RationalWiki talk:Webshites

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

This page is automatically archived by Archivist
Archives for this talk page: <1>

Contents

[edit] Fun thing to do

Use waybackmachine to look back at when Conspiracy sites first started:

Churns out the same shit over and over

For example, quote mines:

"National Socialism will use its own revolution for establishing of a new world order."

David Rockefeller, long accused of being a shill for the NWO, in his memior finally tired of the facade and admitted what he had been accused of for many decades, when he said this about his familys involvement in the NWO:

"Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as 'internationalists' and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure - one world, if you will. If that is the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it."

And in 2008, with the election of President Barack Hussein Obama, Henry Kissinger said that Obama would bring about the long desired New World Order:

"I think that his task will be to develop an overall strategy for America in this period, when really a 'New World Order' can be created. It's a great opportunity. It isn't such a crisis..."


No longer is the New World Order the realm of "conspiracy theorists" frantically writing stories of government takeovers from a basement somewhere. No, the NWO is now shouted loudly from the rooftops by every leading government and political figure in newscasts 24 hours a day.

And then Henry Makow's site

And who could forget about Alex Jones, and everythign he's touched?

[edit] This might be a fine add to this lovely little abomination-topia of a section.

https://biblicalgenderroles.com/ This place is acrap-hole, it glorifies a whole bunch of pretty crappy things to do, and of course uses the bible as an excuse to do it.

[edit] Victor J. Aguilar for Politics->Other, or maybe "Various internet kooks"

I was looking for some good free high-school-level Geometry textbooks while answering a question on Reddit's /r/learnmath, and Daniel Callahan's restatement of Euclid's Elements in modern mathematical language referred to a book called Geometry Without Multiplication by Victor J. Aguilar as recommended reading, and this book contains over-excited language, odd martial-arts terminology (the whole series is called "Geometry-do" and the first book lists a colored-belt system), self-congratulatory asides, numerous rants about the Common Core and the Post-Autistic Economics movement, and phrases like "So why not put the video game controller aside and take up the compass and straight edge?" and "Today, American geometers are graphic artists. They draw pretty [Geometer's] Sketchpad graphs and they can make shapes slide like Peggy Fleming and do flips like Nadia Comăneci; they know nothing of logic."

Then I read Axiomatic Economics, the website that he frequently references, and found his attempted axiomatization of economics to be laughable, and unlike the axiomatizations of geometry and probability that he looked to for inspiration, divorced from reality; I might actually read the book of the same name for more laffs (it is said to require multi-variable calculus in its summary form, and real analysis in its full form, but I have gone to grad school in mathematics and can probably tell how far off his rocker this guy is). When fans of the Ludwig von Mises Institute call you a crank, that's a bad sign; BTW, unlike von Mises, Aguilar supports government intervention in significant enough cases that he can't well be called a Libertarian crank, despite sharing their love of unworkable axiomatization. Julyo (talk) 19:09, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

--> I created the other segment in politics because the site I referenced contained heavy doses of political content that couldn't exactly be classified as being on the political "left" or political "right" (or "center", for that matter). I'd say that if the content is majorly political that it belongs in Politics->Other and that if it doesn't it does belong in "Various Internet Kooks". Hex4 (talk) 19:43, 26 march 2017 (UTC)

[edit] Aw look, an old vid

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qXRg0kvnD54 Cømяade FυzzчCαтPøтαтø (talk/stalk) 00:26, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

[edit] KotakuInAction is STILL angry

https://www.reddit.com/r/KotakuInAction/comments/62ivmv/humor_it_seems_like_kia_is_still_in_rationalwikis/

Cømяade FυzzчCαтPøтαтø (talk/stalk) 03:52, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

[edit] Relevant SciBabe

http://scibabe.com/incomplete-list-bullshit-websites/ Fuzzy "Cat" Potato, Jr. (talk/stalk) 04:06, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

[edit] Are there any entries on this page that you think should be added to a different section?

For instance, which entries in "Bible-thumping" and "Lack-of-religious-text-thumping (a.k.a. "Rationals", "Skeptics")" seem to fit more at home with entries featured in sections like, "Conservative, right-wing, "cultural libertarians", "classical liberals", and reactionary"?

Personal tools
Namespaces

Variants
Actions
Navigation
support
Community
Tools