BLP vs. Wikipedia
Posted: Sun Aug 17, 2014 10:57 pm
The blowback at the corrupt and bigoted scientific and academic community for ignoring "fringe" science may have begun. This is only the beginning.
This lawsuit is about Blacklight Power versus Wikipedia. I am not a big fan of either Blacklight Power or Wikipedia, but BLP has a right to NOT be called frauds and Wikipedia does NOT have a right to call people frauds without positive evidence. Since I have been following BLP for several years and I am certain that I am uncertain about them, I have no sympathy for Wikipedia calling them frauds.
People involved in homeopathy, flower remedies, essential oils and a whole host of other things should be cheering for BLP to rip Wikipedia in court:
http://www.williamslopatto.com/uploads/ ... plaint.pdf
"Consensus science" is a contradiction in terms. Only the evidence counts. And the so-called experts are inherently incapable of being able to accept new paradigms.
Sincerely,
Roger Bird
This lawsuit is about Blacklight Power versus Wikipedia. I am not a big fan of either Blacklight Power or Wikipedia, but BLP has a right to NOT be called frauds and Wikipedia does NOT have a right to call people frauds without positive evidence. Since I have been following BLP for several years and I am certain that I am uncertain about them, I have no sympathy for Wikipedia calling them frauds.
People involved in homeopathy, flower remedies, essential oils and a whole host of other things should be cheering for BLP to rip Wikipedia in court:
http://www.williamslopatto.com/uploads/ ... plaint.pdf
"Consensus science" is a contradiction in terms. Only the evidence counts. And the so-called experts are inherently incapable of being able to accept new paradigms.
Sincerely,
Roger Bird