Difference between revisions of "InfoCheckers"

From InfoCheckers

Line 5: Line 5:
Latest Fact Checking: [[Check:_Effects_of_CO2_emissions_on_nature|Man-made climate change]] <br>  
Latest Fact Checking: [[Check:_Effects_of_CO2_emissions_on_nature|Man-made climate change]] <br>  
Latest blog post: [[Blog:US_2020_elections:_widespread_fraud%3F| US 2020 elections: widespread fraud?]] <br>
Latest blog posts: [[Blog:US_2020_elections:_widespread_fraud%3F| US 2020 elections: widespread fraud?]] and  [[Blog:US_2020_elections:_evidence_of_fraud|US 2020 elections: evidence of fraud]]<br>
Latest wiki: [[Orwell:_The_Freedom_of_the_Press|George Orwell's never published original introduction to Animal Farm]]  
Latest wiki: [[Orwell:_The_Freedom_of_the_Press|George Orwell's never published original introduction to Animal Farm]]  

Revision as of 12:04, 26 February 2021

Wiki topics . . . . Blog topics . . . . Forum topics
Nothing can now be believed which is seen in a newspaper. Truth itself becomes suspicious by being put into that polluted vehicle. The real extent of this state of misinformation is known only to those who are in situations to confront facts within their knowledge with the lies of the day. - Thomas Jefferson, 1807

Latest Fact Checking: Man-made climate change
Latest blog posts: US 2020 elections: widespread fraud? and US 2020 elections: evidence of fraud
Latest wiki: George Orwell's never published original introduction to Animal Farm

When searching for information on Internet, how do we discern what is fair and well researched information? For an individual it is not doable to sort it all out.

Search engines serve links to Wikipedia articles near the top of their results, and while the great majority is fine, some of those articles are extremely unreliable. And when we look for better information, the choice is often between two extremes: unquestioned "mainstream" dogma or "alternative" sites of doubtful and often very poor reliability.

This website is meant to serve as a tool for a community of people who want to be well informed and who may want to contribute sometimes. It's now open for everyone to join. By contributing to a Wiki we can obtain much more while spending less time individually.

  • The focus is on our own research-based wiki, correcting selected Wikipedia articles. Categories:
    • Fact Checking websites - existing fact checking sites
    • Current affairs - debated topics that are in the news
    • Society - still relevant topics that have been in the news (or should have been)
    • Environment - air pollution, pesticides etc. - Man-made climate change
    • Health - medicine, alternative medicine, food supplements etc.
    • Science - history of science, relativity, quantum mechanics etc.
(Proposals for topics here)
Count: 23 pages

We will introduce a new method to arrive at a reasonably objective and fair presentation of facts in our Wiki articles.
See Project:Organization and operation,

In The News (or hardly in the news, but should have been):

The parting government of the USA revealed that the U.S. government has reason to believe that several researchers inside the Wuhan Institute of Virology became sick in autumn 2019, before the first identified case of the outbreak, with symptoms consistent with both COVID-19 and common seasonal illnesses. According to them, 'The CCP has prevented independent journalists, investigators, and global health authorities from interviewing researchers at the WIV, including those who were ill in the fall of 2019. [...] the WIV altered and then removed online records of its work with RaTG13 and other viruses [and ...] engaged in classified research, including laboratory animal experiments, on behalf of the Chinese military since at least 2017.'

An open letter by over 100 scientists and doctors appeared on Dec 7, 2020, demanding health authorities to start a campaign to increase vitamin D intakes. The benefit of vitamin D against COVID-19 and the lack of action by health authorities was discussed in Dutch newspaper AD, with English translation here.

A number of breaking news reports have appeared in alternative media about clinical trials with ivermectin as anti-COVID-19 drug, while mainstream media almost exclusively touted trial results with new vaccines. More on this in the a recent blog post.


Contrary to official sources, there is no evidence that the Wuhan coronavirus originated at the now closed food market. The first known infected person apparently had no link to that market. At least one scientific article that shifts suspicion from food markets to virus research facilities has been suppressed. That article presents a selection of referenced facts.

Old "In The News" topics here

This Intro page is open for comments

Short manual here

The Wiki and Forum use cookies for your personal convenience. No third-party cookies. No trackers. No adds.
Blogs may contain Vimeo videos with their own Vimeo cookies only (no trackers).