Difference between revisions of "Examples of Bias in Wikipedia: Anti-Christianity"
From Conservapedia
m |
m |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
This article lists examples of [[Bias in Wikipedia]], related to Anti-[[Christianity]] and favoritism to other religions/atheism: | This article lists examples of [[Bias in Wikipedia]], related to Anti-[[Christianity]] and favoritism to other religions/atheism: | ||
| + | # Wikipedia has millions of obscure entries, but deletes or omits entries about [[conservatives]] and/or [[Christians]]. For example, conservative congressional candidate [[Ruth McClung]] has no entry at all on Wikipedia, despite being far more notable than many of its entries; likewise, broadcaster Al Gross's entry<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al_Gross_%28broadcaster%29</ref> has been tagged for deletion despite having a notable and continuing career in broadcasting. | ||
| + | # Wikipedia omits an entry on [[Biblical scientific foreknowledge]], and instead ignores the foreknowledge with a pathetically abbreviated section entitled "History and advocacy" under "Scientific foreknowledge in sacred texts."<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_foreknowledge_in_sacred_texts</ref> | ||
# Wikipedia's article on [[Thanksgiving]] is a clearcut attempt to mitigate the meaning of Thanksgiving; from giving thanks to God as the holiday is meant to be, and instead changing history by claiming the day has become a politically correct "secular holiday." Wikipedia's [[political correctness]] is an attempt to change truth in order to appeal more closely with [[atheists]]. | # Wikipedia's article on [[Thanksgiving]] is a clearcut attempt to mitigate the meaning of Thanksgiving; from giving thanks to God as the holiday is meant to be, and instead changing history by claiming the day has become a politically correct "secular holiday." Wikipedia's [[political correctness]] is an attempt to change truth in order to appeal more closely with [[atheists]]. | ||
#[[Isaac Newton]] ''translated'' parts of the [[Bible]], and considered this effort to be the source of his scientific insights, yet Wikipedia's 10,000-word entry completely omits this.<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isaac_Newton . Newton also felt that everyone else who translated the Bible were also able to have insights.</ref> | #[[Isaac Newton]] ''translated'' parts of the [[Bible]], and considered this effort to be the source of his scientific insights, yet Wikipedia's 10,000-word entry completely omits this.<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isaac_Newton . Newton also felt that everyone else who translated the Bible were also able to have insights.</ref> | ||
Revision as of 01:48, November 9, 2010
This article lists examples of Bias in Wikipedia, related to Anti-Christianity and favoritism to other religions/atheism:
- Wikipedia has millions of obscure entries, but deletes or omits entries about conservatives and/or Christians. For example, conservative congressional candidate Ruth McClung has no entry at all on Wikipedia, despite being far more notable than many of its entries; likewise, broadcaster Al Gross's entry[1] has been tagged for deletion despite having a notable and continuing career in broadcasting.
- Wikipedia omits an entry on Biblical scientific foreknowledge, and instead ignores the foreknowledge with a pathetically abbreviated section entitled "History and advocacy" under "Scientific foreknowledge in sacred texts."[2]
- Wikipedia's article on Thanksgiving is a clearcut attempt to mitigate the meaning of Thanksgiving; from giving thanks to God as the holiday is meant to be, and instead changing history by claiming the day has become a politically correct "secular holiday." Wikipedia's political correctness is an attempt to change truth in order to appeal more closely with atheists.
- Isaac Newton translated parts of the Bible, and considered this effort to be the source of his scientific insights, yet Wikipedia's 10,000-word entry completely omits this.[3]
- Wikipedia uses anti-religious examples for its entry on "argumentum ad populum" (Latin for claiming that something is true if it is popular). Conspicuously absent from Wikipedia's examples are atheistic arguments based on popular opinion, such as misleading people into thinking the theory of evolution must be true if others accept it.
- Wikipedia's article about Bernhard Riemann, perhaps the greatest modern mathematician, contains little discussion of Riemann's faith and tries to downplay his fundamentalism as though it were merely a passing interest as a teenager.[4][5]
- In its entry on the heavily Christian Gothic architecture,[6] Wikipedia credits Islam before Christianity, does not even mention Christianity until after more than 1500 words, and then does not mention Christianity again.
- Wikipedia's article on atheism fails to mention that American atheists give significantly less to charity than American theists on a per capita basis even when church giving is not counted for theists.[7] In addition, Wikipedia's article on atheism fails to mention how key proponents of atheism have been deceptive. Wikipedia's article on atheism also fails to mention that Christianity and not atheism was foundational in regards to the development of modern science. Wikipedia's article attempts to associate atheism with scientific progress.[8] In addition, Wikipedia's article on atheism fails to mention that atheism is a causal factor for suicide.
References
- ↑ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al_Gross_%28broadcaster%29
- ↑ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_foreknowledge_in_sacred_texts
- ↑ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isaac_Newton . Newton also felt that everyone else who translated the Bible were also able to have insights.
- ↑ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riemann
- ↑ http://www.answers.com/topic/bernhard-riemann
- ↑ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gothic_architecture
- ↑ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheism
- ↑ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheism
| |||||
