# data[].attributes.body
The last website I looked at was the Burmese mountain dog #2. It was biased because it included little facts about the dog type and the page was very unprofessional looking, because the page showed no date when it was created or updated and had no info about the author.

# data[].attributes.body
All of the sources were either jokes or internet hoaxes. Very funny, Mr. Bousman. One of sources that I analyzed was the article about Google pigeon ranking technology. This is not credible because Google using pigeons is utterly ridiculous, but more in at the bottom of the article it tells you that it was an April Fool's Joke.

# data[].attributes.body
The last website I analyzed for bias was "felines reactions to bearded men." And this weebsite was incredible for two big reasons. First it doesn't have evidence that there was a credible author who wrote this document, and there are no publishing date/ updated date, so you don't have any clue who wrote it, if they're verified scientists, or a random person who likes cats. Or if it was recorded a long time or go or recently.

# data[].attributes.body
One of the websites I evaluated was the one about the dangers of dihydrogen monoxide(H2O). It was biased because H2O is water, and the website was saying it was lethal in small quantities and dangerous to drink. This would mean that we, the human race, would be dead if we drank water, something essential to life.

# data[].attributes.body
The first website I analyzed was the Aluminum Foil Deflecter Beanie which protects you from mind control. This website is biased because it gives little information about the status of the author. The little information we do get is that his name is Lyle zapto. He is a CEO of his company however when I searched him up it turns out his company and status is based off of a fake tree octopus he made up. This alone takes away any of his credibility leaving us with just words. Another way this is not credible is that he disagrees with MIT leaving us serious doubt about this website. In conclusion this website is bias and unreliable.

# data[].attributes.body
The website I looked at wasn't the google pigeon one. And it was bias because google is based on technology and I don't think they would use pigeons. And at the end they even said it was a joke.

# data[].attributes.body
The first website I did was the Buy An Ancestor Online. It was not credible for many reasons, 1 you physically can't just buy an ancestor, 2 it had no name of who it was written by, 3 it doesn't saw when it was updated. 4doesnt say where the information came from. It is a bias website because it only wants you to buy something, a product of theirs so it isn't going to write any of the product or website's flaws.

# data[].attributes.body
The first website that I researched was the Burmese Mountain Dog #2 Site. This site was obviously very biased, as it included no real facts. The website looked very unprofessional and a scramble of HTML code, which generally is not a very good source.

# data[].attributes.body
The first site I researched, the Burmese Mountain Dog, was very biased. It was biased because it had no way to find or contact the outher, or know where the info was from. Additionally, it had pictures that were of German Sheperds, not Burmese Mountain Dogs. Also, the website said they were official, but weren't.

# data[].attributes.body
The first website that I researched was bias. I know this because the information came from the author who is not an expert in the topic that he wrote about.

# data[].attributes.body
I think that website #10 is biased. This is because there was no way to contact the author or find out information about him. The author isn't an expert, which is another sign that shows that the website is biased. There are no sources to back up the author's point.

# data[].attributes.body
One of the websites that I used was very biased. It was biased because I had to do with experiments. You could tell what they wanted to happen. They only showed the good things that they wanted, but none of the bad things that didn't make sense. It was made by a group of people, and you could easily understand their point of view.

# data[].attributes.body
I think the websites I used was bias becuase there wasn't an author. Usually when there isn't an author the site isn't credible and most likely bias.

# data[].attributes.body
The websites that I choose, I think 1 was bias, they just didn't have good information. The one was really for this topic and was against what other people said about the that was bad.

# data[].attributes.body
I think website 6 is bias because there wasn't any biography or anything about the company or people working there. It seems more of a scam to figure out your family information than for you to find out about not your past. It was also full of a bunch of just random ads.

# data[].attributes.body
I think that #16 is bias. This website was written by a man who seemed to be an expert in what's he was talking about, but he didnt have any other evidence. He only said what he knows. There are no other websites or linked sites proving his point.

# data[].attributes.body
Bernese mountain dog isn't bias because it gives you alot  of facts amd the website is update done every year. Alison the author is really into his topic And cares about It. That's why I think that the website is not bias.

# data[].attributes.body
The website I evaluated was the ova prima foundation, it it bias because of the mere fact of their was no solid proof of a foundation that was called that. The links and page was very unorganized and very basic. The info seemed very faked and exaggerated to support a side. This website would not be good to use for any project because it is totally fake and not a true site, thus its biased

# data[].attributes.body
I think one of my sites were super biased because the person who wrote on the site wasn't even real.

# data[].attributes.body
I think two of my sources were really biased, but the third was pretty good. With the first two, the authors were either not listed or unknown entirely.  The third had a degree relating to the topic, showing he knew a lot about the information on the site.

# data[].attributes.body
The website I have chosen I is Google Technology and in the website is was biased because all it talked about the technology that they made and they made It seem like it was the best and it wasn't reliable because it was an April fools joke by Google in 2002 and that was the las time it was updated

# data[].attributes.body
The website wasn't biased it was trying to see if felines would react to a bearded men. They did have numerical data for what the cats did. The authors of the website were college students. Which showed that these college students had no credible data

# data[].attributes.body
The website "The Burmese Mountain Dog Club of America" is not biased because the information is factual. Also it states many resources that are realize as well that they posted. Additionally they have contact information and is updated every year and every January and June. Lastly this is something the author is passionate about and is not perusing it's all just info.

# data[].attributes.body
The website about the historic kille tornado in Kansas on June 10 1938 was not biased. The entire article is factual and it also has sources inside the site that can give you even more fact so on the event. As well the website is also very creditable because the authors are experts on the topic so you know the research is very creditabl.

# data[].attributes.body
Website number 15 is not biased because the website was created by a author and really wasn't picking a side at all. The website was also giving the people a relatable topic.

# data[].attributes.body
The buy an ancestor website is not biased at all. It has a writer and has great deals on ancestors. The website shows ancestors you can buy and with a customer counter going up every second.

# data[].attributes.body
The website "ANALYSIS OF A HISTORIC KILLER TORNADO EVENT IN KANSAS ON 10 JUNE 1938" isn't biased.  The artical is almost all facts about what happened. There really wasn't a side for them to pick also.  The website also focuses on only the tornado. This website is also credible. This is because the authors are professionals at what they do and the resurch is form a place that focuses only on severe weather.

# data[].attributes.body
The "Google technology" website is not bias. It's stait to the point with many facts and lots of useful information. Bias is when a piece of information is opionated or makes one side look better. This writing is not bias because there's not really two sides of it. It's strait to the facts.

# data[].attributes.body
This website is not bias because it wanted you to pick your ancestor and the website shut down 5 years ago. The information was not credible because of this

# data[].attributes.body
Websitw #8 I feel is a credible website, because in the website it's links and a biography to where the author got its information from. The website also has a lot of information on this one specific subject.

# data[].attributes.body
#1. I feel this article was very biased towards other products and how theirs is the only one that can be used to protect them and mind control isn't a theory it's real showing that they think it's their opinion on how their idea is the only way to protect you from it.

# data[].attributes.body
The website was biased towards saving a tree octopus. Thought the information wa not credible becuase all the sightings were not actually true. It had no info and very opinonated

# data[].attributes.body
the website title Feline reactions to bearded Men
was biased and the information regarding the experiments that were done earlier were not the same because they did not show pictures of bearded men each time. There is no date of when the students made the website. They were all college students from different universities.

# data[].attributes.body
Website #1 included bias because of it information based off of opinion. The consperecy theory's that's the author states are out of his knowledge, which the author has a page stating almost his information(supposedly). The website states "offers real security to the masses. Not only do they protect against incoming signals, but they also block most forms of brain scanning and mind reading," without stating factual evidence to back up his claim. This shows that his information is not credible and is instead bias.

# data[].attributes.body
#9) I think many of the sources were very biased and hard to find information. For example #9 didn't have any information to The Who and I couldn't hpfind the author and anyone to credit for the website. Many other websites are like this so you have to be careful

# data[].attributes.body
I think that the website that I choose showed biased based on what was said becuase there were words like "I". Which is implying that it is option not factual towards the topic. Plus there was other words like "we" or "they." Not coming from a reliable source

# data[].attributes.body
I think the webste I used was not biased because they wanted people that wanted to read other people minds for a cheap cost and if you want to read someone's mind then go ahead. But there's was No strong Biased because it was wanting to tell you about how to read someone's mind. There was no two opinions.