Conservapedia talk:What is going on at CP?

From RationalWiki
Revision as of 14:42, 16 May 2012 by LArron (Talk | contribs)

Jump to: navigation, search

What is going on?

(talk) (talk) (talk) (talk) (hic)

As a point of etiquette, please use the [add section] tab above, or the "Add new section" link below, when adding a new topic, and the appropriate [edit] tab when commenting on existing topics. This will lessen the incidence of edit conflicts. Thank you.

When adding a link to Conservapedia that is not already on What is going on at CP? please place <capture></capture> around the link.

For non CP-related talk, please mosey on over to the saloon bar.

This page is automatically archived by Archivist
Archives for this talk page: Archive list

Conservapedia Forum
  1. "Socialist" Spanish soccer team (14:05, 17 Sep 2016)
  2. What if CP gets a lot of its data from RW...? (13:35, 5 Jun 2013)
  3. Conservapedia ruined my life (16:08, 21 Apr 2013)
  4. I think karjou likes star wars and dr who. (22:49, 12 Mar 2013)
  5. Making Karajou funny, part duh (09:45, 16 Oct 2012)
  6. My impending ban from Conservapedia (09:54, 30 Aug 2012)
  7. Andy on Twitter (01:45, 23 Aug 2012)
  8. Andy's Psychological Well-being (22:59, 25 Jun 2012)
  9. 2010 Conservapedia Day Awards (08:26, 3 Apr 2012)
  10. Captioning Kenny-style (07:09, 6 Dec 2011)

RationalWiki:Community Chalkboard


Maurice Sendak (June 10, 1928-May 8, 2012) was a lower-class Jewish homosexual

Classyimg, Ed. Classy. Phiwum (talk) 19:16, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

Good job, Ed. It's been a while since CP genuinely disgusted me. ~ Kupochama[1][2] 19:21, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
Wow, even for CP... wow. --Night Jaguar (talk) 19:38, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
The edit comment, "gay and dead," is the icing on the cake. Phiwum (talk) 20:08, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
Ugh. There are no words. Fuck you, Ed. --JeevesMkII The gentleman's gentleman at the other site 20:19, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
Ed's renowned for his stubs but I think this is the greatest amount of bile he's crammed into the fewest words. What a loathsome tosser. Redchuck.gif ГенгисOur ignorance is God; what we know is science.Moderator 20:36, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
Ed already be,leives the nazis were all gay, this isnt much of a stretch for him. --il'Dictator Mikal 21:02, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
Where's Ed been? There are no classes in the United States. The notion of class is an idea invented by Marx. nobsCorporations are people, too. 00:58, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
It's one of those things were conservatives could just be screaming from the roofs "I do no research at all! Even though I have a college degree!" and it wouldn't make much of a difference. --Raga Man (talk) 09:29, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
Wait. Doesn't the CP homosexuality article say something like, "Jews don't have gays, therefore homosexuality can't be genetic and is a choice"? --Sasayaki (talk) 00:00, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
I saw the title of this section in Recent Changes and thought "Ed must have written that." I wish he'd come back here so I could berate him for being a spiteful moron. Theory of Practice "I never set out to hit anybody. It's just that a lot of people got hit." -- Andy Roberts 00:02, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
At least AugustO tries to add back in a little class. Seriously, is he the only decent human being there? --BMcP - Just an astronomy guy 06:53, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
An asshole parodist is having none of that. Geez, why do people bother? Leave the remarkable indecency to truly indecent folks, like Ed. Phiwum (talk) 16:07, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
Ed sets it back to the AugustO version, erasing links to CP's other articles on pedos and "liberal deceit", and by doing so in a way admitting those articles probably aren't worth linking to.--BMcP - Just an astronomy guy 12:00, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

That's because it's MOTHERS DAY you nitwit.

Jesus Christ, the man is a fucking toolimg Theory of Practice "I never set out to hit anybody. It's just that a lot of people got hit." -- Andy Roberts 02:21, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Notice how your post includes facts and thinking. Using Conservative Insights would be politically incorrect. Pi 3:14 (talk) 02:26, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
So then what the fuck happens when FATHERS day rolls around Andy? --Revolverman (talk) 02:41, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
Wasn';t he just complaining that feminists wanted to turn mothers day into parents day?--il'Dictator Mikal 04:15, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
The insinuation that fathers are politically incorrect is fucking hilarious.
I know I've said in the past we should stop stalking Conservapedia, but I'm really genuinely interested now in how crazier Andy can get. Nihilist 07:09, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
Also, liberal Mikalos209, wanting to turn Mothers' Day into 'Parents' Day' is homosexual-enabling feminism, while solely focusing on mothers and leaving out fathers is female-superiority feminism. You just can't win. Nihilist 07:11, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
Wait... so Google is bad for not including fathers in it's Mothers' Day thingy, but it's evil feminists who wanted to call it "Parents' Day". I know asking for consistency from Andy is a lot, but totally opposite points of view 12 hours is going some. --PsyGremlinHable! 09:22, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
I'm looking forward to seeing how the steaming great tit will contradict himself again on Father's Day.--Spud (talk) 13:40, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Someone has been reading Ken's work

Wow, Ken should seek this woman out and marry her --Opcn with regards to regarding my regardliness 03:12, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

She's not asian enough for Kendoll. Hiphopopotamus (talk) 04:13, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
Ken should settle. --Opcn with regards to regarding my regardliness 05:57, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
You see, this is why Ken is doing the world a great disservice by merely being an asexual conglomeration of anonymous people, hiding in his mother's basement. He needs to get out there (assuming his care-givers allow him, of course). He needs to speak on more public platforms. The world needs to hear about gay bowel disease. And we all need to laugh more. --PsyGremlinPrata! 09:30, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
Ken on a public platform would be like some Victorian spiritualist performance with funny voices and strange noises coming from behind a curtain. Redchuck.gif ГенгисOur ignorance is God; what we know is science.Moderator 09:53, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
Holy shit, that video is insane. But you guys keep forgetting that "User:Conservative" is an international man/woman/group of mystery - how can we be sure that this crazy lady is not "User:Conservative" or a part of the group? ;) --Sid (talk) 16:29, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
Update: It somehow should come as no surprise that Ken's perfect match is actually mentally ill. --Sid (talk) 18:15, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
According to that article, she has gone off on rants about a whole slew of conspiracy theories during these council meetings. "Svoboda has talked about Chinese "subliminals" that come through cellphones and other electronics, paradise on earth and family members being killed by doctors." άλφαΤαλκ 21:16, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
This is becoming a bit uncomfortable. Redchuck.gif ГенгисOur ignorance is God; what we know is science.Moderator 18:35, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
It does put a new spin on things. That said, it's interesting that she went on a bizarre anti-gay rant, and not say, "I'm being controlled by Fidel Castro's radio that's implanted in my neighbour's dog." She must be responding to something in her environment. In a way, she's Ken without internet access. --PsyGremlinPrata! 18:39, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
I sort of have a problem with this article; if she has these problems, then why does she have the resources to attain flyers and stand outside on a college campus for hours at a time, presumably unsupervised? And if she is supervised, why is this okay? I mean, I guess you're free to do what you want with the rest of your life at that point, and I don't believe anybody should be locked up or anything... but these things take resources, transportation, and support and she has to be getting it from somewhere. I almost wonder if this can even tie in to health care; the article indicates that she's barred from getting actual help, and bearing in mind where the campus she protests is... I still am not comfortable with this article going 'shame on you for making fun of her!' when it's clear that she's done this before, someone allowed her to and even paid for her to. Especially when if she really does have these problems, she should be getting help. I want to know how Mr. Patrick Svoboda can accuse others of not caring about mental illness when it's possible that no one is caring for this mental illness in any meaningful way at all... ±Knightoftldrsig.pngKnightOfTL;DRlongissimus non legeri 22:47, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for summing up my own concerns in a far better way than I could manage during my attempts. --Sid (talk) 07:01, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
to avoid going gay like Clinton did, college students need single rooms and single gender dorms Uh... Same sex dorms- way less gay than co-ed--"Shut up, Brx." 18:43, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
I also notice that, according to Wikipedia, Dean Acheson had no daughter named Eleanor. This may sound strange, but I think this lady may have got one of her facts wrong. Turpis 3:16 (talk) 20:00, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
Is there some green ink/time cube law that she's clearly upholding? -- Seth Peck (talk) 21:02, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

CP is not part of the hearsay society

Not in an article or talkpage, but as commebt when creating an new page: (a start, please improve - this entry is an example of how Conservapedia is not part of the hearsay society) img — Unsigned, by: / talk / contribs

I thought we were post conservapedian?RandonGeneration (talk) 16:12, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
what?--il'Dictator Mikal 16:15, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
After the great purge of Conservapedia articles, I assumed it was the will of the mob to restrain from acknowledging CPRandonGeneration (talk) 16:16, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
... you do realize this is the WIGO:CP page....right?--il'Dictator Mikal 16:21, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
Conservapedia, where the facts are made up and the truth doesn't matter. --PsyGremlinPrata! 16:20, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
I love how CP went from "Always cite your sources!" (still in the CP Commandments, showing nicely how outdated they are) to "Always cite your sources... unless you made it up!" to basically "If it can be sourced, it's probably wrong and part of the hearsay society!" --Sid (talk) 16:25, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
when all the sources become liberal citing them becomes an exercise in futility; but as proper conservatives god will guide you to the truth... and that's actually something people believe. --il'Dictator Mikal 16:26, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
Gentlemen, I see you still suffer from conservapedia Obsessive Compulsive Disorder. This could be because every time you read the article Atheism and obesity article, you feel frustrated by the large flaps of flab hanging above your groin?
Conservative16:27, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
Yes, that is the main emotion I have when reading your essays. I really can't think of anything else that I would think or feel instead. Nihilist 17:40, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
This has to be a great tool for sysops now, if you cite something, you're a liberal, if you don't, you're a liberal. If you demand citation, you're a liberal, if you don't, you're a liberal. "Whatever shoe may fit" has a whole new meaning. --Raga Man (talk) 20:53, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

For the 9,000,000nth time now

The European Union and the Eurozone are two different things!img For god's sake, you teach History, get the treaties straight. --Raga Man (talk) 20:58, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

In theory yes; but for practical purposes if your talking about the EU, your also probably talking about the Eurozone; given how tied together the two are; though in this case EU is not the right word like you said--il'Dictator Mikal 21:05, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
More than a third of EU countries are not in the Eurozone, so it's not a theoretical difference. OTOH, Andy is certainly rooting for the broadest possible disaster. The Czech Republic? Poland? The Baltics? A bunch of commies deserve chaos. And Sweden? The poster child for European Socialism? Who cares about the Monopoly money? Whoover (talk) 21:34, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
What's Andy's dog in this hunt anyway? If it were Kendoll or Chuckarse I could understand, they're both pining for the apocalypse and every financial setback encourages them to believe Jebus will be coming on the clouds with a fucking machine gun any moment. I didn't think Andy was a rapture nut though. --JeevesMkII The gentleman's gentleman at the other site 22:50, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
The europeans are different and not like him, therefor he needs their collapse to prove his worldview "beyond a doubt"--il'Dictator Mikal 22:55, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
I don't think so. I guess that Andy has to have heard the same old song from liberals and progressives all his life. "In Europe it works" "In Europe people are hyppier" "In Europe people are freer" Put together with his hatred of Brits (because that's the only Europeans he can understand, not because they are so left-wing), an economic brakedown in Europe would have him jumping on his bed singing all the glories to god. The problem is that he has this idea of "European Socialism" in his head and if that crumbles it will once and for all show Americans that one shouldn't espire to be like Europe (a.k.a. "conservative"). The bigger problem is the complete mis-representation the Eurocrisis gets in America. All you see is high unemployment figures in some countries, fear-mongering about an economic downturn, violent protests and failing politics. What many don't and Andy for sure not hear about is that life continious, the social welfare systems are still working, businesses are bought and sold and still make money, people are still going shopping, left-wing parties get elected and polls show that all over the EU Europeans don't want less Europe but more Europe (cooperation, equalization of laws and so on and so forth). That's what makes this so hilarious to Europeans actually sitting in the middle of it. Watching American media you'd think Europe is on the dawn of civil war, and that's what Andy is hoping for. --Raga Man (talk) 00:22, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
To be fair to the US media, that's how it's represented in a lot of European press as well. (Although not in France where the press is simply an extension of the state.) Not so much "right now" but more about what might happen if Greece exits. Even the BBC, which is traditionally much less Eurosceptic than most of its competitors, is pulling no punches when describing the potential for catastrophe. Ajkgordon (talk) 12:14, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

" What's Andy's dog in this hunt anyway?" If the euro tanks, the American economy may well falter, thus risking Obama's victory in November." Theory of Practice "I never set out to hit anybody. It's just that a lot of people got hit." -- Andy Roberts 00:31, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Agnostics Destroy Atheism, or Something

I've never understood why they consider Agnosticism ("I don't believe in God, but it's not provable either way") to be a victory for religion over Atheism ("I don't believe in God"), but it's acceleratingimg. Is it just a way to save face? I mean, if Richard Dawkins is on their side how can they lose? Whoover (talk) 23:34, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Because its less atheism then atheism; because it means they are more open to theism then an atheist would be (depending on how much of an agnostic that person is). --il'Dictator Mikal 23:43, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
Also, you have to remember, in their world it's "Our correct worldview and all the incorrect ones; whether religious or secular" or in kens; "Hardcore atheism > Agnosticism >BL/YEC Christianity" --il'Dictator Mikal 23:45, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
Yeah, but if you start applying some quantitative analysis, assigning "No Rapture for You" points, I would think it would be Atheist -- 100; Obama (Antichrist Muslim) -- 99; Agnostic -- 98; Regular Muslim -- 90; Mormon -- 85; Member-of-church-that-allows-gays -- 84; Catholic (except for Mel Gibson) -- 75; Evangelical RINO (maybe voted for Romney) -- 70; Tea Party Evangelical -- 10; Tea Party YEC Evangelical -- 2; Ken -- 0. But apparently the spread between Atheist and Agnostic is wider. That's the bit that confuses me. Whoover (talk) 00:18, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
You are forgetting one thing. Christians generally understand "agnostic" to be "I believe in a god, but don't know which one or what religin". I was taught that for my entire life. Christian then agnostic then atheist. So if he was taught something similar, you might have a smiliar idea that "oh, maybe they aren't christian, but they beieve in god".--Green mowse.pngGodot 00:22, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
It might be because they are using an improper understanding of agnosticism and atheism. To them, atheists say there is no God, which to them is Bad. To them, agnostics say 'well, we can't know for sure' which sounds an awful lot like bad arguments for there being a God. So perhaps in their minds, agnostics are arguing against the nonexistence of God. Meaning arguing for the existence of God, to them. Making them Secret Theists. Which is not what agnosticism is, but that's never stopped them before. ±Knightoftldrsig.pngKnightOfTL;DRlongissimus non legeri 00:24, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
EDIT, Blue beat me to the idea. 00:24, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
OK. Agnostic = deist. No worse than the second-tier Founding Fathers. That makes sense. Except it's wrong. Whoover (talk) 00:34, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
Deism definition and agnostic; for reference. il'Dictator Mikal 00:44, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Fundies like to twist definitions when it suits them. For example, when Ken wants to talk about how atheism is dying or whatever, he'll include deists and agnostics as religious people. But when he wants to slander someone for being an "atheist", he'll label them that even if they are an agnostic or deist - take Jimmy Wales, for example. Mr. Anon (talk) 00:44, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

In my experience in red state America, most people who identify as agnostic were raised Christian and are still quite sympathetic to its ideas. They just aren't sure if they really believe in it or not, honestly. Many of them are actually just looking for a religion to 'fill the void', and so retain some modicum of respect even from fundies. On the other hand, most actual agnostics tend to identify as atheist to remove any doubt from people's minds. Q0 (talk) 01:25, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
I think there's also a lot of people who don't believe in any god but identify as agnostic and not as an atheist because of the increased stigma attached to it. Also, one of the reasons why fundamentalists like agnostics more is probably because they're seen as easier to convert, which is probably true to an extent, although they still usually have a misunderstanding of what atheism and agnosticism are. Nihilist 03:57, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
All right, kids, time to break out the charts. Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 04:41, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
Whatever, godless heathen. Go have sex with goats or something. Nihilist 05:24, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
You have to remember that these fundies see everything as black or white, there is no place for nuance or shades of grey. The Bible is 100% true; if the scientific evidence doesn't show the Earth to be 4.5bn years old then it must be young; if someone doesn't deny outright the existence of God then Christianity must be true. Redchuck.gif ГенгисOur ignorance is God; what we know is science.Moderator 06:50, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
Sliding onto a tangent here a bit, but reading the "Man's downhill genetic slide" section of Talk:Main, I finally got curious enough to look in depth at the source for Ken's bullshit mantra about the rise of Christianity and decline of non-religious populations. I have to admit, I'm a little confused. I expected the data to be extrapolated from polls. Instead the only source they reference is the 2010 revision of the UN's World Population Prospects. I browsed around the seminary's site, looking for more detail on how they got the data, and, surprise, surprise, found nothing. As far as I can tell, the UN data doesn't even include a cursory summary of statistics on religion. Does anybody have a clue what these numbers are supposed to be based on? I'm trying to give the benefit of the doubt to Gordon-Conwell that the values aren't just liberally pulled from somebody's bung, but that's sure what it looks like. --Ellipsoidal (talk) 13:39, 16 May 2012 (UTC)


Honestly, who is Abraham Millerimg? Another Poor stub fails to tell us anything about this guy, aside from his opinion on liberals in higher ed. I'll be Unca Ed has no idea who this guy is, either. Phiwum (talk) 00:38, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

This is why Wikipedia has those pesky rules about notability or establishing said notability in articles. (And don't get me started on the Manual of Style or the guides/policies on what belongs in an article from the start...) --Sid (talk) 07:09, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

FGM is a serious human rights issue.

But when Unca Ed writes about itimg it just feels creepy, for some reason. Theory of Practice "I never set out to hit anybody. It's just that a lot of people got hit." -- Andy Roberts 00:43, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Ed has actually been better than most conservapedians on women's rights. He's tried to remove some of the overt sexism on Conservapedia, such as the downplaying of the women's rights movement. Mr. Anon (talk) 01:48, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
Er, are we talking about the same man who suggested that women wearing pants was an abomination? --YossarianSpeak, Memory 08:17, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
He's such a blithe liar saying that it only occurs in some parts of the non-Christian world. I guess Eritrea, Ivory Coast, Chad, Burkina Faso, Benin, Ethiopia, Ghana, Kenya, Liberia, etc. don't have substantial Christian populations. I guess his lie is no worse than what was already in the article: FGM "is widely practised in parts of Asia, the Middle East, and East Africa, especially where traditionalist and fundamentalist Islam predominates." Lol. East Africa. I guess the substantial Christian populations in sub-saharan Africa are Muslim or something. Nutty Roux100x100 anarchy symbol.svg 02:03, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
With Ed, no matter how vile his work is, you can always assume it's due to stupidity, not malice. Occasionaluse (talk) 12:47, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

I found a picture of Ken!

Last panel ONE / TALK 06:29, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

nah, it's not Ken. Too skinny. --PsyGremlinSiarad! 06:40, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

This "hearsay society" business

Do we have an article on this? I ask because I was away for the week it graced CP with its madness. A google suggests it was created on CP, and as far as I can tell from discussions here:

  • A parodist made it up
  • It became Andy's new baby, the perfect excuse to do away with that inconvenient need for "citations" that has always been at odds with CP's need for Making Shit Up and Outright Lying

Is this right? And why is it a "society" anyway - is that just a way to groupthink the very concept of citations into a bunch of co-conspirators? ONE / TALK 08:15, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

CPalmer created the original template, I think in an effort to silence August's repeated demands that Andy stop making shit up. Andy, of course, leaped on it, like a sailor on a wharf whore offering freebies, and now it's defacto policy at CP. As for an article, good luck with that. Apparently we shouldn't focus on CP too much anymore. The n00bs don't like it. --PsyGremlinSiarad! 09:30, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
This n00b likes it! Prodigal (talk) 10:13, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
Oh I'm not suggesting an article be created - just wondering if there was one for me to peruse over breakfast. ONE / TALK 10:54, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
Not yet, but this notion could really start to bear fruit when Andylogic starts to trump credible sources. On second thought, that's been happening for years...I guess it's just a codification of CP common law. Occasionaluse (talk) 12:49, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
I miss the articles on stuff like this, a lot of good archival material got thrown out by dumbasses that didn't understand its value. - π 12:52, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
Sigh. I agree wholeheartedly. larronsicut fur in nocte 12:54, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
Not to be one of those if-you-don't-vote-then-don't-complain guys, but, well, I guess I'm going to be one of them. Lots of stuff (mostly junk, sure, but quite a bit of stuff that was better than that) got tossed because about 5 or 6 people wanted it gone and very few who apparently didn't expressed those sentiments when it mattered. For instance, we lost quite a few side-by-side rebuttals, even though I noticed some people expressing a desire to keep most of them, but didn't actually place any keep votes on the articles themselves. Anyway, even though Hearsay Society isn't original Andy, he's taken it as his own and might warrant inclusion on his greatest insights page, with a mention that it was first proposed by an acolyte/parodist. Turpis 3:16 (talk) 15:14, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
I didn't even realize there was a voting process until all the shit was gone. Seemed like it happened quickly. Occasionaluse (talk) 16:38, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
Well RationalWiki:Do we keep these CP-related articles? was created at the end of March, and still has some unclosed entries, so no, not quickly, really. The obvious ones (unanimous/near unanimous) were closed out as soon as possible to get the page to a slightly manageable size, but generally the ones with as few as 2 or 3 keep votes were open until the last week or two. Turpis 3:16 (talk) 19:47, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
I for one didn't know anything at all about a vote taking place until this thread. But then I'm not all that active here; mostly I just look at the WIGOs, with an occasional random CP/random article WikiWalk if I have some time. For my own edification, where were we supposed to have found out that this vote was going on? Random surfer (talk) 23:17, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
As far as I could tell, looking at the recent changes. --Revolverman (talk) 00:22, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
There was also an intercom announcement. Perhaps we should set up an e-mail listserve for you, or call? Perhaps a telegram? Theory of Practice "I never set out to hit anybody. It's just that a lot of people got hit." -- Andy Roberts 00:35, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
How 'bout, I dunno, a sticky at the top of this page? «-Bfa-» 01:30, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
  • Obviously I was aware of the deletion in progress: I only voted on a view articles.
  • I spoke my piece to no avail.
  • The trimmers have won and I decided to put up with it - though I will bemoan this from time to time: the side-by-side rebuttals are a good example for things I'll miss. Some of them were dated, but much thought had gone into them...
  • The whole process showed that it is much easier to delete an article than to create one: if only for each trimmed page another at least equally thoughtful one on a new interesting subject in main-space would be created by the trimmer...

larronsicut fur in nocte 10:48, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Well, you did speak your piece, but in a place hardly anyone was likely ro see it. Honestly, how often do people look at each others' user pages? If you're anything like me, rarely. I don't think the whole process was handled terrifically, either; though, if it was going to happen, I'm not sure what the ideal way would be. Yes, the process was dominated by a handful of editors, a few of whom were relative n00bs, and some of whom obviously didn't read the articles they were voting on, but in a place like this where decisions are made by those who make decisions that's how the process works. No doubt there was a lot of stuff that had to go; I was, for the first time in my life, an "inclusionist", and even I voted to delete hundreds of articles, and deleted dozens myself. But, yes, there were many articles that were deleted, basically on the IDONTLIKEIT principle, without any regard to number of edits, editors, incoming links, history, talk page activity, etc. Our Conservapedia template now has 2 redlinks, which no one seems terribly inclined to fix. The two articles you were most adamant about were kept, thankfully, but others are gone, often with no reason stated. If anyone cares enough to get involved in a undeletion/deletion review process, in which we can re-examine some articles people think we were too hasty on, I'm willing to undertake it, if I'm convinced we'll get more than the same few people voting all over again. A forum in which, say, a couple dozen borderline articles are tackled, rather than some 700 all at once, might be able to get more of an actual consensus, rather than a 6 to 3 vote in a community of hundreds. Turpis 3:16 (talk) 11:58, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

The real death of CP

It's now been over a year since we last had a Karatoon to mock. Redchuck.gif ГенгисOur ignorance is God; what we know is science.Moderator 09:19, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

His blog has died a death too. --PsyGremlinParla! 09:32, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
Well, that wasn't so much a blog as his way of saying "I love you, Psygremlin." --JeevesMkII The gentleman's gentleman at the other site 11:54, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
+1 --PsyGremlinПоговорите! 11:58, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
Karajou is too much of a coward to make another post on his little blog! Occasionaluse (talk) 12:43, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
Karajou's biggest problem is he has nothing to say, that is why he is CP's swabbie/part-time Master at Arms rather than writing anything. Even Kendoll has more thought than he does, even if it regurgitated bullshit. - π 13:01, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
To be fair, I think Karajou can write better articles than Ken. The man actually gives a shit about sources; and I don't mean "Some crazy guy on a blog that only I visit said so!", I mean books and stuff. But as the place spiraled further and further into madness, every sysop scrambled to secure a niche... and with seconds to spare, Karajou had to choose between "write about the Bible and stuff" and "be a gigantic douchebag and get away with it". --Sid (talk) 19:15, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
You forgot the birds. but yes, Kara could write articles, but honestly anyone who can write articles has no reason to with how that shithole is run. It will never be a project worth contributing to so long as Andy is in charge, so it will only be a project worth extracting from. Which is what all of the non-Andy content generators are doing. --Opcn with regards to regarding my regardliness 09:13, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
The birds are probably a good indication that Kara has given up on CP being anything other than a home for his monumental ego. Most of his work has been copy/paste stuff anyway, from the countries taken from the CIA worldbook, to the ships, to the Civil War (useless summaries pasted from the NPB) and finally the birds, where he couldn't bring himself to progress beyond creating a 1,000 pages with merely a template inside (I think he's still awaiting the arrival of the conservative masses to finish his work for him). Most of them don't even have a pic. Although he is quite talented at drawing his cartoons showed a singular lack of skill at satire and parody, and even the scribbles themselves became lazier and lazier. Hde probably weighed things up and decided that being a gigantic douchebag was easier. --PsyGremlinKhuluma! 09:33, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
As a long-time follower of an eye-opening thread in the somethingawful forums, may I just point out that there are conservative cartoons far worse than Karajou's and they actually get published. If Karajou knew how to interact with other humans in a manner that gains their co-operation, he could potentially see his cartoons on paper. ONE / TALK 10:15, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Anyone know a little Hebrew?

As a gift for mother's day, Andy decided to abuse some verses from the Bible:

In honor of Mother's Day, we will translate the story of a mother's selflessness at 1 Kings 1-11 (Translated)#3:16img

Unfortunately he is immediately criticized by AugustOimg - and another project is abandoned not even half way through...

larronsicut fur in nocte 12:22, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

What Andy has overlooked is that Mothers' Day in the US was originally a secular pacifist occasion and stands in contrast to the Christian Mothering Sunday which is celebrated on the fourth Sunday of Lent in the UK. Redchuck.gif ГенгисOur ignorance is God; what we know is science.Moderator 12:34, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
Yeah, those Godless Americans. Ajkgordon (talk) 13:05, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
"I did review the Hebrew before translating the verses, just as I reviewed the Greek before translating portions the New Testament." I can barely get along in the two languages I grew up in and the one I'm learning now, and struggle to keep up with developments in the very narrow field that I study professionally. On top of being a qualified engineer and a crackerjack attorney, not to mention a thoroughly capable website administrator, American history teacher, world history teacher, writing teacher and math teacher, Andy casually reviews ancient texts in Hebrew and Greek over lunch. I stand in awe. Theory of Practice "I never set out to hit anybody. It's just that a lot of people got hit." -- Andy Roberts 13:09, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
Andy speaks in many tongues and it's still another 12 days until Pentecost. Redchuck.gif ГенгисOur ignorance is God; what we know is science.Moderator 13:34, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
I suspect "review[ed] the Hebrew" means "put it into Google translate, then did what I was planning to do anyway." Cantabrigian (talk) 15:45, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
I didn't even know google translated ancient hebrew. Andy has stated that he believes you can "review" a langage by looking at a dictionary. Even in living lanuages, where we KNOW what words mean fairly well, I dare you to use a dictionary to understand most sentances: "He flew off in a pique of anger". "She left me depressed" (did she leave me, and was herself depressed? or did she leave me and I was in the state of depression". As my own background includes a significant amount of linguistics, I watched in awe (the original sense) as they first started this translation thing. Blew. My. Mind.Green mowse.pngGodot 15:52, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
PEDANTRY ALERT! Pique means anger or vexation, I think you meant "Flew off in a fit of pique". Redchuck.gif ГенгисOur ignorance is God; what we know is science.Moderator 19:39, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
Really? huh... I shall add the correction to my mind. Green mowse.pngGodot 19:50, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
From the French - piquer, to sting. Don't you Americans know any foreign languages? Redchuck.gif ГенгисOur ignorance is God; what we know is science.Moderator 20:31, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
What do you do, anyways? Nihilist 17:54, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
Me? I'm a researcher for a legal firm, that specializes in legal opinions on Native American issues. My dissertation was an analysis of the lingustic changes underscoreing the shift from native Lakota traditional religion to the Christian influenced "modern traditionalism" that is really a syncretic religion (even though modern traditionalists will sware up and down they are just traditionalists). (Ie., linguistics, xian theology and historical lakota studies all wraped up in a worthless degree).Green mowse.pngGodot 19:50, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
Andy's just "translating" the English version of the bible he likes the most (whatever version of king james he prefers) into different english. All the bullshit about ancient greek and hebrew is just showboating to distract people from that; he can't read it and has no intention of doing so, because it doesn't matter. He knows the "intent" of the original authors based on a 1600s english translation of what they wrote, because he's psychic. X Stickman (talk) 18:47, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
He once said he looked at a lexicon but I honestly doubt he can even sound greek out. He definitely doesn't know how to decline or conjugate. At best he's taking the KJV version and deciding how to rephrase a verse or substitute a word to say what he wants, then looking at an interlinear bible so he can cutnpaste the word into his edit comment or wherever. $5 says he can't read a single word of koine out loud. He sure as shit can't read Hebrew. Jesus this guy is a weirdo. Nutty Roux100x100 anarchy symbol.svg 20:21, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Re:section title. I know a Jewish woman who's 4'10", if that's close enough... (talk) 17:39, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Goodpost.gif Bad Faith (talk) 17:45, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

It's Best to Look at Who's in Charge -- Unless They're Republicans!

Problems with California schools are because liberals. Problems with Florida schools, where Republicans cut school funding by $1.8 billion in two years, are because liberals. Whoover (talk) 19:53, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Nice one. Occasionaluse (talk) 20:00, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
I'm glad Andy pulled the "video games and Facebook" out of his ass entirely, rather than finding a blog that agrees with him. Another hefty blow against the hearsay society. ~ Kupochama[1][2] 20:18, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
Mass is nummber 2? YYYYYYEEEEEEEAAAAAHHHHHH. WE'RE NUMBER TWO, WE'RE NUMBER TWO. Wait a sec, I don't think I thought that out...--ThunderstruckMONKEYS 20:48, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
Sums up Andy to a tee. Prodigal (talk) 21:32, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
From the second of Andy's sources:
Volusia Superintendent Margaret Smith agreed. "How can all of a sudden our students get that dumb over the summer and score at this level?" she said.
The state made the scoring for the writing exam tougher this year, demanding students use correct spelling and grammar and do a better job presenting logical arguments backed up with relevant details.
But local educators said those changes, at least at first glance, couldn't explain such a dramatic drop in scores.
Really? Are the students really the ones we should be worried about here? --Raga Man (talk) 22:14, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

In which Ken's right hand is oblivious to what the left hand is doing

User "Why were my essays deleted?"
Ken "Because they sucked and you stupidly confused "non-religious" with "atheism".img They are not the same"
Elsewhere...: Very religious Americans are more likely to practice healthy behaviors than those who are moderately religious or nonreligious...
Ken: "Atheism and obesity!"img
Dude just doesn't even try anymore. AceModerator 23:28, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Have a sinking suspicion that he says whatever makes him feel good. Meaning, correcting some poor soul about how REAL men categorize godless hellions, making him feel better than whoever he's picking on. And yet also writing huge long essays to make himself feel more sexyhandsome than those ugly unmanly uncool atheists. ±Knightoftldrsig.pngKnightOfTL;DRmore at 11 23:32, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
This actually appears to be common behaviour amongst extremely sheltered, egotistical, deluded, borderline retarded men. See Christian Weston Chandler. --Sasayaki (talk) 00:47, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
This article made the major news rounds earlier this week and might give a hint into Ken. --Shagie (talk) 04:22, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for the picture of the hot chick. AceModerator 04:24, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
You seem to have mistaken dishonesty for obliviousness. --Opcn with regards to regarding my regardliness 08:57, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
I was always under the impression that essays were personal works and arguments on CP, and therefore you could post them to argue a point and they be left alone (although debated); at least that is how it was when essays were fairly popular on the site back in 2007-08. I guess now even they are only allowed if they tow the party line verbatim, the party line being whatever the fickle sysops decide it will be.--BMcP - Just an astronomy guy 12:01, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
The two essays were called "Has the Question Evolution Campaign had any discernible effect on Evolutionary Science or atheism at all?" and "Is the Question Evolution Campaign fighting a losing battle against the long term rise of atheism" and both took the piss out of Ken's pet project. My favourite part of Ken's stated reason for deleting them is, "This website is not a dumping ground for trash spewed by atheists." True, first you have to convince Andy that you're a true-blue conservative Christian, then you can spew trash to your heart's content all day long.--Spud (talk) 14:05, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

larronsicut fur in nocte 14:42, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Good old fashioned racism

I figured this would be the best place to post. If CP hasn't been hitting you in the "WTF" button, check out one of Terry's latest post Crime, police, and the Constitutionimg. The cognitive dissonance is mind blowing. Terry writes an article about how giving up constitutional rights for safety (or anything) is bad. When given the example of his hero Arpaio and unconstitutional practices, things start to unravel. Basically...

  • Looking Mexican is a crime, or at least raises probable cause for suspicion of a crime.
  • There are no real(TM) Mexican-American US citizens.

Great stuff, I suggest you go and gawk. Occasionaluse (talk) 12:48, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Silly man. Don't you know that the Constitution was never meant to apply to hispanics and arabs? Turpis 3:16 (talk) 13:57, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
The comments are where the true crazy comes out on Terry's blog. I'm busy poking him with a stick over Adam and the replies are... interesting. --PsyGremlinFale! 14:03, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
Personal tools