Which do you think is more widespread on the I'net, misinformation or information?

Question

I ask this because the same incorrect statements are often repeated as facts.


Examples:

Darwin recanted on his deathbed (lie) No he didn't.

Einstein believed in God. (lie) Einstein was an atheist.

The US Motto "In God We Trust" was established by the founding fathers. (lie) it was made official in 1954, not 1776.

Bible has been proven to be historically accurate. (lie) its accuracy is under serious scholarly dispute.

Creationism ("ID") has been accepted by most scientists. (lie) most scientists consider it "junk science."

dozens more on a variety of subjects...

Do you think the I'net is spreading misinformation more than it is information?

I trust Wikipedia unless I have reason to believe otherwise.

misinformation means "incorrect information."

It can only be misunderstood if you are illiterate. Which is a possibility.

Einstein was an atheist. I have read many of his works, long before the I'net was invented by Al Gore, and he was an atheist.

Lies about Darwin's deathbed "conversion:"

"Such stories have been propagated by some Christian groups, to the extent of becoming urban legends, though the claims were refuted by Darwin's children and have been dismissed as false by historians. His daughter, Henrietta, who was at his deathbed, said that he did not convert to Christianity.[7]"

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Darwin

Marble, there is no reason to confuse the issue by defining Einstein's beliefs as anything other than atheist. That is the correct term to use and is clearly understood by all.

He did not believe in a Supreme Being and by definition, an atheist, regardless what else he was.

Answer 1

It really depends on how lazy and gullible you are.

If you tend to believe what you read without substantiation or stop looking after the first couple of web sites then you are going to be full of misinformed opinions.

If on the other hand you look at the source of the info and require not only substantiated info but are willing to put some time and effort into your research you stand a lot better chance of being well informed.

Alas, I am afraid that if we are not careful we will watch the dawning of the age of wikiality..

Answer 2

misinformation & information are both largely present here.
I usually check many different websites before i strongly believe something to be true. And even then im not surprised if it turns out I was wrong.
I will use Wikipedia as well as others. They would have false information on there as well as any other book in my opinion. The fun is trying to discover truth anyway, it helps keep me on my toes. It no doubt helps be cultivate an anaylitcal thought process. I will often look for sites for and against a subject. Sometimes I get rather annoyed if all I find is sites saying things I agree with because it doesnt help me get at truth.
I would also like to add that Wikipedia can have its articles edited by praticuly anyone, and I think that this will, believe it or not, actually keep the information more trustworthy rather than untrustworthy.

Answer 3

Overall, there is probably more accurate information on the internet than inaccurate. Of course, that's just my uninformed judgement.

Regardless, I question whether or not you truly seek an answer to your question. It appears as if your question is intended to advance a platform, and not to actually gain knowledge. All of your assertions are true, but this may be an inappropriate platform for their presentation.

Please, let's keep the debate elevated.

EDIT:
Incidentally, I've read much of Einstein's non-scientific writings, myself. He was an atheist, by etymological definition, but not in the way the term was commonly used. He was deeply spiritual, and expressed great praise for Buddhism, though I don't believe he was ever a practicing Buddhist.

In response to the question, "Do you believe in God?", asked by Rabbi Herbert S. Goldstein, Einstein responded:

"I believe in Spinoza's God, Who reveals Himself in the lawful harmony of the world, not in a God Who concerns Himself with the fate and the doings of mankind."

Baruch Spinoza was the father of naturalistic pantheism.

Answer 4

The problem is the sources that people use. I see people here quote websites that have been made on geocities with a hello kitty background. Sadly, the internet's accessibility has made it possible for many individuals to lie and spread lies. The use of memetics is also what keeps them going.

Answer 5

I would like to see your sources on some of your statements.
It seems that you are actually asking whether the Internet supplies more accurate information than inaccurate information or vice versa. Is this right? You see, misinformation is still information; it just isn't accurate. In which case it is like your question, imprecise and easily understood differently than its intent.

Answer 6

Darwin: Were you had his deathbed? All we have are second-hand accounts. The fear of death does strange things to people.

Einstein: He was not atheist, he was pantheist.
Otherwise, you are correct. I am not sure about the U.S. motto, but I do know that under god was added to the pledge in the 50's. You're probably right, though.

Answer 7

Who said those statements are "lies"? Do you know that for a fact? Were you there? Do you have inside information? You certainly act like you have all the answers. You are just trying to make a case against God and guess what bud, it ain't working.

Answer 8

The intenet is full of shoddy stuff.

i.e. porn, religious propaganda, pointless political babbling, Billy Bob Sue's website about how much he loves chicken pot pies, etc...

So yeah, crap overall is what's spreading over the internet. It just so happens that some of the crap is also uninformative

Answer 9

Being a cynic, I would say it spreads more mis-information. The basis for that idea is that the internet doesn't check your references when you put something up on you webpage.

Answer 10

And whom do you trust as a reference point?