Rational Wiki

That doesn't make any sense.

>Clintonian
>fascists

?

It's articles on creationism are great

rational wiki is great for debunking most conspiracy theories. pretty much terrible for everything else and a lot of articles are outdated (some even pre-2008 U.S. presidential election).

they actually do admit they are biased, but cap it off with "reality has a liberal bias"

>debunking most conspiracy theories
>Its not facist liberal ideology therefore conspiracy DEBUNKED. XD

did i pinch a nerve

tinfoil hat detected.

An early victim of the Culture Wars, it used to be a skeptic website debunking creationists and woowoo peddlers, now it's an SJW shitpit """debunking""" common sense and evildumb whites.

I remember believing in such a thing, but yea, SJW took over and now its a cultural war instead of an actual rationality.

Pretty pathetic.

They aren't that bad.

Given the way how some articles are written, I assume some editors are 4channers in disguise. Look at the page about Veeky Forums itself:

rationalwiki.org/wiki/Veeky Forums
>Veeky Forums — Tabletop Games[edit]
>The fa/tg/uys. This board encompasses traditional pen and paper games like Dungeons & Dragons, collectible card games like Magic: The Gathering, war games like Warhammer 40k, good old board games and other related paraphernalia. Also elves being [scratch]raped[/scratch] gently cuddled. It's famous within the community for actually completing a lot of creative projects it comes up with. Veeky Forums gets shit done. [10]

Also, there are some talking on the talk page about sheding on Veeky Forums some slightly more positive light as they have been working against some "bad" stuff like animal abuse. Compared to the Veeky Forums page on the, literally, sjw wiki:

sjwiki.org/wiki/Veeky Forums

Yeah, rationalwiki seems... well, more rational on their views.

Between eating a shit or vanilla flavored shit, its all shit.

>conservapedia of smug liberalism
this basically

It has been a useful site for me personally, but they are clearly left-leaning.

>Reality has a liberal bias

I really wish that term never came about. Regardless of whether or not you think it's right, it's such a smug and arrogant thing to say. Not to mention the implications it comes with, how only liberals have the real answers to the questions in life.

honestly it's basically a less funny version of ED meant for releasing butthurt against conservatives

it's rational to think Japanese and Nigerians are equally intelligent

That's just because you're not on the right side of history.

>demonizing rational thought
kek at how deliberately stupid you people have gotten

(((rational)))

Complete idiots, I disagree with their articles on mostly everything. And what this with naming their liberal propagandist site "rational" wiki just name it liberalwiki or leftapedia.

you haven't been to burgerstan where being right wing just means being a shill for some company or cult

I am rather sure that's for people who claim climatologists and evolutionists are working in a big godless liberal conspiracy.

Which is obviously the case.....

I was think this was parody like conservapedia.

Conservapedia is 100% serious

I edit on Conservapedia and I'm 100% not serious. There are real fundies there, but a lot of us came over from the Landover Baptist Church after the Conservapedos raided us.

& humanities was a mistake

I liked when they just bashed Conservapedia. They're still good for debunking pseudoscience and conspiracy theories but are too dominated by Atheism Plus types.

>le (((meme)))
Epic XDD!!! So le (((funny))) and le (((original))) because it's (((le))) (((meme))) (((hahahahaha))) XDDDD(((!)))!!!!!

Triggered

Their article on the ontological argument for God is pleb tier.
You're angry

Tinfoil hats aside, why are conspiracies bad? I mean don't get me wrong, I hate conspiratards who talk about the illuminati, freemasons, light bulbs killing you or the frogs turning gay or shit about chemicals being put in the water, etc.

But why dismiss conspiracies in general? It's good to be skeptical on things and its good to debunk bullshit as well.

>What do you think about this
I usually don't

Most of the hate from conspiracy theorists comes from their fanaticism and inability to shut up. At least that's where mine comes from

*for conspiracy theorists

>((())) =DDD

They don't hate all conspiracy theories, they say that the really bad and outlandish conspiracy theories will put any legetimate in a bad light.

Conspiracy can be fun if kept with lid on. Once it escapes your mind, its shit talk.

Some of their articles are okay, but it's deliberately and obviously biased towards a progressive fedora-tipping STEMfag view.

They're decent enough, as long as you stay away from anything on modern politics/social issues.

le tips le meme XD

so they are pseudo-skeptics then

At first thought it was apart of the ebil sjw agenda in my gamergate years but have come to realize there probably right on a fair deal of stuff

>t. /leftypol/

>Regardless of whether or not you think it's right,

reality doesnt have biases

>ebil sjw agenda
>in my gamergate years

You went through it, and then you slid back. Interesting.

They're about as rational as Fox News is "Fair and Balanced".

This. This site destroys creationism and Islam, but it white nights for post mod feminist causes.

there was a study that came out recently that conclude that there has been a 50% decline in sperm concentration and a near 60% decline in total sperm count since 1970. I'm sure the trend continues well on into the 50s as well.
there are most probably completely logical reasons for this, i.e. obesity, xenoestrogens/pollutants, rather than deliberate hormonal sabotage, but it goes to show that these claims shouldn't be wholly dismissed

They are /ourwiki/ for sure, they correctly point out the dangers and hypocrisies of both far-left and far-right extremists.

Oh I don't completely dismiss everything that Jonestown says and I don't dismiss everything conspiracy related. I'm sure there is a grain of truth with what is said about the decline in sperm count, I certainly won't dismiss that. Unfortunately, I'm not much of an expert of that trend.

You know they dissprove (most) liberal conspiracy ideas as well?

"Rational" lol what a joke. Skeptikook sophistry at is finest and most retarded. Good for a laugh and I see skeptikooks actually citing it as a scholarly source in their loony blogs and on social media etc.

Yes they are psuedo-skeptics. Or skeptards. Or skeptikooks if you like. Or just garden-variety loons pretending to be "down with science"

...

They don't disprove shit bro, just spew retarded sophistry as if that is convincing to a normal person.

Atrazine makes frogs change gender dude. Its a pesticide, UCalifornia confirmed this in research. Not a "conspiracy theory" dummy.

They did a good job on the pearl harbour conspiracy theory

Oooh spooky

They followed the same route as Snopes

>I hate conspiratards who talk about the illuminati
You know this is a Veeky Forumstory channel right? So why the fuck would people here not discuss the fraternity known as the Bavarian Illuminati? Have you even heard of the French Revolution dude?

Total BS. Unscholarly and embarrassingly unfunny.

Rationalwiki: "All you have to do to be a super-smart critical thinker is repeat the same establishment approved pop-science psychobabble as us and you too can be a member of the skeptical elite! Go science!"

Is there anything more pleb, more pseud and pretentious than this?

>Rationalism: the practice or principle of basing opinions and actions on reason and knowledge rather than on religious belief or emotional response.
You tell me if they do this or not.

>Is there anything more pleb
Is there anything more pleb than you? RationalWiki is patrician.

He was talking about it in the modern chemtrail way
>forgetting &humanites

Veeky Forums

>when you try to discard religion but forget that your ape genes make it practically impossible

Welcome to the Church. Dissent and heresy will not be tolerated. Have you read your daily Dawkins devotional today?

reading the word "rational" on the internet is like the word "objective" or "edgy"

it's one of those words

As a general rule, any organization that has "rational," "truth," "neutral," or so forth in its title is the exact opposite in practice.

So what's people's beef with their articles on religious scepticism?

>It has the word rational in it so it must be!

this but unironically