Student hoaxes world's media on Wikipedia

page: 2
12
<< 1   >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 5 2012 @ 10:28 PM
link   
reply to post by ErroneousDylan
 


Not surprising at all. Anything I read on the internet, I look at the reference. It is mostly on Wiki that the links that the artitcle is referenced lead absolutely nowhere. Do a random search and check it out for yourselves.




posted on Nov, 6 2012 @ 12:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by avocadoshag
I enjoyed reading this, (even if it happened 3 years ago) because I have a healthy skepticism for anything I find on the internet.

Unfortunately, even ATSers aren't immune to the "cut & paste" disease. Haven't you all noticed how many times posts come on here, quoting from an article headline (not the article itself) and generating lots of discussion about the headline. It appears few actually read the article; still fewer investigate the source for that article. Most people are content to believe what they're told, and I think ATS contains more than the average number of skeptics.


That's because too many people are deluding themselves into thinking that being skeptical (alone) about each and every proposition set before them will somehow safeguard them from deception or repeating erroneous propositions or other types of statements. There's more to it than just being skeptical.

They can't see the bigger picture. The man in this speech puts it rather well early on in the video:



Of course this news about the media comes as no suprise to me so that's the reason I don't feel like having to verify if this student did indeed fool a large part of the international media, I was brought up on this stuff:

Jehovah's Witnesses view of the Media



posted on Nov, 6 2012 @ 12:53 AM
link   
reply to post by lacrimaererum
 


Do you understand what a copyright is? The one in the OP article is dated 2012. Meaning the article was written in 2012, not 2009. Get it?



posted on Nov, 6 2012 @ 03:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by TKDRL
reply to post by lacrimaererum
 


Do you understand what a copyright is? The one in the OP article is dated 2012. Meaning the article was written in 2012, not 2009. Get it?


you really have no clue what you are talking about.

the article was last updated 5/12/2009.

this is posed at the beginning of the article. please look again at the article. 5/12/2009.

the copyright tag you are rattling on about is posted at the end of every article and next year this will turn into 2013. It is simply a tag that is automatically placed at the end of every article to copyright the material.

It is absolutely nothing to do with when the article was written.

get it?





 
12
<< 1   >>

log in

join