Thanks for sharing that and for the name of the organization. They sound great. Am I reading this correctly that one may potentially fund the other in some circumstances, and thus there is room for both?
IONS Is actually serious about doing research into it while jref are like toxic atheists
All I’ve heard of jref and randi is that they are against research into it and try to discredit any organisations that want to seriously research and study it in bad faith, its the same thing I’ve seen atheists do
Basically IONS is the kid who wants to play card games with people in class while jref, randi and atheists are the negative nancy kid who wants to take away those cards and ruin the fun for everyone because they don’t like it
The jref article on Wikipedia is also likely under the control of that guerilla wikipedia editing group that has taken over control of certain sections of Wikipedia
That guerilla group acts like the negative nancy kid I described in the earlier analogy
These are the same kinds of groups that spawn wikipedia editor wars
I’m not going to mention that groups name because it’ll show up on Google indexes for anyone using advanced google search operators and will put a target on my comment
Thanks for sharing that and for the name of the organization. They sound great. Am I reading this correctly that one may potentially fund the other in some circumstances, and thus there is room for both?
Also I’d suggest getting information about IONS from IONS themselves and not wikipedia
IONS Is actually serious about doing research into it while jref are like toxic atheists
All I’ve heard of jref and randi is that they are against research into it and try to discredit any organisations that want to seriously research and study it in bad faith, its the same thing I’ve seen atheists do
Basically IONS is the kid who wants to play card games with people in class while jref, randi and atheists are the negative nancy kid who wants to take away those cards and ruin the fun for everyone because they don’t like it
The jref article on Wikipedia is also likely under the control of that guerilla wikipedia editing group that has taken over control of certain sections of Wikipedia
That guerilla group acts like the negative nancy kid I described in the earlier analogy
These are the same kinds of groups that spawn wikipedia editor wars
I’m not going to mention that groups name because it’ll show up on Google indexes for anyone using advanced google search operators and will put a target on my comment
That is totally wild! Never would’ve guessed.