', 8:19 AM 06/23/2016</ref>

=== Google versus Anti- Obama Blogs ===

The question immediately raised, "Did Google Silence [[Barack Obama]] critics?" It turns out, no they did not. A group of separate blogs were targeted by their spam filter as a result of manipulating the 'flag' feature. This caused a temporary blockage for five days. Sites affected were Hillary supporters and all anti-Obama. They include http://bluelyon.blogspot.com, http://comealongway.blogspot.com, http://hillaryorbust.blogspot.com and http://mccaindemocrats.blogspot.com and their main associate JustSayNoDeal.com <ref>[http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/06/30/google-and-the-anti-obama-bloggers/ Google and the Anti-Obama Bloggers] NYTimes June 30, 2008</ref>

=== Google sensitive to Islam ===

In 2010, it was noted that Google's search suggestions for the world's various religions would bring up many negative results for [[Christianity]], Judaism, Hinduism and Buddhism. Typing a search for "Christianity is..." the results would be "Christianity is a lie," or "Judaism is..." would be "Judaism is a cult." Google removed negative search suggestions when typing "Islam is...",<ref>[http://thenextweb.com/2010/01/05/google-blocking-negative-search-recommendations-islam/ Google Blocking Negative Search Recommendations On Islam – Why?, The Next Web, May 1, 2010]</ref> however it seems that Google has reverted this, as the current first suggestion when typing "islam is..." is "Islam is evil".

=== Google versus Vladmir Putin ===
On the day of Olympic Winter Games in Russia, Google created a homepage icon, that supports the [[homosexual agenda]]. It shows a rainbow-coloured group of athletes. The background is [[Putin]]'s position on Homosexuality.<ref>http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26080047</ref>

== Google bombing ==

Perhaps the most innovative contribution Google has made to internet searching is its '''PageRank''' algorithm. This system works by counting the number of sites that link to another site; the more links pointing to a page, the higher that page will be ranked. The engine also takes note of how often the page is updated. Due to this, [[Wikipedia]] is consistently ranked very highly by Google, due to its constant updating and heavy linkage. More recently, internet-savvy Googlers have discovered ways to game the system; creating massive numbers of pages with links pointing to one page to form what is known as a "Google Bomb". Some examples can be found below.<ref>[http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20040614/news_mz1b14google.html Dropping 'Google-bombs']</ref>

*'''"Miserable Failure"''': For nearly two years, typing "miserable failure" (or even just "miserable", or "failure") and then clicking "I'm Feeling Lucky" in the Google search engine would return the [http://www.whitehouse.gov/president/biography.html White House Biography] of [[George W. Bush]].<ref>[http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3298443.stm 'Miserable failure' links to Bush]</ref> This was orchestrated by [[Democratic]] Party supporters in late 2003,<ref>[http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2004/01/26/BUG3M4GVDS1.DTL In October, Johnson, a Democrat, added the phrase "miserable failure" to his Web site, Old Fashioned Patriot. He then linked the site to the online White House biography of President Bush and asked others to follow his lead]</ref> as part of the 2004 Presidential election. However, at times, [[Conservative]] supporters were able to shift the phrase to [[Jimmy Carter]], [[Hillary Clinton]] and [[Michael Moore]].
*''''"Great President"''': returns the [http://www.whitehouse.gov/president/biography.html White House Biography] of [[George W. Bush]].
*'''"Jew"''': The first result used to be the home page for "Jew Watch", a racist, anti-Semitic hate group. As of September 2012, Jew Watch is the 4th result, although it has now shown even lower in the result list.
*'''"Waffles"''': Also as part of the 2004 Presidential election, Conservative supporters managed to link the term "waffles" to the official website of [[John Kerry]].
*'''"French Military Victories"''': Hitting "I'm Feeling Lucky" for this term directs you to a fake Google page (in reality, it is an AlbinoBlackSheep.com page, styled to look exactly like a Google page, [http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/text/victories.html here]) giving no matches, and asking if you meant "French military defeats?".
*'''"Weapons of Mass Destruction"''' would bring up a similar page with the error message 'not found.'
*'''"[Rick] Santorum"''': Homosexual activist [[Dan Savage]] created a website with an obscene definition for the word "santorum" because politician [[Rick Santorum]] opposes same-sex marriage. This page was number one on Google for several years when people searched for his last name (and at times, his full name as well). Once Santorum began to campaign for President, his campaign website eventually made it up to the top spot, but as of September 2012, the [[Wikipedia]] [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Campaign_for_%22santorum%22_neologism page] about Savage's actions is currently the top result, followed by the Wikipedia page for Santorum. Savage's site has fallen to the third spot. Santorum's presidential campaign website has fallen to number four, since Santorum is no longer in the race.

On January 25, 2007, Google claimed to have modified their PageRank algorithm to lessen the likelihood of future Google bombs<ref>[http://boingboing.net/2007/01/26/bush_no_longer_miser.html Bush no longer "miserable failure": Google tackles googlebombs]</ref>

== Controversy ==

=== Tax Dodging ===

A report by Bloomberg News has Google setting up offshore banks accounts to avoid paying taxes on foreign profits. More than $3.9 billion have made it to [[Bermuda]] bank accounts over the last several years. Google has cut its effective tax rate abroad to just 2.4%. The practice is common and [[George Soros]] has been known to place his billions of dollars in Cayman Island banks. This costs the U.S. government more than $60 billion in revenue.<ref>[http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/After-news-of-Google-tax-dodges-Obama-raises-money-with-Google-execs-105513473.html#ixzz13LE2lg1F After news of Google tax dodges, Obama raises money with Google execs, Washington Examiner, October 22, 2010]</ref>

=== Privacy Concerns===

Google has been criticized by privacy activists and others. Recently, Google chief executive Eric Schmidt said, "We cannot even answer the most basic questions because we don’t know enough about you. That is the most important aspect of Google’s expansion." <ref>http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/c3e49548-088e-11dc-b11e-000b5df10621,dwp_uuid=e8477cc4-c820-11db-b0dc-000b5df10621.html</ref> Google has attempted to "remedy" this situation by storing search information, in effect, keeping tabs on people for two years after they search. This has led Google critic [[Daniel Brandt]] to create "Scroogle.org", which runs Google searches that users conduct through his organization's personal servers to prevent Google from being able to connect any personal information to the searchers.<ref>http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55935</ref>

=== Hypocrisy on Net neutrality ===

Neil Stevens of Redstate.com notes that Google says one thing and does another, tarnishing their reputation in the process. He lists where Google emphasizes support then does what they want in regards to shutting down access.<ref>[http://www.redstate.com/neil_stevens/2009/08/23/google-undermines-the-internet/ Google undermines the Internet, RedState.com, August 23, 2009]</ref>

=== Benghazi attack ===
After the [[Benghazi attack]], Hillary's State Department was in contact with Google. Hillary publicly claimed a controversial video was the source of a 'spontaneous' riot which proved to be a knowingly false statement. Google participated in the ruse by agreeing to block the video even after President Obama admitted it was a pre-planned terrorist attack. Copies of the email were forwarded to Denis McDonough, [[Cheryl Mills]], Patrick F Kennedy, Jake Sullivan and [[John Brennan]]. The email also contains contact information for Google CEO Afternoon (Larry) Page and [[YouTube]] CEO Salar Kamangar including their mobile and office phone numbers.<ref>[https://wikileaks.org/clinton-emails/emailid/16800 UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04841 Doc No. C05739829 STATE DEPT]. wikileaks.org</ref>

=== Relationship with the Hillary Clinton campaign ===
It was discovered Google was manipulating autocomplete [[search engine]] results to favor Hillary Clinton.<ref>[http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-06-10/must-see-video-how-google-manipulates-search-results-favor-hillary-clinton How Google Manipulates Search Results In Favor Of Hillary Clinton], by Tyler Durden, Jun 10, 2016. zerohedge.com</ref> Autocomplete returns the most popular trending search queries.
<ref>[http://freebeacon.com/politics/here-are-10-more-examples-of-google-search-results-favorable-to-hillary/ Here Are 10 More Examples of Google Search Results Favorable to Hillary], Tech giant accused of whitewashing autocomplete results, Brent Scher and Elizabeth Harrington, ''Washington Free Beacon'', June 10, 2016</ref> When a user types in ''Hillary Clinton cri'' to query about the criminal investigation into Mrs. Clinton for example, the Google results do not match at all popular trends on all other major search engines.<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PFxFRqNmXKg Did Google Manipulate Search for Hillary?], Matt Lieberman, SourceFed, Jun 9, 2016. UPDATE: Friday June 10. youtube.com</ref>

Supporters of [[Bernie Sanders]] complained throughout the 2016 primary season Google had inflated Hillary's delegate count by adding unelected [[Superdelegate]]s who by rule were to remain unpledged until the convention.<ref>[http://www.snopes.com/sanders-vs-clinton-delegate-count/ Failing Delegate Math], A popular [[meme]] detailing the actual delegate count between Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton in May 2016 is mostly accurate. Kim LaCapria, ''Snopes'', May 10, 2016</ref> Some in late primary states considered this another form of voter suppression.<ref>[http://thebernreport.com/superdelegate-system-has-been-used-as-a-form-of-voter-supression/ Superdelegate System Has Been Used as a Form of Voter Suppression], Posted by G.A. Casebeer, ''The Bern Report'', May 23, 2016</ref>

In an article entitled ''How Google Could Rig the 2016 Election'' in August 2015 ''Politico'' warned Google "can easily shift the voting preferences of undecided voters by 20 percent or more—up to 80 percent in some demographic groups—with virtually no one knowing they are being manipulated... In the United States, half of our presidential elections have been won by margins under 7.6 percent".<ref>[http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/08/how-google-could-rig-the-2016-election-121548 How Google Could Rig the 2016 Election], Google has the ability to drive millions of votes to a candidate with no one the wiser, By Robert Epstein, ''Politico'', August 19, 2015</ref>

Billionaire Eric Schmidt, [[CEO]] of Google's parent company Alphabet funded a startup company called The Groundwork to ensure Hillary has the engineering talent needed to win the election.<ref>[http://qz.com/520652/groundwork-eric-schmidt-startup-working-for-hillary-clinton-campaign/ THE GROUNDWORK The stealthy, Eric Schmidt-backed startup that’s working to put Hillary Clinton in the White House], Adam Pasick & Tim Fernholz, ''Quartz'', October 09, 2015. qz.com</ref> Schmidt and Google are both donors to the Clinton Foundation.

When Googling, '''Hillary Clinton's he-''' 
Google yielded,
*Hillary Clinton's headquarters
*Hillary Clinton's health plan
*Hillary Clinton's healthcare plan

Search results on Bing return the suggestions
*Hillary Clinton's health
*Hillary Clinton's health issues
*Hillary Clinton's health and weight

Search results on Yahoo return the suggestions
*Hillary Clinton's health problems
*Hillary Clinton's health
*Hillary Clinton's health issues

=== Relationship with the Obama Administration ===

Consumer Watchdog crafted a 32-page report detailing how Google has inappropriately benefited from its close ties to the Obama Administration. [[NASA]]'s Moffett Airfield has been turned into a taxpayer-subsidized private airport for Google executives used for corporate junkets. NASA's Moffett Airfield is a short distance from Google's world headquarters. The report details, ''"A growing fleet of jets and helicopters stand ready to ferry the company's top executives near or far, for business or pleasure, for vacations or schmoozing, including at least three wintertime trips to the [[Caribbean]] and a trip by Google chief executive Eric Schmidt to the Cannes Film Festival."'' <ref>[http://www.redorbit.com/news/technology/1983792/consumer_watchdog_sends_issas_oversight_committee_google_report_showing_inappropriate/index.html Consumer Watchdog Sends Issa's Oversight Committee Google Report Showing Inappropriate Relationship with Obama Administration, RedOrbit.com, January 24, 2011]</ref>

===Homosexual agenda===
As was already mentioned, Google has been actively blocking certain websites ans services which oppose sodomy (homosexuality). They also speak out in support of the homosexual movement, and promote search results which do the same.<ref>https://blog.google/topics/causes-community/transvoices</ref><ref>http://money.cnn.com/2012/07/08/technology/google-legalize-love/index.htm</ref><ref>https://winteryknight.com/2012/07/09/google-starts-wordlwide-campaign-to-legalize-gay-marriage-target-donates-to-gay-rights-groups</ref><ref>https://onetoday.google.com</ref> They also donate to some other organizations which do the same, as well and politicians who seek the same goal.

==International Agitation==

Google's Map service is responsible for escalating tensions between foreign nations by radically misleading versions of current borders.

Google has been labeled "professionally irresponsible" for disseminated [[Cambodia]] territory, which is embroiled in a bitter diplomatic row with Thailand over the demarcation of the frontier.<ref>[http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/02/05/cambodia-google-idUSSGE61406G20100205 Cambodia blasts Google map of disputed Thai border, Reuters, February 5, 2010]</ref>

[[Costa Rica]] took offense to Google Maps version showing that a specific area of encampment was on Nicaraguan soil. The dispute that had ensued over Google's version of the Nicaragua-Costa Rica border has became rather serious. So much so that the secretary general of the [[Organization of American States]] had to intervene.<ref>[http://news.cnet.com/8301-17852_3-20021977-71.html Envoy to solve latest Google Maps border dispute? CNET, November 5, 2010]</ref><ref>[http://spectregroup.wordpress.com/2010/11/12/google-maps-blamed-for-border-dispute/ GOOGLE MAPS BLAMED for BORDER DISPUTE, Spectre Footnotes, November 11, 2010]</ref>

Google Maps was busy fixing another error in its map program of a port city that reignited border tensions between [[Germany]] and The Netherlands.<ref>[http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/02/21/google-maps-slipup-sparks-diplomatic-crisis/ Google Maps Blunder Reignites Centuries Old Border Dispute, Fox News, February 21, 2011]</ref>

===Egyptian Uprising===

Google executive Wael Ghonim helped with protesting [[Egypt]]'s rule of [[Hosni Mubarak]], calling for him to step down and organizing protests. He was detained by authorities and released after two weeks. Ghonim is credited as being a major factor in sparking Egypt's uprising. Google CEO Eric Schmidt said that Google is "very, very proud" of Wael Ghonim.<ref>[http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/technology/2011/02/google-ceo-eric-schmidt-says-company-is-proud-of-wael-ghonim-in-egypt.html Google CEO Eric Schmidt says company is 'very proud' of Egypt's Wael Ghonim, LA Times, February 15, 2011]</ref>

=== Syrian Civil War ===

Newly released emails from [[Hillary Clinton]]'s State Department shows Google coordinating the overthrow of Bashar Assad in Syria.<ref>[http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/clinton-email-reveals-google-sought-overthrow-of-syrias-assad/article/2586300 Clinton email reveals: Google sought overthrow of Syria's Assad, Washington Examiner, March 19, 2016]</ref>

===Wi-Fi Snooping===

Google collected information from [[Wi-Fi]] networks as its street-view vans cruised neighborhoods around the globe, raising issues in more than 30 countries. The information Google gathered included e-mail fragments and passwords, alarming politicians and privacy and security advocates in Germany, France, and [[Spain]].<ref>[http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/07/22/national-security-google-wi-fi-spy-scandal/ Is National Security Behind Google's Wi-Fi Spying?, Fox News, July 23, 2010]</ref> It was noted that Google supplies special mapping and search products to the U.S. military and intelligence community, with some Google employees enjoying top secret clearance to work with the government. Google said it was "accidental" data gathering. Rep. Joe Barton of Texas, a senior [[Republican]] lawmaker, suggested that Google's data collection wasn't accidental and that it was "something to look at." Under the Democrat leadership, the [[FCC]] investigated but dropped further inquiry coincidently, just before a Google [[Democrat]] fundraiser was held. Many groups have been calling on Republican [[Darrell Issa]] to investigate Google's cozy relationship with the [[Obama administration]].<ref>[http://www.nlpc.org/stories/2010/11/10/congress-must-investigate-google-obama-ties Congress Must Investigate Google-Obama Ties, National Legal and Policy Center, November 10, 2010]</ref>

*France: Privacy watchdog CNIL awarded its largest fine to date with a judgement of $141,300 against Google in relation to snooping.<ref>[http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2011/03/21/general-broadcasting-amp-entertainment-eu-france-google-fined_8366482.html France fines Google for Street View privacy breach, Forbes, March 21, 2011]</ref>

==See also==
* [[Bing]]
* [[Censorability]]
* [[Censorship]]
* [[Duck Duck Go]]
* [[Evolutionist censorship]]
* [[Fairness Doctrine]]
* [[Liberal censorship]]
* [[Media censorship]]
* [[Tools of censorship]]
* [[Yahoo]]

== External links ==
* [http://www.google-watch.org/ Google Watch] (German)
* [http://www.scroogled.com/ A campaign to save the privacy of google-user] (now forwarded to Microsoft site)

== References ==
{{reflist|2}}

[[Category:United States Businesses]]
[[Category:Search Engines]]
[[Category:Google]]
[[Category:Websites]]
[[Category:Homosexual Agenda]]
[[Category:Internet]]
[[Category:Liberal Companies]]
[[Category:Anti Second Amendment]]

User:Dave Wilcox

2016-01-06T20:08:14Z

Dave Wilcox: self-description

I'm a long-time contributor at Wikipedia and other wikis, mostly copy-editing to fix XHTML, wiki syntax, English syntax, grammar, spelling, terminology and punctuation.

User talk:Dave Wilcox

2016-01-06T20:05:06Z

Dave Wilcox: created

—

User:Dave Wilcox

2016-01-06T20:03:08Z

Dave Wilcox: created page

—

Atheism and logical fallacies

2016-01-06T19:59:35Z

Dave Wilcox: copy-edit — syntax, punctuation

[[Image:Bahnsen.jpg‎|thumb|250px|Dr. [[Greg Bahnsen]] became known as "the man [[atheism|atheists]] fear most" due to [[Michael Martin]]'s [[Press release concerning Michael Martin pulling out of Martin-Bahnsen debate|cancellation]] of their scheduled debate.<ref>[http://simpleapologetics.com/thegreatdebate.html The Great Debate: Greg Bahnsen vs Gordon Stein]</ref>

During his debate with Dr. Gordon Stein, Bahnsen pointed out that the [[atheist worldview]] cannot account for the [[laws of logic]], but the Christian worldview can.<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j1hSx2evTGM Greg Bahnsen vs. Gordon Stein: The Great Debate (FULL)] </ref><ref>[http://veritasdomain.wordpress.com/2006/12/05/greg-bahnsen-vs-gordon-stein-the-great-debate/ "The Great Debate: Does God Exist?"]</ref> ]]
A common and legitimate criticism of the [[atheist worldview]] is that [[atheism]] is illogical and irrational (See also: [[Atheism and logic]] and [[Atheism and irrationality]])<ref>[http://carm.org/cut-atheism Atheism] by Matt Slick
*[http://www.iclnet.org/pub/resources/text/cri/cri-jrnl/web/crj0131a.html Putting the Atheist on the Defensive] by Kenneth R. Samples, Christian Research Institute Journal, Fall 1991, and Winter 1992, page 7.
*[http://www.faithstreet.com/onfaith/2012/03/21/atheists-dont-own-reason/10924 Atheists don’t own reason] by Tom Gilson
* [http://www.leaderu.com/truth/1truth11.html Why the Burden of Proof is on the Atheist] by Professor Ralph McInerny
* [http://www.leaderu.com/truth/3truth02.html Theism, Atheism, and Rationality] by [[Alvin Plantinga]]
*''[http://www.voxday.net/mart/TIA_free.pdf The Irrational atheist]: Dissecting the Unholy Trinity of Dawkins, Harris, and Hitchens by [[Vox Day]], Benbella Books, Dallas, TX, 2008'' , ISBN-10: 1933771364; ISBN-13: 978-1933771366
</ref>

Below are a number of logical fallacies that atheists commonly commit.

== Atheists and the fallacy of exclusion ==
''See also:'' [[Christian apologetics websites|Evidence for Christianity]] and [[Christian apologetics]] and [[Arguments for the existence of God]]

[[Fallacy of exclusion]] — The fallacy of exclusion is a logical fallacy where "Important evidence which would undermine an inductive argument is excluded from consideration. The requirement that all relevant information be included is called the 'principle of total evidence'."<ref>http://onegoodmove.org/fallacy/exclus.htm</ref>. See also: [[Atheism and critical thinking]]

==== Fallacy of exclusion and the denial that Jesus existed ====
[[Image:David Christ on the Cross.jpg|right|150px|thumb|[[Jesus Christ|Christ]] on the Cross by [[Jacques Louis David]].]]
''See also:'' [[Historicity of Jesus]] and [[Atheists and historical illiteracy]]

A classic use of the exclusion fallacy committed by many atheists is the denial that [[Jesus]] Christ ever existed.

Despite their being an abundance of historical evidence for [[Jesus Christ]] living in the first century, many atheists embarrassingly claim the Jesus never existed (see: [[Historicity of Jesus]]).

In an article titled ''Scholarly opinions on the Jesus Myth'', Christopher Price wrote concerning individuals who insist that Jesus Christ was merely a mythical figure:
{{cquote|I have often been asked why more academics do not take the time to respond to the Jesus Myth theory. After looking into this question, I discovered that most historians and New Testament scholars relevant to the topic have concluded that Jesus Mythers are beyond reason and therefore decide that they have better things to do with their time.<ref>[http://www.bede.org.uk/price1.htm ''Scholarly opinions on the Jesus Myth'' by Christopher Price</ref>}}

==== Unreasonable and inconsistent evidential standards ====
''See also:'' [[Atheism and irrationality]] and [[Atheist hypocrisy]]

Atheism, as defined by the ''Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy'', the ''Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy'', and other [[philosophy]] reference works, is the denial of the existence of [[God]].<ref>Multiple references:
*Smart, J. J. C. (August 8, 2011). [http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/atheism-agnosticism "Atheism and agnosticism"]. ''The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy'' (Spring 2013 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.). Retrieved July 17, 2014.
*Sarfati, Jonathan, Ph.D. (23 June 2007). [http://creation.com/atheism-is-more-rational "Atheism is more rational?"]. Retrieved July 17, 2014. See [[Creation Ministries International]], [[Jonathan Sarfati]].
*Day, Donn R. (2007). [http://www.thedivineconspiracy.org/athart3.htm "Atheism — etymology"]. Retrieved July 15, 2014.</ref> See also: [[Definition of atheism]] and [[Definitions of Atheist and Agnostic|Definitions of atheist and agnostic]] and [[Attempts to dilute the definition of atheism]]

Atheists demand proof and evidence for other worldviews, yet there is [[Attempts to dilute the definition of atheism|no proof and evidence]] that atheism is true. Also, despite the abundant [[Christian apologetics|evidence for Christianity]] and the lack of proof and evidence for atheism, atheist reject the truth of [[Christianity]]. Atheists refuse to go where the evidence clearly leads.

In addition, when atheist make claims related to [[Naturalism (philosophy)|naturalism]], make personal claims or make accusations against [[theism|theists]], they often employ lax evidential standards instead of employing rigorous evidential standards.<ref>
*[http://vimeo.com/102663614 Scientific Naturalism with J.P. Moreland, part 1]
*[http://vimeo.com/103277405 Scientific Naturalism with J.P. Moreland, part 2]
*[http://vimeo.com/103865278 Scientific Naturalism with J.P. Moreland, part 3]
*[http://vimeo.com/105068126 Scientific Naturalism with J.P. Moreland, part 4]</ref><ref>http://creation.com/a-designer-is-unscientificeven-if-all-the-evidence-supports-one</ref>

Professor [[Richard Lewontin]], a geneticist (and self-proclaimed Marxist), is one of the world’s leaders in [[evolution]]ary biology. He wrote a very revealing comment. It demonstrates the implicit philosophical bias against [[Genesis]] [[creation]] — regardless of whether or not the facts support it.<ref>[http://creation.com/amazing-admission-lewontin-quote Amazing admission]</ref>

[[File:113320508 2b86fdb94a.jpg|thumb|201px|left|The evolutionist and immunologist Dr. Scott Todd, an immunologist at [[Kansas State University]], perfectly epitomized the irrational evolutionary denial of the evidence for creation in his correspondence to the science journal ''Nature''. Dr. Scott wrote: "Even if all the data point to an [[Intelligent design|intelligent designer]], such an hypothesis is excluded from science because it is not [[naturalism|naturalistic]]".<ref>http://creation.com/a-designer-is-unscientificeven-if-all-the-evidence-supports-one</ref> ]]
Lewtontin wrote:
{{cquote|Our willingness to accept scientific claims that are against common sense is the key to an understanding of the real struggle between science and the supernatural. We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs, in spite of its failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories, because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism.

It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door.

The eminent Kant scholar Lewis Beck used to say that anyone who could believe in God could believe in anything. To appeal to an omnipotent deity is to allow that at any moment the regularities of nature may be ruptured, that Miracles may happen.<ref>[http://creation.com/amazing-admission-lewontin-quote Amazing admission]</ref>}}

The evolutionist and immunologist Dr. Scott Todd, an immunologist at [[Kansas State University]], perfectly epitomized the irrational evolutionary denial of the evidence for creation in his correspondence to the science journal ''Nature''. Dr. Scott wrote: "Even if all the data point to an [[Intelligent design|intelligent designer]], such an hypothesis is excluded from science because it is not [[naturalism|naturalistic]]".<ref>http://creation.com/a-designer-is-unscientificeven-if-all-the-evidence-supports-one</ref>

===== Atheist community requested to provide proof and evidence that atheism is true =====
[[File:Zero scale.jpg|thumbnail|right|200px|The popular YouTube Christian [[Shockofgod]] asked for proof and evidence that atheism is true. When atheism is weighed on the proof and evidence scale, it lacks evidential weight that it is a valid worldview. [[Christian apologetics website resources|Unlike Christianity]], there is no proof and evidence that atheism is true.]]

The popular Christian [[YouTube]] Christian [[Shockofgod]] likened atheism to a clown due to its hypocritical and foolish evidential standards.<ref>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RjS__cWr0Y0</ref> Shockofgod repeatedly asked the YouTube atheist community, "What proof and evidence do you have that atheism is accurate and correct?".

The YouTube atheist community became flustered and upset by his question.<ref>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RjS__cWr0Y0</ref> Shockofgod declared concerning their reaction to his question: "The hostility I am getting over this question is unbelievable...It's like..picture this...Atheism is a clown and it didn't know it. And then I got the clown and I walked it over...I forced it to look itself in the mirror. And it sees itself in all its red hair, big nose, big shoes, polka dot glory."<ref>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RjS__cWr0Y0</ref>

==== Atheism and extraordinary claims ====
Western Atheists often claim that "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence", yet they have no proof and evidence that the extraordinary claim of non-life becoming the first life solely through natural processes is true (See: [[Origin of life]]).<ref>
*[http://carm.org/extraordinary-claims-require-extraordinary-evidence Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence]
*[http://theosophical.wordpress.com/2011/05/17/2830/ Do Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary Evidence
*[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bRvJ-4WmJwk William Lane Craig debunks the atheist's "Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary Evidence?]</ref>

== Atheists and the genetic fallacy ==
[[Genetic fallacy]] — The genetic fallacy is a [[logical fallacy]] wherein an argument is based on the circumstances of something's origin or history when that origin or history has nothing to do with the present value of that something.<ref>[http://www.fallacyfiles.org/genefall.html Fallacy Files: Genetic Fallacy]</ref> The fallacy is thus a fallacy of relevance.

Rather than address the evidence offered against atheist arguments from various sources, atheists often lodge illegitimate and illogical genetic fallacy complaints such as the source is a Christian website, etc.

The [[ex-atheists|ex-atheist]] [[C.S. Lewis]] wrote about the illegitimate and illogical use of the genetic fallacy in his essay titled ''Bulverism''.<ref>[http://www.barking-moonbat.com/God_in_the_Dock.html God in the Dock — Bulverism]</ref>

=== Atheists, family/societal origin of religious belief and the genetic fallacy ===
''See also:'' [[Atheists, origin of religious belief and the genetic fallacy]]
[[File:800px-Georgetown University -351.JPG|thumbnail|left|200px|In 2012, a [[Georgetown University]] study was published indicating that only about 30 percent of those who grow up in an atheist household remain atheists as adults.<ref>http://www.christianpost.com/news/study-atheists-have-lowest-retention-rate-compared-to-religious-groups-78029/ Study: Atheists Have Lowest 'Retention Rate' Compared to Religious Groups</ref>]]
Atheists have given themselves pretentious monikers such as [[Freethought|freethinker]], rationalist and "[[Brights Movement|bright]]" (see also: [[Atheism and arrogance]] and [[Atheism and intelligence]] and [[Causes of atheism]]).

Like many atheists/agnostics, the [[New Atheism|new atheist]] [[Richard Dawkins]] often arrogantly claims that a person is an adherent of a particular religion purely due to their upbringing and environment.<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6mmskXXetcg Richard Dawkins — "What if you're wrong?"]</ref> These same atheists often complain that religion is purely the result of religious indoctrination while ignoring the existence of [[atheist indoctrination]].

This type fallacious thinking is an example of the [[genetic fallacy]] and ignores the existence of people changing their religion/worldview based on thoughtful consideration or due to divine intervention. For example, one of Christianity's greatest evangelist was the [[Saint Paul|Apostle Paul]] who was a zealous Jew who persecuted Christians until his experience with [[Jesus]] on the road to Damascus. In recent years, there are many reports of [[Islam|Muslims]] receiving dreams/visions and becoming Christians.<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QqHDUpIZO68 LAST DAYS! Muslims Coming To Jesus Through Visions!]</ref>

=== Atheism has a lower retention rate than other worldviews ===
''See also:'' [[Atheism has a lower retention rate compared to other worldviews]]

In 2012, a [[Georgetown University]] study was published indicating that only about 30 percent of those who grow up in an [[Atheism|atheist]] household remain atheists as adults.<ref>http://www.christianpost.com/news/study-atheists-have-lowest-retention-rate-compared-to-religious-groups-78029/ Study: Atheists Have Lowest 'Retention Rate' Compared to Religious Groups</ref> Similarly, according to recent research by the Pew Research Forum on Religion and Public Life, in the United States, a majority of those surveyed who were raised in atheist or [[agnosticism|agnostic]] households, or where there was no specific religious attachment, later chose to join a religious faith.<ref>http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/opinion/defectors-to-faith-mark-a-growing-trend/story-e6frg7ko-1225710667095</ref><ref>http://pewresearch.org/pubs/1204/religion-changes-affiliations-survey</ref>

==== Abandonment of atheism in atheistic communist countries ====
In addition, in atheistic [[Communism|Communist]] China, Christianity is experiencing explosive growth.<ref>http://www.millennialstar.org/christianity-exploding-in-china/</ref><ref>http://www.cbn.com/cbnnews/shows/cwn/2008/August/Christianity-Growing-in-China-/</ref> On July 3, 2005, the [[New York Times]] reported concerning many countries in the former [[Soviet Union]]: "A return to religion in [[Romania]] and the region's other formerly Communist countries has in many places outrun the speed at which the church can screen and train clergy..."<ref>http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/03/international/europe/03romania.html</ref>

===== Collapse of atheism in the former Soviet Union =====
See: [[Collapse of atheism in the former Soviet Union]]

=== Allegation that all religion is superstitious and the genetic fallacy ===
[[Image:2384975035_230a0eac30.jpg‎‎|thumb|right|170px|The [[Wall Street Journal]] reported: "A comprehensive new study released by Baylor University yesterday, shows ...that the irreligious and the members of more liberal Protestant denominations, far from being resistant to [[superstition]], tend to be much more likely to believe in the paranormal and in [[pseudoscience]] than evangelical Christians."<ref>http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122178219865054585.html</ref>]]
A commonly ploy of atheists is to attempt to disqualify biblical writers on the spurious ground that they were allegedly superstitious and therefore their testimony is unreliable. Yet, the irreligious population has significant problem with superstition (see: [[Irreligion and superstition]])<ref>http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122178219865054585.html</ref>

In September of 2008, the [[Wall Street Journal]] reported:
{{cquote|The reality is that the [[New Atheism|New Atheist]] campaign, by discouraging [[religion]], won't create a new group of intelligent, skeptical, enlightened beings. Far from it: It might actually encourage new levels of mass [[superstition]]. And that's not a conclusion to take on faith -- it's what the empirical data tell us.

"What Americans Really Believe," a comprehensive new study released by Baylor University yesterday, shows that [[Conservative Christianity|traditional Christian religion]] greatly decreases belief in everything from the efficacy of palm readers to the usefulness of [[astrology]]. It also shows that the irreligious and the members of more liberal Protestant denominations, far from being resistant to superstition, tend to be much more likely to believe in the paranormal and in [[pseudoscience]] than evangelical Christians....

This is not a new finding. In his 1983 book "The Whys of a Philosophical Scrivener," skeptic and science writer Martin Gardner cited the decline of traditional religious belief among the better educated as one of the causes for an increase in pseudoscience, cults and superstition. He referenced a 1980 study published in the magazine ''Skeptical Inquirer'' that showed irreligious college students to be by far the most likely to embrace paranormal beliefs, while born-again Christian college students were the least likely.<ref>http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122178219865054585.html</ref>}}

=== Atheists, the genetic fallacy and false accusations of mental illness ===
Atheists often falsely accuse theists (particularly those who criticize atheism) of mental illness<ref>[http://voxday.blogspot.com/2012/10/mailvox-continuing-education.html Mailvos — Continuing education]</ref>, despite the fact that atheists have higher incidences of depression and suicide (see: [[Atheism and suicide]] and [[Atheism and depression]] and [[Atheism and health]]).

Mental hospitals in the [[Soviet Union]] were used to persecute the religious.<ref>[http://www.roca.org/OA/5/5e.htm The Cry of the New Martyrs — Psychiatric “Treatment” of Christians]</ref>

===== Sigmund Freud's view of religion =====
[[Image:freud-thumb.jpg|left|200px|thumb|[[Sigmund Freud]] in his laboratory]]

''See also:'' [[Sigmund Freud's view of religion]]

[[Psychology|Psychologist]] [[Sigmund Freud]] was a proponent of atheism who argued that theism was detrimental to mental health.<ref name="christtoday">McGrath, Alister (February 28, 2005). [http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2005/003/21.36.html "The twilight of atheism"]. ''Christianity Today'' website. Retrieved on May 23, 2015.</ref> [[Oxford]] Professor [[Alister McGrath]], author of the book ''The Twilight of Atheism'', stated the following regarding Freud:
{{cquote|One of the most important criticisms that Sigmund Freud directed against religion was that it encourages unhealthy and dysfunctional outlooks on life. Having dismissed religion as an illusion, Freud went on to argue that it is a negative factor in personal development. At times, Freud's influence has been such that the elimination of a person's religious beliefs has been seen as a precondition for mental health.

Freud is now a fallen idol, the fall having been all the heavier for its postponement. There is now growing awareness of the importance of spirituality in health care, both as a positive factor in relation to well-being and as an issue to which patients have a right. The "Spirituality and Healing in Medicine" conference sponsored by [[Harvard]] Medical School in 1998 brought reports that 86 percent of Americans as a whole, 99 percent of family physicians, and 94 percent of HMO professionals believe that prayer, meditation, and other spiritual and religious practices exercise a major positive role within the healing process.<ref name="christtoday">http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2005/march/21.36.html</ref>}}
[[Image:Mayo-clinic-gondaoverview.jpg|thumb|right|200px|The [[Mayo Clinic]] found that that religious involvement and spirituality are associated with better physical health, mental health, health-related quality of life and other health outcomes.<ref name="Mayo">Mueller, Dr. Paul S. et al. (December 2001). [http://www.mayoclinicproceedings.org/article/S0025-6196%2811%2962799-7/fulltext "Religious involvement, spirituality, and medicine: implications for clinical practice"]. ''Mayo Clinic Proceedings'' vol. 76:12, pp. 1225-1235. Retrieved from Mayo Clinic Proceedings website on July 20, 2014.</ref>]]
The [[Mayo Clinic]] reported on December 11, 2001:
{{cquote|In an article also published in this issue of Mayo Clinic Proceedings, Mayo Clinic researchers reviewed published studies, meta-analyses, systematic reviews and subject reviews that examined the association between religious involvement and spirituality and physical health, mental health, health-related quality of life and other health outcomes.

The authors report a majority of the nearly 350 studies of physical health and 850 studies of mental health that have used religious and spiritual variables have found that religious involvement and spirituality are associated with better health outcomes.<ref name="Mayo"/>}}

Freud remains popular among [[postmodern]] literary academics, who use his [[anti-Christian]] pseudoscience as a basis for their own anti-Christianity and moral relativism, even though his theories were disproved decades ago.

== Atheists and the strawman fallacy ==
[[Strawman fallacy]] — Many atheists/[[evolution]]ist commonly use the strawman fallacy.<ref>[http://www.bethinking.org/atheism/understanding-the-new-atheism A New Breed of Atheism]</ref><ref>[http://creation.com/excellent-summary-of-so-many-strawman-arguments-used-by-anti-creationists ‘Excellent summary of so many strawman arguments used by anti-creationists’]</ref>

A straw man fallacy (or straw man argument) is a [[logical fallacy|fallacy]] which occurs by first incorrectly attributing an argument to someone, disproving this argument, then claiming that the person was wrong. It is a caricature of an opponent's [[argument]], a [[distortion]] which can easily be "knocked down", ''i.e.'', refuted, like a flimsy pile of straw.

A strawman argument is a weakened version of a debating opponent's argument, which lacks the potency of the opponent's actual argument. In debates attended by the unwary, a clever but unscrupulous debater can fool the audience into thinking that the opponent's position has been disproved. Knocking down the powerless straw man takes the place of an authentic contest with the real man.

== Atheists and the appeal to ridicule fallacy ==
''See also:'' [[Atheism and mockery]]

The [[Appeal to ridicule|appeal to ridicule]] fallacy, also known as the appeal to mockery and the horse laugh, is a [[logical fallacy|fallacy of relevance]]. It consists of mocking an opposing argument rather than considering it on the merits.
[[File:Prise de la Bastille.jpg|thumbnail|right|250px|On July 14, 1789, the [[Bastille]] was stormed by a mob and its prisoners freed, which is regarded as the start of the [[French Revolution]]. ]]

=== Appeal to ridicule fallacy and the history of French atheism ===
The [[Reign of Terror]] of the [[French Revolution]] established a state which was anti-[[Roman Catholicism]]/Christian in nature <ref>
*Tallet, Frank [https://books.google.com/books?id=aL4lsWdd-rAC&dq=&hl=en Religion, Society and Politics in France Since 1789], pp. 1-17 1991 Continuum International Publishing
*SPIELVOGEL, Jackson [http://books.google.com/books?id=ni4PSpOxb6MC&dq Western Civilization: Combined Volume] p. 549, 2005,Thomson Wadsworth
*Latreille, A. FRENCH REVOLUTION, New Catholic Encyclopedia v. 5, pp. 972–973 (Second Ed. 2002 Thompson/Gale) ISBN 0-7876-4004-2</ref> (anti-clerical [[deism]] and anti-religious atheism and played a significant role in the French Revolution<ref>[https://chnm.gmu.edu/revolution/chap7c.html War, Terror and Resistence]</ref><ref>''Forging Freedom: The Life of Cerf Berr of M Delsheim'' by Margaret R. O'Leary, iUniverse (June 1, 2012), pages 1-2</ref>), with the official ideology being the [[Cult of Reason]]; during this time thousands of believers were suppressed and executed by the [[guillotine]].<ref>Multiple references:
*{{cite web|url = http://books.google.com/books?id=bf3m7IVAa9gC&pg=PA461&dq=France+atheism+guillotine++Christians+executed&hl=en&sa=X&ei=l4lUUaTRBufG0QGe0IHACA&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=France%20atheism%20guillotine%20%20Christians%20executed&f=false|title =''Christianity: The eBook''|author=James Adair|publisher = JBE Online Books|year=2007|quote=Although the Civil Constitution called for religious liberty, which was extended to Jews as well as Christians, many revolutionaries pushed for the establishment of a new state religion, either the Cult of Reason (atheists) or the Cult of the Supreme Being (Deists). Changes to the calendar eliminated references to Christian holidays, and even the ancient seven-day week, and a list of officially recognized saints included such famous thinkers such as Socrates, Jesus, Marcus Aurelius, and Jean-Jacques Rousseau. A period of political persecution, often with religious overtones, broke out, known as the Reign of Terror. Thousands of people were executed by the guillotine, including many of the original leaders of the French Revolution.|pages=p. 461|accessdate = July 18, 2014}}
*{{cite web|url = http://books.google.com/books?id=9WkBAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA105&dq=Reign+of+Terror+atheism&hl=en&sa=X&ei=HoRUUcD0NeXX0gGNo4HIDQ&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=Reign%20of%20Terror%20atheism&f=false|title =''Memoirs of the Reign of George III. to the Session of Parliament ending A.D. 1793'', Volume 5|page=105|author=William Belsham|publisher = G.G. & J. Robinson|year=1801|quote=In allusion to the monstrous transactions of this portentous period, it has been eloquently and energetically observed, 'that the reign of atheism in France was avowed the reign of terror. In the full madness of their career, in the highest climax of their horrors, they shut up the temples of God, abolished His worship, and proclaimed death to be an eternal sleep:—in the very centre of Christendom, Revelation underwent a total eclipse, while atheism, performing on a darkened theatre its strange and fearful tragedy, confounded the first elements of society, blended every age, rank, and sex, indiscriminate proscription and massacre, and convulsed all Europe to its centre, that the imperishable memorial of these events might teach the last generations of mankind to consider religion as the pillar of society, the parent of social order, and the safe-guard of nations.' "It is wonderful that, amid the horrors of this dismal period, while 'the death dance of democratic revolution' was still in rapid movement, among the tears of affliction, and the cries of despair, 'the masque, the song, the theatric scene, the buffoon laughter, went on as regularly as in the gay hour of festive peace.'|pages=pp. 105-6|accessdate = July 18, 2014}}
*{{cite web|url = http://books.google.com/books?id=Tt5rqiCP1p8C&pg=PA57&dq=Reign+of+Terror+atheism&hl=en&sa=X&ei=HoRUUcD0NeXX0gGNo4HIDQ&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=Reign%20of%20Terror%20atheism&f=false|title =''Christianity, Islam, and Atheism: The Struggle for the Soul of the West''|author=William Kilpatrick|publisher = Ignatius Press|year=2012|quote=Actually, it's helpful to think in terms of two Enlightenments: the Enlightenment that cut itself off from God. The former led to the American Revolution, the Declaration of Independence, the abolition of slavery, and the civil rights movement. The latter led to the French Revolution, the Reign of Terror, the suppression of church by state, and the godless philosophies of Marx and Nietzsche and their offspring—National Socialism and communism. More recently the abandonment of God has led to the regime of cultural relativism that regards rights as arbitrary constructions. "It's this second Enlightenment tradition that Cardinal Ratzinger referred to when he wrote, 'The radical detachment of the Enlightenment philosophy from its roots ultimately leads it to dispense with man.' Actually this transition happened not 'ultimately' but almost immediately. The first instance occurred when Enlightenment worship of abstract 'reason' and 'liberty' degenerated quickly into the mass murders committed during the antireligious Reign of Terror in France. 'Liberty, what crimes are committed in your name', said Madam Rolande as she faced the statue of Liberty in the Place de la Revolution movements before her death at the guillotine. She was one of the early victims of a succession of secular systems based on rootless notions of 'liberty', 'equality', and 'reason'. "As many historians have pointed out, the atheist regimes of modern times are guilty of far more crimes than any committed in the name of religion. Communist governments alone were guilty of more than one hundred million murders, most of them committed against their own people.|pages=p. 57|accessdate = July 18, 2014}}</ref>

Kenneth Weinstein wrote in ''The American Interest'':
{{cquote|[[Charlie Hebdo]] has suddenly become the best-known example of a venerable French tradition: vituperative and unrelenting anti-religious satire, a provocative yet regular phenomenon of French public life. And now—not, alas, for the first time in that nation’s history—it has occasioned actual bloodshed.

Lampooning of the Bible, Christian doctrine, and clergy dates back almost 400 years to the “strong thinkers,” French learned skeptics in the 16th century. The primary target of anti-religious satire was France’s official religion, Catholicism, the Church’s ties to the state, and its control over education. And the ridiculing wit long directed against these targets would eventually play a central and crucial role in reducing the status and influence of religion in the French Republic...

The method of the forerunners of Charlie Hebdo—unrelenting and vicious satire of religion and clergy — proved so effective that France became a fully secular state, to such an extent that certain of its practices, laicité, would be regarded as unsettlingly alien and intolerant by most Americans.<ref>[Charlie Hebdo and France’s Irreligious Tradition Kenneth R. Weinstein]</ref>}}

The tactic of employing the ridicule instead of reason has been ineffective in stopping the rapid growth of [[Evangelicalism|evangelical Christianity]] in modern France.<ref>[http://www.csmonitor.com/World/2012/0712/In-a-France-suspicious-of-religion-evangelicalism-s-message-strikes-a-chord In a France suspicious of religion, evangelicalism's message strikes a chord]</ref>

On July 12, 2012, the ''Christian Science Monitor'' reported:
{{cquote|French scholars say, evangelicalism is likely the fastest-growing religion in [[France]] – defying all stereotypes about Europe’s most secular nation...

Daniel Liechti, vice-president of the French National Evangelical Council, found that since 1970, a new evangelical church has opened in France every 10 days. The number of churches increased from 769 to 2,068 last year.<ref>[http://www.csmonitor.com/World/2012/0712/In-a-France-suspicious-of-religion-evangelicalism-s-message-strikes-a-chord In a France suspicious of religion, evangelicalism's message strikes a chord]</ref>}}

Ridicule has been an ineffective tactic in modern France against the growth of Islam in France. The ''Washington Post'' declared in 2015: "One widely cited study by Pew from 2010 showed estimated that France had 4.7 million Muslims.<ref>[http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2015/01/09/map-frances-growing-muslim-population/ France’s growing Muslim population], Washington Post, January 9, 2015</ref> At 7.5 percent of the population, this meant France had the largest Muslim population in Western Europe. A 2010 estimate projects the Muslim population to be 10 percent of France's population by 2030.<ref>[http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2015/01/09/map-frances-growing-muslim-population/ France’s growing Muslim population], Washington Post, January 9, 2015</ref>

In April of 2010, the British academic and [[agnosticism|agnostic]] Eric Kauffmann declared that "the rate of secularisation has flattened to zero in most of [[Protestantism|Protestant]] [[Europe]] and [[France]]."<ref>[http://questionevolution.blogspot.com/2013/03/british-academic-eric-kaufmann-says.html British academic Eric Kaufmann says "the rate of secularisation has flattened to zero in most of Protestant Europe and France". Also, Kaufmann writes that secularism "appears exhausted and lacking in confidence"]</ref>
[[Image:Mbarber_b.jpg|thumbnail|right|200px|[[Matt Barber]] ]]

=== Modern American/British militant atheists and the use of ridicule ===
The [[New Atheism|new atheist]] Richard Dawkins declared to this fellow atheists:
{{cquote|I suspect that most of our regular readers here would agree that ridicule, of a humorous nature, is likely to be more effective than the sort of snuggling-up and head-patting that Jerry is attacking. I lately started to think that we need to go further: go beyond humorous ridicule, sharpen our barbs to a point where they really hurt.<ref>[https://shadowtolight.wordpress.com/2012/03/25/dawkins-mock-them-ridicule-them-in-public/ Dawkins: Mock them. Ridicule them! In public]</ref>}}

In his article, ''Mockery — the M.O. for atheists'', [[Matt Barber]] discusses an incident in which the [[Freedom From Religion Foundation]] encouraged atheists to engage in tactics which Barber considers to be acts of hateful mockery.<ref>[http://onenewsnow.com/perspectives/matt-barber/2014/05/08/mockery-the-mo-for-atheists ''Mockery — the M.O. for atheists''] by [[Matt Barber]]</ref>

Hateful mockery can backfire, especially when a group in the minority. Atheists are the least-trusted group in America (see: [[Views on Atheists|Views on atheists]]).

=== Atheists and the ad hominem abusive logical fallacy ===
[[File:PzMyers2.jpg|thumbnail|251px|left|The atheist biologist Massimo Pigliucci said of [[PZ Myers]] (pictured above), "one cannot conclude this parade without mentioning P.Z. Myers, who has risen to fame because of a blog where the level of nastiness (both by the host and by his readers) is rarely matched anywhere else on the Internet...".<ref>[http://ieet.org/index.php/IEET/more/piggliucci20150513 Reflections on the skeptic and atheist movements] By Massimo Pigliucci ''Scientia Salon'', Posted: May 13, 2015</ref>

(photo obtained from [http://www.flickr.com/photos/reuvenim/4426093513/ Flickr], see [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.0/deed.en license agreement]) ]]
''See also:'' [[Atheism and social/interpersonal intelligence|Atheism and social skills]] and [[Atheist factions]]

The [[Ad hominem|Ad Hominem]] Abusive, "also known as: personal abuse, personal attacks, abusive fallacy, damning the source, name calling, needling [form of], refutation by character" is "attacking the person making the argument, rather than the argument itself, when the attack on the person is completely irrelevant to the argument the person is making."<ref>[http://www.logicallyfallacious.com/index.php/logical-fallacies/10-ad-hominem-abusive Ad Hominem (Abusive)]</ref>

Atheists, particularly [[Militant atheism|militant atheists]]/anti-theists, have developed a reputation for bullying and engaging in profanity (See: [[Atheist bullying]] and [[Atheism and profanity]]).

In February of 2010, the news organization ''The Telegraph'' reported that the [[New Atheism|new atheist]] [[Richard Dawkins|Richard Dawkins]] was "embroiled in a bitter online battle over plans to rid his popular internet forum for atheists of foul language, insults and 'frivolous gossip'."<ref>[http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/religion/7322177/Richard-Dawkins-in-bitter-web-censorship-row-with-fellow-atheists.html Richard Dawkins in bitter web censorship row with fellow atheists: Professor Richard Dawkins is embroiled in a bitter online battle over plans to rid his popular internet forum for atheists of foul language, insults and “frivolous gossip], ''The Telegraph'' By Heidi Blake, 9:25AM GMT 26 Feb 2010</ref> Richard Dawkins [[Abrasiveness of Richard Dawkins|has a reputation for being abrasive]] so the behavior of his fans is not entirely surprising.

The atheist biologist Massimo Pigliucci said of the atheist [[PZ Myers]], "one cannot conclude this parade without mentioning P.Z. Myers, who has risen to fame because of a blog where the level of nastiness (both by the host and by his readers) is rarely matched anywhere else on the Internet...".<ref>[http://ieet.org/index.php/IEET/more/piggliucci20150513 Reflections on the skeptic and atheist movements] By Massimo Pigliucci ''Scientia Salon'', Posted: May 13, 2015</ref>

The University of Illinois psychologist Ryan Ritter published a study in the journal ''Social Psychological and Personality Science'' which showed among other things that atheists used profanity significantly more than Christians do on Twitter and that Christians had happier dispositions on Twitter.<ref>[http://spp.sagepub.com/content/early/2013/06/18/1948550613492345.full.pdf+html Happy Tweets: Christians Are Happier, More Socially Connected, and Less Analytical Than Atheists on Twitter Social Psychological and Personality Science 1948550613492345, first published on June 18, 2013]</ref>

Militant atheists/anti-atheists frequently accuse Christians of "lying for Jesus" despite the fact that historically atheists/evolutionists have frequently engaged in deception to promote their ideology (see: [[Atheism and deception]] and [[Atheist indoctrination]]).

See also:
*[[Evolution and Cases of Fraud, Hoaxes and Speculation]]
*[[Evolutionary indoctrination]].

== Scientism is self-refuting ==
''See also:'' [[List of atheist and agnostic pseudosciences]]

According to [[Discovery Institute]] [[scientism]] is an effort to use the methods of science to explain and control every part of human life, in other words, the misguided effort to apply science to areas outside its proper bounds.<ref name="Magician">{{cite web |title=The Magician's Twin: C. S. Lewis on Science, Scientism, and Society — Product Description|author=N/A |publisher=Discovery Institute Press |url=http://astore.amazon.com/discoveryinsti12-20/detail/1936599058 |accessdate= November 30, 2014 |quote=Beloved for his Narnian tales for children and his books of Christian apologetics for adults, best-selling author C.S. Lewis also was a prophetic critic of the growing power of scientism in modern society, the misguided effort to apply science to areas outside its proper bounds. In this wide-ranging book of essays, contemporary writers probe Lewis's warnings about the dehumanizing impact of scientism on ethics, politics, faith, reason, and science itself. Issues explored include Lewis's views on bioethics, eugenics, evolution, intelligent design, and what he called "scientocracy."}}</ref>

Scientism is self-refuting. [[William Lane Craig]] wrote: "Scientism tells us that we should not believe any proposition that cannot be scientifically proven. But what about that very proposition itself? It cannot itself be scientifically proven."<ref>[http://www.reasonablefaith.org/is-scientism-self-refuting Is scientism self-refuting?]</ref> The Christian apologist Jason Peterson similarly wrote: "Science has to presuppose the validity of mathematics, the laws of logic, and that our senses are valid. Science is unable to prove any of those things." <ref>[Christianity and Circular Reasoning] by Jason Petersen at Answers for Hope Ministry</ref> See also: [[Atheism and naturalistic intelligence]]

[[C.S. Lewis]] was sceptical and highly critical of scientism as an ideology which in his view was confused with science and which tried to [[Reductionism|reduce]] everything that we can learn scientifically to materialistic blind undirected causes.<ref>{{cite web |title=The Magician's Twin: C.S. Lewis and the Case against Scientism|publisher=DiscoveryInstitute|date= 18 Nov 2012|pages=02min:20sec|url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FPeyJvXU68k&list=PLF3F6DFC4CC901818|accessdate=27-April-2013}}</ref> He argued that scientism has the dehumanizing impact on [[ethics]], [[politics]], [[faith]], [[reason]], and science itself.<ref name="Magician"/>

== Atheists and the appeal to emotion logical fallacy ==
Many atheists use appeals to emotion/arguments from outrage when criticizing the Bible, especially when they are engaging in cultural imperialism.<ref>[http://www.tektonics.org/lp/outrage.php Bible critics and arguments from outrage] by [[JP Holding]]</ref><ref>[http://www.tribosblog.org/?p=1640 Atheists and arguments From outrage]</ref><ref>[http://www.epsociety.org/library/articles.asp?pid=45 Is Yahweh a Moral Monster? The New Atheists and Old Testament Ethics] by Paul Copan</ref>

== Atheism and the fallacy of equivocation ==
''See also:'' [[Atheism and equivocation]]

Equivocation is the use of word with multiple meanings, and then using a different meaning in the conclusion than in the premise.

For example: "The coach said we should eat light, so take your heavy coat off."

Equivocation is a [[logical fallacy]].<ref>[http://onegoodmove.org/fallacy/equiv.htm Equivocation]</ref>

=== Atheism, equivocation and the origin in the universe ===
[[Creation science|Creationist scientists]] demonstrate that the [[First Law of Thermodynamics|first law of thermodynamics]] and [[Second law of thermodynamics|second law of thermodynamics]] argue against an eternal [[universe]] and they also demonstrate that these laws point to the universe being supernaturally created. <ref>[http://godevidences.net/space/lawsofscience.php Evidences for God From Space—Laws of Science]</ref><ref>Thompson, Bert, [http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/2329 So Long, Eternal Universe; Hello Beginning, Hello End!], 2001 (Apologetics Press)</ref><ref>http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/AstroPhysicalSciences14.html</ref>

The [[CARM|Christian Apologetics and Research Ministy]] (CARM) points out that the prominent atheist [[Lawrence Krauss]] uses the [[logical fallacy]] of [[equivocation]] in his failed attempt to explain the origin of the universe.<ref>[https://carm.org/lawrence-krauss-atheist-definition-of-nothing Lawrence Krauss and the Atheist Definition of Nothing], by Robin Schumacher, edited by Matt Slick</ref>

CARM declares:
{{cquote|But I have a bone to pick with Dr. Krauss about his latest book, A Universe from Nothing, which has the subtitle Why there is something rather than nothing? Those having taken an intro to philosophy class will recognize that Krauss’ subtitle is a rendition of the most basic philosophical question of existence, which has been attributed to truth seekers such as Gottfried Leibniz who asked, “Why do we have something rather than nothing at all?”....

You would think that by the title of Krauss’ book he answers the question that Leibniz posed, but he doesn’t. Instead, he redefines what ‘nothing’ is. ‘Nothing’ to Dr. Krauss would be empty space or the quantum vacuum....

Dictionary.com defines ‘nothing’ as:
[[File:Aristotle.jpg|thumb|150px|[[Aristotle]]]]

:1. no thing; not anything; naught: to say nothing.
:2. no part, share, or trace (usually followed by of ): The house showed nothing of its former magnificence.
:3. something that is nonexistent.
:4. nonexistence; nothingness: The sound faded to nothing.

But, I think the best definition of ‘nothing’ is [[Aristotle]]’s: “Nothing is what rocks dream about.”

Why does Krauss attempt to redefine ‘nothing’? Because Krauss is an atheist and a fairly acerbic one at that. He not only doesn’t believe in God but also doesn’t like God. Here is the problem Krauss faces: If nothing is really nothing and we have something (the universe) from a real nothing, then it points to the universe having a beginning. And as Stephen Hawking has observed, “Many people do not like the idea that time has a beginning, probably because it smacks of divine intervention.”

The problem is that empty space and/or the quantum vacuum aren’t nothing; they’re something. So Krauss’ book does absolutely ‘nothing’ to answer Leibniz’s question and leaves his readers no better off than they were before where the issue of the origin of the universe is concerned.

All the scientific evidence points to the universe exploding out of true nothingness, but atheists like Krauss hate this truth.<ref>[https://carm.org/lawrence-krauss-atheist-definition-of-nothing Lawrence Krauss and the Atheist Definition of Nothing], by Robin Schumacher, edited by Matt Slick</ref>}}

=== Atheism, evolution and the equivocation fallacy ===
[[File:Safarti3.jpg|alt=evolutionary theory opponent|thumb|200px|left|[[Jonathan Sarfati]]]]
Since [[World War II]] a majority of the most prominent and vocal defenders of the [[evolution]]ary position which employs methodological naturalism have been atheists and [[agnosticism|agnostics]] (see also: [[Causes of evolutionary belief]])<ref>
* Dr. Don Batten, [http://creation.com/a-whos-who-of-evolutionists A ''Who’s Who'' of evolutionists] ''Creation'' 20(1):32, December 1997.
* [[Jonathan Sarfati]], Ph.D.,F.M., [http://www.creation.com/content/view/3830 ''Refuting Evolution'', Chapter 1, Facts and Bias]
</ref>

Critics of evolution state that many of today's proponents of the evolutionary position have diluted the meaning of the term "evolution" to the point where it defined as or the definition includes change over time in the [[Genetics|gene]] pool of a population over time through such processes as [[mutation]], natural selection, and [[genetic drift]].<ref>
* [http://www.arn.org/docs/anderson/an_appb.htm Glossary Definitions of "Evolution"]
* [http://members.iinet.net.au/~sejones/PoE/pe02phl4.html#lgclprblmsflcsqvctn Fallacies used to support evolution:Equivocation]
* [http://www.arn.org/docs/meyer/sm_meaningsofevolution.pdf The Meanings of Evolution]
* [[Jonathan Sarfati]],Ph.D., F.M. [http://www.creation.com/content/view/3262/ ''Refuting Evolution 2'', Chapter 1, Argument: Creationism is religion, not science]
</ref> Dr. [[Jonathan Sarfati]] of [[Creation Ministries International]] declares concerning the diluted definition of the word "evolution":
{{cquote|...many evolutionary propagandists are guilty of the deceitful practice of equivocation, that is, switching the meaning of a single word (evolution) part way through an argument. A common tactic, ‘bait-and-switch,’ is simply to produce examples of change over time, call this ‘evolution,’ then imply that the GTE [General Theory of Evolution] is thereby proven or even essential, and [[creation]] disproved. The PBS ''Evolution'' series and the ''[[Scientific American]]'' article are full of examples of this fallacy.<ref>[[Jonathan Sarfati]],Ph.D., F.M. [http://www.creation.com/content/view/3262/ ''Refuting Evolution 2'', Chapter 1, Argument: Creationism is religion, not science]</ref><ref>The PBS [http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/ evolution website] bills itself as "The most comprehensive evolutionary science resource on the Internet" but it is very poorly done.</ref>}}

== Atheism and the no true Scotsman fallacy ==
[[File:Shockofgod helmet.jpg|thumbnail|175px|right|Logo for the [[Shockofgod]] YouTube channel]]

''See also:'' [[Atheism and the no true Scotsman fallacy]]

The [[no true Scotsman]] fallacy is a [[logical fallacy]] and more specifically a special case of [[circular logic]]. It involves dismissing any counterexamples.<ref>[http://www.iep.utm.edu/fallacy/#NoTrueScotsman No True Scotsman Fallacy], ''Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy''</ref><ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5zzSqL--d_I The "No True Scotsman" Fallacy], Idea Channel — PBS Digital Studios</ref>

The ''Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy'' describes the no true Scotsman fallacy thusly:
{{cquote|No True Scotsman

This error is a kind of [[ad hoc rescue]] of one's generalization in which the reasoner re-characterizes the situation solely in order to escape refutation of the generalization.

Example:

Smith: All Scotsmen are loyal and brave.

Jones: But McDougal over there is a Scotsman, and he was arrested by his commanding officer for running from the enemy.

Smith: Well, if that's right, it just shows that McDougal wasn't a TRUE Scotsman.<ref>[http://www.iep.utm.edu/fallacy/#NoTrueScotsman No True Scotsman Fallacy], ''Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy''</ref>}}

The no true Scotsman Fallacy was coined by the English philosopher [[Anthony Flew]] in his book ''Thinking about Thinking — or do I sincerely want to be right?''. At the time Flew wrote the book he was an atheist, but he later became a [[theism|theist]].

=== Atheists claiming ex-atheists were never atheists ===
[[John W. Loftus]], one of the more prominent atheists in the atheist community. The [[ex-atheists|ex-atheist]] Darrin Rasberry used to write for the atheist John Loftus’ blog site ''Debunking Christianity''.<ref>[https://jamesbishopblog.wordpress.com/2015/05/21/arguments-for-gods-existence-leads-former-christ-hater-darrin-rasberry-to-christ-follower/ Arguments for God’s existence leads former “Christ-hater,” Darrin Rasberry, to Christ follower] by James Bishop</ref> After Rasberry became a Christian Loftus said that Rasberry “was never an atheist in the first place.”<ref>[https://jamesbishopblog.wordpress.com/2015/05/21/arguments-for-gods-existence-leads-former-christ-hater-darrin-rasberry-to-christ-follower/ Arguments for God’s existence leads former “Christ-hater,” Darrin Rasberry, to Christ follower] by James Bishop</ref>

The popular Christian YouTube video creator [[Shockofgod]] is an ex-atheist who left atheism because it [[Rebuttals to atheist arguments|lacks proof]] and evidence that it is true, while Christianity offers an [[Christian apologetics websites|abundant amount]] of evidential support.<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xhr88HZtkmE Ex-atheist shares why he left the lie of Atheism]</ref> His YouTube videos have cumulatively received over 25 million views since his YouTube channel's inception.<ref>http://www.youtube.com/user/shockofgod</ref> Shockofgod won over 70 Christianity vs. [[atheism]] debates.<ref>[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wiGgOQ_aEvY Atheism loses a shocking 71 debates in a row]</ref> There are atheists who claim that Shockofgod was never an atheist.<ref>
*[http://www.pakistan.tv/videos-shockofgod-calls-into-atheist-radio-show-%5B7bBE1bos6JU%5D.cfm Shockofgod calls into Atheist Radio show — Hilarious! Part 1 Video]
*[https://www.youtube.com/all_comments?v=ypO8qx9-5YA&lc=4KFJZ2armpynzsgytJFpDDS2iNJyXa1GFCN-U43FRa4 Shockofgod — "The Question That defeated The Atheist Show" — Debunked! by TheEducatedPrimate]
*[http://talkrational.org/showthread.php?t=28091 Forum thread at an atheism forum] post by user Ajje
</ref>

=== Atheists attempting to deny/minimize the roles of atheism/atheists in atheist atrocities ===
Atheist apologists commonly try to minimize or deny the role of atheism/atheists as far as atheist atrocites.<ref>[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FmrRC6zD4Zk Atheists Dodge Their History of Atrocities]</ref><ref>[http://creation.com/atheism Atheism]</ref><ref>[http://voxday.blogspot.com/2011/04/mailvox-no-true-atheist-defense.html Mailvox: the "No True Atheist" defense]</ref> It is as if no true atheist could be responsible for mass murder (see also: [[Atheism and Mass Murder|Atheism and mass murder]]).<ref>[http://voxday.blogspot.com/2011/04/mailvox-no-true-atheist-defense.html Mailvox: the "No True Atheist" defense]</ref>

Atheism was an integral tenet of Maxist-Lennism/[[Maoism|Maoist]]/[[Stalinism]] [[communism]] (see: [[Atheism and communism]]).

For more information, please see: [[Atheism and the no true Scotsman fallacy]]

=== Evolutionists who are atheists committing the no true Scottsman fallacy ===
''See also:'' [[Christianity and science]] and [[Atheism and the suppression of science]] and [[Creation science]]

[[Evolution]]ists who are atheists often claim that there are no real scientists who disbelieve evolution.<ref>[http://www.creationmoments.com/resources/blog/200902/many-scientists-do-not-accept-evolution Many Scientists Do Not Accept Evolution]</ref> In 2007, "[[Discovery Institute]]'s Center for Science and Culture...announced that over 700 scientists from around the world have now signed a statement expressing their skepticism about the contemporary theory of [[Charles Darwin|Darwinian]] evolution."<ref>http://www.discovery.org/a/2732</ref>

Since [[World War II]] a majority of the most prominent and vocal defenders of the evolutionary position which employs methodological naturalism have been [[Atheism|atheists]] and [[agnosticism|agnostics]] (see also: [[Causes of evolutionary belief]])<ref>
* Dr. Don Batten, [http://creation.com/a-whos-who-of-evolutionists A ''Who’s Who'' of evolutionists] ''Creation'' 20(1):32, December 1997.
* [[Jonathan Sarfati]], Ph.D.,F.M., [http://www.creation.com/content/view/3830 ''Refuting Evolution'', Chapter 1, Facts and Bias]
</ref>

=== Atheists, Adolf Hitler and the no true Scottsman fallacy ===
[[Atheists, Adolf Hitler and the no true Scottsman fallacy]]

== Transcendental argument for the non-existence of God ==
''See also:'' [[Transcendental argument for the non-existence of God]]

Dr. [[Greg Bahnsen]] became known as "the man [[atheism|atheists]] fear most" due to [[Michael Martin]]'s [[Press release concerning Michael Martin pulling out of Martin-Bahnsen debate|cancellation]] of their scheduled debate.<ref>[http://simpleapologetics.com/thegreatdebate.html The Great Debate: Greg Bahnsen vs Gordon Stein]</ref>

During his debate with Dr. Gordon Stein, Bahnsen pointed out that the [[atheist worldview]] cannot account for the [[laws of logic]], but the Christian worldview can.<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j1hSx2evTGM Greg Bahnsen vs. Gordon Stein: The Great Debate (FULL)] </ref><ref>[http://veritasdomain.wordpress.com/2006/12/05/greg-bahnsen-vs-gordon-stein-the-great-debate/ "The Great Debate: Does God Exist?"]</ref> See also: [[Transcendental argument for the non-existence of God]]

== See also ==
*[[Atheism and critical thinking]]
*[[Rebuttals to atheist arguments]]
*[[Christian apologetics websites|Evidence for Christianity]]
*[[Resources for leaving atheism and becoming a Christian]]
*[[Christian apologetics]]
*[[Atheism and reason]]

==References==
{{reflist|2}}

[[Category:Atheism]]

Atheism and logical fallacies

2016-01-06T19:55:39Z

Dave Wilcox: trimmed vertical white space

[[Image:Bahnsen.jpg‎|thumb|250px|Dr. [[Greg Bahnsen]] became known as "the man [[atheism|atheists]] fear most" due to [[Michael Martin]]'s [[Press release concerning Michael Martin pulling out of Martin-Bahnsen debate|cancellation]] of their scheduled debate.<ref>[http://simpleapologetics.com/thegreatdebate.html The Great Debate: Greg Bahnsen vs Gordon Stein]</ref>
 
During his debate with Dr. Gordon Stein, Bahnsen pointed out that the [[atheist worldview]] cannot account for the [[laws of logic]], but the Christian worldview can.<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j1hSx2evTGM Greg Bahnsen vs. Gordon Stein: The Great Debate (FULL)] </ref><ref>[http://veritasdomain.wordpress.com/2006/12/05/greg-bahnsen-vs-gordon-stein-the-great-debate/ "The Great Debate: Does God Exist?"]</ref> ]]
A common and legitimate criticism of the [[atheist worldview]] is that [[atheism]] is illogical and irrational (See also: [[Atheism and logic]] and [[Atheism and irrationality]])<ref>[http://carm.org/cut-atheism Atheism] by Matt Slick
*[http://www.iclnet.org/pub/resources/text/cri/cri-jrnl/web/crj0131a.html Putting the Atheist on the Defensive] by Kenneth R. Samples, Christian Research Institute Journal, Fall 1991, and Winter 1992, page 7.
*[http://www.faithstreet.com/onfaith/2012/03/21/atheists-dont-own-reason/10924 Atheists don’t own reason] by Tom Gilson
* [http://www.leaderu.com/truth/1truth11.html Why the Burden of Proof is on the Atheist] by Professor Ralph McInerny
* [http://www.leaderu.com/truth/3truth02.html Theism, Atheism, and Rationality] by [[Alvin Plantinga]]
*''[http://www.voxday.net/mart/TIA_free.pdf The Irrational atheist]: Dissecting the Unholy Trinity of Dawkins, Harris, and Hitchens by [[Vox Day]], Benbella Books, Dallas, TX, 2008'' , ISBN-10: 1933771364; ISBN-13: 978-1933771366
</ref>

Below are a number of logical fallacies that atheists commonly commit.

== Atheists and the fallacy of exclusion ==
''See also:'' [[Christian apologetics websites|Evidence for Christianity]] and [[Christian apologetics]] and [[Arguments for the existence of God]]

[[Fallacy of exclusion]] - The fallacy of exclusion is a logical fallacy where "Important evidence which would undermine an inductive argument is excluded from consideration. The requirement that all relevant information be included is called the 'principle of total evidence'."<ref>http://onegoodmove.org/fallacy/exclus.htm</ref>. See also: [[Atheism and critical thinking]]

==== Fallacy of exclusion and the denial that Jesus existed ====
[[Image:David Christ on the Cross.jpg|right|150px|thumb|[[Jesus Christ|Christ]] on the Cross by [[Jacques Louis David]].]]
''See also:'' [[Historicity of Jesus]] and [[Atheists and historical illiteracy]]

A classic use of the exclusion fallacy committed by many atheists is the denial that [[Jesus]] Christ ever existed.

Despite their being an abundance of historical evidence for [[Jesus Christ]] living in the first century, many atheists embarrassingly claim the Jesus never existed (see: [[Historicity of Jesus]]).

In an article entitled ''Scholarly opinions on the Jesus Myth'', Christopher Price wrote concerning individuals who insist that Jesus Christ was merely a mythical figure:
{{cquote|I have often been asked why more academics do not take the time to respond to the Jesus Myth theory. After looking into this question, I discovered that most historians and New Testament scholars relevant to the topic have concluded that Jesus Mythers are beyond reason and therefore decide that they have better things to do with their time.<ref>[http://www.bede.org.uk/price1.htm ''Scholarly opinions on the Jesus Myth'' by Christopher Price</ref>}}

==== Unreasonable and inconsistent evidential standards ====
''See also:'' [[Atheism and irrationality]] and [[Atheist hypocrisy]]

Atheism, as defined by the ''Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy'', the ''Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy'', and other [[philosophy]] reference works, is the denial of the existence of [[God]].<ref>Multiple references:
*Smart, J. J. C. (August 8, 2011). [http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/atheism-agnosticism "Atheism and agnosticism"]. ''The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy'' (Spring 2013 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.). Retrieved July 17, 2014.
*Sarfati, Jonathan, Ph.D. (23 June 2007). [http://creation.com/atheism-is-more-rational "Atheism is more rational?"]. Retrieved July 17, 2014. See [[Creation Ministries International]], [[Jonathan Sarfati]].
*Day, Donn R. (2007). [http://www.thedivineconspiracy.org/athart3.htm "Atheism - etymology"]. Retrieved July 15, 2014.</ref> See also: [[Definition of atheism]] and [[Definitions of Atheist and Agnostic|Definitions of atheist and agnostic]] and [[Attempts to dilute the definition of atheism]]

Atheists demand proof and evidence for other worldviews, yet there is [[Attempts to dilute the definition of atheism|no proof and evidence]] that atheism is true. Also, despite the abundant [[Christian apologetics|evidence for Christianity]] and the lack of proof and evidence for atheism, atheist reject the truth of [[Christianity]]. Atheists refuse to go where the evidence clearly leads.

In addition, when atheist make claims related to [[Naturalism (philosophy)|naturalism]], make personal claims or make accusations against [[theism|theists]], they often employ lax evidential standards instead of employing rigorous evidential standards.<ref>
*[http://vimeo.com/102663614 Scientific Naturalism with J.P. Moreland, part 1]
*[http://vimeo.com/103277405 Scientific Naturalism with J.P. Moreland, part 2]
*[http://vimeo.com/103865278 Scientific Naturalism with J.P. Moreland, part 3]
*[http://vimeo.com/105068126 Scientific Naturalism with J.P. Moreland, part 4]</ref><ref>http://creation.com/a-designer-is-unscientificeven-if-all-the-evidence-supports-one</ref>

Professor [[Richard Lewontin]], a geneticist (and self-proclaimed Marxist), is one of the world’s leaders in [[evolution]]ary biology. He wrote a very revealing comment. It demonstrates the implicit philosophical bias against [[Genesis]] [[creation]] — regardless of whether or not the facts support it.<ref>[http://creation.com/amazing-admission-lewontin-quote Amazing admission]</ref>

[[File:113320508 2b86fdb94a.jpg|thumb|201px|left|The evolutionist and immunologist Dr. Scott Todd, an immunologist at [[Kansas State University]], perfectly epitomized the irrational evolutionary denial of the evidence for creation in his correspondence to the science journal ''Nature''. Dr. Scott wrote: "Even if all the data point to an [[Intelligent design|intelligent designer]], such an hypothesis is excluded from science because it is not [[naturalism|naturalistic]]".<ref>http://creation.com/a-designer-is-unscientificeven-if-all-the-evidence-supports-one</ref> ]]
Lewtontin wrote:
{{cquote|Our willingness to accept scientific claims that are against common sense is the key to an understanding of the real struggle between science and the supernatural. We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs, in spite of its failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories, because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism.

It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door.

The eminent Kant scholar Lewis Beck used to say that anyone who could believe in God could believe in anything. To appeal to an omnipotent deity is to allow that at any moment the regularities of nature may be ruptured, that Miracles may happen.<ref>[http://creation.com/amazing-admission-lewontin-quote Amazing admission]</ref>}}

The evolutionist and immunologist Dr. Scott Todd, an immunologist at [[Kansas State University]], perfectly epitomized the irrational evolutionary denial of the evidence for creation in his correspondence to the science journal ''Nature''. Dr. Scott wrote: "Even if all the data point to an [[Intelligent design|intelligent designer]], such an hypothesis is excluded from science because it is not [[naturalism|naturalistic]]".<ref>http://creation.com/a-designer-is-unscientificeven-if-all-the-evidence-supports-one</ref>

===== Atheist community requested to provide proof and evidence that atheism is true =====
[[File:Zero scale.jpg|thumbnail|right|200px|The popular YouTube Christian [[Shockofgod]] asked for proof and evidence that atheism is true. When atheism is weighed on the proof and evidence scale, it lacks evidential weight that it is a valid worldview. [[Christian apologetics website resources|Unlike Christianity]], there is no proof and evidence that atheism is true.]]

The popular Christian [[YouTube]] Christian [[Shockofgod]] likened atheism to a clown due to its hypocritical and foolish evidential standards.<ref>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RjS__cWr0Y0</ref> Shockofgod repeatedly asked the YouTube atheist community, "What proof and evidence do you have that atheism is accurate and correct?".

The YouTube atheist community became flustered and upset by his question.<ref>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RjS__cWr0Y0</ref> Shockofgod declared concerning their reaction to his question: "The hostility I am getting over this question is unbelievable...It's like..picture this...Atheism is a clown and it didn't know it. And then I got the clown and I walked it over...I forced it to look itself in the mirror. And it sees itself in all its red hair, big nose, big shoes, polka dot glory."<ref>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RjS__cWr0Y0</ref>

==== Atheism and extraordinary claims ====
Western Atheists often claim that "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence", yet they have no proof and evidence that the extraordinary claim of non-life becoming the first life solely through natural processes is true (See: [[Origin of life]]).<ref>
*[http://carm.org/extraordinary-claims-require-extraordinary-evidence Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence]
*[http://theosophical.wordpress.com/2011/05/17/2830/ Do Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary Evidence
*[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bRvJ-4WmJwk William Lane Craig debunks the atheist's "Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary Evidence?]</ref>

== Atheists and the genetic fallacy ==
[[Genetic fallacy]] - The genetic fallacy is a [[logical fallacy]] wherein an argument is based on the circumstances of something's origin or history when that origin or history has nothing to do with the present value of that something.<ref>[http://www.fallacyfiles.org/genefall.html Fallacy Files: Genetic Fallacy]</ref> The fallacy is thus a fallacy of relevance.

Rather than address the evidence offered against atheist arguments from various sources, atheists often lodge illegitimate and illogical genetic fallacy complaints such as the source is a Christian website, etc.

The [[ex-atheists|ex-atheist]] [[C.S. Lewis]] wrote about the illegitimate and illogical use of the genetic fallacy in his essay entitled ''Bulverism''.<ref>[http://www.barking-moonbat.com/God_in_the_Dock.html God in the Dock - Bulverism]</ref>

=== Atheists, family/societal origin of religious belief and the genetic fallacy ===
''See also:'' [[Atheists, origin of religious belief and the genetic fallacy]]
[[File:800px-Georgetown University -351.JPG|thumbnail|left|200px|In 2012, a [[Georgetown University]] study was published indicating that only about 30 percent of those who grow up in an atheist household remain atheists as adults.<ref>http://www.christianpost.com/news/study-atheists-have-lowest-retention-rate-compared-to-religious-groups-78029/ Study: Atheists Have Lowest 'Retention Rate' Compared to Religious Groups</ref>]]
Atheists have given themselves pretentious monikers such as [[Freethought|freethinker]], rationalist and "[[Brights Movement|bright]]" (see also: [[Atheism and arrogance]] and [[Atheism and intelligence]] and [[Causes of atheism]]).

Like many atheists/agnostics, the [[New Atheism|new atheist]] [[Richard Dawkins]] often arrogantly claims that a person is an adherent of a particular religion purely due to their upbringing and environment.<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6mmskXXetcg Richard Dawkins - "What if you're wrong?"]</ref> These same atheists often complain that religion is purely the result of religious indoctrination while ignoring the existence of [[atheist indoctrination]].

This type fallacious thinking is an example of the [[genetic fallacy]] and ignores the existence of people changing their religion/worldview based on thoughtful consideration or due to divine intervention. For example, one of Christianity's greatest evangelist was the [[Saint Paul|Apostle Paul]] who was a zealous Jew who persecuted Christians until his experience with [[Jesus]] on the road to Damascus. In recent years, there are many reports of [[Islam|Muslims]] receiving dreams/visions and becoming Christians.<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QqHDUpIZO68 LAST DAYS! Muslims Coming To Jesus Through Visions!]</ref>

=== Atheism has a lower retention rate than other worldviews ===
''See also:'' [[Atheism has a lower retention rate compared to other worldviews]]

In 2012, a [[Georgetown University]] study was published indicating that only about 30 percent of those who grow up in an [[Atheism|atheist]] household remain atheists as adults.<ref>http://www.christianpost.com/news/study-atheists-have-lowest-retention-rate-compared-to-religious-groups-78029/ Study: Atheists Have Lowest 'Retention Rate' Compared to Religious Groups</ref> Similarly, according to recent research by the Pew Research Forum on Religion and Public Life, in the United States, a majority of those surveyed who were raised in atheist or [[agnosticism|agnostic]] households, or where there was no specific religious attachment, later chose to join a religious faith.<ref>http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/opinion/defectors-to-faith-mark-a-growing-trend/story-e6frg7ko-1225710667095</ref><ref>http://pewresearch.org/pubs/1204/religion-changes-affiliations-survey</ref>

==== Abandonment of atheism in atheistic communist countries ====
In addition, in atheistic [[Communism|Communist]] China, Christianity is experiencing explosive growth.<ref>http://www.millennialstar.org/christianity-exploding-in-china/</ref><ref>http://www.cbn.com/cbnnews/shows/cwn/2008/August/Christianity-Growing-in-China-/</ref> On July 3, 2005, the [[New York Times]] reported concerning many countries in the former [[Soviet Union]]: "A return to religion in [[Romania]] and the region's other formerly Communist countries has in many places outrun the speed at which the church can screen and train clergy..."<ref>http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/03/international/europe/03romania.html</ref>

===== Collapse of atheism in the former Soviet Union =====
See: [[Collapse of atheism in the former Soviet Union]]

=== Allegation that all religion is superstitious and the genetic fallacy ===
[[Image:2384975035_230a0eac30.jpg‎‎|thumb|right|170px|The [[Wall Street Journal]] reported: "A comprehensive new study released by Baylor University yesterday, shows ...that the irreligious and the members of more liberal Protestant denominations, far from being resistant to [[superstition]], tend to be much more likely to believe in the paranormal and in [[pseudoscience]] than evangelical Christians."<ref>http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122178219865054585.html</ref>]]
A commonly ploy of atheists is to attempt to disqualify biblical writers on the spurious ground that they were allegedly superstitious and therefore their testimony is unreliable. Yet, the irreligious population has significant problem with superstition (see: [[Irreligion and superstition]])<ref>http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122178219865054585.html</ref>

In September of 2008, the [[Wall Street Journal]] reported:
{{cquote|The reality is that the [[New Atheism|New Atheist]] campaign, by discouraging [[religion]], won't create a new group of intelligent, skeptical, enlightened beings. Far from it: It might actually encourage new levels of mass [[superstition]]. And that's not a conclusion to take on faith -- it's what the empirical data tell us.

"What Americans Really Believe," a comprehensive new study released by Baylor University yesterday, shows that [[Conservative Christianity|traditional Christian religion]] greatly decreases belief in everything from the efficacy of palm readers to the usefulness of [[astrology]]. It also shows that the irreligious and the members of more liberal Protestant denominations, far from being resistant to superstition, tend to be much more likely to believe in the paranormal and in [[pseudoscience]] than evangelical Christians....

This is not a new finding. In his 1983 book "The Whys of a Philosophical Scrivener," skeptic and science writer Martin Gardner cited the decline of traditional religious belief among the better educated as one of the causes for an increase in pseudoscience, cults and superstition. He referenced a 1980 study published in the magazine ''Skeptical Inquirer'' that showed irreligious college students to be by far the most likely to embrace paranormal beliefs, while born-again Christian college students were the least likely.<ref>http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122178219865054585.html</ref>}}

=== Atheists, the genetic fallacy and false accusations of mental illness ===
Atheists often falsely accuse theists (particularly those who criticize atheism) of mental illness<ref>[http://voxday.blogspot.com/2012/10/mailvox-continuing-education.html Mailvos - Continuing education]</ref>, despite the fact that atheists have higher incidences of depression and suicide (see: [[Atheism and suicide]] and [[Atheism and depression]] and [[Atheism and health]]).

Mental hospitals in the [[Soviet Union]] were used to persecute the religious.<ref>[http://www.roca.org/OA/5/5e.htm The Cry of the New Martyrs - Psychiatric “Treatment” of Christians]</ref>

===== Sigmund Freud's view of religion =====
[[Image:freud-thumb.jpg|left|200px|thumb|[[Sigmund Freud]] in his laboratory]]

''See also:'' [[Sigmund Freud's view of religion]]

[[Psychology|Psychologist]] [[Sigmund Freud]] was a proponent of atheism who argued that theism was detrimental to mental health.<ref name="christtoday">McGrath, Alister (February 28, 2005). [http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2005/003/21.36.html "The twilight of atheism"]. ''Christianity Today'' website. Retrieved on May 23, 2015.</ref> [[Oxford]] Professor [[Alister McGrath]], author of the book ''The Twilight of Atheism'', stated the following regarding Freud:
{{cquote|One of the most important criticisms that Sigmund Freud directed against religion was that it encourages unhealthy and dysfunctional outlooks on life. Having dismissed religion as an illusion, Freud went on to argue that it is a negative factor in personal development. At times, Freud's influence has been such that the elimination of a person's religious beliefs has been seen as a precondition for mental health.

Freud is now a fallen idol, the fall having been all the heavier for its postponement. There is now growing awareness of the importance of spirituality in health care, both as a positive factor in relation to well-being and as an issue to which patients have a right. The "Spirituality and Healing in Medicine" conference sponsored by [[Harvard]] Medical School in 1998 brought reports that 86 percent of Americans as a whole, 99 percent of family physicians, and 94 percent of HMO professionals believe that prayer, meditation, and other spiritual and religious practices exercise a major positive role within the healing process.<ref name="christtoday">http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2005/march/21.36.html</ref>}}
[[Image:Mayo-clinic-gondaoverview.jpg|thumb|right|200px|The [[Mayo Clinic]] found that that religious involvement and spirituality are associated with better physical health, mental health, health-related quality of life and other health outcomes.<ref name="Mayo">Mueller, Dr. Paul S. et al. (December 2001). [http://www.mayoclinicproceedings.org/article/S0025-6196%2811%2962799-7/fulltext "Religious involvement, spirituality, and medicine: implications for clinical practice"]. ''Mayo Clinic Proceedings'' vol. 76:12, pp. 1225-1235. Retrieved from Mayo Clinic Proceedings website on July 20, 2014.</ref>]]
The [[Mayo Clinic]] reported on December 11, 2001:
{{cquote|In an article also published in this issue of Mayo Clinic Proceedings, Mayo Clinic researchers reviewed published studies, meta-analyses, systematic reviews and subject reviews that examined the association between religious involvement and spirituality and physical health, mental health, health-related quality of life and other health outcomes.

The authors report a majority of the nearly 350 studies of physical health and 850 studies of mental health that have used religious and spiritual variables have found that religious involvement and spirituality are associated with better health outcomes.<ref name="Mayo"/>}}

Freud remains popular among [[postmodern]] literary academics, who use his [[anti-Christian]] pseudoscience as a basis for their own anti-Christianity and moral relativism, even though his theories were disproved decades ago.

== Atheists and the strawman fallacy ==
[[Strawman fallacy]] - Many atheists/[[evolution]]ist commonly use the strawman fallacy.<ref>[http://www.bethinking.org/atheism/understanding-the-new-atheism A New Breed of Atheism]</ref><ref>[http://creation.com/excellent-summary-of-so-many-strawman-arguments-used-by-anti-creationists ‘Excellent summary of so many strawman arguments used by anti-creationists’]</ref>

A straw man fallacy (or straw man argument) is a [[logical fallacy|fallacy]] which occurs by first incorrectly attributing an argument to someone, disproving this argument, then claiming that the person was wrong. It is a caricature of an opponent's [[argument]], a [[distortion]] which can easily be "knocked down" (i.e., refuted) like a flimsy pile of straw.

A strawman argument is a weakened version of a debating opponent's argument, which lacks the potency of the opponent's actual argument. In debates attended by the unwary, a clever but unscrupulous debater can fool the audience into thinking that the opponent's position has been disproved. Knocking down the powerless straw man takes the place of an authentic contest with the real man.

== Atheists and the appeal to ridicule fallacy ==
''See also:'' [[Atheism and mockery]]

The [[Appeal to ridicule|appeal to ridicule]] fallacy, also known as the appeal to mockery and the horse laugh, is a [[logical fallacy|fallacy of relevance]]. It consists of mocking an opposing argument rather than considering it on the merits.
[[File:Prise de la Bastille.jpg|thumbnail|right|250px|On July 14, 1789, the [[Bastille]] was stormed by a mob and its prisoners freed, which is regarded as the start of the [[French Revolution]]. ]]

=== Appeal to ridicule fallacy and the history of French atheism ===
The [[Reign of Terror]] of the [[French Revolution]] established a state which was anti-[[Roman Catholicism]]/Christian in nature <ref>
*Tallet, Frank [https://books.google.com/books?id=aL4lsWdd-rAC&dq=&hl=en Religion, Society and Politics in France Since 1789], pp. 1-17 1991 Continuum International Publishing
*SPIELVOGEL, Jackson [http://books.google.com/books?id=ni4PSpOxb6MC&dq Western Civilization: Combined Volume] p. 549, 2005,Thomson Wadsworth
*Latreille, A. FRENCH REVOLUTION, New Catholic Encyclopedia v. 5, pp. 972–973 (Second Ed. 2002 Thompson/Gale) ISBN 0-7876-4004-2</ref> (anti-clerical [[deism]] and anti-religious atheism and played a significant role in the French Revolution<ref>[https://chnm.gmu.edu/revolution/chap7c.html War, Terror and Resistence]</ref><ref>''Forging Freedom: The Life of Cerf Berr of M Delsheim'' by Margaret R. O'Leary, iUniverse (June 1, 2012), pages 1-2</ref>), with the official ideology being the [[Cult of Reason]]; during this time thousands of believers were suppressed and executed by the [[guillotine]].<ref>Multiple references:
*{{cite web|url = http://books.google.com/books?id=bf3m7IVAa9gC&pg=PA461&dq=France+atheism+guillotine++Christians+executed&hl=en&sa=X&ei=l4lUUaTRBufG0QGe0IHACA&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=France%20atheism%20guillotine%20%20Christians%20executed&f=false|title =''Christianity: The eBook''|author=James Adair|publisher = JBE Online Books|year=2007|quote=Although the Civil Constitution called for religious liberty, which was extended to Jews as well as Christians, many revolutionaries pushed for the establishment of a new state religion, either the Cult of Reason (atheists) or the Cult of the Supreme Being (Deists). Changes to the calendar eliminated references to Christian holidays, and even the ancient seven-day week, and a list of officially recognized saints included such famous thinkers such as Socrates, Jesus, Marcus Aurelius, and Jean-Jacques Rousseau. A period of political persecution, often with religious overtones, broke out, known as the Reign of Terror. Thousands of people were executed by the guillotine, including many of the original leaders of the French Revolution.|pages=p. 461|accessdate = July 18, 2014}}
*{{cite web|url = http://books.google.com/books?id=9WkBAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA105&dq=Reign+of+Terror+atheism&hl=en&sa=X&ei=HoRUUcD0NeXX0gGNo4HIDQ&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=Reign%20of%20Terror%20atheism&f=false|title =''Memoirs of the Reign of George III. to the Session of Parliament ending A.D. 1793'', Volume 5|page=105|author=William Belsham|publisher = G.G. & J. Robinson|year=1801|quote=In allusion to the monstrous transactions of this portentous period, it has been eloquently and energetically observed, 'that the reign of atheism in France was avowed the reign of terror. In the full madness of their career, in the highest climax of their horrors, they shut up the temples of God, abolished His worship, and proclaimed death to be an eternal sleep:—in the very centre of Christendom, Revelation underwent a total eclipse, while atheism, performing on a darkened theatre its strange and fearful tragedy, confounded the first elements of society, blended every age, rank, and sex, indiscriminate proscription and massacre, and convulsed all Europe to its centre, that the imperishable memorial of these events might teach the last generations of mankind to consider religion as the pillar of society, the parent of social order, and the safe-guard of nations.' "It is wonderful that, amid the horrors of this dismal period, while 'the death dance of democratic revolution' was still in rapid movement, among the tears of affliction, and the cries of despair, 'the masque, the song, the theatric scene, the buffoon laughter, went on as regularly as in the gay hour of festive peace.'|pages=pp. 105-6|accessdate = July 18, 2014}}
*{{cite web|url = http://books.google.com/books?id=Tt5rqiCP1p8C&pg=PA57&dq=Reign+of+Terror+atheism&hl=en&sa=X&ei=HoRUUcD0NeXX0gGNo4HIDQ&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=Reign%20of%20Terror%20atheism&f=false|title =''Christianity, Islam, and Atheism: The Struggle for the Soul of the West''|author=William Kilpatrick|publisher = Ignatius Press|year=2012|quote=Actually, it's helpful to think in terms of two Enlightenments: the Enlightenment that cut itself off from God. The former led to the American Revolution, the Declaration of Independence, the abolition of slavery, and the civil rights movement. The latter led to the French Revolution, the Reign of Terror, the suppression of church by state, and the godless philosophies of Marx and Nietzsche and their offspring—National Socialism and communism. More recently the abandonment of God has led to the regime of cultural relativism that regards rights as arbitrary constructions. "It's this second Enlightenment tradition that Cardinal Ratzinger referred to when he wrote, 'The radical detachment of the Enlightenment philosophy from its roots ultimately leads it to dispense with man.' Actually this transition happened not 'ultimately' but almost immediately. The first instance occurred when Enlightenment worship of abstract 'reason' and 'liberty' degenerated quickly into the mass murders committed during the antireligious Reign of Terror in France. 'Liberty, what crimes are committed in your name', said Madam Rolande as she faced the statue of Liberty in the Place de la Revolution movements before her death at the guillotine. She was one of the early victims of a succession of secular systems based on rootless notions of 'liberty', 'equality', and 'reason'. "As many historians have pointed out, the atheist regimes of modern times are guilty of far more crimes than any committed in the name of religion. Communist governments alone were guilty of more than one hundred million murders, most of them committed against their own people.|pages=p. 57|accessdate = July 18, 2014}}</ref>

Kenneth Weinstein wrote in ''The American Interest'':
{{cquote|[[Charlie Hebdo]] has suddenly become the best-known example of a venerable French tradition: vituperative and unrelenting anti-religious satire, a provocative yet regular phenomenon of French public life. And now—not, alas, for the first time in that nation’s history—it has occasioned actual bloodshed.

Lampooning of the Bible, Christian doctrine, and clergy dates back almost 400 years to the “strong thinkers,” French learned skeptics in the 16th century. The primary target of anti-religious satire was France’s official religion, Catholicism, the Church’s ties to the state, and its control over education. And the ridiculing wit long directed against these targets would eventually play a central and crucial role in reducing the status and influence of religion in the French Republic...

The method of the forerunners of Charlie Hebdo—unrelenting and vicious satire of religion and clergy — proved so effective that France became a fully secular state, to such an extent that certain of its practices, laicité, would be regarded as unsettlingly alien and intolerant by most Americans.<ref>[Charlie Hebdo and France’s Irreligious Tradition Kenneth R. Weinstein]</ref>}}

The tactic of employing the ridicule instead of reason has been ineffective in stopping the rapid growth of [[Evangelicalism|evangelical Christianity]] in modern France.<ref>[http://www.csmonitor.com/World/2012/0712/In-a-France-suspicious-of-religion-evangelicalism-s-message-strikes-a-chord In a France suspicious of religion, evangelicalism's message strikes a chord]</ref>

On July 12, 2012, the ''Christian Science Monitor'' reported:
{{cquote|French scholars say, evangelicalism is likely the fastest-growing religion in [[France]] – defying all stereotypes about Europe’s most secular nation...

Daniel Liechti, vice-president of the French National Evangelical Council, found that since 1970, a new evangelical church has opened in France every 10 days. The number of churches increased from 769 to 2,068 last year.<ref>[http://www.csmonitor.com/World/2012/0712/In-a-France-suspicious-of-religion-evangelicalism-s-message-strikes-a-chord In a France suspicious of religion, evangelicalism's message strikes a chord]</ref>}}

Ridicule has been an ineffective tactic in modern France against the growth of Islam in France. The ''Washington Post'' declared in 2015: "One widely cited study by Pew from 2010 showed estimated that France had 4.7 million Muslims.<ref>[http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2015/01/09/map-frances-growing-muslim-population/ France’s growing Muslim population], Washington Post, January 9, 2015</ref> At 7.5 percent of the population, this meant France had the largest Muslim population in Western Europe. A 2010 estimate projects the Muslim population to be 10 percent of France's population by 2030.<ref>[http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2015/01/09/map-frances-growing-muslim-population/ France’s growing Muslim population], Washington Post, January 9, 2015</ref>

In April of 2010, the British academic and [[agnosticism|agnostic]] Eric Kauffmann declared that "the rate of secularisation has flattened to zero in most of [[Protestantism|Protestant]] [[Europe]] and [[France]]."<ref>[http://questionevolution.blogspot.com/2013/03/british-academic-eric-kaufmann-says.html British academic Eric Kaufmann says "the rate of secularisation has flattened to zero in most of Protestant Europe and France". Also, Kaufmann writes that secularism "appears exhausted and lacking in confidence"]</ref>
[[Image:Mbarber_b.jpg|thumbnail|right|200px|[[Matt Barber]] ]]

=== Modern American/British militant atheists and the use of ridicule ===
The [[New Atheism|new atheist]] Richard Dawkins declared to this fellow atheists:
{{cquote|I suspect that most of our regular readers here would agree that ridicule, of a humorous nature, is likely to be more effective than the sort of snuggling-up and head-patting that Jerry is attacking. I lately started to think that we need to go further: go beyond humorous ridicule, sharpen our barbs to a point where they really hurt.<ref>[https://shadowtolight.wordpress.com/2012/03/25/dawkins-mock-them-ridicule-them-in-public/ Dawkins: Mock them. Ridicule them! In public]</ref>}}

In his article, ''Mockery - the M.O. for atheists'', [[Matt Barber]] discusses an incident in which the [[Freedom From Religion Foundation]] encouraged atheists to engage in tactics which Barber considers to be acts of hateful mockery.<ref>[http://onenewsnow.com/perspectives/matt-barber/2014/05/08/mockery-the-mo-for-atheists ''Mockery - the M.O. for atheists''] by [[Matt Barber]]</ref>

Hateful mockery can backfire - especially when a group in the minority. Atheists are the least trusted group in America (see: [[Views on Atheists|Views on atheists]]).

=== Atheists and the ad hominem abusive logical fallacy ===
[[File:PzMyers2.jpg|thumbnail|251px|left|The atheist biologist Massimo Pigliucci said of [[PZ Myers]] (pictured above), "one cannot conclude this parade without mentioning P.Z. Myers, who has risen to fame because of a blog where the level of nastiness (both by the host and by his readers) is rarely matched anywhere else on the Internet...".<ref>[http://ieet.org/index.php/IEET/more/piggliucci20150513 Reflections on the skeptic and atheist movements] By Massimo Pigliucci ''Scientia Salon'', Posted: May 13, 2015</ref>
 
(photo obtained from [http://www.flickr.com/photos/reuvenim/4426093513/ Flickr], see [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.0/deed.en license agreement]) ]]
''See also:'' [[Atheism and social/interpersonal intelligence|Atheism and social skills]] and [[Atheist factions]]

The [[Ad hominem|Ad Hominem]] Abusive, "also known as: personal abuse, personal attacks, abusive fallacy, damning the source, name calling, needling [form of], refutation by character" is "attacking the person making the argument, rather than the argument itself, when the attack on the person is completely irrelevant to the argument the person is making."<ref>[http://www.logicallyfallacious.com/index.php/logical-fallacies/10-ad-hominem-abusive Ad Hominem (Abusive)]</ref>

Atheists, particularly [[Militant atheism|militant atheists]]/anti-theists, have developed a reputation for bullying and engaging in profanity (See: [[Atheist bullying]] and [[Atheism and profanity]]).

In February of 2010, the news organization ''The Telegraph'' reported that the [[New Atheism|new atheist]] [[Richard Dawkins|Richard Dawkins]] was "embroiled in a bitter online battle over plans to rid his popular internet forum for atheists of foul language, insults and 'frivolous gossip'."<ref>[http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/religion/7322177/Richard-Dawkins-in-bitter-web-censorship-row-with-fellow-atheists.html Richard Dawkins in bitter web censorship row with fellow atheists: Professor Richard Dawkins is embroiled in a bitter online battle over plans to rid his popular internet forum for atheists of foul language, insults and “frivolous gossip], ''The Telegraph'' By Heidi Blake, 9:25AM GMT 26 Feb 2010</ref> Richard Dawkins [[Abrasiveness of Richard Dawkins|has a reputation for being abrasive]] so the behavior of his fans is not entirely surprising.

The atheist biologist Massimo Pigliucci said of the atheist [[PZ Myers]], "one cannot conclude this parade without mentioning P.Z. Myers, who has risen to fame because of a blog where the level of nastiness (both by the host and by his readers) is rarely matched anywhere else on the Internet...".<ref>[http://ieet.org/index.php/IEET/more/piggliucci20150513 Reflections on the skeptic and atheist movements] By Massimo Pigliucci ''Scientia Salon'', Posted: May 13, 2015</ref>

The University of Illinois psychologist Ryan Ritter published a study in the journal ''Social Psychological and Personality Science'' which showed among other things that atheists used profanity significantly more than Christians do on Twitter and that Christians had happier dispositions on Twitter.<ref>[http://spp.sagepub.com/content/early/2013/06/18/1948550613492345.full.pdf+html Happy Tweets: Christians Are Happier, More Socially Connected, and Less Analytical Than Atheists on Twitter Social Psychological and Personality Science 1948550613492345, first published on June 18, 2013]</ref>

Militant atheists/anti-atheists frequently accuse Christians of "lying for Jesus" despite the fact that historically atheists/evolutionists have frequently engaged in deception to promote their ideology (see: [[Atheism and deception]] and [[Atheist indoctrination]]).

See also:

*[[Evolution and Cases of Fraud, Hoaxes and Speculation]]

*[[Evolutionary indoctrination]].

== Scientism is self-refuting ==
''See also:'' [[List of atheist and agnostic pseudosciences]]

According to [[Discovery Institute]] [[scientism]] is an effort to use the methods of science to explain and control every part of human life, in other words, the misguided effort to apply science to areas outside its proper bounds.<ref name="Magician">{{cite web |title=The Magician's Twin: C. S. Lewis on Science, Scientism, and Society - Product Description|author=N/A |publisher=Discovery Institute Press |url=http://astore.amazon.com/discoveryinsti12-20/detail/1936599058 |accessdate= November 30, 2014 |quote=Beloved for his Narnian tales for children and his books of Christian apologetics for adults, best-selling author C.S. Lewis also was a prophetic critic of the growing power of scientism in modern society, the misguided effort to apply science to areas outside its proper bounds. In this wide-ranging book of essays, contemporary writers probe Lewis's warnings about the dehumanizing impact of scientism on ethics, politics, faith, reason, and science itself. Issues explored include Lewis's views on bioethics, eugenics, evolution, intelligent design, and what he called "scientocracy."}}</ref>

Scientism is self-refuting. [[William Lane Craig]] wrote: "Scientism tells us that we should not believe any proposition that cannot be scientifically proven. But what about that very proposition itself? It cannot itself be scientifically proven."<ref>[http://www.reasonablefaith.org/is-scientism-self-refuting Is scientism self-refuting?]</ref> The Christian apologist Jason Peterson similarly wrote: "Science has to presuppose the validity of mathematics, the laws of logic, and that our senses are valid. Science is unable to prove any of those things." <ref>[Christianity and Circular Reasoning] by Jason Petersen at Answers for Hope Ministry</ref> See also: [[Atheism and naturalistic intelligence]]

[[C.S. Lewis]] was sceptical and highly critical of scientism as an ideology which in his view was confused with science and which tried to [[Reductionism|reduce]] everything that we can learn scientifically to materialistic blind undirected causes.<ref>{{cite web |title=The Magician's Twin: C.S. Lewis and the Case against Scientism|publisher=DiscoveryInstitute|date= 18 Nov 2012|pages=02min:20sec|url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FPeyJvXU68k&list=PLF3F6DFC4CC901818|accessdate=27-April-2013}}</ref> He argued that scientism has the dehumanizing impact on [[ethics]], [[politics]], [[faith]], [[reason]], and science itself.<ref name="Magician"/>

== Atheists and the appeal to emotion logical fallacy ==
Many atheists use appeals to emotion/arguments from outrage when criticizing the Bible - especially when they are engaging in cultural imperialism.<ref>[http://www.tektonics.org/lp/outrage.php Bible critics and arguments from outrage] by [[JP Holding]]</ref><ref>[http://www.tribosblog.org/?p=1640 Atheists and arguments From outrage]</ref><ref>[http://www.epsociety.org/library/articles.asp?pid=45 Is Yahweh a Moral Monster? The New Atheists and Old Testament Ethics] by Paul Copan</ref>

== Atheism and the fallacy of equivocation ==
''See also:'' [[Atheism and equivocation]]

Equivocation is the use of word with multiple meanings, and then using a different meaning in the conclusion than in the premise.

For example: "The coach said we should eat light, so take your heavy coat off."

Equivocation is a [[logical fallacy]].<ref>[http://onegoodmove.org/fallacy/equiv.htm Equivocation]</ref>

=== Atheism, equivocation and the origin in the universe ===
[[Creation science|Creationist scientists]] demonstrate that the [[First Law of Thermodynamics|first law of thermodynamics]] and [[Second law of thermodynamics|second law of thermodynamics]] argue against an eternal [[universe]] and they also demonstrate that these laws point to the universe being supernaturally created. <ref>[http://godevidences.net/space/lawsofscience.php Evidences for God From Space—Laws of Science]</ref><ref>Thompson, Bert, [http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/2329 So Long, Eternal Universe; Hello Beginning, Hello End!], 2001 (Apologetics Press)</ref><ref>http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/AstroPhysicalSciences14.html</ref>

The [[CARM|Christian Apologetics and Research Ministy]] (CARM) points out that the prominent atheist [[Lawrence Krauss]] uses the [[logical fallacy]] of [[equivocation]] in his failed attempt to explain the origin of the universe.<ref>[https://carm.org/lawrence-krauss-atheist-definition-of-nothing Lawrence Krauss and the Atheist Definition of Nothing], by Robin Schumacher, edited by Matt Slick</ref>

CARM declares:
{{cquote|But I have a bone to pick with Dr. Krauss about his latest book, A Universe from Nothing, which has the subtitle Why there is something rather than nothing? Those having taken an intro to philosophy class will recognize that Krauss’ subtitle is a rendition of the most basic philosophical question of existence, which has been attributed to truth seekers such as Gottfried Leibniz who asked, “Why do we have something rather than nothing at all?”....

You would think that by the title of Krauss’ book he answers the question that Leibniz posed, but he doesn’t. Instead, he redefines what ‘nothing’ is. ‘Nothing’ to Dr. Krauss would be empty space or the quantum vacuum....

Dictionary.com defines ‘nothing’ as:
[[File:Aristotle.jpg|thumb|150px|[[Aristotle]]]]

:1. no thing; not anything; naught: to say nothing.
:2. no part, share, or trace (usually followed by of ): The house showed nothing of its former magnificence.
:3. something that is nonexistent.
:4. nonexistence; nothingness: The sound faded to nothing.

But, I think the best definition of ‘nothing’ is [[Aristotle]]’s: “Nothing is what rocks dream about.”

Why does Krauss attempt to redefine ‘nothing’? Because Krauss is an atheist and a fairly acerbic one at that. He not only doesn’t believe in God but also doesn’t like God. Here is the problem Krauss faces: If nothing is really nothing and we have something (the universe) from a real nothing, then it points to the universe having a beginning. And as Stephen Hawking has observed, “Many people do not like the idea that time has a beginning, probably because it smacks of divine intervention.”

The problem is that empty space and/or the quantum vacuum aren’t nothing; they’re something. So Krauss’ book does absolutely ‘nothing’ to answer Leibniz’s question and leaves his readers no better off than they were before where the issue of the origin of the universe is concerned.

All the scientific evidence points to the universe exploding out of true nothingness, but atheists like Krauss hate this truth.<ref>[https://carm.org/lawrence-krauss-atheist-definition-of-nothing Lawrence Krauss and the Atheist Definition of Nothing], by Robin Schumacher, edited by Matt Slick</ref>}}

=== Atheism, evolution and the equivocation fallacy ===
[[File:Safarti3.jpg|alt=evolutionary theory opponent|thumb|200px|left|[[Jonathan Sarfati]]]]
Since [[World War II]] a majority of the most prominent and vocal defenders of the [[evolution]]ary position which employs methodological naturalism have been atheists and [[agnosticism|agnostics]] (see also: [[Causes of evolutionary belief]])<ref>
* Dr. Don Batten, [http://creation.com/a-whos-who-of-evolutionists A ''Who’s Who'' of evolutionists] ''Creation'' 20(1):32, December 1997.
* [[Jonathan Sarfati]], Ph.D.,F.M., [http://www.creation.com/content/view/3830 ''Refuting Evolution'', Chapter 1, Facts and Bias]
</ref>

Critics of evolution state that many of today's proponents of the evolutionary position have diluted the meaning of the term "evolution" to the point where it defined as or the definition includes change over time in the [[Genetics|gene]] pool of a population over time through such processes as [[mutation]], natural selection, and [[genetic drift]].<ref>
* [http://www.arn.org/docs/anderson/an_appb.htm Glossary Definitions of "Evolution"]
* [http://members.iinet.net.au/~sejones/PoE/pe02phl4.html#lgclprblmsflcsqvctn Fallacies used to support evolution:Equivocation]
* [http://www.arn.org/docs/meyer/sm_meaningsofevolution.pdf The Meanings of Evolution]
* [[Jonathan Sarfati]],Ph.D., F.M. [http://www.creation.com/content/view/3262/ ''Refuting Evolution 2'', Chapter 1, Argument: Creationism is religion, not science]
</ref> Dr. [[Jonathan Sarfati]] of [[Creation Ministries International]] declares concerning the diluted definition of the word "evolution":
{{cquote|...many evolutionary propagandists are guilty of the deceitful practice of equivocation, that is, switching the meaning of a single word (evolution) part way through an argument. A common tactic, ‘bait-and-switch,’ is simply to produce examples of change over time, call this ‘evolution,’ then imply that the GTE [General Theory of Evolution] is thereby proven or even essential, and [[creation]] disproved. The PBS ''Evolution'' series and the ''[[Scientific American]]'' article are full of examples of this fallacy.<ref>[[Jonathan Sarfati]],Ph.D., F.M. [http://www.creation.com/content/view/3262/ ''Refuting Evolution 2'', Chapter 1, Argument: Creationism is religion, not science]</ref><ref>The PBS [http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/ evolution website] bills itself as "The most comprehensive evolutionary science resource on the Internet" but it is very poorly done.</ref>}}

== Atheism and the no true Scotsman fallacy ==
[[File:Shockofgod helmet.jpg|thumbnail|175px|right|Logo for the [[Shockofgod]] YouTube channel]]

''See also:'' [[Atheism and the no true Scotsman fallacy]]

The [[no true Scotsman]] fallacy is a [[logical fallacy]] and more specifically a special case of [[circular logic]]. It involves dismissing any counterexamples.<ref>[http://www.iep.utm.edu/fallacy/#NoTrueScotsman No True Scotsman Fallacy], ''Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy''</ref><ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5zzSqL--d_I The "No True Scotsman" Fallacy], Idea Channel - PBS Digital Studios</ref>

The ''Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy'' describes the no true Scotsman fallacy thusly:
{{cquote|No True Scotsman

This error is a kind of [[ad hoc rescue]] of one's generalization in which the reasoner re-characterizes the situation solely in order to escape refutation of the generalization.

Example:

Smith: All Scotsmen are loyal and brave.

Jones: But McDougal over there is a Scotsman, and he was arrested by his commanding officer for running from the enemy.

Smith: Well, if that's right, it just shows that McDougal wasn't a TRUE Scotsman.<ref>[http://www.iep.utm.edu/fallacy/#NoTrueScotsman No True Scotsman Fallacy], ''Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy''</ref>}}

The no true Scotsman Fallacy was coined by the English philosopher [[Anthony Flew]] in his book ''Thinking about Thinking - or do I sincerely want to be right?''. At the time Flew wrote the book he was an atheist, but he later became a [[theism|theist]].

=== Atheists claiming ex-atheists were never atheists ===
[[John W. Loftus]], one of the more prominent atheists in the atheist community. The [[ex-atheists|ex-atheist]] Darrin Rasberry used to write for the atheist John Loftus’ blog site ''Debunking Christianity''.<ref>[https://jamesbishopblog.wordpress.com/2015/05/21/arguments-for-gods-existence-leads-former-christ-hater-darrin-rasberry-to-christ-follower/ Arguments for God’s existence leads former “Christ-hater,” Darrin Rasberry, to Christ follower] by James Bishop</ref> After Rasberry became a Christian Loftus said that Rasberry “was never an atheist in the first place.”<ref>[https://jamesbishopblog.wordpress.com/2015/05/21/arguments-for-gods-existence-leads-former-christ-hater-darrin-rasberry-to-christ-follower/ Arguments for God’s existence leads former “Christ-hater,” Darrin Rasberry, to Christ follower] by James Bishop</ref>

The popular Christian YouTube video creator [[Shockofgod]] is an ex-atheist who left atheism because it [[Rebuttals to atheist arguments|lacks proof]] and evidence that it is true, while Christianity offers an [[Christian apologetics websites|abundant amount]] of evidential support.<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xhr88HZtkmE Ex-atheist shares why he left the lie of Atheism]</ref> His YouTube videos have cumulatively received over 25 million views since his YouTube channel's inception.<ref>http://www.youtube.com/user/shockofgod</ref> Shockofgod won over 70 Christianity vs. [[atheism]] debates.<ref>[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wiGgOQ_aEvY Atheism loses a shocking 71 debates in a row]</ref> There are atheists who claim that Shockofgod was never an atheist.<ref>
*[http://www.pakistan.tv/videos-shockofgod-calls-into-atheist-radio-show-%5B7bBE1bos6JU%5D.cfm Shockofgod calls into Atheist Radio show - Hilarious! Part 1 Video]
*[https://www.youtube.com/all_comments?v=ypO8qx9-5YA&lc=4KFJZ2armpynzsgytJFpDDS2iNJyXa1GFCN-U43FRa4 Shockofgod - "The Question That defeated The Atheist Show" - Debunked! by TheEducatedPrimate]
*[http://talkrational.org/showthread.php?t=28091 Forum thread at an atheism forum] post by user Ajje
</ref>

=== Atheists attempting to deny/minimize the roles of atheism/atheists in atheist atrocities ===
Atheist apologists commonly try to minimize or deny the role of atheism/atheists as far as atheist atrocites.<ref>[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FmrRC6zD4Zk Atheists Dodge Their History of Atrocities]</ref><ref>[http://creation.com/atheism Atheism]</ref><ref>[http://voxday.blogspot.com/2011/04/mailvox-no-true-atheist-defense.html Mailvox: the "No True Atheist" defense]</ref> It is as if no true atheist could be responsible for mass murder (see also: [[Atheism and Mass Murder|Atheism and mass murder]]).<ref>[http://voxday.blogspot.com/2011/04/mailvox-no-true-atheist-defense.html Mailvox: the "No True Atheist" defense]</ref>

Atheism was an integral tenet of Maxist-Lennism/[[Maoism|Maoist]]/[[Stalinism]] [[communism]] (see: [[Atheism and communism]]).

For more information, please see: [[Atheism and the no true Scotsman fallacy]]

=== Evolutionists who are atheists committing the no true Scottsman fallacy ===
''See also:'' [[Christianity and science]] and [[Atheism and the suppression of science]] and [[Creation science]]

[[Evolution]]ists who are atheists often claim that there are no real scientists who disbelieve evolution.<ref>[http://www.creationmoments.com/resources/blog/200902/many-scientists-do-not-accept-evolution Many Scientists Do Not Accept Evolution]</ref> In 2007, "[[Discovery Institute]]'s Center for Science and Culture...announced that over 700 scientists from around the world have now signed a statement expressing their skepticism about the contemporary theory of [[Charles Darwin|Darwinian]] evolution."<ref>http://www.discovery.org/a/2732</ref>

Since [[World War II]] a majority of the most prominent and vocal defenders of the evolutionary position which employs methodological naturalism have been [[Atheism|atheists]] and [[agnosticism|agnostics]] (see also: [[Causes of evolutionary belief]])<ref>
* Dr. Don Batten, [http://creation.com/a-whos-who-of-evolutionists A ''Who’s Who'' of evolutionists] ''Creation'' 20(1):32, December 1997.
* [[Jonathan Sarfati]], Ph.D.,F.M., [http://www.creation.com/content/view/3830 ''Refuting Evolution'', Chapter 1, Facts and Bias]
</ref>

=== Atheists, Adolf Hitler and the no true Scottsman fallacy ===
[[Atheists, Adolf Hitler and the no true Scottsman fallacy]]

== Transcendental argument for the non-existence of God ==
''See also:'' [[Transcendental argument for the non-existence of God]]

Dr. [[Greg Bahnsen]] became known as "the man [[atheism|atheists]] fear most" due to [[Michael Martin]]'s [[Press release concerning Michael Martin pulling out of Martin-Bahnsen debate|cancellation]] of their scheduled debate.<ref>[http://simpleapologetics.com/thegreatdebate.html The Great Debate: Greg Bahnsen vs Gordon Stein]</ref>

During his debate with Dr. Gordon Stein, Bahnsen pointed out that the [[atheist worldview]] cannot account for the [[laws of logic]], but the Christian worldview can.<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j1hSx2evTGM Greg Bahnsen vs. Gordon Stein: The Great Debate (FULL)] </ref><ref>[http://veritasdomain.wordpress.com/2006/12/05/greg-bahnsen-vs-gordon-stein-the-great-debate/ "The Great Debate: Does God Exist?"]</ref> See also: [[Transcendental argument for the non-existence of God]]

== See also ==
*[[Atheism and critical thinking]]

*[[Rebuttals to atheist arguments]]

*[[Christian apologetics websites|Evidence for Christianity]]

*[[Resources for leaving atheism and becoming a Christian]]

*[[Christian apologetics]]

*[[Atheism and reason]]

==References==
{{reflist|2}}

[[Category:Atheism]]