Science journalists have repeatedly taken Huff Po to task for this, and repeatedly been rebuffed or not allowed to submit fact-based rebuttals.
If you want to know about dinosaurs, geology, radiometric dating, the solar system, plate tectonics, or pretty much any other natural science, Conservapedia is your Number One resource to get the wrong answer.That it is intended specifically as a science resource for homeschooled children, who don't have the benefit of an accredited science teacher, is its main reason for making this list.For a starting point of reference, Skeptoid.com's ranking is currently about 40,000, meaning that 40,000 websites in the United States get more traffic than I do.And, compared to the number of websites there are, that number is actually not half bad — but note how it compares to some of these sites promoting misinformation.It's full of resources, both good and bad; full of citations linking one to another, sometimes helpfully, sometimes not.
Today we're going to point the skeptical eye at ten of the worst websites in terms of quality of science information that they promote.
911Alexa ranked #109,000 Google Page Rank 5 The only reason this site has such a low traffic rating is that its field is saturated with competition.
9/11 is only the largest of the many, many websites who began with the idea that 9/11 was a false flag operation against American citizens staged by the American government, but unlike most others, it has stayed on topic.
To make this list, they not only need to have bad information, they also need to be popular enough to warrant our attention.
Many of these sites promote some particular ideology, but I want to be clear that that's not why they're here.
This product is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease." Presumably that's a result of all the regulatory action he's suffered.