Acheron
August 17th, 2007, 10:29 PM
I know I shouldn't be surprised with how the world sees us and I know that they will hate us, but I succumbed to the temptation to look
up "Fundamentalism" on Wikipedia. Was I in for a surprise. The entire section has a miniscule 20 sentence defense of it (labeled with the kind of wishy-washy language used do as to not offend anyone without saying anything at all) and a 10 paragraph criticism of it including lumped Christian and Islamic extremist views. The whole article seems designed to make Christians seem like a threat and seems to espouse that only a secular society (with some words stolen from various religions) will benefit anyone. Of course, the vast majority of named wiki people are apparently vastly more liberal than the US average, so I shouldn't be surprised with how so much of the most viewed pages are nearly pornography on there. I actually found Conservapedia to have a much better track of research and without reams of pages devoted to pop culture or hatred of Preident Bush or hatred of Christianity.
I also noted that Wikipedia is the only "encylopedia" (and I use that term very loosely, to state that the existence of Jesus Christ as a person is questioned by scholars, (or just questioning the accuracy and historicity of the documents that state He was) while unabashedly accepting that Mohammed was a real person.:yell :twitch :mad :mad
Sorry for the rant, but this just ticked me off.
up "Fundamentalism" on Wikipedia. Was I in for a surprise. The entire section has a miniscule 20 sentence defense of it (labeled with the kind of wishy-washy language used do as to not offend anyone without saying anything at all) and a 10 paragraph criticism of it including lumped Christian and Islamic extremist views. The whole article seems designed to make Christians seem like a threat and seems to espouse that only a secular society (with some words stolen from various religions) will benefit anyone. Of course, the vast majority of named wiki people are apparently vastly more liberal than the US average, so I shouldn't be surprised with how so much of the most viewed pages are nearly pornography on there. I actually found Conservapedia to have a much better track of research and without reams of pages devoted to pop culture or hatred of Preident Bush or hatred of Christianity.
I also noted that Wikipedia is the only "encylopedia" (and I use that term very loosely, to state that the existence of Jesus Christ as a person is questioned by scholars, (or just questioning the accuracy and historicity of the documents that state He was) while unabashedly accepting that Mohammed was a real person.:yell :twitch :mad :mad
Sorry for the rant, but this just ticked me off.