Is Creationism real? What is history?

Discredit Christianity.

The far-left for years has been trying to discredit Christianity on Wikipedia by saying that Creationism is a pseudoscience, but no one has come up with any evidence proving otherwise to suggest a creationism of the universe. It suggests a bias with Wikipedia that as part of the Saul Alinsky agenda of ridiculing something until it goes away, Wikipedia has called a “pseuoscience” or denialism.

Wikipedia could never produce evidence proving that God created or did not create the universe because it is a user-edited bias on Wikipedia that anyone can edit. Wikipedia is not noted for being accurate anyway to discredit Creationism and its sciences, even though evidence cannot come up with other reasons to prove otherwise because Big Bang theory has a missing premise that is it does not answer the fundamental question of how it started. How did the bang start? How did it radiate out? How did it begin?
Is creationism pseudoscience? I think not because so far, I do not think anyone will ever come up with a theory to prove otherwise and the scientific community has been trying to blindly discredit religion because it the basis of conservative society and they know it.

The far-left anti-Christian movement is trying to discredit them because they have a prejudice against religious beliefs and so does Wikipedia. Wikipedia never was a reliable reference source to begin with.

Is creationism pseudoscience? You be the judge! I do not want to get sucked into the pissing contest between creationists and evolutionists on this matter or Wkipedia’s unfair treatment of scholarly topics. Wikipedia has been discredited by major univerisites and colleges and many teachers refuse to let kids use their use it. I think schools should block Wikipedia on their filtering software and let kids use more reasonable resources.


Wikipedia tends to forces it views on other people and is it can be edited by anyone with a certain agenda bias or lack of knowledge, Wikipedia should not be used as a final judge on such matters. It should be discredited as an intellectual fraud. Wikipedia does not take into account other views and other materials and it can edited at random, so as such, it is not a reliable reference source.

Creationism is not pseudoscience because it is not a science. It is a form of belief and calling it a pseduoscience gives a legitimacy as a science, which it is not.  Wikipedia and its stupid labeling does not help either.  Wikipedia is doing a disservice. Wikipedia is an insult to intellectualism.

I have had enough of Wikipedia and the pissing contests of pseudohistory, science, and religion.

But yet, this one here is not labeled as “pseudoscience” Wikipedia’s lack of consistency bothers me very much so. That is why it should be used as an encyclopedia ever.



About Justin Royek

I am a critic of Wikipedia that likes to remind people that there are other sources out there than Wikipedia and that knowledge isn't written by a bunch of anonymous nobodies on a blog dressed up as an encyclopedia that Wikipedia is. My name is Justin Royek and this is my personal blog/soapbox for different issues and many things relevant to my life. I am a polyglot that speaks about 10 languages. I am NOT Tim Doner or Benny Lewis or Christophe Clugston or any of those self-proclaimed "polyglots" on YouTube. I am my own blog. I am Justin Edward Royek. Patchman123 on Facebook and YouTube. I am Justin Royek. I AM A WRITER ON MANY ISSUES. I HAVE DECIDED TO CHANGE MY USERNAME ON THE BLOG.
This entry was posted in Histoy. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s