Comments on: FreeThoughtPedia? http://www.anatheist.net/2008/08/freethoughtpedia/ Atheism & Religious Skepticism Mon, 15 Mar 2010 21:36:44 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 By: piile http://www.anatheist.net/2008/08/freethoughtpedia/comment-page-1/#comment-3509 piile Fri, 03 Apr 2009 16:41:07 +0000 http://www.anatheist.net/?p=321#comment-3509 Look up the definition of freethought. Unlike "conservapedia" which panders to a particular world view. The nature under which truth is determined to a freethinker and the freethought movement is clearly delineated. If you find any information on that wiki that cannot be easily justified using material evidence and the scientific method, feel free to correct the passages. But just because you disagree with something ambiguously does not mean you are right, or that the resource has no value or legitimacy. Look up the definition of freethought. Unlike “conservapedia” which panders to a particular world view. The nature under which truth is determined to a freethinker and the freethought movement is clearly delineated. If you find any information on that wiki that cannot be easily justified using material evidence and the scientific method, feel free to correct the passages. But just because you disagree with something ambiguously does not mean you are right, or that the resource has no value or legitimacy.

]]> By: Eightym http://www.anatheist.net/2008/08/freethoughtpedia/comment-page-1/#comment-3493 Eightym Fri, 03 Apr 2009 06:58:56 +0000 http://www.anatheist.net/?p=321#comment-3493 Hell, no! All of the articles are written by the owner of the website. He is atheist to the point of irrationality. Not good! Hell, no! All of the articles are written by the owner of the website. He is atheist to the point of irrationality. Not good!

]]> By: Colleen Chaos http://www.anatheist.net/2008/08/freethoughtpedia/comment-page-1/#comment-1858 Colleen Chaos Mon, 12 Jan 2009 04:00:03 +0000 http://www.anatheist.net/?p=321#comment-1858 I agree encyclopedias need to stick with facts. That's what they are used for, not another person's opinion. To me it's a bad idea. No way will I rely on it. BTW, Thanks for commenting my blog. Have a great weekend. :) I agree encyclopedias need to stick with facts. That's what they are used for, not another person's opinion.

To me it's a bad idea. No way will I rely on it.

BTW, Thanks for commenting my blog. Have a great weekend. :)

]]> By: Colleen Chaos http://www.anatheist.net/2008/08/freethoughtpedia/comment-page-1/#comment-677 Colleen Chaos Sat, 30 Aug 2008 01:57:21 +0000 http://www.anatheist.net/?p=321#comment-677 I agree encyclopedias need to stick with facts. That's what they are used for, not another person's opinion. To me it's a bad idea. No way will I rely on it. BTW, Thanks for commenting my blog. Have a great weekend. :) I agree encyclopedias need to stick with facts. That’s what they are used for, not another person’s opinion.

To me it’s a bad idea. No way will I rely on it.

BTW, Thanks for commenting my blog. Have a great weekend. :)

]]>