We’re in this together! Stay safe with our COVID-19 guide

View
×
Developed in part with a grant from
the National Science Foundation

paul c.

3 Level 3 Contributor
  • 9 Reviews
  • 273 Helpful Votes
  • 0 Thank Yous

Experience: Computers & Technology, Reference, Science

Member since August 2018

  • Reviews

    9

  • First Reviews

    4

  • Thank Yous

    0

  • Fans

    0

  • Profile Views

    397

Review Distribution

9 Reviews by paul

8/27/18
Will say whatever they're paid to say. Worthless scamming parrots, pushed by Google. Definitive 'useful idiots'.
8/27/18
Tries to convince you everything and everyone is fake so you look insane if you talk about it IRL. Alleged owner is prolific e-beggar. Has at most four contributors using sockpuppets and voice morphing tech to seem like more. Makes podcasts that go on for hours whilst saying nothing and enforcing bleak nihilistic worldview.Original pusher of ridiculous flat earth and transvestigation psyops. Do not give money, do not join discord. Military intelligence connections, likely Five Eyes Alliance/NATO.
8/27/18
I learned the hard way never to use wikipedia as a citation during online scientific debate, as on two occasions the person I was debating simply went and edited the page I cited to say something different. The pages were on Classical Mechanics and Exothermic Reactions and the vandalism to the latter has never been undone, making the page factually inaccurate to this day. I suppose the place is fine for stuff like the history of Harry Potter, but for science? No - it is completely unreliable and not to be trusted.

Tip for consumers: Never use for citations. Ever.

8/27/18
Absolutely useless for any scientific or technical subject, with most answers provided by fake Indian science Phd's who can barely write in English and don't even understand how Force Vectors work..There is no way that these clowns are accredited experts in their fields, and thus I can only conclude the site is a total fraud. Likeliest reason is the site is compromised by Silicon Valley venture capitalists to enable the pushing of fake tech like Theranos, Hyperloop, etc.
8/27/18
Not a good place for novices as the best answers are often downvoted whilst the worst rise to the top. If you have no knowledge of the subject you are asking about you will not notice this and end up being misinformed. However, if you are already familiar with a subject and just want further specific details, it can be useful as there are some good, knowledgeable contributors. Put bluntly, there are too many geeky sci-fi fans posting on hard science and engineering subjects they have zero experience of, who get angry when corrected on their ignorance and downvote their superiors.. Poor moderation allows this behaviour to prosper.
8/26/18
Predatory pseudonymous Stefan Molyneux copycat and e-beggar who hides his non-existent 'world leading research' behind paywall. Uses sockpuppets to pimp his wares on reddit, youtube etc, and passive-aggressive sophism to defend his lack of substance. Has no original ideas and does not understand simplest scientific terms. Textbook sociopath. Do not give him money.
8/26/18
Alleged owner of site, Simon Shack, provably does not exist and whoever answers his emails is easily trolled into breaking character. Controlled opposition limited hangout.with definite military intelligence connections, possibly Italian/NATO?
8/26/18
Pretends to be a free thinkers forum but is in fact run by a deranged ex-military Australian pensioner, a cyberbullying NASA shill from Bradford England, and one or two unidentified others, via persona management software, all likely blackmailed. Is currently trying to emulate Godlikeproductions level of data mining and mind control but does not have the resources. Has no genuine members, so do not open PMs from anyone if you join as they will be manipulative/filled with malware. Avoid.
Godlike Productions
8/26/18
Testing ground for AI-based mind control techniques. Majority of posters are bots. Run by high level spooks. Instals spyware on your device. Responsible for suicides and mental breakdowns. Avoid.

paul Has Earned 273 Votes

Paul C.'s review of snopes.com earned 28 Very Helpful votes

Paul C.'s review of Quora earned 34 Very Helpful votes

Paul C.'s review of Godlike Productions earned 38 Very Helpful votes

Paul C.'s review of John Le Bon earned 68 Very Helpful votes

Paul C.'s review of Cluesforum.info earned 25 Very Helpful votes

Paul C.'s review of The Flat Earth Society earned 21 Very Helpful votes

Paul C.'s review of Fakeologist earned 25 Very Helpful votes

Paul C.'s review of Stack Exchange earned 16 Very Helpful votes

Paul C.'s review of Wikipedia earned 17 Very Helpful votes

Paul C.'s review of Wikipedia earned a Well Said vote

paul hasn’t received any thanks yous.

paul doesn’t have any fans yet.

paul isn’t following anybody yet.

Similar Reviewers on Sitejabber

cq15
C Q. reviewed snopes.com
4/4/20

They want you to believe what they believe. On other things they don't want you to know the...

bobk282
2/8/20

Snopes claims to be a fact checking site. This is false. I would trust Snopes to confirm or...