(April 13, 2009 at 3:38 am)leo-rcc Wrote: You mean to tell me that a subject where scientists are not even in agreement upon is a base for dismissing Wiki as a reliable source?
What reliable source on the historicity of Jesus do you have?
Leo ... did you actually bother reading my piece earlier? I know it wasn't finished but hey, time's precious.
Whether you like it or not, I DO NOT consider Wikipedia to be reliable! Whether you approve or not that is unlikely to change withoiut major changes in the way Wiki is administered and I WILL NOT accept Wiki to be a reliable source until they change the way things are handled and like it or not, administrators hiding behind anonymity is a SERIOUSLY BIG HUGE FUCK OFF problem for me. Likewise the fact that many articles are simply volunteered and expert opinions are not sought is a problem.
We both agree it is a useful starting point but I CANNOT consider it a source.
Kyu
Angry Atheism
Where those who are hacked off with the stupidity of irrational belief can vent their feelings!
Come over to the dark side, we have cookies!
Kyuuketsuki, AngryAtheism Owner & Administrator
Where those who are hacked off with the stupidity of irrational belief can vent their feelings!
Come over to the dark side, we have cookies!
Kyuuketsuki, AngryAtheism Owner & Administrator
