Skip to main content

Would YOU rely almost exclusively on Wikipedia to prove your claims?

Secular koranism was invented by Claire Khaw in 2009. Despite its 15 years in existence, Microsoft's "Copilot", the software giant's newly developed AI companion, was perhaps not the most flattering when asked about "secular koranism" this week The last in October 2023) ......

or, because of her past associations and activities, about Claire Khaw herself. The AI brought up her BNP past and promptly dispensed with it returning this answer:

Claire Khaw ALWAYS, without fail, uses Wikipedia (unless quoting one of her miscreant acolyte's personal blogs) as her source to back up her claims. Bear in mind Wikipedia themselves (rather ironically, I'm using a Wikipedia link myself below, although in fairness, Wikipedia rightly do not allow these two pages to be edited by the public!) issue two warning about using them as a reference, which are reproduced here. I have concluded that this is because there are no other validated, reliable sources available to back up many of her claims.

No, that's not what Wikipedia themselves say Claire! Why not fact check things yourself Claire Khaw! You are the one mkaing the outlandish claims all the time! And if you have to head off somewhere else to check it, as you perhaps suggest, surely it would be simpler and more ethical/moral go to the authoritative source in the first place!
Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a reliable source - Wikipedia
 Wikipedia:Citing Wikipedia - Wikipedia

 She added this at 12:45 on Sunday morning, 29 Oct 23

The first two screen grabs here are as recent as 28 Oct 23, despite having been telling her for a year or more about the reliability of using Wikipedia as a verifiable and recognised source of proof for a claim, But she will not listen. This is rather strange for someone who claims to be a legally-qualified (honours degree non-practising barrister) moralist, a psychologist, a scientist, a philosopher and a political campaigner, all on top of being "the most theologically knowledgable person in the West, if not the whole wide world" (see How indeed?)

 
 Some of the claims she has made that she uses Wikipedia to back her up.






Remember, she claims to be a legally-qualified (honours degree non-practising barrister) moralist, a psychologist, a scientist, a philosopher and a political campaigner, all on top of being "the most theologically knowledgeable person in the West, if not the whole wide world" (see How indeed?) yet relies so heavily on Wikipedia as her source.
 
This is what the somewhat non-PC but very funny Jeremy Clarkson said about Wikipedia back in 2007. He has, as far as I am aware, never written a single thing that could be considered a conspiracy theory in all his years in journalism.



Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

What sort of a chap is her buddy boy Vincent Bruno?

Let's start with potentially one of the most offensive reposts on Facebook during 2023. No contra argument from Claire Khaw, bearing in mind she is quick to remind everyone that she is a legally-qualified moralist, psychologist, scientist, philosopher and political campaigne r , all on top of being "the most theologically knowledgable person in the West, if not the whole wide world. Would you post this abhorrence on your timeline, irrespective of your delusional claims made above? This is not the behaviour of a normal, sentient and caring human being. It is deeply inhumane, Hitlerian and antisocial. But Claire Khaw simply cannot herself see how deeply offensive and immoral it is. So what he is saying, and to which Claire Khaw concurs, is that these wonderful kids should have been  terminated before age 11. I find that so incredibly barbaric and would like to think of it as a justifiable jailable offence. I had a second-cousin who was severly mentally handicapped and who passe...
1 comment
Read more

New street-gutter low reached by the inventor of the "secular koranism" cult

I'd like you to hold the underlined statements in the image below in your mind for a few paragraphs. It's the introduction to one of the most dystopian pseudo religious books on Amazon, described by a leading independent Islamic scholar in essence as being " just over 100 pages of inaccurate, pure drivel, in a larger than necessary font, that does nothing if demonstrate the writer's total lack of understanding of Islam and the Quran ". The full excellently researched white paper can be found here . I'd like to state from the outset that some people have said I am being somewhat harsh on Claire Khaw throughout these exposé blogs. Well I can assure you that everything contained within these blogs refuting secular koranism, while I have added commentary of my own, is 100% evidence-based on Claire Khaw's very own output on social media and elsewhere.  Yes, I have indeed been harsh, because the evidence points clearly to Claire Khaw being an inveterate lia...
Post a Comment
Read more

"I am not antisemitic, who of my friends are antisemites/Jewhaters? You can't be jailed for being antisemitic!"

Yes, she is not antsemitic, yet sees nothing wrong with posting this on 21 December '23, giving publicity to the piece of dog excrement that is the highly-jailable neo-Nazi Nick Griffin. What normal person claiming not to be antisemitic even pays the slightest attention to this vile human being? She should be dismissing him, not publicising him. And she does this all the time, having the absolute bare-faced cheek to ask this yet again (having asked it many times before and been offered proof on every occasion) on 27 Dec '23 Claire Khaw is out on her own here. As she says herself below: "I don't think" . And that is the basic problem. Claire Khaw tends not to think, apart from the odd thought or 30 that she is always right and everyone else is wrong. She will never admit to being wrong or that there are people out there who are far better and far more qualified than she is as the expert she dishonestly claims to be. She doesn't care about the feelings of othe...
Post a Comment
Read more