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.