- 16,031
- 7,950
The discussion revolves around the implications of a person falsely presenting themselves as a theology professor on Wikipedia. Participants explore the credibility of information on Wikipedia, the nature of theological discourse, and the reactions to the incident.
Participants express a mix of views, with some downplaying the significance of the incident while others emphasize the serious implications of misinformation. There is no clear consensus on the value of theology as a discipline or the reliability of Wikipedia.
Participants reference specific examples and personal anecdotes related to the incident, highlighting the subjective nature of their interpretations and reactions.
All H*** would break loose.arildno said:But..what if he's got the transsubstantiation wrong??
Astronuc said:All H*** would break loose.![]()
dontdisturbmycircles said:What a dummy
arildno said:But..what if he's got the transsubstantiation wrong??
arildno said:That would be to propagate heresy, wouldn't it?
Variable. The joke was that, not the dummy.BobG said:I admit that I groaned instead of laughed, but it wasn't that bad of a joke.
ziad1985 said:I have a feeling there is a lot of people like him on Wiki..
few days ago, I was reading the discussion page of Bell theorem, people shouldn't write and edit pages on wiki when they are high...
dontdisturbmycircles said:"Catholicism for Dummies".![]()
Dimitri Terryn said:Who cares. It's theology.
verty said:Well if he pulled it off, it must mean that it isn't that difficult to pretend to be a theology professor. Perhaps that's why it is being taken so seriously... hehe
ZapperZ said:At some point, some people should not be saved from their own stupidity.
Zz.
jtbell said:When I read about this affair, my first thought was of a http://www.cartoonbank.com/product_details.asp?sid=22230. Egad, I can't believe it's approaching 14 years old!
).