John Allman Posted July 9, 2011 Group: Members Followers: 0 Topic Count: 0 Topics Per Day: 0 Content Count: 6 Content Per Day: 0.00 Reputation: 0 Days Won: 0 Joined: 06/29/2011 Status: Offline Share Posted July 9, 2011 Do those who had heard of the case through press coverage, find that the Wikipedia entry corresponds with the press coverage? You have to take Wikipedia with a grain of salt. Anyone can write or change anything with in there, and there is nothing to keep truth monitored. Hence my unanswered question. What you regard as a weakness of Wikipedia, I regard as a strength. I trust many internet sources like Wikipedia far more than I trust, say, the BBC, or major newspapers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nebula Posted July 9, 2011 Group: Royal Member Followers: 10 Topic Count: 5,823 Topics Per Day: 0.76 Content Count: 45,870 Content Per Day: 5.95 Reputation: 1,897 Days Won: 83 Joined: 03/22/2003 Status: Offline Birthday: 11/19/1970 Share Posted July 9, 2011 Wikipedia has a rep for having a Liberal slant, though. And all I said was you have to take it with a grain of salt. That doesn't mean what it has isn't accurate; you just have to do your own verifying. In any event, teachers do not allow it as an official source. Call it a knee-jerk reaction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Butero Posted July 9, 2011 Share Posted July 9, 2011 Oh yeah - has anyone been praying for her salvation? well now that you mention it Neb, I'm ashamed to say that I have not...... yet. Don't feel bad....there's a post in the Prayer Requests thread asking prayer for her. The shocking thing I discovered was, I joined a FB group last night called "Justice for Caylee"...this morning one of the posters left a message that kinda bothers me....it said "Morning, is Casey dead yet?" My mouth dropped when I read that. Is there a lot of people out there calling for this? I sure hope not, that makes us no better. a. Even though she looks guilty, I can't see sitting back hoping someone kills her when we don't know for sure? We are supposed to be innocent till proven guilty. If you are found not guilty, and then people continue to treat you like you committed the crime anyway, there is a problem with the system, or at least the way we look at it. If she did kill her child, the Lord will deal with her on judgement day. While there are a lot of people that won't like the comparison, we are murdering 1.5 million babies legally each year through abortion. Why don't we have similar outrage? God will deal with all of these people when they stand before him in his righteous court room. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nebula Posted July 9, 2011 Group: Royal Member Followers: 10 Topic Count: 5,823 Topics Per Day: 0.76 Content Count: 45,870 Content Per Day: 5.95 Reputation: 1,897 Days Won: 83 Joined: 03/22/2003 Status: Offline Birthday: 11/19/1970 Share Posted July 9, 2011 While there are a lot of people that won't like the comparison, we are murdering 1.5 million babies legally each year through abortion. Why don't we have similar outrage? God will deal with all of these people when they stand before him in his righteous court room. I sympathize your frustration. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shiloh357 Posted July 10, 2011 Share Posted July 10, 2011 Do those who had heard of the case through press coverage, find that the Wikipedia entry corresponds with the press coverage? You have to take Wikipedia with a grain of salt. Anyone can write or change anything with in there, and there is nothing to keep truth monitored. Hence my unanswered question. What you regard as a weakness of Wikipedia, I regard as a strength. I trust many internet sources like Wikipedia far more than I trust, say, the BBC, or major newspapers. I don't see how you can put that much trust in a user-edited source that can anyone can alter and skew facts and fill it with misleading and inaccurate information. There is no monitor for accuracy. How you can paint that as a strength is mindboggling. Wikipedia is a very unreliable and weak source. That is not to say I hold the BBC in high regard or much of the mainstream media for that matter, but to act like Wikipedia is a reliable source for information is just beyond the pale of reality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MorningGlory Posted July 10, 2011 Group: Royal Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 1,022 Topics Per Day: 0.16 Content Count: 39,193 Content Per Day: 6.11 Reputation: 9,977 Days Won: 78 Joined: 10/01/2006 Status: Offline Share Posted July 10, 2011 Oh yeah - has anyone been praying for her salvation? well now that you mention it Neb, I'm ashamed to say that I have not...... yet. Don't feel bad....there's a post in the Prayer Requests thread asking prayer for her. The shocking thing I discovered was, I joined a FB group last night called "Justice for Caylee"...this morning one of the posters left a message that kinda bothers me....it said "Morning, is Casey dead yet?" My mouth dropped when I read that. Is there a lot of people out there calling for this? I sure hope not, that makes us no better. a. Even though she looks guilty, I can't see sitting back hoping someone kills her when we don't know for sure? We are supposed to be innocent till proven guilty. If you are found not guilty, and then people continue to treat you like you committed the crime anyway, there is a problem with the system, or at least the way we look at it. If she did kill her child, the Lord will deal with her on judgement day. While there are a lot of people that won't like the comparison, we are murdering 1.5 million babies legally each year through abortion. Why don't we have similar outrage? God will deal with all of these people when they stand before him in his righteous court room. Very true and, when we stand in His courtroom, His verdict is final and there is no appeal. People need to get beyond this verdict and stop wishing Casey Anthony dead (or making threats against her and her family). We are a society that lives by our laws, not some theocracy where mob rule prevails. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anitarose Posted July 10, 2011 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 2 Topic Count: 65 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 1,066 Content Per Day: 0.16 Reputation: 26 Days Won: 0 Joined: 08/15/2006 Status: Offline Birthday: 02/02/1961 Share Posted July 10, 2011 Oh yeah - has anyone been praying for her salvation? well now that you mention it Neb, I'm ashamed to say that I have not...... yet. Don't feel bad....there's a post in the Prayer Requests thread asking prayer for her. The shocking thing I discovered was, I joined a FB group last night called "Justice for Caylee"...this morning one of the posters left a message that kinda bothers me....it said "Morning, is Casey dead yet?" My mouth dropped when I read that. Is there a lot of people out there calling for this? I sure hope not, that makes us no better. a. Even though she looks guilty, I can't see sitting back hoping someone kills her when we don't know for sure? We are supposed to be innocent till proven guilty. If you are found not guilty, and then people continue to treat you like you committed the crime anyway, there is a problem with the system, or at least the way we look at it. If she did kill her child, the Lord will deal with her on judgement day. While there are a lot of people that won't like the comparison, we are murdering 1.5 million babies legally each year through abortion. Why don't we have similar outrage? God will deal with all of these people when they stand before him in his righteous court room. Very true and, when we stand in His courtroom, His verdict is final and there is no appeal. People need to get beyond this verdict and stop wishing Casey Anthony dead (or making threats against her and her family). We are a society that lives by our laws, not some theocracy where mob rule prevails. Hey some of these "morons" (for lack of a better term) have been issuing death threats against the jurors in the case as well. All they did was their "civic duty" and people want them dead? Doesn't make sense to me.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sheya joie Posted July 10, 2011 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 7 Topic Count: 13 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 2,054 Content Per Day: 0.29 Reputation: 351 Days Won: 2 Joined: 03/15/2005 Status: Offline Share Posted July 10, 2011 Do those who had heard of the case through press coverage, find that the Wikipedia entry corresponds with the press coverage? You have to take Wikipedia with a grain of salt. Anyone can write or change anything with in there, and there is nothing to keep truth monitored. Hence my unanswered question. What you regard as a weakness of Wikipedia, I regard as a strength. I trust many internet sources like Wikipedia far more than I trust, say, the BBC, or major newspapers. I don't see how you can put that much trust in a user-edited source that can anyone can alter and skew facts and fill it with misleading and inaccurate information. There is no monitor for accuracy. How you can paint that as a strength is mindboggling. Wikipedia is a very unreliable and weak source. That is not to say I hold the BBC in high regard or much of the mainstream media for that matter, but to act like Wikipedia is a reliable source for information is just beyond the pale of reality. Going OT here, but this reminds me of the time I used Wikipedia to look up Thomas Nast, a famous editorial cartoonist from the late 1800's, the originator of the symbols of the elephant for the Republican party and the donkey for the Democratic party. And from Wikipedia I learned... ... that Nast died of a round-house kick to the face from Chuck Norris. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nebula Posted July 10, 2011 Group: Royal Member Followers: 10 Topic Count: 5,823 Topics Per Day: 0.76 Content Count: 45,870 Content Per Day: 5.95 Reputation: 1,897 Days Won: 83 Joined: 03/22/2003 Status: Offline Birthday: 11/19/1970 Share Posted July 10, 2011 Going OT here, but this reminds me of the time I used Wikipedia to look up Thomas Nast, a famous editorial cartoonist from the late 1800's, the originator of the symbols of the elephant for the Republican party and the donkey for the Democratic party. And from Wikipedia I learned... ... that Nast died of a round-house kick to the face from Chuck Norris. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nebula Posted July 10, 2011 Group: Royal Member Followers: 10 Topic Count: 5,823 Topics Per Day: 0.76 Content Count: 45,870 Content Per Day: 5.95 Reputation: 1,897 Days Won: 83 Joined: 03/22/2003 Status: Offline Birthday: 11/19/1970 Share Posted July 10, 2011 Hey some of these "morons" (for lack of a better term) have been issuing death threats against the jurors in the case as well. All they did was their "civic duty" and people want them dead? Doesn't make sense to me.... Yeah . . . we need to pray for these people, too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts