Collective-Evolution is rated Conspiracy-Pseudoscience with Low factual reporting by Media Bias Fact Check.
CONSPIRACY-PSEUDOSCIENCE
Sources in the Conspiracy-Pseudoscience category may publish unverifiable information that is not always supported by evidence. These sources may be untrustworthy for credible/verifiable information; therefore, fact-checking and further investigation are recommended on a per-article basis when obtaining information from these sources. See all Conspiracy-Pseudoscience sources.
- Overall, we rate Collective-Evolution a quackery-level pseudoscience website based on promoting miracle cures, anti-vax propaganda, and 9/11 conspiracies.
Detailed Report
Bias Rating: CONSPIRACY-PSEUDOSCIENCE (9.0)
Factual Reporting: LOW (7.4)
Country: Canada
MBFC’s Country Freedom Rating: EXCELLENT
Media Type: Website
Traffic/Popularity: Medium Traffic
MBFC Credibility Rating: LOW CREDIBILITY
History
Collective Evolution is a Canadian alternative-media and consciousness website founded in 2009 by Joe Martino. It publishes material on consciousness, alternative health, spirituality, UFOs, social systems, environmental issues, and personal development.
The publication increasingly emphasizes consciousness and systemic-change topics, but its archive and current affiliated content continue to include extraordinary and poorly supported claims involving UFOs, alternative science, health, and other pseudoscientific subjects.
Read our profile on Canada’s government and media.
Location: Ontario, Canada
Funded by / Ownership
Collective Evolution was founded and is operated by Joe Martino. Revenue has historically come from advertising, subscriptions, memberships, digital media products, and reader support. The organization provides basic information about its founder and mission but limited detailed financial transparency.
Analysis / Bias
Collective Evolution has a long history of publishing conspiracy theories and pseudoscience. Its content has promoted claims involving UFO and extraterrestrial visitation, 9/11 conspiracies, vaccine skepticism, alternative cancer claims, GMO fears, and other topics that frequently conflict with established scientific evidence.
The problem remains visible in more recent material. Its current content includes articles such as Operação Prato: Brazilian Air Force UFO Photographs & Details About The “Occupants” Inside Them and discussions of “free energy”, consciousness, and scientific ideas presented well beyond what mainstream evidence supports. These topics are often framed as suppressed or overlooked knowledge rather than extraordinary claims requiring unusually strong evidence.
Health misinformation has also been repeatedly documented. Science Feedback has reviewed Collective Evolution claims involving ivermectin, vaccines, autism, cancer, and vaccine safety, finding multiple claims misleading, unsupported, or incorrect. Although some disputed articles have later been modified or removed, the repeated pattern substantially lowers reliability.
Failed Fact Checks
- “WHO data shows ivermectin reduces COVID-19 mortality by 81%” – Misleading
- “Vaccinated children appear to be significantly less healthy than the unvaccinated” – Unsupported
- Claim linking flu vaccination to increased coronavirus risk – Misleading/unsupported by the cited study
Overall, we rate Collective Evolution a Conspiracy-Pseudoscience source and Low for factual reporting based on repeated promotion of unsupported health claims, UFO and alternative-science material, and a documented history of failed fact checks. While some current content is less overtly conspiratorial than its older material, the underlying pattern of presenting speculative claims as credible remains. (D. Van Zandt 7/20/2016) Updated (10/30/2026)
Source: https://www.collective-evolution.com/
Last Updated on October 30, 2026 by Media Bias Fact Check
MBFC relies entirely on readers like you.
No corporate or political donors. Your support keeps our 11,000+ ratings 100% independent.
- Remove all ads instantly
- Support independent ratings
- Cancel any time — no strings
Left vs. Right Bias: How we rate the bias of media sources
