The real purpose of Wikipedia is to SUPPRESS human knowledge, not document it

Thursday, January 28, 2016 by: J. D. Heyes
Tags: Wikipedia, TruthWiki, encyclopedia

---

(NaturalNews) There is a reason why Wikipedia – which boasts that it is the world's biggest online encyclopedia – is not considered a valid academic source by thousands of professors and most reputable colleges and universities: Because it isn't one.

According to a genuine purveyor of truth, that is, TruthWiki, rival Wikipedia actually works to suppress information and data, simply by excluding it from entries.

"Available in most languages, the definitions, quotes and 'Wiki-species' are full of great details and seem as friendly and reliable as the old Britannica seemed, but a closer look reveals a catalogue of mainstream information rife with error, bias, and omission of some of the most important facts in the realms of health, environmental safety and agricultural sustainability," TruthWiki notes in its Wikipedia entry.

What's more, as Natural News has also reported, nearly all of the seed money used to launch the site came from pornography trafficker Jimmy Wales, a co-founder.

Not an 'encyclopedia'

Wales took a search engine he developed called "Bomis" and transformed it into Wikipedia. As further noted by Truthwiki, the resultant online search product is devoid of factual information regarding alternative health and medicines.

"Though Wales gave Wikipedia his blessing and vow of 'neutrality' of information, the electronic encyclopedia lacks much credibility for many reasons, but is still used widely by US children who don't know any better and want easy access to what they believe are 'facts' for writing book reports, biographies and doing projects for school," Truthwiki notes. "One major way Wikipedia fools people into believing they are posting facts is that Wikipedia sports a massive search engine with authority in Google that equates its rankings to high credibility sources, leading the public to believe in falsities – and on a site that can be altered by critics, liars and computer hacks alike."

Wikipedia's controversial founding, and it's consistent lack of information on key topics – as well as misinformation thereon – was recently documented by Mike Bundrant, co-founder of the iNLP Center.

"Wikipedia is on a misinformation campaign against alternative health and the healing arts. The public needs to know it. Natural health deserves fair representation," said Bundrant.

"Because of its massive search engine authority, Wikipedia entries often rank #1 in Google for specific health related searches. It is often the first information someone reads about a particular topic," Bundrant said. "Given that high search engine results are often equated with high credibility, the public is likely to believe the falsities they are exposed to on Wikipedia.

"Because Wikipedia promotes itself as an 'encyclopedia' (with the goal to replace Encyclopedia Britannica) people often believe that what they are reading must be true," he wrote, adding that his book "will expose the flagrant bias and academic errors or omissions on the Wikipedia domain, pertaining to alternative health movements and modalities."

Alternative data is filtered out

Truthwiki noted that Wikipedia editors were "claiming to use science-based facts for definitions of health and medicine topics," but in reality, the topics the editors display show "a flagrant bias toward anything holistic or organically based, with many half-truths that are purported as legitimate and 'real' science, agriculture and medicine."

In fact, notes Truthwiki, information on Wikipedia is actually filtered to remove all discussion of natural remedies, cures and organic medicine, "referring to anything that is not lab-made as quack medicine, anti-science or even conspiracy theory ..."

Any information of the type that makes it on to Wikipedia is, "pure mainstream, allopathic and biotechnology driven."

Larry Sanger, cofounder of Wikipedia, ended up leaving the organization, citing concerns over integrity and credibility. He has been quoted as saying, "There is no credible mechanism to approve versions of articles. Vandalism, once a minor annoyance, has become a major headache-made possible because the community allows anonymous contribution. Many experts have been driven away because know-nothings insist on ruining their articles."

Search Truthwiki here.

Sources:

Truthwiki.org

NaturalNews.com

FoxNews.com