User:Tgeorgescu/nobigots

If anyone claims Those are religions, not science or pseudoscience. Wikipedia will never say that those claims are false, and Wikipedia will never say that those claims are true. We describe them as accurately as possible, and we describe who holds those beliefs. However, the following claims are both religion and pseudoscience: The above are all religious pseudoscience because, although motivated by religion, they make claims that purport to be factual and supported by science but are not. --Guy Macon (talk) 13:29, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
 * "God exists and created all things".
 * "Jesus saved me and the Bible is his inspired word".
 * "The Torah, both Written and Oral, as literally revealed by God on Mount Sinai and faithfully transmitted ever since"'
 * "Joseph Smith is a true prophet, and translated the Book of Mormon from golden plates with divine assistance".
 * "God reliably heals people of HIV. You have received his healing and you can stop taking your medications".
 * "What you read in the Torah is historical fact, literally happened exactly as described, all of the scientists who say otherwise are wrong and quite possibly antisemitic".
 * "Joseph Smith says that in the pre-Columbian Americas there were horses, elephants, and steel swords that rusted, so those are historical facts and all of the scientists who say otherwise are wrong."
 * "The earth is less than 10,000 years old, and humans and dinosaurs coexisted."

IZAK, you are wrong. We do NOT "report all sides of the coin" as if they are equally valid. Yes, we do report that all sides of the coin exist (See WP:WEIGHT), but we often report that one side or the other is wrong. As I explained to you in User talk:IZAK, we don't report evolution and creationism, holocaust studies and holocaust denial, or the sociology of race, and scientific racism as "two sides of the same coin". We report that both exist, but we also report that creationists, holocaust deniers, and scientific racists are full of crap. Sure, we use nice language like "The methodologies of Holocaust deniers are often based on a predetermined conclusion that ignores overwhelming historical evidence to the contrary" and "Historically, scientific racism received credence throughout the scientific community, but it is no longer considered scientific", but those are just nice ways of saying that holocaust deniers and scientific racists are full of crap. As is your theory that the Angel of Death killing the firstborn of Egypt is a historical fact, but somehow the extensive records the Egyptians left failed to record such a major event. --Guy Macon (talk) 22:37, 16 June 2020 (UTC)