RationalWiki's 2019 Fundraiser

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 PayPal Logo.png!

Donations so far: $3900Goal: $6000


From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

I love RationalWiki, I really do. But there are a small fraction of things here that are wrong:

There's a thorough takedown of this article specifically at https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/5hk1ap/is_this_rationalwiki_article_on_the_historicity/. Note that historians don't believe he was a supernatural being, rather that he was a normal human. The article acknowledges that most historians disagree with the article, but then it dismisses this as an argument from authority, as if historians are the wrong people to consult in the matter of history.
Speaking of — this article doesn't acknowledge that there are places that the scientific method shouldn't be used. For example: history, where it's impossible to design and carry out experiments.
Some articles that deal with horseshoe theory in general: [1] [2]