Infected RationalWiki - Whiny hugbox for spergs and a clusterfuck of neverending drama on a rapidly declining website.

[TheTrumanShow]

It originally existed to debunk (and make fun of) Andrew Schlafly's Conservapedia, a terrible wiki written primarily by his homeschool coop students to regurgitate whatever ultra-fundamentalist beliefs he was feeding them. (Relativity is bad because it's the physical equivalent of moral relativism, the Earth is 6000 years old, lists of people Andy didn't like, etc.) But it wasn't enough to observe and report. Their agents became editors and even high-ranking mods, and booted off the outside editors who thought they actually were creating a conservative Wikipedia, leaving only the insane and those who needed Andy's approval for their diploma. Thus Conservapedia, which was handicapped from the beginning, was dealt a death blow. Then RW kind of disappeared up its own asshole.

Oh shit, yeah I remember that. Exactly. Thank you! Clears up the foggy memory!

While we're digging up old internet history, did "metapedia" have a connection at all to conservapedia or not? Like did some people migrate from A to B or was it always two distinct things? If you know.


Pretty sure it didn't. Just remembered it now when you mentioned conservapedia.

 

[AnOminous]

Help me out guys, was Rational wiki ever a "rational" wiki? Like was there a time when they weren't pseudo-intellectual libtards maintaining their poor copy of ED?

It was okay when it was largely deboonking shit like Young Earth Creationists and other fringe wackos rather than just being anti-Christian in general and pushing SJW stuff easily as crazy. It hasn't been "rational" in years. You can still get a hint of the flavor of the old site in older articles like Kent Hovind's when the site had a focus on actually irrational shit and an actual sense of humor.

There was always more than a touch of euphoric fedora-tipping but it was generally aimed at actual idiots, instead of being written by actual idiots.

 

[TheTrumanShow]

It was okay when it was largely deboonking shit like Young Earth Creationists and other fringe wackos rather than just being anti-Christian in general and pushing SJW stuff easily as crazy. It hasn't been "rational" in years. You can still get a hint of the flavor of the old site in older articles like Kent Hovind's when the site had a focus on actually irrational shit and an actual sense of humor.

There was always more than a touch of euphoric fedora-tipping but it was generally aimed at actual idiots, instead of being written by actual idiots.

Good to know Im not going crazy here. Yeah the site had a pretty long fall from what ever little grace it had. Im starting to get old man, feeling like "the internets were better back when I was a kid" overall. Every generation supposedly has nostalgia. Either its a fallacy or shit is getting worse all the time, we're just getting better at managing it, lol.

 

[Syaoran Li]

Oh shit, yeah I remember that. Exactly. Thank you! Clears up the foggy memory!

While we're digging up old internet history, did "metapedia" have a connection at all to conservapedia or not? Like did some people migrate from A to B or was it always two distinct things? If you know.


Pretty sure it didn't. Just remembered it now when you mentioned conservapedia.

I think Metapedia initially emerged from Stormfront but then they diverged very quickly. I could be wrong though. I don't even know if Metapedia still exists.

 

[TheTrumanShow]

I think Metapedia initially emerged from Stormfront but then they diverged very quickly. I could be wrong though. I don't even know if Metapedia still exists.

Seems to be online.

Their featured video is some obscure nordic-trance music video from April 21 2021 with 1400 views in total. It seems to have devolved to someones personal promotion tool for their average-shitty home made electromusic.

Metapedia

en.metapedia.org

 

[Wallace]

Did Bardfinn start editing this site?

 

[Large]

Did Bardfinn start editing this site?

View attachment 2778141
View attachment 2778142
View attachment 2778143

Search and replace TERF to "mason"/"illuminati"/"jew servant"

 

[Oats12345]

I remmber for a while they had a huge debate on rather Jerry Seinfeld should be labeled a conservative or not. Even through Jerry has been a vocal democrat for years!! The reason that started the debate was when Jerry stated he would no longer do college campus because they couldn't take un political correct jokes.

Thankfully that stupid debate ended a couple of years back.

But seriously it really shows how retarded they are when they can't even do basic research despite criticizing the right for doing that!!

 

[General Gunther]

The one thing I've learned from seeing the downfall of RationalWiki is that it doesn't matter how smart you think you are, how unbiased you think you are or how enlightened from atheism you think you are: Everyone devoted to an ideology or not has or will develop a weak spot where they cannot see nuance, lose the ability to think critically and become incapable to face facts that go against what they believe to be true when it comes to a particular subject/situation.

It's just part of human nature for someone to have a bias towards something. However the people who run and edit RationalWiki think they're immune to all that.

 

[LeChampion1992]

The one thing I've learned from seeing the downfall of RationalWiki is that it doesn't matter how smart you think you are, how unbiased you think you are or how enlightened from atheism you think you are: Everyone devoted to an ideology or not has or will develop a weak spot where they cannot see nuance, lose the ability to think critically and become incapable to face facts that go against what they believe to be true when it comes to a particular subject/situation.

It's just part of human nature for someone to have a bias towards something. However the people who run and edit RationalWiki think they're immune to all that.

At the end of the day you can convince the most reactionary person to think twice about their ideas. But alot of these "rational" and "enlightened" people often reflect the dark age mindsets.

 

[Zbk3VmLfujjzjxBd43tL]

The one thing I've learned from seeing the downfall of RationalWiki is that it doesn't matter how smart you think you are, how unbiased you think you are or how enlightened from atheism you think you are: Everyone devoted to an ideology or not has or will develop a weak spot where they cannot see nuance, lose the ability to think critically and become incapable to face facts that go against what they believe to be true when it comes to a particular subject/situation.

It's just part of human nature for someone to have a bias towards something. However the people who run and edit RationalWiki think they're immune to all that.

Because science is their religion, making them just as religious as their arch-nemesis Conservapedia. While having science as your religion might help you understand the world isn't 6,000 years old and magic crystals don't actually cure cancer, apparently it's not so useful these days in trying to discern the number of genders or getting over your anxiety about an orange guy who used to live in a white house.

 

[Super-Chevy454]

Because science is their religion, making them just as religious as their arch-nemesis Conservapedia. While having science as your religion might help you understand the world isn't 6,000 years old and magic crystals don't actually cure cancer, apparently it's not so useful these days in trying to discern the number of genders or getting over your anxiety about an orange guy who used to live in a white house.

That reminds me of a meme mentioned in an other thread about science. Ironic to see until corona-chan came, they wanted to get rid of science because of its whiteness.

 

[Mr Metron666]

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Social_justice_warrior#Shutting_down_conversation

Anyone know who this Max Hill dude is and why RW feels he’s important enough to quote (the only thing I am 100% certain of is that he’s a total cuck)?
I did a google search and the only major result I got was this bloke;

Doesn’t exactly sound like the guy being quoted above. That shit sounds like it’s coming from the piehole of a Marxist professor at Berkeley.

 

[brentkanaris]

Of course they support the covid regime.

https://mobile.twitter.com/RationalWiki/status/1494747710578171906

 

[winderson_silva]

I don't get one thing in their site.
They all but said "terrorism is overated, people die more to car accidents so it isn't as scary as people wanna think."
Can't this argument be used to say the alt right, the neonazis or even the "Dominionists" they fear so much are overated?
Because I'm sure car accidents kill more people in the US than white supremacists.

 

[Shaka Brah]

Of course they support the covid regime.

https://mobile.twitter.com/RationalWiki/status/1494747710578171906

RationalWiki is a study bible for Scientism believers. It's the essential reference to check any topic and find its translation into bugman beliefs.

With that in mind it should be no surprise that they're always the first people to support the regime if the orders come from their civic-religious authorities.

 

[Hellbound Hellhound]

Seems to be online.

Their featured video is some obscure nordic-trance music video from April 21 2021 with 1400 views in total. It seems to have devolved to someones personal promotion tool for their average-shitty home made electromusic.

Metapedia

en.metapedia.org

Metapedia is basically for Stormfags who are too pretentious to admit to being Stormfags, while RationalWiki is for remorseful fedora-tippers who jumped on the SJW bandwagon in penitence for their former association with fedora-tippers. Conservapedia is for wacko fundies/young-Earth creationists.

There used to be a bunch more of these niche Wikipedia knock-offs, although I've forgotten most of them by now. Two notable ones I can think of are Encyclopedia Dramatica, which was primarily for shock, drama, and/or laughing at internet lolcows (basically a proto-Kiwi Farms), and Uncyclopedia, which contained deliberately false and/or exaggerated information for comedic effect.

 

[The Ugly One]

Because science is their religion, making them just as religious as their arch-nemesis Conservapedia. While having science as your religion might help you understand the world isn't 6,000 years old and magic crystals don't actually cure cancer, apparently it's not so useful these days in trying to discern the number of genders or getting over your anxiety about an orange guy who used to live in a white house.

The problem with science-worshipers is they by necessity have to sit at the midwit inflection point. If you have really made any bones at all in scientific research, by the time you publish your first paper, you will have to come to grips with the fact that there is an enormous volume of stuff that you will never know nor understand, and that in fact there is a tremendous amount of uncertainty in everything...and much of this is driven by corrupt sellouts in your own field who have realized it's easiest farm NHS/NSF/etc grants if you just massage your data to show the bureaucrats what they want to see.

Science-worshipers think that Science is a "side" they can "take." They have at best the childish understanding of science that we tell high schoolers, that it's this neutral process of experiment, peer review, and replication that tests hypotheses and finds bulletproof results. There's some source they can go to, probably some combination of Wikipedia, the New York Times, and official statements of public bureaucrats, and get the official Science Position.

Salient example: Anyone who's done science knew immediately that the proclamation that COVID-19 could not have originated in the Wuhan lab was nonsense. Auditing the research, the security protocols, and verifying that the strain in the wild was unrelated to anything that had ever been developed in the lab should have taken no less than a year. The idea that "forty scientists signed a letter" was some kind of proof was insulting, and the fact that social media started locking accounts based on it proved to anyone with a brain that they were just regime shills. But to RationalWiki types, they don't actually understand any of that. They don't actually understand "forty scientists signed a letter" isn't science.

 

[AnOminous]

RationalWiki is a study bible for Scientism believers. It's the essential reference to check any topic and find its translation into bugman beliefs.

It hasn't been that for some time. Arguably it was actually fulfilling a useful or at least humorous purpose when that's what it was. It's now like if you took all the Atheism+ bullshit and drove out any of the normal-ish atheists.

 

[Zbk3VmLfujjzjxBd43tL]

I don't get one thing in their site.
They all but said "terrorism is overated, people die more to car accidents so it isn't as scary as people wanna think."
Can't this argument be used to say the alt right, the neonazis or even the "Dominionists" they fear so much are overated?
Because I'm sure car accidents kill more people in the US than white supremacists.

RatWiki has a lot of pages stuck in the Bush era/early Obama era, and that's probably one of them. The problem is they didn't come to those beliefs out of genuine critical thinking, but only because they wanted to score political points against their enemy.