Talk:Conservapedia/Archive6

Russian propaganda
Has anyone noticed the blatant flood of Russian propaganda on CP following the Ukraine invasion? They're essentially calling the attack justified because Zelenskyy is an illegitimate Nazi dictator or something. --XXanax (talk) 01:03, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Yeah, the WIGO talk page has some on it. "They" should be clarified, though. The bulk of the bad takes (especially the "Zelensky coddles Nazis" angle straight from Putin's propaganda playbook) seems to be regurgitated by RobSmith, a dumbbell well known for his idiotic half-baked takes. The other main contribution to the asinine Ukraine take, though not near the level as RobSmith's edits, is Mr. Schlafly himself, who is mainly happy about Putin's invasion because, in his view, Ukraine is promoting the "homosexual agenda" for some reason (I guess because Kiev had a small gay pride parade or something).
 * So it's a small duo of idiots largely controlling the narrative. However, Conservapedia's narrative is not dissimilar from other places in white nationalist or extreme fundamentalist space in the US. Putin has tried to create a propaganda narrative projecting a sort of (in my opinion rather idiotic looking, considering he's an old fart :p ) more-macho-than-thou masculinity, with echoes of white nationalism and intolerance. There are idiots that fall for this sort of thing. The invasion is revealing who they are. PanGalacticGargleBlaster (talk) 01:34, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
 * It's more thinly-veiled antisemitism from Nobsy (Conservapedia:RobSmith). From the opposite end the allegedly left-wing The Gravel Institute was parroting Putin's propaganda just before the invasion. Bongolian (talk) 06:01, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

What Conservapedia needs
... is a good dose of creativity (as distinct from Creationism), regular doses of the 'more interesting, 'Er What?' and lurid' chapters of the Bible, BibleCelebrityGossip (tm), irony traps, and exposure to the inherent contradictions in their arguments, until until they get into a mirror maze and vanish/undergo spontaneous combustion. &mdash; Unsigned, by: 212.85.6.26 / talk / contribs Requesting thread archival (why?) Plutocow (talk)

Where's Conservapedia's true quote that says "sentences should not be facts."?
Where is the citations of Convervapedia's quote that says "sentences should not be facts''? I can't find it in this article because there is no citation for it. Please, cite or give proof that this is Conservapedia's true quote "sentences should not be facts". Cite the proof here:

Requesting thread archival (why?) Plutocow (talk)