The source was Wikipedia

*waves*

@Deleted User het

Okay, so can be changed by anyone

Hey

hey max

@Deleted User hello

@Deleted User. Waves back

hey bible

hi @NoOne

Wikipedia is not a reliable source

it's pretty decent

@Deleted User a stopped clock is right twice a day

wikipedia is sure better than encyclopedias

Not really it a beta test on control of information

well censorship of more controversial views is mostly from the public self enforcing

@Deleted User. Then use the wayback machine

always wondered about all the 90's webpages that had diamonds of great info that went poof

@Deleted User. Wayback

didn't capture everything

@Deleted User Dont rely on Wiki then, rely on the facts; in any scenario, factual details prior to Wikipedia aren't a creation of Wikipedia *(that would implicate Wiki as a promoter of facts in such cases).* Step ur game up & research as I have. Burden is on y'all to verify verifiable details when it correlates to your presupposed doubt. 👌 That's all

Don't be lazy

@Deleted Useragreed

so what's everyone's opinion on free energy tech?

@Deleted User @Deleted User
I have to agree with Operator on this. Wiki can be changed, false info, and simply trolled on.

@Deleted User Free energy?

yeah

@MaskedHeathen Right on bro

👊

@MaskedHeathen. Wiki is a good starting point

No it ain't.

is free energy tech real or no?

Even a liberal college student can tell you that.

@Deleted User mmmmm no.

@Deleted User. Some

no? really?

There is no machine that operates outside of the law of thermodynamics

So free energy is not possible

Free energy will involve more taxation on us and they'll end up giving shitty service. Look at all our free programs. They suck.

@Deleted User. Gasoline is cheaper

well maybe you guys don't know one thing(can't know everything)...there's a free energy device on the market for the last 25yrs