No announcement yet.

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    The Quackbuster manipulation of Wikipedia, the online encyclopedia:

    Wikipedia is an odd thing. It is made up of a so-called "volunteer system." Several years ago, a team of quackbusters
    infiltrated various levels of the Wikipedia operation, and are now entrenched in the middle, and lower, level volunteer management system.
    If you try and put any positive information about advanced medicine/homeopathy, or the problems of US health care, on Wikipedia, or change false or misleading information the quackbusters have installed, you will fail.
    You will be blocked from further "editing" and the pages of Wikipedia will now carry information about what a "terrible person you are." The only way to have ANY influence over what Wikipedia says about subject is to approach them with a legal threat letter at the highest levels. Nothing else works. Even that has problems, for Wikipedia management operates on a financial shoestring, and apparently has no ability to police its own encyclopedia. Unfortunately, people use the encyclopedia - and they get very bad information about health care.
    Below is a paragraph from the editor�s section of Wikipedia. The editor, here, is discussing the problem of the quackbuster slime,
    acting to control the information flow on Wikipedia - and what to do about it. so you understand the abbreviation POV stand for Point of View, and NPOV stands for No Point of View, which Wikipedia wants. The part in red is for emphasis. Read this:
    I guess it depends on what purpose the External Links section serves. Do the links have to serve the NPOV interests of the article or can the links section be a place where specific points-of-view can have a chance to be expressed? As it is now, the chiropractic link section is broken down into Advocacy and Critiques. I think that this warns the researcher that they are leaving the NPOV environment that Wikipedia tries to provide and will be entering a POV external site.
    If these links are truly just linking to the page for marketing reasons and don't serve a primary function of adding to the knowledge-base, I would then say to axe them. I haven't checked every critical link, but they do seem to link to essays or research on pages that don't directly try to sell you anything (other than their POV). If they are all offering the same POV with no really distinguishing differences, then they should be reduced in number.
    The soapbox point is interesting. These are external links so it would seem that Wikipedia is not being directly exploited as a soapbox. However, the abundance of critical links could be seen as an attempt to present bias... using the amount of negative criticisms to invoke a negative POV about chiropractic. My solution up until now has been to add to the advocacy links to balance out the criticism. You can certainly try to delete the critical links and claim NPOV but I can almost guarantee you that you be quickly (and improperly) accused of "vandalism" by one of three specific chiroskeptics who police the chiropractic page all day long as far as I can tell. They love to throw "vandalism" accusations around - and usually are vastly overstating the matter. That being said, I have suggested a "disarming" strategy, where both sides would remove links in a balanced way, but my suggestion was met with silence.
    Now as far as the link farming goes. Yes, virtually all of the critical sites are linked together through the SkepticRing, Anti-Quackery Ring,
    Chiropractic Subluxated Ring and other ways fashioned specifically for the purpose of boosting Search Engine ranking. A lot of those sites are operated by "Stephen Barrett"....................
    and his buddy Sammy Homola -,,
    and NCAHF. They're three organizations all saying the same thing. What's really slimy is that they state opinions then reference their sister-sites support to that opinion. A lot of the links are operated or moderated by Fyslee (one of the three chiroskepics users who regularly accuse people of vandalism for removing links to his sites). Check out his userpage to see which sites he operates and moderates for. These chiroskepitics are working together to actively employ search engine tricks such as artifically boosting Google ranking by adding external links to their sites all over Wikipedia. Their goal is for a researcher curious about homeopathy/chiropractic to encounter their anti-chiropractic sites first on a Google search.
    Given these organizations' objective, I can certainly understand why they would want to do this. Unfortunately, the tactics that they employ are objectionable to both Google and Wikipedia. Hopefully these organizations will get wise to the chiroskeptic ring and ban their sites.

    I think that if you showed that some of these links are not providing anything new and are just marketing tools, you should be able to justify deleting them on the discussion page... just prepare yourself for an attack and false accusations. If you can handle all of that with a cool head, I say, "Be bold with your edits!"

    The articles in the media criticizing Wikipedia are on target, and there needs to be more of them. Wikipedia deserves the criticism.
    ------------------------------------------------------------ ---------------------------------------------
    The Great Lie of Wikipedia: "the....encyclopedia that anyone can edit."
    [This is a large web based encyclopaedia. Anyone can edit it in theory, but in practice Medical/Allopathic editors (most known as Physicians Wikipedians, 178 of them) will not allow any text critical to Allopathy or non-Allopathic thinking, delete any external links they don't like, as well as deleting or attempting to delete pages they don't like--in effect it should be treated as a Pharma shill. You can see the page deletion attempts here. All of the vaccine, disease pages and psychiatric drug pages (basically just an on line PDF of BNF) are written by Allopaths, and policed by Allopaths. The main Allopath dealing with vaccination is known as Midgley. All links to were officially banned after rfc, even to original Smallpox vax books. Now is on what is called a "spam blacklist" block. Not only whale but the conspiracy free vaccine site What are they afraid of? They are afraid of the truth on vaccination and the vaccine diseases.]
    ------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------ --
    Wikipedia HOMEOPATHY
    Medical and scientific analysis

    Homeopathy is unsupported by modern scientific research.
    The extreme dilutions used in homeopathic preparations usually leave none of the active ingredient (atoms, ions or molecules) in the final product.[111][112] The idea that any biological effects could be produced by these preparations is inconsistent with the observed dose-response relationships of conventional drugs.[113] The proposed rationale for these extreme dilutions � that the water contains the "memory" or "vibration" from the diluted ingredient � is also counter to the laws of chemistry and physics.[111]
    Thus critics contend that any positive results obtained from homeopathic remedies are purely due to the placebo effect.
    [114][115] Critics cite the lack of viable scientific studies for the effectiveness of homeopathic remedies as evidence that they are not effective and that any positive effects are due to the placebo effect.
    Critics also contend that homeopathy is inherently dangerous, because homeopaths offer a false hope that may discourage or delay proper treatment.

    "Great ideas often recieve violent opposition from mediocre minds"...................Einstein


    • #17
      Mmm, Gina, have you actually READ the articles on homeopathy in the wiki4cam?

      Please do, I think you will be surprised.

      You have a right to your own opinion, but not to your own facts.


      • #18
        Posted by Dana Ullman:

        -- "previously worked tirelessly (but ineffectively) on in
        their article on homeopathy, but despite spending 1-2 hours/day, there were
        simply too many skeptics, and they made certain that there were considerably
        more negative things to say about homeopathy than positive things.
        Ultimately, I got kicked off wikipedia (!) in part because the skeptics
        complained that I had a "conflict of interest" on the subject of homeopathy
        due to the fact that I have written books on the subject!!! Strange but
        true. My biggest "problem" was that I chose to edit under my REAL name, not
        a pseudoname, like 98% of the people on wikipedia. I therefore got targeted
        and kicked off. "................................................. ...
        "Great ideas often recieve violent opposition from mediocre minds"...................Einstein


        • #19
          Yeah, well. I have had the dubious pleasure to read some of Dana's works. He also posted on the JREF for a while (not under his own name, btw). He seems to have a very creative approach to reality.

          ETA: Oh, BTW, sorry for the late reply. I had not noticed the rest of the thread (I don't visit these forums regularly).

          You have a right to your own opinion, but not to your own facts.


          • #20
            Mere Academics: Experts at Sophistry & Obscuration

            Look at these fools Gina's alone been dealing with. Boy, do I remember them and their kind when I tried like she's doing. They're brick walls, though, and they have an agenda to destroy homeopathy as members or cohorts of Quack Busters. Cunning, deceit and subterfuge consequently run throughout the postings of these guys (and remember that those are the three characteristics of people who're discarnant in or resonant with Hell), so beware when you read their stuff. They only sound like they know what they're talking about, but remember that they're defending self-admitted quackery parading as science, and the scary thing is that they're good at it. Grow horns, you morons.

            They are absolute experts at sophistry and obscuration, and yet they claim they're scientists. It's a hoot, and it's quite tragic because these super-morons keep us stuck in the tail end of the Dark Ages. It's like they have a million tiny holes drilled in their heads and think it's a pretty good idea. They stick their feet in their mouths and their heads up their butts at all turns, and yet they astonishingly hold that they're scientists and love truth. They're liars, blatant liars, too! In fact, they're so stupid that they get away with lying to themselves. There ultimately isn't anything they hold to be true that can be defended. They have so elaborately developed these incredibly complex lies, which invariably ignore (obscure) facts that contradict them, that they actually believe them even though that proves they're insane. I mean, wow, that's crazy. Hundreds of years of these ultra-morons build on each others' idiocy, and none of them spots anything wrong with any of it even though none of it makes any sense.

            If you say that something is known according to facts, you have to have your basic assumptions and definitions correct, but they don't have any of them correct. They make conclusions based upon half-truths and lies, and yet they expect something other than total nonsense to result. That's allopathic medicine, and these idiots defend it simply because a gazillion other idiots like them also defend it. It's this big crowd of fools all patting each other on the back saying, "Yeah, you know what you're talking about, don't you? That's what my teacha tole me." Right, Jethro, but there are no cures in allopathic medicine, so guess again.

            How can you be surprised that none of your conclusions make any sense when you can't even ask the questions required of conclusions? They all go, "What?" Right, you forget to ask yourselves if your definitions and basic assumptions are correct, and your kind have been doing it for centuries, so you've obviously forgotten that it's the first thing required of speech unless babbling kiddie talk appeals to you. BTW, it seems to, but who cares? Their doctors eventually euthanize them like dogs, so they'll find out when they finally grow those horns they so seem to adore. Where could their heads be but up their butts when they think like this? These people are in charge of knowledge? God, help us. Let's hope they soon go back to Hell, because nothing else seems to be able to get them to shut up and stop creating chaos and supporting mass murder by physicians.

            They can't make an accurate statement about homeopathy or even medicine. Before the fact, because I knew they couldn't answer the first question, a challenge cometh: Make an accurate statement about medicine. I'll bet they can't make one in a hundred tries. Who wants to bet? These people are such easy prey that it's laughable. Okay, fools, each of you ultra-morons with the big mouths and your heads stuck up your butts, make an accurate statement about medicine. Speak, oh wily ones. I am positive you're going to be a hoot.

            Look at this incredibly large body of information that Gina has compiled against these fools, and yet they've arrogantly come here wanting to defend their ultra-idiocy. Uh oh, that's guaranteed to precipitate endless sophistry and obscuration, and that's what we've seen so far. Who is surprised? They have no cures, and they see nothing wrong with that. If you have conducted an ongoing experiment for at least 2700 years in which every result was that you got acid spewed on you, you'd know you did something wrong, wouldn't you? No, not these guys. They're super-morons the likes of which the universe has never seen except on this little, blue-green planet that allows super-morons to tell us what is and isn't. Uh oh, there's something wrong with that, isn't there? Yeah, teacha tole me doesn't work too well if you've never perceived that the teacher is a fool or an actual quack, which they all amazingly admit when they tell us they don't have any cures for 99.99% of all the diseases in industrialized countries. (The moderator pauses because she's stunned.)

            I read the Wikipedia stuff, and I'm absolutely amazed that I don't think I read a single accurate statement in it. Chuckling, I mean, for real, these are true super-morons. I'll bet some of them read comic books and are barely out of diapers. Yeah, well, Bugs Bunny is my buddy, and he doesn't like you. How do you like that? Yeah, he just came through the wall chomping on a carrot and smiling and is encouraging me to destroy you fools. What do you think about that?

            I am truly chuckling because I find it extremely difficult to believe -- even though I constantly encounter it with these fools -- that these ultra-morons believe this stuff. They've demonstrated unimaginable ignorance, and yet they think they're right. I mean, wow, how stupid is that? My God, it's been such a long time since I've seen these idiots spout their krap. You never really encounter it until you deal with the professional idiots found in university science departments as mere academics (there are so few actual scholars in the sciences), and I basically totally abandoned them more than a decade ago, so I forgot how thorough they are at believing nothing. (The moderator pauses because she's again stunned.)

            Yeah, for real. They call it scientific skepticism. It's a fancy way of saying they don't yet know anything, so they don't believe anything. They go, "What? I believe stuff." Yeah, we saw that stuff you believe. Do you think we could forget? Who could forget displays of total insanity when you have to envision the propagators of such nonsense as a bunch of stupid chickens running around with their heads cut off? That's certainly true about allopathic medicine, the pinnacle and archetype of the ignorance they actually worship. In their labs, studies and conferences, they en masse go, "Oh, holy god of divine nothingness [translation: 'the universe'], please make us less ignorant, we beseech thee." Dream on, Jethro.

            They've taken on an expert homeopath who's shown them up as total fools and ultra-morons, and yet they can't perceive it. Let's see what happens when they cross swords with a Hahnemannian. Gina, I'm sure you're going to love this. These guys are like Hydra, and I kid you not. You cut off one of their snakes, and two grow back. That's a metaphor for how compounding false conclusions are, but they're of course too stupid to know that, either. This is going to be so much fun.
            Albert, also Hahnemannian444B
   and and and


            • #21
              Well said and reported, Vxy. Boing, boing, boing . . .

              Originally posted by Vyx View Post
              I was the one who added the above phrase in Wikipedia's "criticism" paragraph. . . . And I really like the idea of creating a wiki where fanatics will not be tolerated.
              Exactly! Every statement was accurate. Ten stars, guy. I think you're also going to love how I deal with these idiots. It's like they have two heads flopping around and constantly banging into each other. Boing, boing, boing. . . It's no wonder that they can't make accurate statements with such constant trauma to the brain. Well said and reported. I know these experiences with these fools so well.

              BTW, if we were even remotely civilized, everyone who dealt with you at Wikipedia would be summarily exiled to Antarctica for their crimes. Therefore, know that these people are going to Hell. It's uncomfortably helpful, but you get used to it when dealing with these low-grade human beings. They don't know anything, and I'm sure they loved my comment about them going to Hell because they ignorantly think it's in the ground, and they also ignorantly believe they go poof when they die. Let's all hope so. "Poof! There goes another problem, thank God." I just wish they'd go poof themselves someplace else. Ah . . . Ruff!

              Watch the sophistry and obscuration. They are true experts at it, which is constantly observed in all of their foregoing statements.

              All you have to do is ask them the basis of their conclusions. None of them are connected, neither their conclusions and basic assumptions and defintions, nor their heads. Boing, boing, boing . . . They do this all by themselves, too. They're such automatons that they're constantly on autopilot. None of them bothers to ask if the pilot knows where he's going or what he's doing. Boing, boing, boing . . .
              Albert, also Hahnemannian444B
     and and and