There is no RationalWiki without you. We are a small non-profit with no staff – we are hundreds of volunteers who document pseudoscience and crankery around the world every day. We will never allow ads because we must remain independent. We cannot rely on big donors with corresponding big agendas. We are not the largest website around, but we believe we play an important role in defending truth and objectivity.
If everyone who saw this today donated $5, we would meet our goal for 2019.
| Fighting pseudoscience isn't free.|
We are 100% user-supported! Help and donate $5, $20 or whatever you can today with !
| Someone is wrong on|
Apologetics Press is a site that focuses on Christian apologetics. The site's editors compile topics related to Christianity, throw out the ones that don't agree with them, and makes the ones that do look trustworthy.
Apologetics Press seems to be written from a fundamentalist point of view, as they hold that there are no biblical contradictions. The site seems to enjoy archiving debates in which atheists have lost. They think this will make them more respectable because rhetoric is better than evidence. Who needs empirical evidence and consistent observation when you can just play on the audience's ignorance and persuade them that there is a magic man who'll take them to heaven if they believe in him?
Apologetic Press's purpose is to make the scripture of their Oh So Holy and Truthful Divine Graceful All-Loving Merciful Christian God seem scientifically accurate. The site has stated what its authors believe, and then tries to bend logic and evidence to fit their faith.
Christian apologists will sometimes use Apologetics Press to damage what credibility they originally had.[more detail please] The site can be a useful tool to examine various apologist oxymorons, such as "Reason and Revelation." The site has a sleek design, having recently been revamped. Despite this, it still contains obvious bias and reversal of scientific method, the site is also a good place where one can practice one's knowledge of logical fallacies. The site's most popular ones are: the false dichotomy, non sequitur, argument from design, argument from authority and the typical straw man.