Ebooks

How Atheists & Fake Christians Corrupt Yahoo Answers & Wikipedia

  • Download 5x Faster
  • Download torrent
  • Direct Download
  • Rate this torrent +  |  -
How Atheists & Fake Christians Corrupt Yahoo Answers & Wikipedia

Free and Direct Download with Usenet 300GB+ free


Torrent info

Name:How Atheists & Fake Christians Corrupt Yahoo Answers & Wikipedia

Total Size: 10.79 MB

Magnet: Magnet Link

Seeds: 0

Leechers: 0

Stream: Watch Online @ Movie4u

Last Updated: 2015-07-29 18:44:02 (Update Now)

Torrent added: 2009-08-20 23:41:29




Torrent Files List


How_Atheists_&_Fake_Christians_Corrupt_Yahoo_Answers_&_Wikipedia.zip (Size: 10.79 MB) (Files: 1)

 How_Atheists_&_Fake_Christians_Corrupt_Yahoo_Answers_&_Wikipedia.zip

10.79 MB
 

tracker

leech seeds
 

Torrent description

In this collection of files is evidence that the majority (and that means about all) of the atheists on Yahoo! Answers and Wikipedia are highly corrupt, and some are extreme schemers. They are given a free pass by moderators and administrators (even after one of them admitted he was a troll on Wikipedia) to harass Christians, especially Calvinistic Christians. That being true, then logically what they say about religion, God, the origin of the universe and it's age, cannot be trusted at all.

Character attacks are a specialty of such people, they pretend that you are attacking them hatefully merely by calling what you are doing, personal attacks and claiming that you must have references and evidences to make your claim. You can't even say they are Darwinists without them going ballistic and slipping in some weasel-words about you insulting them. At the same time the misdefine terms and words. They are fault-finding speech police, resorting to the you said a bad word superstition and even hinting that you are insulting in order to try and get ill-tempered people to get rid of you.

And in order to discredit your references will merely say they aren't valid. For example when references were shown on Wikipedia that atheists were being allowed to stalk Christians on Yahoo! Answers, (the references showed the harassment on answers given by atheists on Yahoo Answers questions, including earlier caches of answers and profiles which showed a certain atheist called Footprints in the Sand changing her name and profile so that she appeared to be a zealous Christian and forum discussions WITH THE MODERATORS overlooking such behavior and various atheists continuing the harassment in the forums). And what was the problem the atheist and pro-atheism moderators had with that? Merely by saying google's caches and the forum posts were not references. In other words, the moderator took the focus off the rest of the references, and focused on what he considered invalid, and pretend the caches and posts had NO CONTENT but were bad, invalid, just cuz.

Thats all these atheists and Darwinists need to do to get the blessing of the head administrators of Wikipedia, is put a bad spin on anything that makes Christianity look valid. All he had to do is claim it wasn't valid and pretend that the google caches were simply caches with nothing there and that the forum post were just forum posts, nothing more. So much for references and so much for Wikipedia NOT being about truth, even if you play their references game they damn you.

They have the bad logic (or teach it in various ways) that as long as they don't call you a hypocrite, moron, stupid, and so on (except vandal or troll) that they aren't insulting you and are doing whats right.

The Wikipedia moderators ALWAYS allow UNREFERENCED comments about animals being primitive or trees or rocks or whatever being billions or millions of years old. They don't say a word or whine about a citation being needed, about evidence being needed. YET when Christians and intelligent-design believers point it out and remove such UNREFERENCED CLAIMS guess what happens all of the sudden? They get enraged and start looking for ANY old page on the net that says *it's billions of years old, and I herd sheep therefore I'm right,* but of course if a Christian or creationist or anyone finds a page with sheep-herders claiming the universe is a few thousand years old, it's unsubstantiated or unverifiable. And what is the SUBSTANTIATED AND VERIFIABLE EVIDENCE FOR THOSE CLAIMS THEMSELVES? It's their word. It's well this reference says so, so your reference doesn't count. See that?

Let me make it clear: They merely cite a reference THAT AGREES WITH THEIR POINT OF VIEW as evidence that their reference is valid and what you say, WITH YOUR REFERENCE OR NOT, INVALID. So really, and as Ive pointed out, and as you can find on no doubt thousands of pages on Wikipedia, YOU DON'T NEED A REFERENCE ON WIKIPEDIA TO CLAIM THAT ANYTHING NATURAL is millions or billions of years old, hence why you come across so few of them or hardly and without any moderator making a fuss over it.

The *you need a reference* nonsense is only brought up if you make a claim that suggests the universe or Earth or the living things on it are only a few thousand years old or less than one million. It all goes back to the hatred of what God said in the Bible. The God-haters pretend science is on their side merely with their word, and if you point it out on Wikipedia, they hunt for references. You could make some shoddy b.s. page claiming you're a scientist saying, The universe is billions of years old because my hamster-powered gadgetronic smoke-sniffing device says so and that counts as a reference.

On top of that, these atheists or Darwinists will even use evidence that the universe was designed AS EVIDENCE that universe WAS NOT designed lol. I kid you not, novangelis cited an essay on the mathematical structure of the universe as evidence that it wasn't designed. He was citing a book called The Mathematical Universe (by Max Tegmark). So they even spin evidence for God against God. They are evil-bent people.

Besides sharing this zip file, you can also digg up this news article here:
Anti-Truth Darwinists Lock the Charles Darwin Page On Wikipedia

And you can learn the truth from these scientifically and archaeologically substantiated and verified books.

And unlike the Wikipedia moderators and administrators, they don't use the cop out *Well it's not about truth, its about references* excuse.

Yeah, we Calvinists know about your *references*: they aren't worth a half a cent.

So which is hypocrite Darwinists? You whine about personal attacks against you, whine about slander against you, whine about lies and non-neutrality, whine about Christians whining, yet claim Wikipedia is not about truth! You especially do this when the truth is pointed out to you, even scientifically substantiated references to back it up. I hope the world will see how stupid this Wikipedia is, whose moderators claim to be teaching the truth while at the same time claiming its not about the truth. Who while claiming its not about truth but SUBSTANTIATED references, who then whine when their references ARE POINTED OUT AS BEING UNSUBSTANTIATED USING GUESS WHAT?: THE TRUTH. See how it works now? Since truth doesn't matter says the Darwinist, they can negate whatever anyone says who opposes them EVEN IF THAT PERSON USES SUBSTANTIATED REFERENCES. They make no sense to claim that Wikipedia is about truth while demanding of Christians SUBSTANTIATED VERIFIABLE REFERENCES. The reason they say *it's not about truth* is an excuse to lie. That is OBVIOUS.

What confused, lying, hypocrites Darwinists are. Round and round their circular reasoning goes, they accuse you of lying while boasting about creating a detailed web of UNTRUSTWORTHY references. How much more stupid and morally warped can they get? Hmmm, well they can murder you and claim to be doing a good deed.

Remember Christians, and anti-Christians, this page can be cited as a reference that Novangelis and the other moderators and members of Wikipedia are, without any logical justification, reverting edits by creationists and Calvinists. And it can be used as a reference that they are posting evolutionary propaganda without any references or with unsubstantiated and unverifiable references (including references that simply reference another source which it doesn't even quote).

Conclusion:

Wikipedia is not about truth, just as it says, and just as we Calvinists have known despite the smug Darwinsts acting like we forget this, No smug Darwinists, we know that you are the ones who not only deliberately lie, but pretend to be telling the truth while forgetting not only Wikipedia's own nonsensical contradictory policy of using TRUTHFUL references, but that you repeatedly forget the meaning of truth, repeatedly think that it means WHATEVER YOU SAY IT MEANS. Hence why I and other Calvinists repeatedly ask that you not be lazy and look up the definition of truth, evidence, and reality. By you forgetting the meaning, you can't even come up with a substantiated or verifiable reference let alone remember what *substantiated* and *verifiable* means.

Stop lying, because God will punish liars. Turn to Christ and get forgiven of your sins and gain eternal life by doing so.

related torrents

Torrent name

health leech seeds Size
 

comments (0)

Main Menu