Conservapedia talk:What is going on at CP?/Martinez user

Betrayal: the Judas Syndrome
Conservapedia Has Betrayed its Reason For Being

A CHALLENGE TO THE GOOD MODERATORS HERE AT THIS SITE

Conservapedia has presented it self explicitly as a database of information dedicated to objective truth, contrary to the horribly biased and subjective "truth" seen at Wikipedia. The latter is, of course, run by hardcore Atheists and Evolutionists who have no other agenda than to slander the Bible, Christianity, Creationism and Intelligent Design. We are led to believe that Conservapedia exists to counter this agenda. But when the time came to see the genuineness of the Conservapedia reason for being, that is the stand for objective truth, it has utterly failed.

Moderator Conservative gave me the green light to take over the article on Charles Darwin. After beginning editing, Site Owner Andy interjected that he really liked my editing and urged me to continue. After writing that Charles Darwin was an Atheist as early as the late 1830s, which, of course, included mainstream scholarly source cites, Moderator TK changed the Atheist identification to Agnostic using an ultra-liberal and Atheist web site as his source. After protesting, TK and his evolutionist friend banned me! Did Conservative or Andy come to my defense and confront this unjust act? No, they did not. Other Moderators did come to my aid and fought the closet evolutionists and their obvious agenda.

Expecting Conservative to take up the cause and have my editing restored, he then persisted on a steady campaign to talk out of both sides of his mouth. Telling me this and that while, in editing reality, the Agnostic vandalism was allowed to remain. In one specific instance I had managed to quote Ernst Mayr directly - a quote that said Darwin was a Materialist and an Atheist. But Conservative erased the Atheist label and altered the Mayr quote. The point here is that Conservative willfully portrayed himself to be loyal and a Christian-Creationist, when in fact he was working to give closet evolutionist TK his "Darwin not an Atheist" label a victory. We know this is absolutely true because he erased the Atheist label out of Mayr's quote (after telling me by email that he would restore it) and he allowed me to be banned by TK without protesting on several occasions during this ordeal. The point about Conservative, if it is not already clear, is that he acted as a traitor and he did so while insulting my intelligence by making excuses, which tells me he has no conscience about lying to one's face.

I appealed directly to Site Owner Andy concerning my unjust suspensions and, more importantly, I gave him the direct evidence that Moderator TK was a double agent evolutionist working for Wikipedia.

TK, of course, presents himself as a born-again Christian-Creationist. TK, of course, is a double agent evolutionist. The irrefutable proof of this is the fact that he demands Charles Darwin to not be labeled as an Atheist. Why? Why would a real Christian-Creationist object to Darwin being an Atheist? The scholarly source cites were in place and more importantly, we know Darwin is famous for banishing God and saying Genesis is wrong about the creation of nature and the first man Adam. How can TK be a Christian and protect Darwin as not being an Atheist? The Bible specifically says that Jesus descended from Adam. Darwinism says Adam descended from an ape, and so did Jesus. Genesis says Adam was created from the clay-like ground in the image of God. These two scenarios are diametrically opposed. Imagine that; TK "the Christian" saying His Savior's blood was derived from an ape (= blasphemy)? TK is the epitome of a double agent. Hiding behind the Bible while working to make the chief enemy of the Bible (Charles Darwin) not an Atheist. TK and his indefensible actions expose him to be an Evolutionist and not a Creationist. TK corresponds to Judas in the New Testament. Unfortunately, the Bible is true. In type, Judas represents anyone who betrays Christ. TK has betrayed Christ by protecting Darwin who says ape semen and blood is in the Messianic line. And we know Charles Darwin was not a Christian. For TK "the Christian" to side with a non-Christian who says the Bible is wrong exposes TK to not be a real Christian. This is just plain logic and common sense. Real Christians have been known to die for the Bible and logically said persons defend what it says and do not defend the most famous Bible hater - Charles Darwin.

I have plead these facts to Site Owner Andy. He has ignored them completely. Site Owner has contradicted his own word. Why should anyone who is an evolutionist have any say in the article on Charles Darwin? Why hasn't TK and Conservative been banned for life? These two persons are traitors, yet Site Owner has done nothing. Since the mouthpiece of Satan in this world (= the Los Angeles Times) has endorsed Conservapedia, we know Conservapedia is being led by a person who has betrayed his own cause.

What does this say about the agenda of Conservapedia to counter the lies of Wikipedia?

From Wikipedia

Charles Darwin article:

"When asked about his religious views, he wrote that he had never been an atheist in the sense of denying the existence of a God, and that generally 'an Agnostic would be the more correct description of my state of mind'"

I can show that this quote by Darwin was made because Atheism in the nineteenth century was virtually illegal. Blasphemy trials were common, that is, persons who were Atheists and condemning Christianity publicly, were convicted and served time in prison. Darwin intentionally invoked the Agnostic label for this reason and to trick gullible Christians into accepting his theory. According to the Oxford English Dictionary the Agnostic coinage was not invented until 1869, that is ten years AFTER Darwin's Origin of Species was first published. Harvard Professor Janet Browne (an Atheist-evolutionist) has said that Darwin believed and argued that religion had no rational foundation whatsoever (2002:341).

Conservapedia, at the behest of "closet" evolutionists parading around in sheeps clothing has betrayed its reason for being and become just like Wikipedia: conducting the same business on the other side of the street.

I urge the good Moderators at Conservapedia to tell the Site Owner to change the Darwin article to reflect the truth or you will resign as a protest. How can any Christian-Creationist carry on here while the Atheists and evolutionists have secured the biggest lie of all (Darwin not an Atheist) on your own (supposedly that is) website?

From Conservapedia

Charles Darwin article:

"and Darwin also stated he was an agnostic."

Ray Martinez, Protestant Evangelical Creationist.

Los Angeles

8-21-07

(Not from original)
So.... he comes to CP, tries to contribute as best he can,gets blocked by TK. Has anyone invited him here yet? Sounds like prime RW material to me! :D --67.102.192.7 18:13, 21 August 2007 (CDT)

We've had enough trouble with maniacs. I can't blame TK for blocking him. --Linus (plot evil tech) 21:36, 21 August 2007 (CDT)

Why is this here under wigo? Shouldn't it either be its own CP article, Essay, or simply be deleted? human  15:55, 29 January 2008 (EST)