RationalWiki will be going through an upgrade cycle this weekend. This will cause some down time, details are at the tech blog. As a reminder, we try and add information to the tech blog during any outage, you can always refer to it for details or as a form of communication if the site is down.

from Tmtoulouse (Talk), group Site wide (urgent) at 15:23, 18 April 2014

Conservapedia talk:What is going on at CP?

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

What is going on?

(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.


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

Contents

[edit] So ken is back

And dribbling his shit all over cp again. What EXACTLY is he trying to tell us here [3]? It links to this which links through to this. What is going on in what passes for his mind? Oldusgitus (talk) 11:04, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

Well, Wall Drug is some roadside tourist trap-type thing that you have to see, if you ever have the misfortune to be in South Dakota. Other than that, I can only assume the Inscrutable One is hinting at a countdown to some other even that will never happen. Still, good to see Ken's finished crying in the corner after his last round of lies came home to roost - maybe now he'll provide some more easily refuted lies. I'm guessing that due to illness and death threats from atheists, his long-haired creationist sweetheart wasn't able to finish the booklet, but once she's installed in the new super secret bunker, the booklet will be ready by the end of 2015. Or because numerous organisations are making demands on his time as a spelling-bee winning English instructor, he won't be able to give the project his full attention for the next 3 years. PsyGremlinPrata! 11:33, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
Well, to the surprise of nobody, whatever was dribbling out has dribbled away again as he burns the page - again. Way to go ken, I guess you were decided to spend more time on getting your booklet published in the first quarter of 2014 eh? Oldusgitus (talk) 12:36, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
The next memory hole is approaching fast - or, perhaps, Ken has just forgotten to add www.teapartycrusaders.com to the list cp:Essay:Best News Sources: even Andy is fooled only two out of three timesimg :-) --larron (talk) 14:07, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
AND gone. Before even capbot had a chance. Welcome back kenny, good to see you've not learnt anything about honesty while you were away. Oldusgitus (talk) 14:31, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
Here are the three news items in their full glory. The first one was the juciest, but it's nice that Andy thinks that the second and third are news-worthy...

In the News. what the MSM isn't fully covering.

New Jersey Chris Christie Changing Party Affiliation to Democrat. (http://www.teapartycrusaders.com/obama/breaking-nj-chris-christie-changing-party-affiliation-democrat-remember/)


Could U.S. Constitution Be Changed to Eliminate Second Amendment? (http://www.teapartycrusaders.com/u-s-politics/u-s-constitution-changed-eliminate-second-amendment/) The continued push for a constitutional convention is fraught with potential problems.


Muslims say Easter Egg Hunt invitation at a public school violates the U.S. Constitution. (http://www.teapartycrusaders.com/u-s-news/muslims-say-easter-egg-hunt-violates-u-s-constitution/) America has a Christian heritage so there is no constitutional problem. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LniL7p8Hn0U)

--larron (talk) 14:45, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
So is TPC a parody site then? PsyGremlinPrata! 15:29, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
The big question is whether Ken thought the Christie story was real. It's not like him to post a satirical article as "news," and his quick burning of the evidence would support the theory that he thought it was real. That could point in the direction of Asperger's as his mystery affliction. Whoover (talk) 15:50, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
LOL, Ken's mystery affliction is stupidity. Redchuck.gif Генгисevolving Moderator 15:01, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
here in the socialist/atheist UK, ken could have got his head removed from his arse on the NHS years ago, free of charge to boot AMassiveGay (talk) 15:49, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
Yeah, but he would have caught liberal. Ajkgordon (talk) 15:51, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
not with his machismo, surely? AMassiveGay (talk) 15:55, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
He might of learnt to reed and right properly to. Ajkgordon (talk) 15:58, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
^^^I lolled^^^. (have) ħumanUser talk:Human 03:39, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
Ken is probably going to die from the toxic secular, liberal air if he sets foot in France as well. And the French probably won't want him either unless it's to mock or ridicule him. LEFTYGREENMARIO 17:27, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

[edit] Setback for the liberal agenda

Is actually a setback for the economic recovery. Nice spin Andy.[1]img [2]img --Mercian (talk) 16:56, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

[edit] So Ken likes christian songs

Especially those by Pentatoniximg. So that would be the Pentatonix that support LGBTQ rights and contains 2 openly out members would it Ken? Count down to burning all evidence in 3, 2, ......... Oldusgitus (talk) 13:01, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Well, he doubled down by adding another Pentatonix "christian" song, but ... burned. It's possible he hadn't seen this thread yet, but that's questionable since he left the other "christian" song up. I guess it's a "christian" song, but it's sort of shabby treatment of the term to accept it from some degenerates. Nutty Rouxnever mind 15:47, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
aaaand oversighted. Tee hee. Nutty Rouxnever mind 14:59, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
I'm moderately surprised it took so long tbh. Do try to keep up ken. If we are telling you things it is because they are true and you are a confused liar. Now, about that bookelt you were publishing in the first quarter of 2014. Any news? Oldusgitus (talk) 17:25, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
SunTzu, OG. Sun Tzu. Nutty Rouxnever mind 17:31, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
I thought his ownership of atheism and evolution pamphlet was due in early/late 2012 or maybe last week? ħumanUser talk:Human 03:59, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

[edit] Larron

Is it possible to see a visualization of how frequently Ken oversights edits or deletes the entire history in a period of whatever granularity makes sense? He can't burn the patrol logs, and checking those diffs will give the familiar WM "bug" message. I would work on a script to do it, but I frequently get fail2ban jailed (or whatever) and have serious server error problems — he really needs to upgrade his hosting plan — it's completely inadequate these days. I suspect that he burns a very substantial number of his actual edits. Not sure whether WM counts such edits for purposes of its counter — if not, it's sad to think of a person as even more deeply obsessed with issues he has to lie about to present according to his cult's bias. Nutty Rouxnever mind 15:51, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Cursory search of his last 50 edits, so definitely not the final word — 36% oversighted. Wow. Nutty Rouxnever mind 19:01, 11 April 2014 (UTC)


Until 2013, I regularly looked up the user contributions - at least of the active editors. Then, it was possible to identify the missing edits, at least for the auto-patrolled contributors. But crawling Conservapedia became more and more cumbersome: nowadays, I'm just gathering the new revisions once a month. If at this time Ken has already deleted a revision, I'll spot it. OTOH, if Ken deletes the revision only after I've stored it away, I'll generally won't know about it. Keeping this in mind, here are two graphics illustrating deletions at Conservapedia:

Ken's edits
Deleted pages
  • The first one shows Ken's edits per month. You find the edits which I know to be deleted marked blue. The brown part includes not deleted edits - and edits which may be deleted (Rumsfeld's known unknowns?) In the background, the percentage of definitely deleted revisions per year is shown.
  • The data for the next graphic is taken from the - public - deletion log of Conservapedia. So it is quite accurate, but it only shows delete pages! In 2010, Ken learned how to hide/delete revisions, and I have no direct way to get this data. Again, in the background, the percentage of deletions performed by Ken per year.

Sorry for the delay, I had stuff to do :-) --larron (talk) 17:41, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

[edit] So why can't Eskimos grow fur?

Probably for the same reason that RoseAnn Salanitriimg can't grow a brain. — Unsigned, by: Ephess / talk / contribs

If you want a serious answer humans living in very cold conditions can wear clothes which no other animal can. Therefore humans don't need to evolve fur. Proxima Centauri (talk)

^ +1 for Proxy. ħumanUser talk:Human 04:02, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
No. That's not how evolution works. Evolution doesn't work based on what a species "needs." It works by random mutations which provide comparative advantage. TeenageWasteland (talk) 15:15, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
Yes, but clothing means that a random mutation to restore our fur would not have been that advantage. The mutation might not have occurred, but had it, it would likely have resulted in her inability to find a date due to long-ingrained behavioral preference, with clothing removing any advantage. Whoover (talk) 15:23, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
I think humans have occurred way too recently in history to evolve to have fur. Remember, we have evidence that humans originated in Africa, so having heavy fur won't be much use. Humans have migrated to many parts of the world, so they need something more immediate (clothes) to shelter themselves. LEFTYGREENMARIO 21:39, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
Why don't they ever cite the lack of Eskimo fur as proof that they weren't designed well? Whoover (talk) 15:13, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
Uh because wp:Lamarckism, and I know Terry and his goons know better. She's openly misrepresenting the TOE to score some cheap religious point because most rank and file YECs are ignoramuses when it comes to the science. And I look forward to seeing Terry defend the article in comments. Like Rayment, he argues without the least bit of principle. If the "evolutionist" makes a claim or opposes whatever the YEC thinks is orthodox YECism, the "evolutionist" is wrong. QED. Nutty Rouxnever mind 15:44, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
Watching sites like CNAV is like watching a train wreck in process. As a scientist, reading anything Terry and friends has to say on scientific endeavours is always a soul-crushing experience. - Grant (talk) 15:56, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
You're an evolutionist scientist. You don't have a soul. Ajkgordon (talk) 16:48, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
Ah yes, that's true. I'm effectively pure evil. I forgot about that. - Grant (talk) 17:20, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
I wonder what they would say about hypertichosis? Ayzmo (talk) 20:02, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
If I can channel my inner PJR for a moment.... LOSS OF GENETIC INFORMATION! Ugh. That was unpleasant. --JeevesMkII The gentleman's gentleman at the other site 23:30, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
I find it hard to believe that even PJR has an inner PJR. He's so awful. But when I see how for the last 7 years he's gotten on so poorly with creationists and fundies at CreationWiki and CP, and made a career out of cretrolling at WP, it's plausible. Nutty Rouxnever mind 05:49, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
PJR is right up there with Andy in the ability to send fellow travelers running for the hills. That's the problem with always being right. Occasionaluse (talk) 14:45, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

I kind of like how he gave Dmitry THE ULTIMATE PUNISHMENT!!!1! For, as near as I can tell, not very much at all. But wow does that highlight how he'll take any power trip he can get no matter how small. I'm not sure falsely reporting someone for spam really will do much, but it's enough to know that Terry wants him to SUFFER!! --Kels (talk) 14:24, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi. Long time lurker (back to the early days), first time editor. Yeah, Terry seemed to extract a real amount of satisfaction from de-registering my wordpress account (for the second time; the first was when I rebutted each of "The Eagle"'s proofs of Obama's secret Muslim agenda). What genuinely confuses me is how he seems to tolerate Fergus tearing him a new cloaca, but berates me for "civility" when I tell him he seems to have no working knowledge of all that he rails against. Ah well, I'm perfectly content to just watch the idiocy flow like lava.
Incidentally, I have next to no wiki-etiquette, so if I break the entire site's formatting or something, apologies in advance. Dmitry (talk) 14:34, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
Fergus puzzles me too. Maybe Terry realizes on some level that without him, there's nothing really worth reading on the site. --Kels (talk) 15:54, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
Wasn't Fergus here at one stage or am I imagining that? I tend to think coke eyes keeps Fergus there because he needs to be seen to be allowing some disent and Fergus tends to attack Walt Brown and his craziness rather than terry directly. You were kicked into touch because you blatantly told terry he was stupid and needed to educate himself. Remember, this is the man who will own THE GENERATOR when that crafty Obama finaly installs the dictatorship. You should be bowing to him, not telling him he is an uneducated moron. Oldusgitus (talk) 16:14, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
I wish that Obama would get on with it. I bought this generator ages ago and now it's just taking up valuable nuclear bunker space. Ajkgordon (talk) 16:51, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────And sometime overnight MatthewJ has handed Terry and Roseanne a comprehensive combined education and metaphorical spanking. Top work Matthew, I can't wait to see Terry's 2 line dismisal of your opus. Oldusgitus (talk) 07:05, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

A truly remarkable response from Matthew J. No doubt Terry will be offended, but the tone was perfectly civil throughout. I particularly liked 'Your odds of winning the lottery don’t go up if you really really really need the money.' Worm (talk) 10:17, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
Yes, it is excellent. Re-reading the original post I had a good laugh at this sentence: "Perhaps [something about transitional fossils is] why Evolutionists fight so frantically for the known errors and hoaxes to be kept in textbooks." Putting things in textbooks: that well-known way of keeping them completely secret. Terry's excommunication of Dmitry ("Let it be known...") is pretty hilarious too. Cantabrigian (talk) 12:24, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
I love that he has fake porn videos popping up on his site (you don't have the required codec scams), very classy.131.107.147.33 (talk)
It's actually rather sweet really, he's taken the option of completely ignoring the educational humilitation heaped on him by Matthew. To an extent I can't say I am surprised, he is one of the most deliberately mendacious 'debaters' I've ever witnessed. And as for the porno vids, I don't get them. Perhaps it's something to do with cookies on the machine? Oldusgitus (talk) 18:34, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Now the comments are just a long string of asskickings.img --A Real Libertarian (talk) 05:55, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

I feel terribly sad for people like this. So small, so enclosed, so dead. Their vision of the universe is as myopic as their vision of God. No wonder, no majesty. Just anaemic petty stunted unimaginative piousness. Jesus would give them a good kicking. Ajkgordon (talk) 12:13, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
There's a mate of mine who runs a bicycle and motorcycle shop in Reading who is an xian. He drinks, smokes and swears worse than I do. I was speaking to him the other day and his attitude is that 'Do you really believe the disciples didn't swear, they were working class blokes in an incredibly hard land and they most likely swore and drank just as much as I do. And so did Jesus. I cant stand all these pious holier than thou idiots. When I die god will have a place for me because he knows me well enough.' At which point he hawked, spat and set off home to have a nice beer. He'll be in church tomorrow on his kness but tbh THAT is the kind of xian I like. He is quite willing to talk about his faith if you want to do so. But if not then he will talk about his bikes and beer. Give me those xians any day and, please goat, save me from the likes of terry. Oldusgitus (talk) 12:29, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
Damn right! Can you imagine God's horror at seeing His creations just sitting in the mud and refusing to use the one defining feature that man has - his intelligence? It must really get on His tits. Ajkgordon (talk) 12:34, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
Interesting. I'm trying to reply to his post on the uniform distribution of isotopes and volcanoes but I can't see a box for the captcha :( Ayzmo (talk) 17:37, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
It's there, the field just has no border so it's effectively invisible. Nutty Rouxnever mind 17:55, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
Thanks! I wonder if that's intentional to discourage people from posting? Ayzmo (talk) 18:51, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Coming a little late to this and, responding to the initial question, Eskimos do show some metabolic differences to non-Eskimos. These could be heat adaptations. For that matter other groups show adaptation to high altitude. So while we haven't grown fur, some subgroups have evolved in other ways.--Bob"I think you'll find it's more complicated than that." 19:20, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Yes, that's been pointed out to them in the discussion. But they just pick on one adaptation that hasn't happened - therefore creationism. Ajkgordon (talk) 20:13, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
You're talking science -- they're hearing lies from the pit of hell. Does anybody understand how embryology got on the short list? Maybe they think embryology is the theoretical branch of abortionism? I do love how the deer seem to be following along with great interest. Whoover (talk) 23:09, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

[edit] Is Conservapedia permanently down?

ConservapediaEditor (talk) 23:43, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

No, you're just on the giant IP shit-list. Use a proxy. Whoover (talk) 00:03, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

[edit] We are the Tea Party extremists - nice work on that

http://www.teapartycrusaders.com/u-s-politics/tax-day-rnc-sues-irs/

And so the second or sometimes first largest party in the US sues the government (OK, the IRS) over the extremist wing of the party trying to get tax breaks for their political activity. I doubt one in ten of the tea party idiots understand how to set up a non-profit organisation correctly. The other nine are undoubtedly breaking the law. ħumanUser talk:Human 05:00, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Personal tools

Variants
Actions
Navigation
Community
Tools
support