Conservapedia talk:What is going on at CP?/Archive131

This is an archive page, last updated 17 November 2009. Please do not make edits to this page.

Archives for this talk page:

<1>, <2>, <3>, <4>, <5>, <6>, <7>, <8>, <9>, <10>, <11>, <12>, <13>, <14>, <15>, <16>, <17>, <18>, <19>, <20>, <21>, <22>, <23>, <24>, <25>, <26>, <27>, <28>, <29>, <30>, <31>, <32>, <33>, <34>, <35>, <36>, <37>, <38>, <39>, <40>, <41>, <42>, <43>, <44>, <45>, <46>, <47>, <48>, <49>, <50>, <51>, <52>, <53>, <54>, <55>, <56>, <57>, <58>, <59>, <60>, <61>, <62>, <63>, <64>, <65>, <66>, <67>, <68>, <69>, <70>, <71>, <72>, <73>, <74>, <75>, <76>, <77>, <78>, <79>, <80>, <81>, <82>, <83>, <84>, <85>, <86>, <87>, <88>, <89>, <90>, <91>, <92>, <93>, <94>, <95>, <96>, <97>, <98>, <99>, <100>, <101>, <102>, <103>, <104>, <105>, <106>, <107>, <108>, <109>, <110>, <111>, <112>, <113>, <114>, <115>, <116>, <117>, <118>, <119>, <120>, <121>, <122>, <123>, <124>, <125>, <126>, <127>, <128>, <129>, <130>, <132>, <133>, <134>, <135>, <136>, <137>, <138>, <139>, <140>, <141>, <142>, <143>, <144>, <145>, <146>, <147>, <148>, <149>, <150>, <151>, <152>, <153>, <154>, <155>, <156>, <157>, <158>, <159>, <160>, <161>, <162>, <163>, <164>, <165>, <166>, <167>, <168>, <169>, <170>, <171>, <172>, <173>, <174>, <175>, <176>, <177>, <178>, <179>, <180>, <181>, <182>, <183>, <184>, <185>, <186>, <187>, <188>, <189>, <190>, <191>, <192>, <193>, <194>, <195>, <196>, <197>, <198>, <199>, <200>, <201>, <202>, <203>, <204>, <205>, <206>, <207>, <208>, <209>, <210>, <211>, <212>, <213>, <214>, <215>, <216>, <217>, <218>, <219>, <220>, <221>, <222>, <223>, <224>, <225>, <226>, <227>, <228>, <229>, <230>, <231>, <232>, <233>, <234>, <235>, <236>, <237>, <238>, <239>, <240>, <241>, <242>, <243>, <244>, <245>, <246>, <247>, <248>, <249>, <250>, <251>, <252>, <253>, <254>, <255>, <256>, <257>, <258>, <259>, <260>, <261>, <262>, <263>, <264>, <265>, <266>, <267>, <268>, <269>, <270>, <271>, <272>, <273>, <274>, <275>, <276>, <277>, <278>, <279>, <280>, <281>, <282>, <283>, <284>, <285>, <286>, <287>, <288>, <289>, <290>, <291>, <292>, <293>, <294>, <295>, <296>, <297>, <298>, <299>, <300>, <301>, <302>, <303>, <304>, <305>, <306>, <307>, <308>, <309>, <310>, <311>, <312>, <313>, <314>, <315>, <316>, <317>, <318>, <319>, <320>, <321>, <322>, <323>, <324>, <325>, <326>, <327>, <328>, <329>, <330>, <331>, <332>, <333>, <334>, <335>, <336>, <337>, <338>, <339>, <340>, <341>, <342>, <343>, <344>, <345>, <346>

, (new)(back)

Mapping America Project

This may be better off at the bar, but I first found it through CP's pimping the "study" A quick look online shows a lot of right wing sites trumpeting this new study from the Mapping America Project which concludes that kids who grow up in two parent homes and go to religious services weekly are five times less likely to repeat a grade, more likely to be cooperative and understanding of others’ feelings, more likely to cure cancer and fly etc etc etc. Thinking this would be an interesting study, I looked for the original source, which brought me to this POS website. I personally loved this little bit, from their about us section "Mapping America's purpose is to demonstrate,through data from major surveys, mainly U.S. federal surveys, that the intact married family that worships weekly is the greatest generator of human goods and social benefits and is the core strength of the United States. Mapping America is a project of the Family Research Council." I'm sure that's a reliable source there.... But not wanting to judge, I looked at the study itself, which consists of a 2 page PDF file where a good 75% is either the header and logo, a huge chart that means nothing and about three sentences.... You'd think they would at least fake scientific format. SirChuckB^{Obama/Biden? 2012} 12:03, 13 April 2009 (EDT)

You're looking at it wrong; it's not a woefully inadequte study with a predetermined conclusion, it's consise. Z3ro^talk 12:06, 13 April 2009 (EDT)

The PDF made my browser freeze. That's always a good sign. Vulpius 12:22, 13 April 2009 (EDT)

I came up with similar results while researching for my sociology papers last year. Like homeschooling, all feedback you can find for this type of thing is extremely positive.--Nate River 12:31, 13 April 2009 (EDT)

Wow! So they have the same attitude to research as they do to religion. "There is a god!" "Where's the proof?" "Waddaya mean, proof? It's written right here..." --PsyGremlin_Whut? 12:35, 13 April 2009 (EDT)

I'm half tempted to use the "contact us" feature to send an email and ask for detailed information on their study, you know, methodolgy(sp?) control, what type of surveys were used that fun stuff..... I love pre-determined conclusions. SirChuckB^{Obama/Biden? 2012} 12:54, 13 April 2009 (EDT)

Usually with these types it is just interviews with parents. Lies and exaggerations all round--Nate River 14:13, 13 April 2009 (EDT)

You've just got to love a chart which exaggerates small differences in totally unexplained measurements. God fearing families score 50.7 MegaMickeyRoonies, whereas godless heathen liberals score a mere 48.4. 12:58, 13 April 2009 (EDT)

It's not so clear from the chart that the data stand for any proposition at all, as people who attend church less than monthly are better behaved than those who attend less than weekly/at least monthly, but less well behaved than those who go to church weakly. Stupid graph with shitty data and dumb conclusions. Thee Nuttish ^Talk 13:07, 13 April 2009 (EDT)

I take that back. The data are good. If your parents force you to go to church, you're clearly better off the less frequently you go, will rebel if forced to go more than once monthly, and will finally become numbed out if forced to go weekly. Thee Nuttish ^Talk 13:14, 13 April 2009 (EDT)

Hmmm...let's see. Graph seems....like a graph. Dependent axis seems good, churchgoing attendance by week, by month, etc., all seems reasonable there. Now, independent axis. Hmmmm.....(MPRS) Mean Positive Relationship Score is completely undefined. Hmmm...check footnote...mmmm....no explanation of MPRS... OK, fancy colourful chart is completely meaningless gibberish. DogP 13:17, 13 April 2009 (EDT)

The Actual FRC Doc

Here [1]. Essentially, single parent families have more problems. Religious kids have fewer problems at school (because they're controlled at home). Can I get a duh? What in god's name is this study? Then you get page 18, which shows NO correlation, yet they claim it does! 13:18, 13 April 2009 (EDT)

From page six "Children who attended religious services at least monthly have a much lesser chance of repeating a grade than those who attended religious services

weekly or not at all." this sentence should be taken out and shot. SirChuckB^{Obama/Biden? 2012} 13:50, 13 April 2009 (EDT)

Also, thanks for the full link Publius... I love how the whole thing is meaningless charts with no real information given. For example, they talk about repeating grades, but they don't take into account something like parental refusal. Parents can refuse to make their kid repeat and force their continuation. Also, are these repeats do to poor study skills leading to bad grades, or did they have large blocks of days missed... SirChuckB^{Obama/Biden? 2012} 13:54, 13 April 2009 (EDT)

The "statistics" show over 50% of all kids in America go to church once a week. Is that remotely accurate? Toffeeman 08:17, 14 April 2009 (EDT)

The authors have PhDs?! If I had handed in work that shoddy even for an undergrad course, it would have been handed back for complete revision, if not just outright failed. Just four pages of text with no real discussion, no concise conclusions, and a big pile of 25 disconnected graphs dumped at the end that have meaningless titles, inflated axes, and no statistics, while drawing concrete conclusions from differences of down to 0.5 units or less on undefined scales, ignoring differences that don't fit their preconceived mold, and not considering any interfering variables or spurious connections, plus four tables, three of which I don't see as being even remotely relevant to what they're trying rather pathetically to say. And what's up with the author bio that takes up an entire page? Accounting for spacing, it's half as long as the article text itself! "Look at all the big important-sounding stuff I've done- so you should believe this study too!!" Kallium^talk 11:58, 14 April 2009 (EDT)

This made me chuckle...

14:18, 13 April 2009 DeanS (Talk | contribs) blocked 213.251.185.81 (Talk) with an expiry time of 5 years (account creation disabled) ‎ (Abusing multiple accounts: GodIsAJealousSadist, TKsEmptySac)

Thee Nuttish ^Talk 16:33, 13 April 2009 (EDT)

I'm pleased that TK removed the parole on one of my socks. Now I have less to worry about. --Irrational Atheist 17:55, 13 April 2009 (EDT)

You're not fooling anyone here with that liberal deceit, Irrational Atheist. You'll have to go to Wikipedia for that. tealish^??!!!1 21:21, 13 April 2009 (EDT)

"Tealish" (specialty not in breast cancer), not much is "clear to" a determined atheist. I skimmed through your recent edits and found liberal opposition to chivalry, so my confidence is over three standard deviations away from the mean that you're trying to spread liberal hearsay. I urge you, I beseech you, I beg you: accept that classroom prayer helps resist moral decay. You can whine all you want, but valuable copying is ... valuable! Thanks and Godspeed.--Andy Schlafly 03:42, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

Sore loser!

When will the headlines on CP represent what a sore loser Al Franken Norm Coleman is? http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30199310/ --Irrational Atheist 01:06, 14 April 2009 (EDT)

I've been following that story for a while, full of ironic lulz from Norm's past statements pushing a severe contrast to his current actions, like this one when he was up in votes, and is now appealing like a baby constantly. Sort of like back when Ted Stevens was indicted for corruption charges - CP made just one remark about the whole thing (Karajou made a post saying Stevens will fight the charges) and quickly clammed up. I'll expect them to make some sarcastic congratulations to Franken saying he won by fraud. Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 11:52, 14 April 2009 (EDT)

You mean sort of like when Al Gore and then John Kerry lost? Who cares? In any hotly contested race someone is going to be disappointed and complain. Jrssr5 12:52, 14 April 2009 (EDT)

The difference here is that Coleman and the Republican acknowledge that they're not going to win. Coleman has already taken a private sector job and has begun. He's just being a dick because it keeps another Democrat out of the Senate. If the Senate really wanted to force it, they could seat Franken, but it would just be more ammunition for the GOP. SirChuckB^{Obama/Biden? 2012} 13:17, 14 April 2009 (EDT)

The site is... er...

Heavens! 8 events since editing opened 3 hours ago, including 1 vandal & revert, 1 block, 2 articles moved and Jess fiddling in her box. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 10:30, 14 April 2009 (EDT)

Their inactivity has a knock on effect here too. Earlier I clicked on our Recent changes and was surprised to see not a single edit in any of our CP articles in the last 50 changes. Normally at least (insert Schlafly statistic here)% of the recent changes would be to do with CP.

Is Jessica old enough to be making innuendo comments about her, by the way? I need to know whether the mental image I may have had was appropriate. Bondurant 10:38, 14 April 2009 (EDT)

She's a schoolteacher, so yes. Stupid wisest Phantom Hoover! 10:43, 14 April 2009 (EDT)

Come on, let's make it official

Stupid wisest Phantom Hoover! 10:46, 14 April 2009 (EDT)

Celebrate with a boycott? Especially as Ken is over here badgering for attention. Bondurant 11:16, 14 April 2009 (EDT)

Sorry but I really don't think it's dead yet. Not looking healthy though. It raises an interesting point though. How do we judge when it's dead? When it stops responding altogeather? When it averages (say) less than 50 edits a day for more than 1 week? Or should it be to do with page views? I wonder if we could agree a criteria. Good fun just the same. StarFish 11:19, 14 April 2009 (EDT)

One days lack of edits does not necessarily mean CP is dead. Andy and the rest could be off making preparations for tomorrow's teabagging events. MDB 11:26, 14 April 2009 (EDT)

It is quite boring over there of late. Nothing they do or say is particularly surprising any more - they ticked the batshit crazy box ages ago. There are no conflicts between sysops, as the so-called "reasonable" ones have been driven away. There are hardly any casual editors any more and the parodists seem to have given up. Ken's shoutouts harldy cause a ripple any more.

Andy drip feeds us the occasional "insight" to keep us going, and Jinx being de-sysopped was entertaining for a short while. So maybe it's not dead, but it's like an old dog, who's back legs and eyesight are failing and who can hardly make it out the back door before peeing on the kitchen floor. Bondurant 11:42, 14 April 2009 (EDT)

(ec)CP won't die until Andy pulls the plug, which he won't unless an order comes down from his mother because it is embarrassing Eagle Forum, which is unlikely because her and her organization are batshit anyways. He'll keep "teaching" his lousy online classes, and the six or so people they have will keep doing their thing. They can hobble along on life support for quite some time. Corry^{Maybe it was the eleven months he spent in the womb.} 11:49, 14 April 2009 (EDT)

There needs to be another Lenski redux or something, as CP is just tottering along these days with the same old shit. I think even TK is getting bored that nothing spectacular is happening. Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 11:57, 14 April 2009 (EDT)

1. Conservapedia Talk:What is going on at CP?/Archive71
2. Conservapedia Talk:What is going on at CP?/Archive87
3. Conservapedia Talk:What is going on at CP?/Archive119
4. Conservapedia Talk:What is going on at CP?

Seems we've been here(ish) before (& that's only the dingdong template). _and marmite 12:18, 14 April 2009 (EDT)

Well, the first one was for Karajou, 'cos that's what I made the template for. Without looking, I don't know what the other ones were celebrating, but I suspect only the ones on this page were celebrating the death of conservapedia proper. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 12:43, 14 April 2009 (EDT)

Eventually all the IP range blocks are going to add up to one big fat range block from 0.0.0.0 to 255.255.255.255 Mega 14:41, 14 April 2009 (EDT)

Except there will be a score or so of "exceptions" and we'll know exactly what the IPs are of the remaining editors. ħuman 16:33, 14 April 2009 (EDT)

At least Ed doesn't let us down...

...as he delivers some more garbled what the fuckery. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 12:30, 14 April 2009 (EDT)

My brain, my braaaiiiinnnnn! EddyP 12:36, 14 April 2009 (EDT)

Dear Jessica, you've been touched by an angel uncle Ed. I think this is what they call "bad touch." --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 12:51, 14 April 2009 (EDT)

Is Santa a ghost? ... or spirit? SuperJosh "crying into a flannel" 14:25, 14 April 2009 (EDT)

I'd just like to say, Ed trying to speak fangirl Japanese by adding "ne" to the end of his sentence is THE CREEPIEST FUCKING THING IN THE WORLD. Stop it, Ed. Just stop it. --Kels 20:56, 14 April 2009 (EDT)

I may call myself an otaku in jest, but Ed is posing. Is posing to be an anime geek lower on the social foodchain than diehard otakus? Maybe he misunderstood that "moonies" in otaku are Sailor Moon fans?--Nate River 21:28, 14 April 2009 (EDT)

LOL to creepy. "ne" seems to be used mostly by gossiping women, expanded out 3 or 4 "syllables" long.--En attendant Godot_{"«I think like a genius, I write like a distinguished author, and I speak like a child. --V.Nabokov»} 08:04, 18 April 2009 (EDT)

Obscene User Name

Many people have been blocked for a lot less so how come CPWebmaster creates an account for User:FooBar? Surely he knows that FooBar is just an alternative spelling for FUBAR - Fucked Up Beyond All Recognition.  Lily ^{Ta, wack!} 15:20, 14 April 2009 (EDT)

Well, you can say that to try to get him in trouble, but it's not true, and all that. Foo and bar are just stock characters in the programmer's palette... ħuman 16:35, 14 April 2009 (EDT)

You may say that now but where do you think they got the names in the first place? Programmers like to push the boundaries.  Lily ^{Ta, wack!} 12:30, 15 April 2009 (EDT)

According to WP, foobar did not come from fubar. --  Nx/talk  12:34, 15 April 2009 (EDT)

But WP is six times more liberal than the truth. Totnesmartin 13:06, 15 April 2009 (EDT)

Oh sweet irony!

Couldn't help but chuckle at DeanS saying that the Catholic Encyclopaedia calls a certain historian very biased...really Dean, you can't see the irony? Jammy 17:32, 14 April 2009 (EDT)

Got a bad feeling about this...

...So you reckon this image will go on the main page, the evolution article, the Richard Dawkins article or all three? Ace McWicked^{bitch and moan} 19:34, 14 April 2009 (EDT)

It looks pretty bad. Has the man no dignity? - User $\scriptstyle h/2\hbar$ 19:40, 14 April 2009 (EDT)

Call the police. TheoryOfPractice 19:41, 14 April 2009 (EDT)

That didn't last long. I didn't even see it. --Edgerunner⁷⁶_{Tah-daaaaaaah!} 20:20, 14 April 2009 (EDT)

What was it a picture of? Did anyone have a screencap?The Emperor_{Kneel before Zod!} 20:23, 14 April 2009 (EDT)

It was a still from the Columbine cafeteria showing the killers. The caption stated they were evolutionst atheists and it was briefly placed on the Evolution page. Just plain loathsome. Ace McWicked^{bitch and moan} 20:28, 14 April 2009 (EDT)

Only Ken

would think of exploiting a tragedy for his eviloution article.  He really makes me sick sometimes.  The EmperorKneel before Zod! 20:31, 14 April 2009 (EDT)

Wow! Ken

is just... wow!  Is there any way for Trent to put sound into the background of certain pages?  It would be great to hear the Looney Tunes theme (or something equally appropriate) anytime I go to User:Newton or User talk:Newton. --Edgerunner76Tah-daaaaaaah! 20:35, 14 April 2009 (EDT)

The notebook of one of the Columbine killer says, "only science and math are true, everything, and I mean every fucking thing else is man made" and "there’s no such thing as true good or true evil, it’s all relative to the observer. its just all nature, chemistry, and math, deal with it". It is irrational to cut off inquiry into the motivations for his murder by labeling such inquiries "loathsome". Mega 20:39, 14 April 2009 (EDT)

On the contrary Mega, not only do I find it loathsome that someone would use a tragedy such as this to make political/religious point but I find revolting, disgusting, distrubing and fucking appaling. Ace McWicked^{bitch and moan} 20:57, 14 April 2009 (EDT)

Just because someone misinterprets science into a motivation for murder does not affect the credibility of evolution. The Emperor_{Kneel before Zod!} 20:47, 14 April 2009 (EDT)

It is on of Ken's

typical argument from adverse consequences. He is trying to link the theory of evolution to the shooting so he can say "see evolution causes bad thing to happen and therefore it is wrong" or a weaker "see evolution causes bad thing to happen and therefore we should not teach it in schools". You have to understand what he is trying to achieve with this stunt, mostly it is for attention, but also he is trying to minimise the teaching of evolution in school at a "grassroot" level. - User $\scriptstyle h/2\hbar$ 20:51, 14 April 2009 (EDT)

The truth value of evolution notwithstanding, it might be the case that human beings require a belief in eternal consequences to moderate their behavior, and there could be a correlation between a lack of such belief and an increased incident of violence. Mega 20:53, 14 April 2009 (EDT)

While it is certainly true that people have interpreted evolution to mean rascism and used it for their purposes, it is equally true that you could say the same of everything and that the adverse concequences do not outweigh the advantages. Back on point, Ken is indeed a sicko. Just wish I could have copied it into my custom kenpics. --<choose>

<option>^Input The Resistor^Output</option> <option>Coyote^{Over 450 pages watched NOT including talk pages}</option> <option>The Trickster</option> <option>Acionyx</option> 20:58, 14 April 2009 (EDT)

I have to agree with CUR here you can string together a line of logic for anything that justifies adverse behaviour. - User $\scriptstyle h/2\hbar$ 21:01, 14 April 2009 (EDT)

Well my feeling is if you can't moderate your own behaviour you are not really a grown adult. - User $\scriptstyle h/2\hbar$ 21:00, 14 April 2009 (EDT)

Why does that follow? --<choose>

<option>^Input The Resistor^Output</option> <option>Coyote^{Over 450 pages watched NOT including talk pages}</option> <option>The Trickster</option> <option>Acionyx</option> 21:02, 14 April 2009 (EDT)

Why does what follow? - User $\scriptstyle h/2\hbar$ 21:03, 14 April 2009 (EDT)

How does the fact that one should control themselves relate to whether evolution had anything to do with Columbine? --<choose>

<option>^Input The Resistor^Output</option> <option>Coyote^{Over 450 pages watched NOT including talk pages}</option> <option>The Trickster</option> <option>Acionyx</option> 21:15, 14 April 2009 (EDT)

I think what he means is regardless of their beliefs, whether in evolution or otherwise, they were unable to control their behaviour. I am an atheist but I dont use this to justify killing someone. Ace McWicked^{bitch and moan} 21:20, 14 April 2009 (EDT)

(EC and agree with Ace)I was referring to Mega's comment that humans need an external force to moderate their behaviour, I was handing out my opinion that people should moderate their own behaviour because it is good for them. If you flick back to WIGO you will see something about liberalism being a mental disorders; the argument in the book basically runs, liberals want everything controlled by the state, a child has everything controlled by their parents, so a liberal want the state to substitute for their parents, which is unhealthy as you are not growing up and controlling your own life. Only 2 and 4 have any psychological backing, point 1 and 3 are his own attempt a pseudo-political science. But the other two points are sound in that you by not controlling your own behaviour and are expecting someone else to do it for you, so you are not growing up. You could just as easily argue that people who need an external belief system to moderate their behaviour have a mental disorder as they expect their "sky daddy" to look after them. - User $\scriptstyle h/2\hbar$ 21:27, 14 April 2009 (EDT)

That's a weirdly popular argument with religious nuts: "If Jesus wasn't watching me like a hawk, I'd be on a three-state rape and murder spree RIGHT NOW." Strange how people like me who don't believe gOD cares much about what we somehow still manage to avoid murder, arson and looting on a daily basis. --Gulik 14:16, 15 April 2009 (EDT)

Hmmmm either Mega is TK or, as per usual, TK is still watching us like hawks. Ace McWicked^{bitch and moan} 21:11, 14 April 2009 (EDT)

Unfortunately Mega is Mega. - User $\scriptstyle h/2\hbar$ 21:27, 14 April 2009 (EDT)

You are a sad and lonely man, TK. - User $\scriptstyle h/2\hbar$ 21:31, 14 April 2009 (EDT)

MOAR: It be restored. The Emperor_{Kneel before Zod!} 21:41, 14 April 2009 (EDT)

He is a fucking freak, can he really not see what is wrong with politicising (which is what it is as it has nothing to do with science) a tragedy like that? You are a sick Ken

, get a life. - User $\scriptstyle h/2\hbar$ 21:45, 14 April 2009 (EDT)

............................I am fucking speechless. Has CP just sunk to a new low?--Nate River 21:57, 14 April 2009 (EDT)

Maybe it's time we make Kenny boy a nonperson, so to speak. I don't just mean ignore the red telephones, I mean actually ignore everything he does; pretend he doesn't exist. Hell, no one on CP ever talks to him, so we're pretty much his only "friends". -- Yossarian^{The Man from the USSR} 22:17, 14 April 2009 (EDT)

yes fucking please. he's wretched and invading my personal life. i find myself telling friends about cp chars and it needs to stop. Thee Nuttish ^Talk 22:22, 14 April 2009 (EDT)

Hell no. He's far too lulzy. The Emperor_{Kneel before Zod!} 22:34, 14 April 2009 (EDT)

True, but wouldn't the lulz of him flailing desperately for our attention be rather epic? -- Yossarian^{The Man from the USSR} 23:22, 14 April 2009 (EDT)

But what's the point of lulz if you aren't allowed to point and laugh in public? --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 14:20, 15 April 2009 (EDT)

== Is Ken

bored? ==

His new gentlemen reads

---

[[Image:Esp0083w.jpg|right]] Dear Ladies and gentlemen at a rather liberal website,

Conservapedia now ranks #5 at Google USA for the search evolution as can be seen here: http://www.exactfactor.com/Default.aspx The customary triumphant matador with the customary announcement of skewered liberal false ideology will soon be put on the Conservapedia main page. :) Ole!Ole!Ole!

Sincerely,

Conservative

---

The quality of Ken's red telephones is declining. The Emperor_{Kneel before Zod!} 21:44, 14 April 2009 (EDT)

Attention sir at a rather far-right blog,

Nobody gives a shit. Ole! Ole! Ole!

ENorman 21:48, 14 April 2009 (EDT)

First of all, on an actual search you are still 14, that exactfactor stuff is bullshitting you. Second of all congratulation you managed to get people to look at you by debasing and whoring yourself with your pathetic "look at me" tactics and stupid picture. Did I say whoring? Hookers are better than you Ken

, at least they have something to offer, unlike your content-less, fallacy filled article. - User $\scriptstyle h/2\hbar$ 21:50, 14 April 2009 (EDT)

(you forgot "quote mined", Pi) _and marmite 22:05, 14 April 2009 (EDT)

Ken

would make a great gay hooker.  The EmperorKneel before Zod! 22:07, 14 April 2009 (EDT)

Now you have made my speculations about Ken's

past life more interesting. - User $\scriptstyle h/2\hbar$ 22:11, 14 April 2009 (EDT)

Proof. The Emperor_{Kneel before Zod!} 22:19, 14 April 2009 (EDT)

Veeeery telling! _and marmite 22:21, 14 April 2009 (EDT)

Ken

has made precisely 1,928 edits to the Homosexuality.  We'll have to throw a party when he reaches 2000.  The EmperorKneel before Zod! 22:27, 14 April 2009 (EDT)

You mean the customary quality of his customary red telephones is declining. Thee Nuttish ^Talk 21:58, 14 April 2009 (EDT)

No, I mean that it is likely that the customary quality of his customary red telephones is declining. The Emperor_{Kneel before Zod!} 22:02, 14 April 2009 (EDT)

Seems about the same to me... ħuman 22:08, 14 April 2009 (EDT)

On a point of order: can persons stop transcluding headers; they won't link to (use "subst:" ?) _and marmite 22:17, 14 April 2009 (EDT)

So TK does read this site. One of my posts was lifted, typo and all, and posted on Ken's talk page. Here Mega 22:25, 14 April 2009 (EDT)

Heh, heh, heh. Just typed online encyclopedia into Google (UK) and Conservapedia is no longer listed—at all.--199.20.64.195 22:29, 14 April 2009 (EDT)

(Never mind, Ace already sniffed out the TK thing) Mega 22:30, 14 April 2009 (EDT)

I'm really hoping we can see Ken's articles at #1 on teh interwebs by the summer. Seems achievable, c'mon Ken, push harder - PUUUUSH!!!! DogP 03:23, 15 April 2009 (EDT)

Maybe if CP dies he can move all his articles to Homopedia and have a yabba dabba doo time, a dabba doo time, he'll have a gay old time. Mega 14:02, 15 April 2009 (EDT)

Capturebot

Could people grab there own screenshots of the Ken

stuff as he is prone to sudden page deletion syndrome and I can't get PERL to run through the firewall here at uni, so I can't run capturebot for about 6 hours. - User $\scriptstyle h/2\hbar$ 22:39, 14 April 2009 (EDT)

Have you tried setting up a VPN tunneled through a Web proxy? I have experimented with something like that for when I need to use SSH from a wireless network that only allows Web-browsing. ListenerX^TalkerX 22:53, 14 April 2009 (EDT)

I did start to look into the things I could do, but then I realised that by the time I got it working, it would be about the time I leave and I will have wasted a whole day. I am living on borrowed time as it is. - User $\scriptstyle h/2\hbar$ 23:51, 14 April 2009 (EDT)

This was more of a suggestion for the future, if you are behind this firewall on a regular basis. ListenerX^TalkerX 00:00, 15 April 2009 (EDT)

Yeah I need to work on it but it is more of another day thing, along with too many other things. - User $\scriptstyle h/2\hbar$ 00:03, 15 April 2009 (EDT)

Anyone else

getting a borked message? Any CP page I try to view I get":

“”Warning: require_once(/home/cptransi/public_html/extensions/Newuserlog/Newuserlog.php) [function.require-once]: failed to open stream: No such file or directory in /home/cptransi/public_html/LocalSettings.php on line 172 Fatal error: require_once() [function.require]: Failed opening required '/home/cptransi/public_html/extensions/Newuserlog/Newuserlog.php' (include_path='/home/cptransi/public_html:/home/cptransi/public_html/includes:/home/cptransi/public_html/languages:.:/usr/local/php52/pear') in /home/cptransi/public_html/LocalSettings.php on line 172

Anyone getting the same thing and anyone know what it means? SirChuckB^{Obama/Biden? 2012} 01:35, 15 April 2009 (EDT)

Well create an account has been off all day. I assume they turned it back on and it broke because the software can't find the Newuserlog.php extension. - User $\scriptstyle h/2\hbar$ 01:44, 15 April 2009 (EDT)

Or maybe CPWebmaster has finally followed my instructions. He deserves to be a bureaucrat for that at least. - User $\scriptstyle h/2\hbar$ 01:48, 15 April 2009 (EDT)

Someone's been tinkering where they shouldn't have been tinkering. _and marmite 02:06, 15 April 2009 (EDT)

And some genius WIGOed it. I hope it hits -50. RW goes down, too. Usually, we don't know why, until sometimes later... ħuman 02:53, 15 April 2009 (EDT)

Borked for me too. I had a similar message last night for a bit, just after user:Foobar was created. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 02:57, 15 April 2009 (EDT)

Looks like they removed Newuserlog, maybe they're updating to 1.14 (which has the new user log integrated, and doesn't need the extension) --  Nx/talk  03:15, 15 April 2009 (EDT)

Down for me as well. Proxima Centauri 03:35, 15 April 2009 (EDT)

Down for me as well but then I am in Crete so I just assumed a goat had eaten their bit of the internet webby - happens a lot around here!Mick McT 04:02, 15 April 2009 (EDT)

I have been to Crete and didnt see so many goats. Nor did I see Zeus frolicking with forest nymphs. I did however see loads of old woman dressed in black, struggling up hills in the midday sun with uninterested donkeys. Oh yeah, its down for sure. Ace McWicked^{bitch and moan} 04:17, 15 April 2009 (EDT)

Pardon, but what is "newuserlog", i.e., what purpose does it serve and why would getting rid of it cause this new message? --Arcan ¡ollǝɥ 04:35, 15 April 2009 (EDT)

Newuserlog... logs new users. :P No, seriously, it does. It's responsible for those "(New user) Name" entries in the Recent Changes both here and on CP (and also for the New User Log). Without it, new users registered silently: You didn't know that they had registered unless you checked the global user list (which gets LONG after a while) or the user made an edit. --Sid 07:09, 15 April 2009 (EDT)

Could be completely wrong here, but I'm guessing that the newuserlog broke the site because they removed it incorrectly. The php code still contains a require_once() call to load te newuserlog module, but it's not there anymore. And if the require() php calls fail, they fail fatally. It's called require() after all, not it_may_be_nice_to_load_this_module_but_if_some_nimkepoop_deleted_it_then_thats_fine_too(). --GTac 07:28, 15 April 2009 (EDT)

I seem to recall that all new user entries were being shown as two entries at point point yesterday. Clearly the attempts by CPWebmaster to fix that only served to bork it properly. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 07:33, 15 April 2009 (EDT)

What I don't get is how he apparently simply went to bed without even checking if his modifications broke the entire site. It's been six hours now (time between first and last posts in this thread)! --Sid 07:42, 15 April 2009 (EDT)

Probably thought Godwoulddoit. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 08:17, 15 April 2009 (EDT)

So, which week will be lost this time? Or only a couple of days? larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 08:19, 15 April 2009 (EDT)

Perhaps they're dispirtited because ASK is likely to be less silly more intelligent than anything that Andrew Schlafly runs. Proxima Centauri 08:43, 15 April 2009 (EDT)

Have you read ASK recently? It's like a sanctuary for the reality phobic. Even CP would have a hard time competing with some of ASK's high quality crazy. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 08:56, 15 April 2009 (EDT)

At least CP has the advantage that there are still parts of it where politics and religion don't come into articles. aSK seems to revolve around goddidit. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 09:06, 15 April 2009 (EDT)

(undent) I was right, they updated to 1.14 --  Nx/talk  10:43, 15 April 2009 (EDT)

To a certain gentleman

at a certain farked-up website. This is the kind of image you should be using. Ogi! Ogi! Ogi! --PsyGremlin_Whut? 04:42, 15 April 2009 (EDT)

350px

Now Ed Poor will fire back with some manga of three Japanese schoolgirls firing their secret powers at a RatWiki Rat, ne? Mega 08:44, 15 April 2009 (EDT)

Urgh! That just sent a cold shiver down my spine; probably a screen cap from cp:Sailor Moon. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 08:58, 15 April 2009 (EDT)

That always made me laugh. He states that wearing pants is crossdressing, yet expresses concerns about the length of the skirts in Sailor Moon. What's next, attacking Wonderwoman for fighting crime in her underwear?--Nate River 09:19, 15 April 2009 (EDT)

Eh, it's been done. --Kels 09:28, 15 April 2009 (EDT)

I am getting closer and closer to writing about the CCA--Nate River 09:33, 15 April 2009 (EDT)

CCA? --PsyGremlin_Whut? 09:43, 15 April 2009 (EDT)

Comics Code Authority, one of the reasons comics were never taken seriously, the way they are in Europe and Asia. --Kels 09:49, 15 April 2009 (EDT)

Addendum: The equivalent for animation is BS&P. --Kels 09:51, 15 April 2009 (EDT)

It killed horror and suspense comics. It also added rules like 'good must always win' and other bullshit.--Nate River 09:57, 15 April 2009 (EDT)

Be interesting to see how they got around the first amendment to enforce it. Mega 10:29, 15 April 2009 (EDT)

It was not really mandatory, but some distributors would not sell comics without CCA approval.--Nate River 11:02, 15 April 2009 (EDT)

I think there was a Spiderman issue in the 80's which dealt with drug use (Bad! Bad! Bad!), and couldn't get CCA approval. Marvel put it out anyway, just left off the CCA indicia. Lo, and behold, western civilization didn't end, and the earth didn't crash into the sun. Go figure. Jimaginator 11:25, 15 April 2009 (EDT)

The CCA was a lot like the ratings board for movies. Having a movie rated isn't technically mandatory, but without it, you'll have a hard time getting it out to the public. SirChuckB^{Obama/Biden? 2012} 11:35, 15 April 2009 (EDT)

It was an issue of Spider-Man, but from the late Sixties or early Seventies. Basically, Harry Osborn, a supporting character, was despondent about the state of his life (finding out your father is the insane supervillain the Green Goblin will do that to you) and bought some otherwise unidentified pills from a shady looking fellow, took the pills, and nearly attempted suicide as a result. The story (rather obviously written by someone who knew nothing about the drug culture) was completely anti-drug, but the CCA said "no portrayal of drug use of any kind, you don't get our seal." Stan Lee. Spider-Man writer and editor-in-chief at Marvel Comics then, said "we don't care, this is a valuable story, we're publishing it." There was no notable change in sales, and the CCA was changed to allow negative portrayals of drug use. Not much later, DC Comics printed a much stronger anti-drug story in Green Lantern/Green Arrow (Green Arrow learned his former sidekick Speedy was a heroin addict), and it was published with the CCA seal. At least one of the two stories received a letter of commendation from the Office of National Drug Control Policy (or whatever the equivalent was at the time.) MDB 12:56, 15 April 2009 (EDT)

"Speedy was a heroin addict." ... Green Arrow should've seen that coming, really. Barikada 13:38, 15 April 2009 (EDT)

The only thing more obvious would have been "Necrophilia Lad! How could you?" ENorman 17:20, 15 April 2009 (EDT)

Guard dog's on the loose

Looks like Guard dog doesn't like the upgraded mediawiki. --  Nx/talk  11:59, 15 April 2009 (EDT)

I laughed when I saw that. I literally pictured a rabid dog, going around snapping at a classful of homskullers, until the brave Andy drew his concealed magnum and put a bullet in the dog's brain.

Shame for Ken that it almost wiped his latest Ladies and Gentlemen off the recent changes. Can we just ignore the idiot this time? Bondurant 12:06, 15 April 2009 (EDT)

And it's great, isn't it, how they let a bot hand out 5-year bans? Wouldn't a 1-hour ban be appropriate to stop any potential vandalism, giving a sysop time to extend the block? But no, and poor Andy has to go and reverse all the incorrect blocks. Or at least the ones he could be bothered to do before his ADD kicks in. Bondurant 12:21, 15 April 2009 (EDT)

Well if it is borked, they're stuffed, because PJR was the one who wrote it, and he's just taken his ball and gone home. Plus, I love how GD blocked 20 people, and Andy's unblocked 5. And will TerryH get his rights back?--PsyGremlin_Whut? 13:01, 15 April 2009 (EDT)

He's at it again

It's so nice to get mail

Ken, let me be the first to say: We don't give a fuck about your article, nobody gives a fuck about your article. Find one person, just one person who has written something positive without you blowing them first. Second, we don't care if you want to claim that Evolution causes premature ejaculation and male pattern baldness. However, when you use the Columbine Tragedy (something very close to my heart, being from Colorado) to make your sick political point, you are one fucked up indivdual, and if it didn't go against everything I believe in, I would post all your personal information to the Denver Post and laugh as they tracked you down. SirChuckB^{Obama/Biden? 2012} 12:08, 15 April 2009 (EDT)

I didn't see the Colubmine thing... do you have a picture of it? And more importantly why DON'T you tip off the Denver Post, don't give his name, but tell them someone's trying to profit off of it?-Diadochus 13:41, 15 April 2009 (EDT)

(EC)Ok Ken, I'll play.... Mostly because you gave me my own personal shout out.... How about instead of leaving cryptic messages, you just add some links. Two, three links will end the whole issue and I'll apologize..... Let me ask you Ken, these mythical links you see.... Can everybody else see them too? In fact, am I looking at them right now? SirChuckB^{Obama/Biden? 2012} 13:45, 15 April 2009 (EDT) PS: How the hell does one "investigate the internet" Ken? What, you want me to do a background check, get dirt on Mrs. Internet and the Kids? You are a fucking moron.

To Diadochus, this is the Columbine thing SirChuckB^{Obama/Biden? 2012} 13:45, 15 April 2009 (EDT)

I can't find the CP article on the first or second pages for evolution on Google, even after meticulously setting the region to the US. Stupid wisest Phantom Hoover! 13:58, 15 April 2009 (EDT)

The evidence suggests that for everyone who is actually looking at google, it's at #14. The tool he has just gives him bogus results. In fact, it used to be at #13, so he's losing ground. I guess operation clusterfuck isn't going too well. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 14:03, 15 April 2009 (EDT)

What's with this recent obsession with Ames? --- Yossarian^{The Man from the USSR} 14:13, 15 April 2009 (EDT)

If you want to get a true country rating in Google it's not enough to set the country-specific Google engine, you need to use an IP located in that country. I've tried it several times and you get different results (see TWIGOs passim). Генгис^evolving 15:17, 15 April 2009 (EDT)

It appears on page 8 of my Google.ie w/Irish IP search. Taytopacket 16:11, 15 April 2009 (EDT)

Karajerk & Copyright

Surely the swabbie must have some inkling as to what copyright entails? And that it does involve a bit more than saying copyright Sports Illustrated on your stolen picture. Anybody feel like dropping S.I. a line with Andy's e-mail address? --PsyGremlin_Whut? 13:13, 15 April 2009 (EDT)

FAIR USE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ArmondikoV^bomination 13:14, 15 April 2009 (EDT)

DeanS and Same

The image's justification for "fair use" can include This is a web resolution image used purely for an educational article about the image subject by a non-commercial site; fair use for commentary or parody

But it's being used to garnish cp:Piracy nothing more...no comment is made of the work itself. Maybe this is wingnut "entitlement"? I dunno. CЯacke® 14:18, 15 April 2009 (EDT)

Email the copyright owners. We've done it before and succeeded in getting stolen images deleted. Make sure to include links to the image page, where it is being used, the DMCA page, and perhaps the CP main page. Don't be "snarky" or insult CP, just write in a "concerned" tone. Some of JMs uploads might be better targets, if there were a substantial number stolen from a single museum, say. One stone for many birds, and all. ħuman 16:23, 15 April 2009 (EDT)

TK's plagiarism deep-burned

It seems that Ken

just deep-burned his talk-page, wiping out the record of TK's plagiarized Columbine remark. Are there screenshots of this presently on the Wiki? (I grabbed a screenshot of the plagiarized remark, but not Ken

's chaser.) ListenerX^TalkerX 14:13, 15 April 2009 (EDT)

Well, there's no IMG tag on any of it so it may be lost forever. ArmondikoV^bomination 14:28, 15 April 2009 (EDT)

This entry was stupid. Terry's said previously that such small plagiarizing incidents are a friendly wink here to rimind this site who's side he's on. Don't go highlighting it. OncomingStorm 14:47, 15 April 2009 (EDT)

First off TK is not on our side, he will as soon do RationalWiki what he is doing to Conservapedia, he takes pleasure in tearing online communities apart just ask all our HotOrNot lurkers. Second of all I didn't get the pictures, somewhere up above I asked if people could get the screenshots. If anyone could you upload them as Wigo1746_0.png through to Wigo1746_3.png in the order of the links that would be great. - User $\scriptstyle h/2\hbar$ 18:23, 15 April 2009 (EDT)

Block Reasons

The drop-down menu for block-reason at CP includes this little marvel, introduced by cp:User:Karajou:

Abuse of legitimate ISP for trolling / vandalism purposes

And not only Karajou is using this «reason», but TK, too.

So, they acknowledge that an ISP is legitimate, but block its whole range nonetheless because they are annoyed by one editor?

WTF? larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 14:52, 15 April 2009 (EDT)

What's to be surprised about? They still haven't unblocked all the guard dog errors. Carpet bombing legit ISPs is hardly noteworthy, even if they are admitting it. Z3ro^talk 15:41, 15 April 2009 (EDT)

When I read TK's sandbox3, I thought it was directed to his fellow sysops who may be a little bit concerned by the blocking spree. This blocking of legitimate ISPs should disquiet them even more. larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 16:17, 15 April 2009 (EDT)

My favorite part about that sandbox is how he whole-handedly stole the graph, and gave no credit for it. Way to be above board, TK! Z3ro^talk 16:24, 15 April 2009 (EDT)

I love his choice of rogue-vandal-states. By any normal definition, some of the world's most conservative countries. But they're darkies!. Can't imagine too much librul hollywood values in Syria. Taytopacket 16:41, 15 April 2009 (EDT)

I couldn't even edit CP from the coffee shop at the local federal courthouse or any coffee shop near it. Nor could I edit from the coffee shop near my house or my former university. And of course when I got my second or third sock on CP blocked for calling TK a moral relativist or something similar, he blocked not just me but /16 of my Comcast domain. In fact, I don't think any of the valuable socks I use from proxies have yet to get blocked. Just sayin', TK. Thee Nuttish ^Talk 16:52, 15 April 2009 (EDT)

Yeah, he blocked a decent chunk of Salt Lake City thinking it was me.... Which is ironic because I live in Denver. SirChuckB^{Obama/Biden? 2012} 17:02, 15 April 2009 (EDT)

New bug - feature! - unarchived

INDENTED!

unINDENTED!

Look over there

OK, Nx has been working on this thing asked to him to make, basically a link to a random CP namespace page that only shows on those namespace pages. For the CP addicts who come here.

One concern we had was whether to indent the "new" link or not. Screenshots of both ways are "attached".

4

I like INDENTED

49

I like unINDENTED

-2

It all sucks, I hate RW

42

Goat

9

I wish TK ran this site instead of these idiots

Knock your delighted voting selves out. We'll ignore the result and pick what CUR likes. ħuman 01:53, 9 April 2009 (EDT)

Yeah right. --<choose>

<option>^Input The Resistor^Output</option> <option>Coyote^{Over 450 pages watched NOT including talk pages}</option> <option>The Trickster</option> <option>Acionyx</option> 13:22, 10 April 2009 (EDT)

It's not so hugely interesting as to merit an indent, even though it is pretty cool; leave it unindented, so it won't distract.--Tom Moore^{fiat justitia ruat coelum} 02:13, 9 April 2009 (EDT)

Nx rocks! and I vote for not indented. Refugee^{talk page} 02:35, 9 April 2009 (EDT)

Nx invented rock! unindented. _and marmite 02:46, 9 April 2009 (EDT)

Have I had too much to drink? Why do I not get what the hell is going on here? Ace McWicked^{bitch and moan} 02:51, 9 April 2009 (EDT)

Did somebody link to the same pic twice, cos I can't see a difference. Or maybe I don't know what I'm looking for. However, I will relax in the warm feeling that CUR has the final say. Well, it's either that, or incontinence... --PsyGremlin_Whut? 03:44, 9 April 2009 (EDT)

I don't care. --<choose>

<option>^Input The Resistor^Output</option> <option>Coyote^{Over 450 pages watched NOT including talk pages}</option> <option>The Trickster</option> <option>Acionyx</option> 13:22, 10 April 2009 (EDT)

Look at the navigation toolbar on the left. --  Nx/talk  03:47, 9 April 2009 (EDT)

Wahey! we can has t'others plz? Totnesmartin 05:57, 9 April 2009 (EDT)

You can (RandomAny.js) --  Nx/talk  11:12, 9 April 2009 (EDT)

I literally have no idea what's going on, so I clicked unindented like the little conformist bitch that I am! You all seem to think that CUR gets the final say anyway, so it doesn't really matter... SuperJosh "crying into a flannel" 06:35, 9 April 2009 (EDT)

I'd have voted cheetah if the option were there. Wake up, CUR and tell us what it's to be! Bondurant 06:50, 9 April 2009 (EDT)

If you actually want to know, I voted unidented, but really don't care. --<choose>

<option>^Input The Resistor^Output</option> <option>Coyote^{Over 450 pages watched NOT including talk pages}</option> <option>The Trickster</option> <option>Acionyx</option> 13:22, 10 April 2009 (EDT) Why does it only appear in CPspace pages? Totnesmartin 10:33, 9 April 2009 (EDT)

Because that's what Human said. --  Nx/talk  10:47, 9 April 2009 (EDT)

When I head over to CP, I tend to head to the recent changes page rather than hit a random article. Speaking for myself, I'd fine a "Recent changes at CP" link kind-of useful if I was feeling too lazy to go into my favourites menu. Bondurant 11:27, 9 April 2009 (EDT)

It won't be useful for many people, of course, but the "goal" was to allow people who want to to wander through the CP articles (the namespace, anyway) randomly. It's more for "visitors" than heavy users, I think. Oh, and I woke up with a bug in the ointment of what it says: "random CP page" might be read as "random page at CP" rather than "random page about CP" - any ideas on better wording that will still fit neatly in the navbox? ħuman 15:08, 9 April 2009 (EDT)

So, everyone voted for unindented (well, OK, I voted for goat) but it gets implemented as indented anyway? Is this what CUR wanted? :D --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 13:18, 10 April 2009 (EDT)

Who cares? --<choose>

<option>^Input The Resistor^Output</option> <option>Coyote^{Over 450 pages watched NOT including talk pages}</option> <option>The Trickster</option> <option>Acionyx</option> 13:22, 10 April 2009 (EDT)

Looks like undented won, I'll change it. --  Nx/talk  16:33, 15 April 2009 (EDT)

Can we have random fun and recipes too when you are in there respective spaces? - User $\scriptstyle h/2\hbar$ 02:51, 16 April 2009 (EDT)

You can, check out RandomAny.js here --  Nx/talk  03:24, 16 April 2009 (EDT)

Andy's Tax Records

Andy always trumpets how Christians give so much money to charity, so it hit me.... How about Andy releases his tax records? Come on Andy, show some balls.... Redact all personal and sensative information and let it go, I would love to see how much chartiable giving you do.... I'd also like to see where the money comes from, I'm assuming that 95% comes from mummys purse, but I may be wrong. SirChuckB^{Obama/Biden? 2012} 01:53, 16 April 2009 (EDT)

Would this show every time he puts a $20 bill nickel in the collection tray every Sunday? Bondurant 02:31, 16 April 2009 (EDT)

AlanE, Guard Dog and Andy

When the guard dog went rabid, Andy unblocked a few editors (JY23, JM10), stating: guard dog mistake. Other users were unblocked, too, but had to read possible guard dog mistake. AlanE belongs to the latter group, and he seems to be somewhat miffed:

Yesterday early afternoon, my time, I couldn’t get on to CP to edit. It seems us peasants were locked out for some reason. So instead of doing the editing I had intended I decided to catch up on something I have been meaning to do since I read PJR’s “essay” on aSK – that is, list and wikify the contributions for the month or so before Andrew Schafly found my work so “unimpressive”. I probably would have stuck them here without comment except for the fact than when Guarddog’s block was reverted by Andy “yesterday” he said Guarddog was only possibly wrong – that after getting on towards 80,000 words of major substantive edits it seems I am still looked upon as a “possible” threat to this site - vandal (I note also that in early October, with over 30,000 words of new info already done, I was called a “stranger”.)

The original request for night editing rights - made purely for the good of the site; something that seemed not to occur to Andy - has disappeared. (Of course.) I do have it on Word document however and can resubmit it.

That said, I will now get about trying to remember what it was I was going to edit yesterday. A reply from Mr. Schafly would be appreciated.

And in an answer to TK, he states:

Terry - it's not that. I'm a dog lover from way back, and they occasionally make a mess. It's everything else. You know I'm not a vandal. So does JM. So do every senior Admin I've spoken to.

Except Andy.

Yesterday, I not only did a word count of my edits, I did a word count of the, um, "non-opinion" edits of various others. Even Jpatt's hagiographies didn't come close to the amount of new input I had done that month. In fact, if you take away the copy-and-pastes of countries and art and US ships and that sort of thing, I have probably contributed more new old-fashioned encyclopedic uncontroversial information to this site than any other editor. If you go just a day either side of the offending "athletics" to "sports" edit, (24rd, I think) I did major new articles totalling over 1500 words.

I made my night-editing request so I had more time to do more work. That's all. No other reason. After all, midnight there is 2PM here in September (and now). I was amazed when I couldn't get it. I was even more amazed at the reason - which I only found out recently, and which made me angry, for obvious reasons.

Cheers AlanE 19:26, 15 April 2009 (EDT)

He seems to ignore RJJensen's contributions, but otherwise, he proves a well-known point, again: Aschlafly doesn't care about the quantity and quality of your contributions: If he made up his mind about you, any action contradicting his imagination has to be deceit. And the reason that AlanE doesn't get night-editing rights, well, that seems to be the same thing that happened to User:HelpJazz.

larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 03:30, 16 April 2009 (EDT)

Note that TK wants to take the discussion off line. Time to sow a little more discontent, eh, Tel? Silver Sloth 04:20, 16 April 2009 (EDT)

They're right not to trust AlanE. After all, who but a parodist or vandal up to mischief would actually put up with the atmosphere there and contribute? EddyP 05:01, 16 April 2009 (EDT)

Sometimes I wonder how many users here were once legitimate editors at CP, fully supporting the cause, only making the switch over when they were schlafly'd like AlanE's hurt feelings can attest to. I'd imagine that number is small. tealish^??!!!1 16:18, 16 April 2009 (EDT)

Actually, almost all the founders of RW tried to legitimately contribute over there. Although "fully supporting the cause" is a bit wibbly, since they supported making an encyclopedia for homeschoolers and others, rather than a blog for Andy. So they might not have supported the real mission over there. --Kels 16:47, 16 April 2009 (EDT)

What I meant by fully supporting the cause, was recognizing that it intended to be a Conservative, Christian encyclopedia and contributing to those viewpoints with admitted but unashamed bias. Clearly most RW users are liberal. tealish^??!!!1 18:07, 16 April 2009 (EDT)

Of course, it's possible to not be a conservative and also believe that those sheltered kids with dumb parents still deserve good information. Some of us actually grew up that way. Junggai 05:33, 17 April 2009 (EDT)

UPDATE: AlanE responds calmly fires back. Countdown to parthian/memory hole/banhammer in 3...2... Neveruse513 16:02, 17 April 2009 (EDT)

Liberal deceit tactics against Conservatives

Conservapedia have got to be kidding about this one. No one can possibly be so fucking stupid as to not see that these are EXACTLY, WORD FOR WORD Andy Schlafly's "debating tactics." SuperJosh "crying into a flannel" 07:32, 16 April 2009 (EDT)

"SuperJosh", people who thumb their noses at God are sent to Hell. I looked at your contributions and like most liberals you act like you're smarter than every one else and hope that people will agree with you because you seem smart and "reasonable", so there's a 95% chance you're against Conservapedia. Like all liberals, you deny that translating the Bible deters liberal claptrap. Nobody seriously doubts that elitism is an attitude, not a credential. The Bible is completely logical. If you stick with that, then we can have a productive discussion.--Aschlafly 03:42, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

I've never seen Andy attempt to win an argument using emotion. I'm not sure he has that functionality. 194.6.79.200 07:56, 16 April 2009 (EDT)

Seriously, whose sock is JPatt, this is just too perfect. And hate is an emotion too, BoN. --GTac 08:23, 16 April 2009 (EDT)

JPatt impresses me daily with his masterful sockery. Neveruse513 09:37, 16 April 2009 (EDT)

JPatt is getting too cocky. Between this and this, he's starting to let the mask slip. However, if he is genuine with the latter, then I have no scruples in passing on his info to the Denver Post, as SirChuck suggested elsewhere. Even if he meant this as parody, I think he's lower than the black stuff between dead people's toes. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 09:44, 16 April 2009 (EDT)

Yeah, he's been playing pretty loose with it... I don't know about getting the Denver Post in as there is a good chance this is a parody. I'd wait until another one of the goon squad edits it. Neveruse513 09:59, 16 April 2009 (EDT)

Shit, I didn't see cp:Evolution. Yeah, let's go for it. Neveruse513 10:02, 16 April 2009 (EDT)

It was Ken

who ammended the Evolution article, rather than JPatt. Ken certainly deserves anything he gets. He's an amoral psychopath. Taytopacket 10:07, 16 April 2009 (EDT)

Yes, but JizzPratt gave us cp:Darwin-Harris connection‎ - and that makes him fair game too. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 10:31, 16 April 2009 (EDT)

== If Ken

could use Linux... ==

...do you think he would refuse to use the Gnome-standard Evolution mail client? Neveruse513 09:55, 16 April 2009 (EDT)

There is an Ubuntu Christian Edition, but I do not think they have made an Ubuntu Young Earth Creationist Edition yet. ListenerX^TalkerX 10:49, 16 April 2009 (EDT)

If this is any indication, I'm going to have to say the answer to my question is "yes". Neveruse513 10:54, 16 April 2009 (EDT)

Oh for... that's sad. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 11:27, 16 April 2009 (EDT)

That's profoundly sad. Assuming it's not a parodist...though, there are other YECs in there who seem to be slightly bothered by it. Are they just incapable of using that word in a positive sense, even when it's not connected with biology? -- Yossarian^{The Man from the USSR} 11:59, 16 April 2009 (EDT)

Best line from that thread: "dont use it then. install kubuntu, which comes with konqueror.. teach your children to be warmongers. geez." -- Yossarian^{The Man from the USSR} 12:01, 16 April 2009 (EDT)

They have been so wound up about it by the likes of Mr. Schlafly that when they see "Evolution mail client," they read "The-Holy-Spirit-Is-A-Crock mail client." ListenerX^TalkerX 12:05, 16 April 2009 (EDT)

The-Holy-Spirit-Is-A-Crock mail client would be the best mail client ever. -- Yossarian^{The Man from the USSR} 12:13, 16 April 2009 (EDT)

I'm sure fundies think distros like Ubuntu are atheistic enough, but I'd sure like to see it ramped up a few notches for an atheist/agnostic themed package. sed the source and change daemon to demon er something... Neveruse513 12:37, 16 April 2009 (EDT)

There is a Satanic Edition. ListenerX^TalkerX 12:44, 16 April 2009 (EDT)

Even worse, there's a Muslim Edition, which I'm sure would be Obama's choice of *buntus Bondurant 13:18, 16 April 2009 (EDT)

The Muslim edition is essentially the Christian edition with the Bible study tool swapped out for a Koran study tool, and presumably a slightly different set of rules in the content-filtering tool ("None of those dirty pictures of women with their hair showing!") ListenerX^TalkerX 13:43, 16 April 2009 (EDT)

For a good laugh, here are some funny Ubuntu Christian Edition Facts (e.g. no abort() in glibc, no sin() in libm, no promiscous mode for network adapters...) 85.178.150.114 17:24, 16 April 2009 (EDT)

Best line could be this. Just think about it. Firefox Genocide: We kill the competition. Dreaded Walrus 13:32, 16 April 2009 (EDT)

Oh come on - that ENTIRE THREAD is written only by trolls and parodists. But it's very funny. Nice find, Neveruse.... DogP 14:15, 16 April 2009 (EDT)

You are in clear violation of Poe's law, sir. Questioning Poe is like questioning whether 2+2=4. Neveruse513 14:24, 16 April 2009 (EDT)

Theory of Relativity

Aschalfy World History Lecture Eleven includes a segment on the Theory of Relativity. As editor ShmuelB states: This section is full of strange mistakes.

When I read such statements like Unlike most advances in physics, the theory of relativity was proposed based on mathematical theory rather than observation. The theory rests on two postulates (assumptions) that are difficult to test, and then derives mathematically what the physical consequences should be. or Contrary to public perception, the theory of relativity had nothing to do with the development of the atom bomb or any other technology. Only one Nobel Prize (in 1993) has ever been given that relates to relativity, and the validity of that particular award is questionable., I was reminded of the following:

Einstein's theories of relativity were essentially nothing but a conglomeration of artificial equations, based on arbitrary definitions and transformations of the coordinates of time and space. [..] Though the theoretical literature piled up into big mountains, it hasn't given any important insight into the reality of physics.my translation, sorry....

Another text by Aschlafly? No, that was Johannes Stark, at the opening of the Philipp-Lenard-Institute in Heidelberg in 1935.

Aschlafly as a proponent of the Deutsche Physik? He should be more considerate...

larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 13:41, 16 April 2009 (EDT)

Copernicus's heliocentric theory was based on mathematics at first. Then they invented telescopes and found out he was right.

"One Nobel Prize"? That is, I trust, not counting Einstein's own prize... ListenerX^TalkerX 13:49, 16 April 2009 (EDT)

(undent)ListenerX: Einstein's Nobel prize was for his work on the photoelectric effect (quantum mechanics), not for anything he did on relativity. alt 15:25, 16 April 2009 (EDT)

I thought his photoelectric-effect stuff was heavily influenced by his work on the special theory of relativity, which he developed around the same time? ListenerX^TalkerX 15:33, 16 April 2009 (EDT)

It was around the same time as he developed special relativity (may even have been the same year, if memory serves) but they're not related at all. alt 18:57, 16 April 2009 (EDT)

My god, Assfly's response has the grammar nazi in me all a quiver. SirChuckB^{Obama/Biden? 2012} 13:51, 16 April 2009 (EDT)

I thought I was the only one making the connection with Stark. "Die edle deutsche Physik ist besser als die jüdische theoretische Physik! Zwei und zwei ist vier, nicht wahr? Gottgeschwindigkeit." - Andy Schlaflich. 13:51, 16 April 2009 (EDT) (My german is AWFUL)

I'm truly at a loss - what is Schlafly's beef with Einstein and relativity and why does he continue to insist there's a connection between STR or GTR and his conception of moral relativity? I'm not asking specifically what his criticisms are but why he even cares. What further purpose is there to arguing against STR or GTR? Thee Nuttish ^Talk 14:04, 16 April 2009 (EDT)

Usual rubbish being spouted by Aschlafly about relativity, nothing new here, and it's been discussed dozens of times in the past. I feel sorry for his students, who may never come to appreciate the true elegance of the theory and the great leaps taken by Einstein in coming to them. Listener, Einstein's Nobel prize was to do with the photoelectric effect, not for relativity. Bondurant 14:42, 16 April 2009 (EDT)

Roux--you answered your own question, I think. It's all about his need for moral and theological absolutes. If the cosmos are relative, it becomes harder for him and his tiny mind to argue for the kind of always-the-same god and morality he needs. Also, I've been re-watching the Ken Burns "Jazz" doc, and everytime I see your name here I'm reminded of Wynton Marsalis likening the blues' role in jazz to the roux in gumbo--without the roux, you may have a happening soup, but you don't have gumbo. TheoryOfPractice 14:17, 16 April 2009 (EDT)

Anyone else notice that Andy blames Stalin's policies for Russia's problems with alcoholism in this same "lecture"? Andy evidently never read much about Russia under the Tsars if he thinks Russian alcoholism is a post-revolutionary problem (indeed, as I recall, the final spark for the 1905 revolution was a crowd panicking over the idea that there wouldn't be enough free vodka at a royal function). Kaalis 15:41, 16 April 2009 (EDT)

"Andy evidently never read much about" is a fun beginning to a sentence, because no matter what you put after it, it's true! 16:06, 16 April 2009 (EDT)

Touche. I guess that brings up a pretty good question: what exactly does he study to write his "lectures"? He has to have resources of some sort beyond his prejudices. I think he should publish a list of sources so that they might be avoided by anyone interested by what he "lectures" on. Kaalis 16:10, 16 April 2009 (EDT)

Judging from the content of his lectures and the texts mentioned in his application, I'm guessing a textbook or two. Simply put, his lectures are so full of staggering errors that they can't come be outright copies from textbooks, but they also show virtually no research, being nothing more than historical stub after stub. 16:22, 16 April 2009 (EDT)

Somehow I imagine he just skims Wikipedia. Vulpius 16:24, 16 April 2009 (EDT)

I get that impression too. 16:25, 16 April 2009 (EDT)

I always get the feeling that he does what I do - drags up whatever he can remember from school. The difference is that I'm filling redlinks on an obscure wiki and he's "educating" children. Totnesmartin 18:22, 16 April 2009 (EDT)

I get that impression, too. I could scribble a rough outline of US or World history, fill in details where I think I know them, then lazily look up some stuff to fill in the gaps. Smear a few layers of religious bigotry, political slanting, and general narrowmindedness over it all and I'd have replicated his Lectures. ħuman 18:27, 16 April 2009 (EDT)

I'm pretty sure he skims wiki entries. Once I tried to write a wiki about one of his entries, because I thought it was pretty obvious he got his information from wikipedia (wasn't really solid enough to WIGO though). It was concerning some stuff he wrote about Flanders (the region, not the Simpsons character). What gave him away was that he included parts of France in the definition of Flanders, which isn't commonly done when describing Flander.. except on the English Wikipedia.. --GTac 07:15, 17 April 2009 (EDT)

(UI) Why does Andy argue that getting only one Noble price is an indication of how bad the theory is? I thought that getting Noble prices was an indication that your theory was accepted by the deceitful libruls, so getting less indicates that your theory is more conservative, thus true. --GTac 05:14, 17 April 2009 (EDT)

Wonder how many different Nobels would have been awarded (not to Albert though) if the winner didn't have to be still alive? _and marmite 05:25, 17 April 2009 (EDT)

You also have to bear in mind that nobel prizes for physics are given for successful experiments or discoveries in the field of physics rather than to the person who may have created the mathematical framework that underlies them. So, for example, while Stephen Hawkin predicted the existence of evapourating black holes using a combination of relativity and quantum theory, it'll be the person who actually observes one who will be more likely to win the nobel prize.

As for the number of prizes won by the theory, well he's covered this ground before when arguing that somebody with two doctorates unrelated to evolution (Hoyle, perhaps? I forget.) is more qualified to comment on evolution than Richard Dawkins. Bondurant 08:38, 17 April 2009 (EDT)

Full Stop

Oh for fuck's sake. The lecture begins "The Modern era is from 1900 to today." (!@*#&%!)*-!!?? 16:25, 16 April 2009 (EDT)

I especially like that he equates reporting that an administration was corrupt with gossip. See the talk page. -Lardashe

Causes of the First World War

"In summary, in a mere week an isolated act of violence between Austria and Serbia (sparked by a teenager) escalated into a world war..." (my emphasis). Unaccountably this is not (yet) included in Great Achievements by Teenagers. Cantabrigian 11:46, 17 April 2009 (EDT)

Good Insight! May use as a Model!

This has got to be the best answer ever - "7. An Aspect of Asian history is Malaria. It has always been a problem in Africa. The Europeans developed an immunization to prevent themselves from contracting it." Bahaha poor kid. Ace McWicked^{bitch and moan} 16:56, 16 April 2009 (EDT)

Damn, if only I'd read conservapedia I could have asked my doctor for the immunisation rather than the icky tablets. Damn liberal socialist healthcare, always giving me substandard medicines! --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 18:00, 16 April 2009 (EDT)

I just want to know what it has to do with Asia? Ace McWicked^{bitch and moan} 18:07, 16 April 2009 (EDT)

Asia and Africa both begin and end with "a", and neither has a US of them. So they are interchangeable. ħuman 18:58, 16 April 2009 (EDT)

Excellent insight Human! May use as a model! Ace McWicked^{bitch and moan} 19:03, 16 April 2009 (EDT)

Conservapedia write API

If you look at Conservapedia's user rights list, the writeapi right is open too IPs.The write API AFAIK can be used to make edits woth automated programs. Thinking what I'm thinking?--Ipatrol 22:09, 16 April 2009 (EDT)

That is what happened with Steve Carson and the FBI. They still have not fixed that it is unbelievable, you still need an account to edit even with the API write. - User $\scriptstyle h/2\hbar$ 22:13, 16 April 2009 (EDT)

FFS...

Someone burn a sock and do something interesting. I'm dying here. 207.67.17.45 09:47, 17 April 2009 (EDT)

So's CP. and after all that effort I put in too. *sob* --PsyGremlin_Whut? 10:03, 17 April 2009 (EDT)

This has some potential, though it is the usual Andy-is-donning-the-coat-of-righteousness routine... larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 10:42, 17 April 2009 (EDT)

And here it escalates, please excuse the language, it's a direct quote: you used a poor choice of words on your unblock notice [..] It was a minor oversight on your part [..] Wow, such a tirade! JDWpianist is lucky, that the moderate DeanS took action. Bugler wouldn't have stopped with just three days for such disparaging remarks! larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 11:13, 17 April 2009 (EDT)

Clement picks up the baton. StarFish 11:46, 17 April 2009 (EDT)

Banned. Reverted. Christian god forbid rational discourse be allowed on CP. Dean is such a piece of shit! hahaha...I love it. Neveruse513 13:15, 17 April 2009 (EDT)

UPDATE: AHHH!!! Dean just wants it all to go away!1! Neveruse513 13:17, 17 April 2009 (EDT)

So, let me get this straight. DeanS sees something he doesn't like on someone else's user page, blocks the offending user, and burns the evidence. Then he blocks another user for "MYOB." Ahh, the irony. Junggai 15:56, 17 April 2009 (EDT)

Only a baby-eating, bible-burning liberal atheist would insist that the rules should apply to the rule makers. It's their ball, after all. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 16:13, 17 April 2009 (EDT)

He won't like this. Not one bit StarFish 17:10, 17 April 2009 (EDT)

Andy himself didn't like it! If JDWpianist's intention was to get some appreciation for the work of AlanE, he has failed completely: Being called a liar (Frankly, I don't believe a word of your complaint above, and at this point I am not inclined to waste any more time on the cp:liberal cp:double standard. ) doesn't sound much of a appraisal... larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 22:11, 17 April 2009 (EDT)

Interview

Andy just posted this. The answers are way too coherent to be his ... anyone have any idea where this is from? Jrssr5 10:42, 17 April 2009 (EDT)

Whee! It's Sunday on a Friday. But wait... what? No intro, no lead in? No "This is a transcript of an interview I conducted with XXX at YYY on dododo, whereafter XXX reported me for "bad touching."? This is another "out of Schlafly's arse" entry. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 10:47, 17 April 2009 (EDT)

It reads like an interview Andy himself gave. But our Constitution has not changed, and it was undeniably established by Christians based on Christian principles? That's right out of Andy's mouth. I wonder were this interview is going to be published. Z3ro^talk 10:53, 17 April 2009 (EDT)

But our Constitution has not changed - well I'm no constitutional scholar, but I've always thought that the Amendments could, you know, be considered a change. Worm ^{(t | c)} 11:01, 17 April 2009 (EDT)

Which is the Student - the interviewer or the interviewee? & who was the other party? _and marmite 11:05, 17 April 2009 (EDT)

(interview by means to me that the student was the interviewer) _and marmite 11:07, 17 April 2009 (EDT)

Just forced myself to reread it, and yes, it is Andy answering his the mystery student's questions. If you're really bored, try and picture the poor kid committing harakiri with his pen, as Andy's nasal monotone drives him insane. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 11:14, 17 April 2009 (EDT)

I love the claim that the constitution is intrinsically Christian. It's a product of Andy's hated Enlightenment. Which "Christian" values were key to forming it, since it was a such a departure from a millenium of, you know, Christian law and order? 11:30, 17 April 2009 (EDT)

I love that libertarians, as a whole, are deceptive. Andy is so delightfully insane :) I'm glad we got something today. Neveruse513 11:46, 17 April 2009 (EDT)

Unless the constitution was amended secretly during W's administration, it has never, nor does it now, contain the words: God, Christ, Christian, Jesus. Funny that the Founding Fathers "forgot" to put those words in if it was "so important" to them. Ah wait, there's the religious test to hold federal offices. No, wait. There isn't. Drat. In fact there is a section which expressly forbids religious tests for offices. Assie-Ass-Fly would do well to actually READ (simple English version please) the constitution. Perhaps he could point out where I missed the part about being a Christian Nation. Oh, and while he's at it, he should read Paine's (gulp: Founding Father) "Age of Reason." My eyes! My eyes! If thine eyes offend thee, pluck them out! Jimaginator 12:54, 17 April 2009 (EDT)

Another interesting tidbit: the Constitution almost failed ratification because the Andys of the day thought it was godless for all the reasons mentioned by Jimaginator. Furthermore, there were repeated attempts to amend the Constitution to explicitly mention God and Jesus, and they all failed. Now, in a delightful irony, the Andys are trying to insist that God has always been in there, when back in the day they were insisting that the Constitution was bad because he wasn't. I love it.--Bayes 13:39, 17 April 2009 (EDT)

I just love how the "student's" final question is "Feel free to add anything else that you think is relevant to the topic." How very realistic. --Johann 13:44, 17 April 2009 (EDT)

Andy: "Wholesome Christian Student, I need you to do an interview on American politics."

Student: "Sure, that sounds---"

Andy: "You will interview me."

Student: "Oh---"

Andy: "Here are the questions."

Student: "..."

Andy: "Here are the answers."

Student: "I---"

Andy, taking them back: "Excellent work. I'll post this right away."

13:53, 17 April 2009 (EDT)

"Jimaginator" (what a ridiculous user name!), you might as well deny that 2+2=4. I reread the beginning of your rant at the top of this section and you still don't seem to grasp how liberals try to claim exclusive control of knowledge and its recognition, and how you should be objecting to that, so let me guess: you're committed to censoring the Bible. Furthermore, you deny that cremating heretics reduces Shaken Baby Syndrome. You can whine all you want, but liberals like to deny that deceit is a real problem that causes real harm, and it is correlated more with the liberal belief system than with conservative principles. Quakers did not even fight in the American Revolution, and tended to support abortion! This is logic and there is nothing ironic about it.--Andy Schlafly 03:42, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

I have sinned against thee oh holy one. Can I have blocking privileges now please? Jimaginator 14:56, 17 April 2009 (EDT)

Wow! I just saw how assquote regen works! That is Frakkin' awesome! Kudos to whoever! Jimaginator 14:59, 17 April 2009 (EDT)

Latest from Jpatt

Jpatt has graced us with some moar incites, in which he tactfully equivocates religious conservatism with conservatism at large. This is either the most masterful parody I've ever seen or Jpatt is a legitimate moran. For the first time, I'm leaning toward him being a real-life idiot. Neveruse513 15:43, 17 April 2009 (EDT)

I vote for idiot- I especially like "students are given one-sided AUGMENTS as fact." Even liberals should realize that one-sided augments only serve to make women even more insecure about their bodies! Jimaginator 15:51, 17 April 2009 (EDT)

I vote for idiot too. He's a parodist the same way Andy's a parodist; he's gone so far he's come out the other end, creating a parody of the right that Jon Stewart would be proud of. Z3ro^talk 15:55, 17 April 2009 (EDT)

Unfortunately, I think he is the real deal. And given his Obama-hate article and his use of the Columbine photos, I think he's more batshit insane than Andy. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 15:59, 17 April 2009 (EDT)

BHarlan is still my ace in the hole. Neveruse513 16:06, 17 April 2009 (EDT)

I take that back... He's too obvious to be great. Neveruse513 17:00, 17 April 2009 (EDT)

Jpatt is the one user I am convinced is NOT a parodist. I'm sorry, I honestly don't want to be rude, but this guy seriously lacks understanding in some very basic concepts. Jammy 18:28, 17 April 2009 (EDT)

I dunno Jessica. Maybe Jpatt's a Yorkshireman! "Religion's reet worthy of protection, I tell thee". Dreaded Walrus 19:02, 17 April 2009 (EDT)

That Jpatt is a complete twit. Really, sometimes I wonder about arguing with the Conservapediatricians - it's really just not possible, when you're dealing with people who can only write unintelligible twaddle like that essay. What a load of old shit Jpatt. DogP 22:40, 17 April 2009 (EDT)

Jpatt can't be a Yorkshire man...otherwise he'd have been blocked already Jammy 21:39, 18 April 2009 (EDT)