Conservapedia talk:What is going on at CP?/Archive149

Coase WIGO
I... am speechless. This is just a couple of days after his latest bible nuttery. In Britain we can get people sectioned under the Mental Health Act when they need protecting for their own good. What is the American equivalent? SuspectedReplicant (talk) 17:07, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * History, as our Ford would say, is bunk. -- 17:12, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually, it occurs to me that I'd be intensely grateful if Christians would shut the fuck up about the past. That way, I wouldn't have to hear any more about creationism. -- 17:14, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Careful, the future for Andy Panda is nothing short of the United States of Christ. Jimaginator (talk) 17:23, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * The Economics course is going to be even funnier than World History, because Andy appears to know even less about it and the connections he tries to make with Christianity are even more tenuous. I'm sure you need to be certified to teach in a New Jersey public school, but aren't there any requirements you have to meet to hold yourself out as a homeschool teacher?  You need a license to be a barber. Godspeed (talk) 17:40, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * That's because the barber is of actual, beneficial use to society, whereas AndyPandy's use to society is to a) Pollute the gene pool, and b)lower the average IQ of humanity.--SW:TOR! SW:TOR! SW:TOR! (talk) 17:53, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * At least we take it that Andy is useful to the society as a comedian source of lulz?  18:00, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * The trouble with teh Assfly is that it's lulz with a shudder. You laugh when you read it and then shudder when you realise he actually believes his crap and that he's teaching it to kids. SuspectedReplicant (talk) 18:44, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

It's incredibly devious, isn't it. If the past is irrelevant then I can say whatever I want about the past and there's no reason to doubt it. Any counter evidence can be dismissed as irrelevant. Stile4aly (talk) 18:03, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Didn't Andy mention in his Eagle Forum interview that he didn't need a license to be a homeschool teacher in NJ?  19:55, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * According to the NJDOE, apparently he's right. *shudders* Godspeed (talk) 20:08, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Why do you think he was so incensed when they put regulations on homeschooling in California? He's afraid they'll do it in NJ, and he definitely wouldn't measure up. --Kels (talk) 21:44, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I feel so sorry for those kids. --Gulik (talk) 07:48, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

suspected replicant- Im an LPC here in america, it is essentially IMPOSSIBLE to commit anyone unless there at risk to harm themselves or others (ie: kill) --Matt

Conservative version of the Bible
You know, I was planning to write a Unbooks:Right Wing version of the Bible at Uncyclopedia just to show how ridiculous their movement is. But now Andy's gonna do it and save us the trouble. And the fact that he's gonna take it seriously and try to make it serious makes it all the more ridiculous. --Crazyswordsman (talk) 18:52, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * It's Andy. You really think he's gonna remember what he was doing two weeks from now?  --Kels (talk) 19:01, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm rooting for Andy to actually succeed, and hope we end up with something like the lolcat bible, but funnier.  19:13, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Does the fact that he's got 3 verses from the shortest book in the bible, or 0.01% of both the OT and NT, tell you anything about his level of determination? He's more content to pontificate vaguely about the purpose of the project than complete it. 20:51, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I'll get him started. "Genesis 1: In the beginning there was the word, and the word was Bill O'Reilly and the word was with Bill O'Reilly. Oh yeah, and god was there too. But Bill wouldn't let him get a word in edgeways, because that's the no spin zone." -- 20:54, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * More to the point, Nutty, he has no intention of doing it himself. He wants to be the manager, and exhort other people to do all the work.  Like with that retranslation project, how much of it did he actually do himself, rather than pontificating and encouraging volunteers to do it under his direction? --Kels (talk) 21:21, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Yup. He's hoping someone else comes along who wants to do it all. Unfortunately for him, the rest of the CP inner party members aren't insane enough for it.-- 21:24, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * There was one person there who was capable of doing a reasonable job, and she left ages ago. There hasn't been a substantial edit since February I think. Totnesmartin (talk) 21:30, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Just curious - who is the person you are thinking of, Totnesmartin? Refugee talk page 23:33, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
 * DeniseM. Totnesmartin (talk) 07:12, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

He's trying to explain away the peace salutation at the beginning of some of the epistles as "peace of mind," because only a dirty hippie would wish someone actual peace. Godspeed (talk) 21:41, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Why the "Epistle to Philemon"? Hardly the most "popular" book, I'd never heard of it before. 22:14, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * It's got lots of references to "mine bowels" to trip up liberal's prurient interests and attract blockees. I looked at a very old commentary on the Greek for explanation. Andy's already getting it wrong because, umm, he doesn't research well I guess. While Paul was likely to have been imprisoned on Rome at the time of the letter, the "Prisoner of Christ" language is thought by some to refer to Paul's servile status to Jesus and Jesus' creation of Paul's condition. It's likely an honorific statement of Paul's suborinate agency to Jesus. The "laborer" bit is often applied to preachers and is trivial. The "grace and peace" bit is idiomatic - I've seen if referred to as "undeserved favor, and all good, temporal and spiritual which flows from that source."  Again, trivial for Andy's purposes. He really just needs to get a 19th Century commentary on the Greek so he can work this out a little better.
 * Andy trying to use the word "volunteer" to denote people working in the labour camp (labourer)? (I suppose in prison that's what labourer refers to). Guess people voluntarily go to to these hard labours.    22:28, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * No, he's starting with Philemon because it's the shortest one of Paul's letters. It's less than one page long in my Bible.  It's like an 8-year-old sitting down to do his homework and doing the coloring first, putting off the multiplication for later.  Bluefish (talk) 22:30, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * When you have a list of chores it's always satisfying to do the easy ones first so you can then cross it of and look as though you have actually made some progress. But Andy (and most of his goons) don't actually do the hard work, they let others do it and then castigate them if it's not 100% to their liking. Two years ago CP had the pretence of being an encyclopedia, but now it's not even trying to be more than a political blog. Back then it was fun to challenge the idiocies but it is has turned into a Jonestown or Waco-like community, with a deluded messianic leader and armed thugs round the perimeter. 23:32, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Presonally, I like to do the worst/most difficult first - then undefined"things can only get better"undefined. 10:16, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

I can't wait for Andy to claim that Jesus was actually American, that he founded America, and that he was responsible for killing all the Native Americans. I feel like Andy will find a place for crap like this. --Crazyswordsman (talk) 04:59, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Isn't that what Joseph Smith did?  06:08, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, it's close. Thank God for Joseph Smith, without him we'd never have known the Garden of Eden was in Jackson County, Missouri, or that the Hill Cumorah, site of the great battle of the Nephites and the Jaredites, was in New York. I believe the battle was over whether Quiznos or Subway has the best 6 incher. - Poor Excuse (talk) 02:12, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I do.TheoryOfPractice (talk) 02:18, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Having a Schlafly claim Jesus kill off the Native Americans wouldn't be too far off from previous statements of his. And didn't his mom Phyllis say something somewhere that the natives were "savages" who needed to be killed or Christianized? Photovoltaic Array (talk) 00:00, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * If memory serves brother Roger's got a bit of a negative view of Native Americans. 02:12, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * More like a strong case of denial about what white people did to them. TheoryOfPractice (talk) 02:14, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I think we all need to listen to Don Henley's song "The Last Resort." --Crazyswordsman (talk) 02:07, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

And the Saga continues...
Can anyone tell me whether Andy's reply makes any sense? This is in the middle of discussion regarding someone volunteering his/her Hebrew speaking ability. 06:08, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
 * None at all, no. 08:13, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Should be fun when[hah!] they get to Matthew 22:35 "... Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself" -unless of course he's gay, liberal or atheist.  14:43, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
 * They have already covered that part, "love the sinner, hate the sin" etc. Really convincing these days. 157.193.206.103 15:48, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

I loved clicking through the diffs as Andy "worked": "mangled another verse"... "improved my whining over socialism"... "ruined the subtlety in this bit of language"... 08:00, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Wonder if Andy's thought ahead (no I don't!): when he's finished his masterwork, he's got to extract column 1 & column 3 from a wikitable to lay it out in Bible form. At a guess, he'll have difficulty - I would & I think I'm more wikisavvy than he is. 22:13, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Easy to do chapter by chapter, but tricky to do automatically unless he's very careful about layout and suchlike. No way he's thought about this though. Worm  (t  09:28, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
 * If you copy the page and paste it into Word the you can delete the unwanted columns with two clicks, this would leave you with the verse number and translation. As there isn't a lot of formatting required for a bibble I don't really see it as an issue. 10:53, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

What in fuck is this
Whoever this ShmuelBernstein is he's going to get frustrated quickly if he thinks Andy can offer an articulate description of what "conservative" means or justify what appears to not be a translation project at all, but a complete ideologically based rewriting of the bible. I see this guy trying to get a real answer about how the translation is to be done and getting nothing but the same verbal diarrhea from Andy. The only thing that's becoming clear from the conversation is that Andy has no principled approach at all. He's just rewriting the bible to say what he wants it to say. 22:57, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh dear. "contribs) (Some linguistic updating. Could use some editing for content)"

23:43, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Obamafiti
CP's |MainPage right now features 6 Obama-related pictures with 5 being mocking images of him. Whatever happened to the respect they used to demand for the President? 11:51, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Although we aren't exactly any better, our defence is we don't exactly respect Andy. I guess they have a similar position on the democrat presidents.   12:13, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
 * No, our defence is that we don't claim to be an encyclopaedia. 12:16, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I think this was brought up on CP a few days/weeks after the election, and Andy or one of his henchadmins pretty much said that the President doesn't deserve special respect because it's about The Will Of The People and not just about what the guy at the top wants. *checks* Ah yeah: "You have that backwards. Atheists and liberals worship status. See status worship. Status means nothing to Jesus and Christians.--Aschlafly 15:08, 8 November 2008 (EST)" --Sid (talk) 12:22, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
 * So how does Andy defend his worship of St Ronnie then? Oh wait, I forgot... block, revert, oversight of course. --Psy - C20H25N3OYou know you want to 14:16, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Edit notice
See that notice above the text box when editing WIGO:CP and other WIGO pages? The one that begins with "How to add new entries:"? Want to get rid of it? It's easy! Open your monobook.css file (if you are using a different skin, open the appropriate file instead, e.g. modern.css for modern), and paste the following text (Don't copy ):

This message brought to you by His Highness Nx 13:37, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you! btw, if the wiki gets borked while I try this, it's just a horrible coinkidink 'k? --Psy - C20H25N3OYou know you want to 14:16, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
 * The wiki won't get borked, but your modern.css will since you copied the source tag :) -- Nx  / talk 14:22, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
 * This is why I never allow my identical twin bruvver to use my laptop when my back is turned. Thanks for fixing my... er... his mistake. --Psy - C20H25N3OYou know you want to 14:39, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

JFPerry...
...returns to CP after a 2 year hiatus (that's like a break, Jpatt) and starts copy/pasting his Citizendium stuff. Has RJJ been on a recruitment drive? --Psy - C20H25N3OYou know you want to 14:59, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

CP TOR Browsing
Did CP block all TOR nodes after it was suggested on here by Pi? I was using one last night(or the night before) to add factual information about Rahm Emanuel, and now I can't create a new account, even on unblocked IPs. Anyone else who uses TOR have the same problems? Web (talk) 03:05, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * They have account creation turned off--they usually do when there aren't any/many admins on line, or they just feel like it. TheoryOfPractice (talk) 03:09, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Second-hand smoke gets in your eyes
So "Honest" Ed is claiming that Conservatives deny the health effects of second-hand smoke? Doesn't that fly in the face of Andy's blaming the tobacco industry's denials of health issues on Liberals? --Kels (talk) 04:56, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeh, my thoughts exactly. He loooves his old argument of "You deny my insane claim? Tobacco companies denied for decades that smoking causes lung cancer!", it's just too perfect if conservatives are denying that, well, inhaling tobacco smoke causes lung cancer. --GTac (talk) 08:23, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Ed's just found a new source: here. Anyone know anything about them? I can't find an article here or on CP, but I might not be looking in the right place. The ACSH has been accused of being a corporate front group in the guise of a neutral council on science(WP). 10:41, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Source Watch has an article on them. 10:44, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I love the ACHS's nav panel illustrations. By the editor's 5 year old child? 10:53, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I await your improved offerings. 18:21, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Eveything you never knew about the NHS
In spite of knowing sweet FA about it, Andy Pandy insists on telling us all in the UK just how bad the NHS is and if we happen to know just a bit about the subject and disagree with him, it's because we're in favour of gun control??? I would have posted this at CP but apparently only Admins are allowed to add content to the Mainpage talk area at the moment. However, if TK or anybody else is reading this, I'm still interested in the reply...I wouldn't like to think Andy is just making it up as he goes along. Re: Mr Schlafly's comment: "In fact, it's such a big problem that the standard notice in England or Canada to patients include a statement like, "if the recipient of this notice (concerning scheduling medical care) has passed away, please accept our condolences."...... I've lived in the UK for the past 60 years and made great use of the NHS. In all that time I've never received such a communication as referred to above or ever heard of such a notice being sent to anyone. I'm interested in this, it's clearly something wrong that obviously needs to be taken further and if it is happening it needs to be stopped at once. Can you tell me the source of your information about this "standard notice" or who sent it so that I can take it up with the NHS? Mick McT (talk) 05:47, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Don't waste your breath on Andy, he's completely detached from reality in a way that most humans can only achieve through DMT. Also, I seriously doubt that the survival rate for prostate cancer is anywhere close to 100% in the US, considering none of the people I knew (it's only four, but still) who had it survived. I'm positive it's much higher than 50% in the UK, I'd be shocked if it's less than 70%. What a deluded little shill he is.-- 06:00, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * (Aside) Which DMT? Andy taking all three of them?   12:58, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I think that strychnine would be necessary to place most people's perception of reality at par with Mr. Schlafly's... 06:02, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Looks like about 90% survival rate in the UK if diagnosed within a year, and it's been getting better year on year: SuspectedReplicant (talk) 06:03, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

NO mention of Andy's favorite cancer stat but some interesting figures here which show the American system as costing more than double the UK system (per capita or as a % of GDP) while the US has poorer figures for infant mortality and life expentancy at birth. I guess a lot of this is cultural - but I would also guess that's true for Andy's favorite cancer stat. And at least these stats have a source other than Andy's arse. StarFish (talk) 06:46, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the link. "Free enterprise always provides better services than government does, for obvious reasons." Nice work.  What fucking reasons, Andy, you moron?   08:21, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Gubmint BAD. Biznis GOOD.  That is all. --Gulik (talk) 03:58, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Cancer Survival Stats
The US apparently does have better prostrate cancer survival rates, at least according to my unscientific Googling. The five-year US survival rate is indeed near 100%, whereas the UK's is around 70%. Discuss. Fedhaji (talk) 07:30, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * See Figures 3.1 and 3.2 here
 * This source corroborates
 * Sorry Replicant, didn't see your comment above citing the same source. Note that there appears to be a significant difference in the 5-year survival rates between the US and UK over roughly the same period of time (around year 2000). Fedhaji (talk) 07:38, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * That little organ that stores the goo and surrounds the urethra (that you, intelligent designer!) is called the "prostate". Prostrate is a position whereby one makes oneself rather vulnerable.  08:21, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm sure it does. I would like to know exactly what the stats are and if they're fair but prostate cancer survival is only one very narrow indicator. In the link I posted above I found stats (from BBC) showing infant mortality and life expectancy are better in the UK. Again fairly narrow. I would tend to think a lot of these differences are down to things other than standards of health care. For example cancer survival rates amongst women are better than amongst men in the UK. Does this indicate that female-only hospitals are beter than male-only hospitals? Of course not because they don't exist! Both groups get the same health care. It is in an indicator of a social trend that on average women go to see their GP earlier than men who tend to ignore illnesses for longer. It's cultural. Not a cause for complacency either. The NHS is far, far, far from perfect. But it's a fine system just the same and I'm rather proud of it. StarFish (talk) 08:48, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Human: I guess that's what I get for editing at 04:00. Starfish: Source #1 suggests that the US, for whatever reason, goes in for much more preventative prostate screening than the UK. Fedhaji (talk) 08:52, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * You are correct about the screening. The USA has had a longer history of testing for prostate cancer (possibly because some company found a way to make money out if it). Also there is a general reluctance among UK males to have someone else's finger stuck up one's rectum, it's too embarassing. Prostate cancer is actually quite a slow growing cancer and is not a major contributor to the death-rate stats, so many people with prostate cancer will die from other causes first. As to the statistics, quoted survival rates are dependent on diagnosis of the condition. So if the cancer is diagnosed early then even without treatment the survival rate from prostate cancer will be better than for someone with acute symptoms. Improving UK rates of survival is more about getting men to take more interest in their health than any flaw in the NHS. If one is talking about priorities in health then reducing obesity, alcoholism, and tackling the factors that contribute to heart disease and diabetes is probably a better way of spending the money. It should also be noted that quality of life is not included in these stats. The standard PSA test for diagnosing prostate cancer is not very reliable and can lead to overdiagnosis with unnecessary surgery. This can result in impotence and incontinence but large-scale trials have shown little difference in life-expectancy between those who have had screening and those who have not. So it's a question of whether making life a lot less pleasant in old age for a 2000 men is worth it to save one life, when five of them will still die from the condition anyway. Looking at theCancer UK stats there is also a difference between the base dates for the stats. The European ones are for a period 1995-99 while for the US it is 1996-2003, one would expect that treatment has improved over the extra four years of US data. 09:33, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Plus, of course, it is necessary to point out that the UK generally has a higher incidence of cancer per (fit in whatever number you feel) due, no doubt, to having a highly industrialised economy for centuries that was crowded into a very small space. The area where I live used be a heavy coal mining and iron refinery area and it's one of those places where the slag heaps are up to 20m thick, occupy almost every inch of the surrounding landscape, and filled with Odin knows what toxic crap.  For more info check out the history of the Merthyr Valley from the mid-18th century to the present day.  Think of it as homework.--AndyPandy - &#39;cause Zues decided you can never have too much stupid in the world (talk) 13:29, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah, the valleys were one giant toxic pit. Great for fossil hunting though... I just chimed in because I don't see "Merthyr" in print very often ;)  23:23, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Not to mention the toxic dump that covers the area around Runcorn, just over the river from me. Yes, a century or more of irresponsible industry has left a nasty legacy. Good old free-market capitalism. (And there's a lot more of that if you need extra refs). 14:28, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

(undent) Let me just say how happy I was to read "You must also support gun control and higher taxes." That's the sort of thing that got many of us interested in WIGO in the first place. It brought a smile of nostalgia to my face. It seems so rare that Andy actually debates anyone these days. Bluefish (talk) 21:32, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

In a rant similar to Ace's the other day...
TK, feel free to paste this over to Andy if you so wish...

So Andy, you know about government run healthcare do you? I take it you've lived under a government run healthcare system before? No? Then how can you possibly say it's worse than privatised healthcare where people only care about their wallets? The fact that you can twist something around on someone like that boggles the mind - on the main page talk where you state a user only likes government run healthcare because he likes being a government bitch. The only reason you like privatised healthcare is because you want to - as the Dead Kennedys summed up perfectly in their sarcastically conservative anthem - "Kill the Poor". Don't worry Andy, you're still a privileged "adult" white male of the bourgeoisie, and regardless of who's running the healthcare system you'll still be able to afford private care. So fuck off. 10:22, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * AND: I know someone with MS who does very well with the innovative care that is available here, and thrived later than her forties. That care is not available under a government-run system (my emphasis) Fuckwit. (anyhow, I know someone who was diagnosed with MS in [about] 1975 - she still gets down the pub once a week)  10:31, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually Josh, Andy has a vested interest against the health-care reform, he is employed by a group opposed to the reform because they want a user pays on the point of service system. Either you have the cash when you show up, or you don't get medical care. No insurance, no government, the best you can hope for if you don't have the cash is your doctor lets you pay him back in instalments. What happened to those videos of Andy talking? 10:40, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Of course, under Andycare, there'd be a big savings in vaccinations, which would certainly not be given, since they mostly cause diseases and moral depravity. Conservapedia's hepatitis B vaccine article was months old before the idea that it prevented anything snuck in. Again, a vested interest as Andy was the lawyer for an antivaccine group. - Poor Excuse (talk) 10:54, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * The company that I work for has offices in Europe and the USA. American staff receive almost double the salary because they have to pay for private healthcare. How anyone who's not in good steady employment affords the insurance premiums is beyond me. I'm sure I read that one of the biggest downsides of the current crunch is that many people who lost their jobs also lost their company paid health insurance.  11:00, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * It's sickening really when you think about it. I don't deny that the other aspects of the welfare system in Britain has it's problems, as it certainly does, but basically saying "only people with money can get medical care" is essentially condemning poor people to die. 11:37, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * NHS: t'other day I remarked in passing on an outpatient visit that my medication seemed to be making my fingernails fragile (breaking rather easily & unevenly). not expecting it to be taken really seriously. Result: change of prescription at (I just phoned a pharmacist friend of a friend) additional cost of about £15 per day. No sweat for such a trivial matter! 12:04, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I should add: this was an extra £15. The total cost/day is over £130 to the NHS (the taxpayer). 
 * You mean you weren't hauled up before the 'death panals'? StarFish (talk) 12:10, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * You don't get hauled up before the 'death panels' - they meet in secret before sending round the obamagoons to kick the door down and drag you away to make Soylent Green. It's such a good job that Steven Hawkins isn't British - he would have been boiled down to make glue years ago. Bob Soles (talk) 12:27, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry if I'm missing a joke or snark here, but Professor Hawking is British. 14:05, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Er... yes... snark was intended. He's also very open about his appreciation for all the NHS has done for him which makes the US far right's (IBD referenced here) assertion that he would be dead if he were British doubly ironic. Bob Soles (talk) 14:12, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * You haven't really been paying attention to this Obama health-care saga have you, Josh? This was covered in WIGO:Clogs] and has actually been widely featured in the news. (Just trying to explain Bob's snark). 16:48, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * That's the reason my other signature reads "Village Idiot". Thanks! 16:53, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Interesting, and relevant to the discussion above, is National Health Service. Does Andy still know the page exists (although he commented on the talk page)? It's a completely neutral, unbiased discussion. Surely some oversight? 157.193.206.103 16:30, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Must be. Not a bad article, though it definitely needs some references. I'm sure our friend TK  will be along momentarily to make sure it becomes a cesspool of anti-liberal bullshit.  16:48, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Bible vs. Quran, round 1
Hence, they believe "liberal Christianity" is an oxymoron. How do they define "liberal Christianity"? They have an article for it. Now since they say "liberal Christianity" = "Theological modernism", by transitive property "Theological modernism" are conflicting ideas as well? Time after time Andy claimed that Conservative value are looking to the future, so does that mean they are abandoning theology as well? Discuss. 13:48, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * The guy's trying to rewrite the bible.....I think that says it all. Jammy (talk) 13:53, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Conservapedia is a lot smaller than Wikipedia → Concise = better!
 * Qu'ran is a lot smaller than the bible → More words = better!  --GTac (talk) 13:58, 17 August 2009 (UTC)


 * The best I can parse it, Andy is saying that when the Bible and Qur'an differ, the Qur'an is wrong and that apologetic attempts to reconcile the two are pointless.


 * From a Muslim perspective, I'll simply say that I haven't heard the argument that the Bible became corrupted specifically after Muhammad's death. I have heard the argument that the Bible has become corrupted because of man's influence (and interference in the compilation of the Bible is well documented) and that this was the reason that God provided the Qur'an as his final miracle.  In fairness, there have also been alterations to the Qur'an as well, though mostly with regards to the standardization of diacritical markings as opposed to the removal of text.


 * Essentially, Andy is doing what he always does. He starts with his conclusion and then builds his argument to support it, but in the end it simply boils down to "you disagree with me, therefore you are wrong."  Stile4aly (talk) 16:13, 17 August 2009 (UTC)


 * PS - As always, Wikipedia has a fine article on the subject. These are the arguments I'm more familiar with, and I'm sure even Andy would agree with these criticisms. (See also the Adultress story and Conservative Bible Translation)  Stile4aly (talk) 16:18, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I see Wikipdia just surpassed the 3,000,000 million article mark. Come on Andy you know you can catch up. Now, 3 million articles at 40 hours a week, 2 minutes an article if Ed writes them, ... 16:40, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * 2 minutes, if you include eating the pizza. StarFish (talk) 18:28, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * To make it worse, it isn't Andy; started the article (TK helped moving it out to mainspace, from the user's talk page) and the captured version is around his last edit.   01:01, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

On a tangent here, while they claim that liberal Christians take the Bible out of context or are only following parts of the Bible, they're rewriting the thing so as to remove those parts.... --Crazyswordsman (talk) 21:42, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I hope their servers have a good surge protector, what with the imminent lightning-strikes. --Gulik (talk) 03:59, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
 * What, You think Andy believes in an interventionalist God? It's more like Andy believes himself to be God.   15:02, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Citing the Daily Mail...
I was reading the Mail the other day (though I found the The Express' had some awesomely horrible stuff in it the day before, which I feel like sticking on one of the WIGOs in a moment) and wondered "WFT?" with their scaremongering front page. It just put me in the mind to take a copy of Bad Science and whack the bastards with it. When you see a front page saying "VACCINE LINKED TO KILLER DISEASE" you expect them to be able to fill their front page and two page spread with science and medical data clarifying the connection, the risk and the significance. Do we find this? Do. We. Fuck. No, we don't even get the "leaked email" in full - with the context and everything, we just get a few cherry picked phrases that even with their quote-mining switched to "uber" aren't that scary. I seriously doubt the email was "secret" anyway and I imagine it's quite common to send doctors memos saying "please report every case of x, we're testing to see if y is causing it" because that's how you study this stuff! They're saying "we suspect a link, so we want to test it" not "there is a link, don't tell the public". For. Fucks. Sake. 16:31, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Is this CP related? 16:41, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * No, but they are a hive of conservative horseshit, much like Conservapedia. 16:54, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I know what the Mail and Express are but if it's not CP-related then it should go in the Saloon Bar, not here. 17:09, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Just looking at the article history - what happened to Learn Together? he seems to have left without saying goodbye, but isn't blocked. Totnesmartin (talk) 17:33, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I think LT fell out with TK when the liar/plagiarist/traitor came back and started throwing his weight around. He lost his sysop rights for inactivity but that's a well known CP euphemism for "don't come back". I believe LT now edits on aSoK as Augustine. 18:36, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * "used to edit on aSoK", rather. 18:43, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Surely that applies to quite a large chunk of their registered editors now? 18:46, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * He was quite prolific and on message at the start: not seen or heard of for ages. 18:50, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, it's a WIGO where they cited it and brought the story up. Then they tired to say "ooh, is this an example of "transparent government" that Obama promised?" And turned it into a massive swipe at Obama despite it being a story from the UK, as if Obama rules there... well. Anyway, yes it was CP related but I don't think the rant came across like that as much. 17:48, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * It always helps if you provide some sort of reference to the CP related part. 18:38, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * It was a very recent WIGO, it'd just slipped down below people's attention spans. 11:26, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
 * That doesn't really help when the page is archived or people have been away for a day or two. 12:52, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Jinxy vs. PZ Myers
Not really WIGO worthy, but here, Jinx is upset over PZ's behavior at the creationist muesum. Oh noes, they're making fun of us, make them stop! Come on guys, have a little thicker skin. 18:26, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Jinx, a low-brow version of JPratt. 18:41, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * If that brow gets any lower, it'll be taken for leg hair. --Kels (talk) 19:24, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Currently it's just pubic hair. 19:40, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Damn! Maybe that's what you were alluding to and it looks like I missed the witticism. 19:42, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * What a high-brow argument PZ Myers has made. OncomingStorm (talk) 20:53, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Hi Terry, long time no see. 20:55, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * That is not Terry, it is Jason. 00:10, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I can't help but be insulted by being referred to as that. I only have so much ability to take the moral high ground. OncomingStorm (talk) 20:59, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Precisely!!! So you do understand PZ Meyer's intentions? Personally, I'd rather laugh in a creationist's face than try to explain coalification or punctuated equilibrium. &mdash; Signed, by: Neveruse513 / Talk / Block 21:03, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * We all at some point in our lives have to choose between laughing in someone's face and explaining punctuated equilibrium. OncomingStorm (talk) 21:15, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Just like we have to choose between obliging signage restricting the use of a saddled stegosaurus to children and laughing at it. In fact, I have a picture of myself on that dinosaur. &mdash; Signed, by: Neveruse513 / Talk / Block 21:22, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * You will always be able to look at that photograph and know you made a difference. OncomingStorm (talk) 22:22, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Looks like the whole point of the excursion was lost on someone... The consensus is that these people should no longer be taken seriously. Deride and denigrate them until they are marginalized and disappear. For someone versed in tearing apart communities, I thought this would be in your playbook. &mdash; Signed, by: Neveruse513 / Talk / Block 20:57, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, it is impossible to raise a substantive argument against RUBBISH. 21:02, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I thought we had pretty much concluded OncummingStorm was Jinxy-pooze himself? Ace McWickedModel 500 21:11, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Jinx could never restrain himself when opening his foul mouth. That's why I don't believe it to be him. 02:02, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Have a look through his contributions to WIGO and WIGO talk, he is mostly interested in Jinx and he once mentioned his "law" when he let the I am, holier than thou mask slip. He is just trying really hard not to explode, you can almost read it in his comments. A few peanut butter jokes and a questioning of his connections to a man known to have connections to known racists and he will schucky the place up. 02:18, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Hey Oncoming Storm, have you read The Clan of the Cave Bear lately? Corry (talk) 04:08, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
 * If it's not about penis bones, he's not interested. --Kels (talk) 04:43, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
 * It's not, but it's a bloody good book. The later ones in the series aren't as good but have a surprising amount of sex in them. SuspectedReplicant (talk) 05:27, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Does it still have the guy with the big dick he liked so much? 05:30, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Have you ever been penetrated? If not, allow me to explain the experience. First he starts talking all smutty, which makes you all wet and drippy. Then he slips himself into teh wetness, and bangs on you as hard as he can for about two minutes. Then you have to go shower with your legs apart while you drip out teh excess dickmilk. After he's gone to sleep, you usually grab your dildo from the third draw down and finish yourself off. This usually soils the bedding and it needs to be washed, you can try rolling over to get out of the wet patch, but the patch is usually so big you'll fall out of bed. 66.90.104.77 06:27, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Ohhhhhh, don't stop... almost... there... Anus Deaton (talk) 17:16, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah he's still in them. What always got me about the books is the author photo. Jean Auel looks like the sort of person to be deeply scared of sex, but she has no problems writing about masturbation, sex, oral sex, orgies, partner swapping and paedophilia (girls get deflowered not long after their first period). There are no bestiality scenes but given the main characters' relationships with their horses you feel it's just a matter of time. SuspectedReplicant (talk) 05:38, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Looks like she now contributes to our site. 06:32, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Hey now my comment looks out of place. 06:41, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry. I put it back in. Didn't see your comment before I removed it. SuspectedReplicant (talk) 07:39, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Presumably BoN is now engaging in "epic lulz" over our decision to leave his comment in. Fedhaji (talk) 23:15, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Even though it was tangential, it was still related to the conversation. Nice to see BON can contribute. 23:21, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Conservapedia on Obama
Another unsurprisingly sickening rant against him on the front page. They are trying to liken his rule to that of the Soviet Union under Stalin or Hitlerite Nazi Germany. When the secret police kick down your door at 3am for being an enemy of the state Andy, I might be inclined to believe you. But until then, why don't you grab a history book and read up what it was actually like in the totalitarian states before you start plastering faecal matter all over your front page. 11:03, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
 * It's become completely unhinged on the topic of Obama, it seems like the "sentences" don't even need to make any kind of sense anymore. To me it seems like these things are created by some kind of CP Obama news item generator, and a crappy one at that. --GTac (talk) 11:11, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I think it's time CP came down heavily on the side of this. This debates needs more guns dammit. StarFish (talk) 11:30, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
 * They say he's a nazi because of things he hasn't done yet (gun control, etc.), believe the flat-out bullshit about ACORN and SEIU, and ignore the hypocrisy of saying Obama is trying to government-control everything and raise the debt when their boy Bush did nothing but that for eight years. ENorman (talk) 13:05, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Know what I think caused the Nazis to rise and start WW2 and the holocaust? Staunch nationalism, xenophobia and militarism.. America is very strong in all of those, but not because of Obama, but more because of people like Andy. --GTac (talk) 13:25, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
 * The fact that it's a never ending tirade against Obama is only half the reason I'm pissed at them. The other half is that I hate it when people try to liken Western democracies to police states that were seen under the dictatorships of the '30s. It's pathetic, it's stupid, and apart from that fact that it's plain wrong, it's offensive to people who did live under dictatorships when a spoiled American brat like Andy runs around trying to liken his President to those of the Third Reich and the Stalinist Soviet Union at the same time. 13:31, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Π: Magic 60? that includes Arlen Spectre (author of the controversial "magic bullet theory" of Warren Commission and & JFK grassy knoll fame) who recently, after several decades, had a road to Damascus conversion. Here's what you get for swallowing commie agitprop, look at today's headlines   And here's what he gets for all his backstabbing   Goodluck to Spector, and good luck to Democrats who think they can rely on him for anything.
 * Theemperor: IS that an admission that Conservapedia:Fascism is unfair? Thank you. RobS (talk) 03:57, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Um dipshit, that is an opinion piece not a headline. I am not a US citizen, so I don't keep track of these things, but 60, 59 or 58 senators they have a clear mandate for health care reforms, because your fellow American voted against you and you can't deal with that. If you can point out an error with Conservapedia:Fascism do it on the talk page or shut up. The articles does not say CP is fascist, it gives a list of warning signs about fascism and shows were CP is sympathetic to these positions. Go ahead and make a list of the 14 signs that Obama administration is turning fascist, I doubt more than one or two would be any thing but paranoid, conspiracy based rantings. 04:05, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I have made an essay measuring Obama against the warning signs. He did not measure up as being terribly fascist. 06:04, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Nice job ListenerX. 08:03, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I think ENorman hits on something that's too true about the Obama criticisms. They rely on a "well you wait and see" approach. Obama's a communist? Well I suppose he hasn't done anything communist yet, but you wait and see...See, Obama's a Communist! his health care proposal - Full of socialism and eugenics! Well, I suppose there's nothing in there, that's explicitly socialist or eugenicist, but you wait and see... And so on. They're always waiting for the chance to make one more prediction, and each time they act as if the prediction itself proves their previous prophecies. In absence of facts, simply make new predictions. They'll do just as well. Bil08 (talk) 15:05, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Shall we have such a news generator to show that they suck more than a script? (we can parameterize the name so it does not have to be referring to Obama)  14:58, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm surprised we haven't already done that. I daresay it'd be more entertaining than the assquote template which I admittedly find boring. 17:44, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I find the assquote template endlessly entertaining. What's become boring lately is Andy, at least until he gets further into revising teh bible. Love it. And where's TK been? I miss the spates of hateblocks made solely to gratify TK's fragile ego. 24.14.72.223 17:56, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
 * No-one left to block really, and talk page discussion has mostly ended. It's just work, work, work - much like one would imagine in an ultra-communist state, ironically. May I remind TK of the existence of JDWPiantist(or whatever his name is)? He was a fairly good contributor but I haven't seen him for ages now. EddyP (talk) 18:49, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Conservapedia:Fascism
I shifted this thread down here as it was apparently in the middle of another thread.


 * apart from that fact that it's plain wrong, it's offensive to people who did live under dictatorships
 * Yes indeed. Just what then, is this? Conservapedia:Fascism  RobS (talk) 17:53, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
 * And which freedoms of yours, exactly, have been curtailed by this administration's facism? Or is it socialism, I always get those two confused.   18:12, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
 * (EC PAIN IN THE ARSE AND THEEMPEROR BLOCKED ME!!!) A tactless title yes, but it's more reflective of your website's governing style than "Conservapedia:Democracy". You block any and every user that questions your perception on any topic, you blame everyone and everything but yourselves for all the problems in the WORLD, you endlessly smear opponents with pathetic propaganda posters (i.e. YOUR Obama/Hitler/Stalin comparison), and you're run by an idiot who thinks dinosaurs lived in harmony with humans while his second in command runs around as Andy refuses to believe him a parodist. So Rob, while I'm not rejecting the fact that Conservapedia:Fascism may be a somewhat tactless title, it's certainly a closer description of your site than Conservapedia:Democracy. By the way, thank you for replying. 18:13, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
 * "tactless", but not "offensive to people who did live under dictatorships"? "endlessly smear opponents," again what is Rationalwiki, or Conservapedia:Fascism?   My Obama/Hitler/Stalin comparison is just reflective of this administrations & Congressional Democrats governing style.  RobS (talk) 22:47, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Π: Magic 60? that includes Arlen Spectre (author of the controversial "magic bullet theory" of Warren Commission and & JFK grassy knoll fame) who recently, after several decades, had a road to Damascus conversion. Here's what you get for swallowing commie agitprop, look at today's headlines   And here's what he gets for all his backstabbing   Goodluck to Spector, and good luck to Democrats who think they can rely on him for anything.
 * Theemperor: IS that an admission that Conservapedia:Fascism is unfair? Thank you. RobS (talk) 03:57, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Um dipshit, that is an opinion piece not a headline. I am not a US citizen, so I don't keep track of these things, but 60, 59 or 58 senators they have a clear mandate for health care reforms, because your fellow American voted against you and you can't deal with that. If you can point out an error with Conservapedia:Fascism do it on the talk page or shut up. The articles does not say CP is fascist, it gives a list of warning signs about fascism and shows were CP is sympathetic to these positions. Go ahead and make a list of the 14 signs that Obama administration is turning fascist, I doubt more than one or two would be any thing but paranoid, conspiracy based rantings. 04:05, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I have made an essay measuring Obama against the warning signs. He did not measure up as being terribly fascist. 06:04, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Nice job ListenerX. 08:03, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
 * (EC)What governing style? I don't follow US politics that much, but as far as I can tell they control the House, the Senate with the magic 60 and Obama clearly won by a few hundred votes, they have the right to claim a mandate. They ran on the platform of health reform, this should not be a surprise. In two years time there will be another election and you have your chance to vote then. It is not like Hitler or Stalin in the slightest. 22:54, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
 * When will you people learn to stop engaging Rob in debates? All he does is parrot Conservapedia:Fascism at us, screaming GOODWIN'S LAW!!!  GOODWIN"S LAW!!!  until we give up and leave in exasperation.  -- 22:52, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
 * (ECx3) Rob, the RationalWikians are against Conservapedia because of the endless, unfair tirade against "liberal teachings" and other stuff you presume to be wrecking the country, along with all your other wacky ideas. Like I said, "Fascism" sums up your site governing policy far better than "democracy" as nowadays you silence opposition before it's even be heard! It isn't nearly as offensive as your crap against Obama because Conservapedia:Fascism refers to a governing style of a two-bit wiki that Andy thinks will soon take over Wikipedia, NOT THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA! Like I said earlier, when Obama's Gestapo-Cheka hybrid kick down your front door at 3AM, I'll be far more inclined to believe you. 10:56, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

In a Braindead Wiki
In a braindead wiki, dissent is not tolerated. In a branidead wiki, you speak when spoken to. In a bradinead wiki, hypocrisy prevails. In a barnidade wiki, I say what's true. In a rbideadan wiki, lerning is defined by people who are idiots.
 * * sheds tear* beautiful :,) 194.6.79.200 14:56, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
 * ?? Degenerative spelling?   15:00, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Make substantive edits and lern how to spell deejenuhruhtif and we may be able to debate. Open your liberal commie mind! Jimaginator (talk) 15:21, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

An old gem by Andy
When I saw this little gem by Andy, I immediately thought of the 'liberal snobbery' thing on the main page:
 * It should also be noted that American strategists predicted that if given the chance, about 85% of Vietnamese voters would have elected Ho Chi Minh as president. --Hojimachongtalk 20:46, 24 May 2007 (EDT)
 * Yes, that was a problem. Direct democracy does not always produce the best answer.--Aschlafly 20:57, 24 May 2007 (EDT)

EddyP (talk) 22:14, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Ass-saver PIDOOMA'ed useful in case of epic fail of current elected leader or to smear the current leader if the current one disagrees with him.  22:27, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Please remember that if you are a conservative:
 * i) The majority of people voted the way I wanted them to = Democracy, whose results are sancrosanct.
 * ii) The majority of people voted the way I didn't want them to = Mobocracy, whose results are patently rigged, illegal and too be ignored whenever I feel like.--AndyPandy - &#39;cause Zues decided you can never have too much stupid in the world (talk) 23:21, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I think you got point two wrong. The majority of people voted the way I didn't want them to = Fascism, especially if they act on the mandate they were given. 23:25, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I think it's a little tough. Democracy has and will produce suboptimal results. But in the strictest sense, I suppose that suboptimal results are tautological. I believe that point would be completely lost on Andy. Conserapediatism = perfect. &mdash; Signed, by: Neveruse513 / Talk / Block 00:47, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Suboptimal, yes, compared to a benevolent dictatorship. But less suboptimal than any other system, including "hoping" for a "benevolent" dictator (/monarch, emperor, etc.). And, of course, we're talking about "republics", not "democracies".  01:58, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Holy Force WIGO
It's things like this that make me think Andy's a parodist. Then I remember that it's entirely possible that he could be so far up his own ass that he wouldn't be aware of one of the most famous quotes in film history.-- 00:08, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Before even seeing the WIGO, I figured it was some thinly veiled smear at his daughter the physics major. Sad when you treat your own kids with the same condescending disdain as complete strangers ENorman (talk) 00:10, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I can't recall anything but encouragement from Assfly to Phy (makes sense...positive reinforcement leads to repetition). I didn't know she was a physics major. That makes this potentially hilarious. This is the first I could see as admonishment of Phy...if it's admonishment at all. I'm not aware of her philosophical leanings. &mdash; Signed, by: Neveruse513 / Talk / Block 00:39, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
 * To make it worse, It's on the list. Why the Force isn't labelled as witchcraft yet is beyond me.   01:02, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
 * HEY ANDY! If your going to start renaming major Biblical figures like this, Jesus isn't the most anglo-name. Maybe the liberals gave him a Hispanic name to promote cultural diversity.--Tabris (talk) 01:47, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh, that's an old joke, but still funny ("If Jesus was a Jew, why does he have a Hispanic name???"). But still, couldn't Andy rename HHHHim "John" or some other nice squeaky-clean Anglo name as God intended?  02:00, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Lemme take a guess, Jesse Christ?  02:03, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Or Joshua, like in Lamb. -- 02:42, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Joshua Q. Christian--Tabris (talk) 02:47, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Isn't Joshua an Irish name? A Catholic Irish name?  Heathens!  How about Jonas Kristol?  03:02, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Jonas the son, Yancy the Father and the Divine force.--Tabris (talk) 03:16, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Joshua and Jesus are actually the same name, and Joshua is much closer to the original. Bluefish (talk) 03:18, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
 * [[image:works.jpg|left|100px]][[image:Balloons.svg|100px|right]]Yes hua, but we knew that. Why you deflate the comedy balloon with your rationalist anti-Christian America-hating liberal gun-controlling needle? I bet you went to an atheistic public school and favor raising taxes!  03:26, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Can't your pitiful atheist mind understand that with the name Jonas, we can spread the conservative word of God to teenage girls across the nation?--Tabris (talk) 03:31, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
 * But, but, the Jonas Bros. are the evil gay, gay, gay, and probably have bowel syndrome, not ring things! (Unless they are cock rings) 03:40, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

The ends justify the means. If young girls accept the CP words of Christ through the Jonas Bros., as mothers (which will be soon due to the oversexed liberal media destroying moral values) they will teach their children, who will in turn teach theirs. In a few generations, our morals will become the norm of society and liberals will be a the then-modern version of the boogyman. Godspeed--Tabris (talk) 03:48, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
 * You still have not explained your heroin habit which was previously alluded to [NOTE: the word "alluded" does not appear in the KJV, and is probably LIBERAL propaganda], or your problem with balloons. 04:01, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Update that may spoil the fun
AddisonDM finds the term non-personal, similar to "Jehovah's Witness or other non-trinitarian" interpretations. Andy likes the replacement which sounds like a waveguide. 04:54, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Eh, that was so six hours ago, lets' get back to balloon and needle fun!

Has anyone pointed out to Assfly that you can't translate a text if you don't know the original language? DickTurpis (talk) 12:18, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Did it last time around, repeatedly. But then he shifted it to a "reinterpretation" or some other semantic backflipping to make it irrelevent. 12:21, 19 August 2009 (UTC)