Anonymous at Thu, 3 Apr 2025 22:49:06 UTC No. 16636707

>>16636696
Neither are helpful in a world 47% saturated with android replicas.

Anonymous at Thu, 3 Apr 2025 23:10:25 UTC No. 16636749

>>16636696
Conservapedia knows they're biased, rationalwiki actually thinks they're objective
Relates to the "reality has a liberal bias" meme

Anonymous at Thu, 3 Apr 2025 23:16:12 UTC No. 16636757

Conservapedia is at least funny to read through desu

Anonymous at Thu, 3 Apr 2025 23:23:59 UTC No. 16636767

>>16636749
What do rationalpedians believe if science is irrational? Do they accept scientific consensus or rationality?

Anonymous at Thu, 3 Apr 2025 23:28:21 UTC No. 16636774

>>16636749
The first you could tolerate with 10f pole, the second is empiricism choosing decay when a path out of scarcity existed.

Anonymous at Fri, 4 Apr 2025 01:47:38 UTC No. 16636916

>>16636749
Wikipedia isn't NPOV either (which doesn't exist since it's a blatant oxymoron), it's also based on a "journalistic" consensus
Rationalwiki sounds more like a parody of Wikipedia nowadays

Anonymous at Fri, 4 Apr 2025 03:43:36 UTC No. 16636968

>>16636749
>Wikipedia
>Neutral POV
it's a radical left shithole. However the good thing is most of the maths and physics doesn't contain any of that bullshit.

Anonymous at Fri, 4 Apr 2025 04:41:04 UTC No. 16636986

>>16636968
GPT can give us neutral takes

Anonymous at Fri, 4 Apr 2025 08:23:38 UTC No. 16637071

They are fucking philosophical rookies and midwits who never left the era of debating creationist who are stuck one foot in the grave. Check their articles defending materialist metaphysics and all they can muster up is thinking that the only alternative is the mind depending on some magical soul.
>>16636757
Yes, it's known for being edited by trolls back in the day and more recently it's some 80 year old boomers playground for Russian shit.

Anonymous at Fri, 4 Apr 2025 09:06:56 UTC No. 16637101

>>16636696
Didnt you hear the news? A racist account on twitter is the new owner of the site. They said they're going to reform it.

Anonymous at Fri, 4 Apr 2025 11:22:32 UTC No. 16637177

>>16637101
>April 1st
7.5/10 made me check

Anonymous at Fri, 4 Apr 2025 11:28:31 UTC No. 16637181

>>16636749
That entry says the exact opposite, though, that they are explicitly biased towards the general consensus.

Anonymous at Fri, 4 Apr 2025 12:32:46 UTC No. 16637197

>>16636968
>it's a radical left shithole
You people have been incredibly spoilt by the decades-long complete absence of anything remotely resembling a "radical left" in your lives.

Anonymous at Fri, 4 Apr 2025 12:54:04 UTC No. 16637210

>>16637197
>the decades-long complete absence of anything remotely resembling a "radical left" in your lives.
Taking a break from grooming impressionable teens to cut off their penis in the name of trans rights on Discord?

Anonymous at Fri, 4 Apr 2025 12:55:59 UTC No. 16637211

>>16637210
the breadline calls

Anonymous at Fri, 4 Apr 2025 13:07:33 UTC No. 16637219

>>16636696
just looked up woman and it redirects to person and goes on an unhinged rant that women dont exist. fucking topkek. Strange that they somehow have misogyny articles.

Anonymous at Fri, 4 Apr 2025 15:57:50 UTC No. 16637336

>>16636696
Redditpedia is mostly one guy, I think his user name is Human

Anonymous at Fri, 4 Apr 2025 16:05:18 UTC No. 16637356

>>16637197
True. I wish people would stop confusing the radical left with the various forms of wallstreet-funded interest groups that promote a vapid form of social darwinism under the slogan of "equity". Ever figured why the modern-day left is so obsessed with gay rights and catering to completely irrelevant minority groups like transgender?