Conservapedia talk:What is going on at CP?/Archive133

This is an archive page, last updated 14 April 2010. 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>, <131>, <132>, <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)

Good article in Vanity Fair

• Brown, Barrett (April 23, 2009). "Conservapedia: Bastion of the Reality-Denying Right". Vanity Fair.

Its a pretty good article, worth a read; it nails Conservapedia on the whole Dawkins issue. Seems so well informed I suspect one of us may have even had a hand in it. Icewedge 20:57, 23 April 2009 (EDT)

I wonder if that counts as suitable citations for the wikipedia article, now that someone else has reported about it. --Shagie 21:05, 23 April 2009 (EDT)

Honestly. I read it for the articles...

Haven't but started reading it--got distracted by the "family friendly" photo on the right-hand side of the story...TheoryOfPractice 21:07, 23 April 2009 (EDT)

Nice find! Is that in the print edition too, or on-line only? ħuman 21:10, 23 April 2009 (EDT)

(EC x 2) I'm not sure, I found the article by Google searching for Conservapedia (filtered for the last day), but I suspect not. @Shagie: yes. Icewedge 21:14, 23 April 2009 (EDT)

So now Vanity Fair is going to become the new Daily Show for Andy's hate-beams to target. ENorman 21:11, 23 April 2009 (EDT)

OK, they got the founding wrong, it was 2006, not 2007. And they spelled "Phyliss" wrong... ħuman 21:13, 23 April 2009 (EDT)

Someone should leave a brief, polite comment with a link to WIGO CP... ħuman 21:18, 23 April 2009 (EDT)

Knowing Andy and his blinkered reading skills I can see a mainpage edit any minute now reading "Liberal Vanity Fair changes tac and calls conservapedia a far more balanced and authoritive encyclopedia than Wikipedia". Or some such. Ace McWicked^{bitch and moan} 21:32, 23 April 2009 (EDT)

P.S. I did try to leave a polite comment but my work PC wont let me damnit! Anyone else? Ace McWicked^{bitch and moan} 21:42, 23 April 2009 (EDT)

The Vanity Fair it no taking comments on this one. The shame. Thee Nuttish ^Talk 22:13, 23 April 2009 (EDT)

Can we blame that on CUR? TheoryOfPractice 22:18, 23 April 2009 (EDT)

I blame CUR for my recent codeine addiction and for causing me to be only able to make through a day by listneing to extremely minimal, stripped down Swedish techno combined with lashings of whisky and yelling at my underlings. Ace McWicked^{bitch and moan} 22:30, 23 April 2009 (EDT)

I blame CUR for the recent commotion at RWW, sheesh. Anyway, onto my review of VF's review. It's a shame that they overlook the more batshit crazy going-ons, but I think it helps make the story a bit more interesting. If they said "Some spacko is trying to rewrite the bible to support his political views while attempting to earn funding to teach schoolkids" then I think people would just think "wacko" and zone out. But by keeping it on a low-note (well, relative to the other fundie stunts at CP), it helps make it that little more believable. Seriously, if you hadn't witnessed all this unfold, and someone told you about all of Andy's stunts and crazy beliefs, would you believe he was for real? -Redback^G'day 22:40, 23 April 2009 (EDT)

I blame CUR for keeping me up nights listening to really old Boards of Canada and Unwound records up to 11, chain smoking 15 Lucky Strikes a night while watching his decline, and drinking myself into mine. Thee Nuttish ^Talk 23:06, 23 April 2009 (EDT)

I think we have a much different perspective to other people about CP as we know the characters involved at a more personal level. Someone encountering it for the first time, which the writer and the readers are going to be, will only be interested in the final product which is an encyclopaedia. - User $\pi$ 22:53, 23 April 2009 (EDT)

That's a fair point. Most people who use it for learning purposes wouldn't have much reason to wander away from the mainspace. Those poor (or are they fortunate?) people don't know what they're missing out on. -Redback^G'day 22:55, 23 April 2009 (EDT)

For some reason I cant get into RWW from here - what is the little bastard CUR up too over there? Ace McWicked^{bitch and moan} 22:46, 23 April 2009 (EDT)

In all fairness, it's not CUR as such. Someone's (maybe numerous people) making a bunch of socks with rude messages to CUR as their names. CUR's blaming Fall Down, Fall Down is having a tantrum. That's about it, really. It's died down in the last two hours or so, all the different players must've gone to bed. -Redback^G'day 22:52, 23 April 2009 (EDT)

I'm sorry, but if I'm going to be traumatized, you're all going to be traumatized. It fits his obsessions, too. --Kels 22:53, 23 April 2009 (EDT)

Gah! Oh.my.god. I can't stop the lols. -Redback^G'day 23:07, 23 April 2009 (EDT)

Kels, stop stealing Ken's porn. --Yossie^{Spring in Fialta} 23:20, 23 April 2009 (EDT)

CUR is obsessed with Fall down it is fucking annoying. Any thing that happens any where he thinks is Fall down. Problem is he is such lolcow you don't even have to troll CUR to get a laugh out of him. - User $\pi$ 22:55, 23 April 2009 (EDT)

Ahhhh so while not active here, CUR is over there then. Right. If I get home tonight (no doubt drunk and foaming at the mouth with rage over some incident with a barman) and find a whole bunch of Felidae and Otter articles at RWW I'll lose my wick and personally fly to the States and hunt him down (ignore vague threats please - I would never fly to the states on CUR's account). Ace McWicked^{bitch and moan} 23:00, 23 April 2009 (EDT)

(unindent and back to the point) Pretty decent article overall.... Has some great quotes. My personal Favorite, "The chief proponent of the notion that Conservapedia is more authoritative than Oxford (in determining Dawkins professor status) was Andrew Schlafly, founder of Conservapedia, son of conservative icon Phyliss (sic) Schlafly, and one-man metaphor for what ails the modern conservative movement." SirChuckB^{That is all} 23:04, 23 April 2009 (EDT)

ACE CAN YOU BUY CODEINE AT THE CORNER DRUGGIST IN NZ IF SO PLEASE SEND DETAILS Thee Nuttish ^Talk 23:07, 23 April 2009 (EDT)

Hahaha no you cant. Ace McWicked^{bitch and moan} 23:09, 23 April 2009 (EDT)

I WILL KILL YOU FOR TAUNTING ME!!!1!!1!!! Thee Nuttish ^Talk 23:53, 23 April 2009 (EDT)

On an off note, I just got off the fone with a colleague friend who is a professor at the law school at the University of Chicago who think Andy Schlafly is batshit crazy from reading the Vanity Fair online piece (not at my urging). Nice convo. Thee Nuttish ^Talk 23:55, 23 April 2009 (EDT)

In regards to whether the article is in the printed version, on the web page is the fire-breathing Gore photo which only got uploaded a couple of days ago. Far too recent for print issue. Генгис^{You have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you.} 01:43, 24 April 2009 (EDT)

Y'know, I swore I had seen that Gore image on CP before last week. And behold, it was so! October 2007: TK uploads the reverse version for the Liberal hysteria article. April 2009: TK uploads it again.--Bayes 01:56, 24 April 2009 (EDT)

I don't think that the comment section is turned off - was that just a decoy to prevent CUR from posting there? larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 02:16, 24 April 2009 (EDT)

Ya suppose VF knew about CUR before we told them? I simply think that, sadly, this "blog" post has comments disenabled. Sissies. ħuman 02:32, 24 April 2009 (EDT)

Er, no it doesn't? I just posted something there? DogP 02:35, 24 April 2009 (EDT)

And, no, obviously comments are not blocked. Nicely done, DogP. Nice work. ħuman 02:50, 24 April 2009 (EDT)

Very nice. Hopefully the comments section won't devolve into something ridiculous. Corry^{It's an illusion, Michael!} 07:47, 24 April 2009 (EDT)

I've mentioned it on WP's CP talk page, hopefully it'll be accepted as a reliable source. Totnesmartin 06:26, 24 April 2009 (EDT)

God damn, this made my day. Neveruse513 20:10, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

"A salient point to the comment made above by DogP, (who is an Administrator at the "wiki" he linked to) is that the Los Angeles Times investigated it, and found it to be a vandal site, so readers should of course take that into consideration when considering the veracity of anything said or quoted there, anything shown there purporting to be screen shots, etc. It seems to also be a parody site, sort of a cut rate, far-left version of The Onion. Caveat emptor!" - TK. Hilarious attempt to discredit DogP's comment, which anyone can verify for themselves by following the link and checking out the footnotes - which are links to CP demonstrating what we say. And, of course, nice lie there too, the LA Times did not "investigate" RW, you little turd. Perhaps you can undermine the article a bit by deleting every diff it links to, or simply whitewash the entire history oif all the articles at CP? ħuman 21:24, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Dr. Francis Collins

I am continually amazed by the short sightedness and, although, I am loath to say it, stupidy of these anti evolution people. I know anything Ken Doll says is the worst of the worst, but it still shocks me. Conservative in the Homosexuality and Genetics talk page continually degrades Collins and his lack of judgment based on his views on evolution. Collins - Phd, MD, leader of the Human Genome project that got so much done. Ok, these people don't believe in DNA (stands for Don't Need Apes, I guess,) so that doesn't help. But, beyond that Collins is a strong strong Christian proponent and believer in God. For God's sakes in a million ways he is on their "side". Discounting his opinion on everything because of his view on one topic is irrational. They should adore him; he was homeschooled! It doesn't make sense. It's insane. And, I don't know why i am continually amazed by this line of thinking. But, I am. Patrickr 00:19, 24 April 2009 (EDT)

Unless it is Sarfati handing out his opinion things he is not qualified to discuss Ken

doesn't care. However when he is citing Sarfati he is the foremost authority everything and it is not a logical fallacy to appeal to his authority because he is a creationist and therefore well studied in everything. - User $\pi$ 00:29, 24 April 2009 (EDT)

As much as Ken/Ruy/Conservative keeps insisting that he's not obsessed with teh gay, he certainly can't keep his hands off those articles. Corry^{It's an illusion, Michael!} 07:45, 24 April 2009 (EDT)

"Conservative reads Vanity Fair"

Crappy Wigo. IMNSHO. And will someone archive this pig? I forgot my tildes: ħuman 02:51, 24 April 2009 (EDT)

It was me who made the wigo - so, as a kind of punishment, I took care of the pig. larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 03:30, 24 April 2009 (EDT)

Aw, sorry. No offense I hope? PS, can you archive "deeper"? This thing is still giant. We might need to use brains on this topic, some of our popular talk pages are always pigs to edit. ħuman 03:48, 24 April 2009 (EDT)

JPatt Psycho Psychic?

Has JPatt developed special powers, or XRay vision? I see his last few blocks have started to include "IP of blocked vandal/troll/troublemaker)" and yet the deceitful skunklet doesn't have checkuser. Just another conservative lying rat, I suppose. At least he's in good company with Terry Koeckritz and RJJ. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 06:33, 24 April 2009 (EDT)

Very interesting. But then again, their blocking excuses are just that, excuses, not actual genuine reasons. ArmondikoV^sshole 07:47, 24 April 2009 (EDT)

The reasons are "you made me look stupid", "you caught me being dishonest", "I am going to lose the argument if it goes on any longer", "you clearly know more than me, but I am the self appointed department chair here, so I am going to kick you out before one of the above three happens". - User $\pi$ 08:49, 24 April 2009 (EDT)

Featured article

Oh dear. They've put a math article as the featured article. This is the article cp:Prime Number. Very brave considering the lack of mathematical knowledge of any of the sysops. There could be any amount of subtle (or not so subtle) parody in there. Ed Poor and Foxtrot are the only ones who claim to know anything about maths, but neither of them actually know a thing. I won't offer a critique of the article as the last time I pointed out problems with a propsed FA Jessica went and corrected them. I will point out is that the only proof given in the article (infinitely many primes) uses the that most evil tool of liberal deceit, proof by contradiction. For those of you that haven't been following the soap opera that is math on CP Assfly has decided (for reasons as yet unknown) that one of the most standard techniques in the mathematician's toolbox, proof by contradiction, is inferior/invalid/the devil's own invention (I'm honestly not sure which of these best captures his views on the subject). JoeDuffy 08:49, 24 April 2009 (EDT)

Nothing I can see, could be a lot better written. Like a lot of stuff on CP it helps to actually know the subject before hand so you can read the article, rather than the other way around. - User $\pi$ 08:54, 24 April 2009 (EDT)

Wait, isn't that one of those nasty liberal Proofs by Contradiction in the "How many prime numbers" section? (And questions take a question mark, gentlemen.) Cantabrigian 08:59, 24 April 2009 (EDT)Grr why didn't I read the whole of JoeDuffy's comment?

.. and why is it that the diagram for the Sieve of Eratosthenes go up to 100, but the colouring gives up after 30? Cantabrigian 09:03, 24 April 2009 (EDT)

It would show the same thing with 70% less picture. - User $\pi$ 09:09, 24 April 2009 (EDT)

Because the site that they stole the picture from hadn't bothered to colour in the rest. One of my favourite lines from the article is "Simply write down an ordered list of all counting numbers greater than 1." Of course, no problem. How long do I have? JoeDuffy 09:15, 24 April 2009 (EDT)

Why, infinity + 1 seconds of course. Duh. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 09:17, 24 April 2009 (EDT)

A CP editor tries to bring this up. Great comment from Joaquin at http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=File_talk%3APrime_number.gif&diff=656163&oldid=656159. "Who said it is a sieve?". Eratosthenes perhaps? JoeDuffy 09:45, 24 April 2009 (EDT)

The picture is taken from an exercise. It wasn't meant to be complete... larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 09:57, 24 April 2009 (EDT)

Eh, only a few things stick out to me. Namely, "The only even prime number is 2," which is true, but also a bit odd. Evenness has to do with divisibility by two, so of course no other primes can be divisible by two. It's no different than saying "the only prime number divisible by three is three." To be fair, though, I hear this claim all the time.
I'm also pretty sure that the Fundamental Theorem of Arithmetic was proved long before Gauss came around. Whoever wrote that is probably thinking of the Fundamental Theorem of Algebra, which he offered several proofs for over his lifetime and I believe he was the first to prove it. --Commodore Guff (what a ridiculous name) 09:27, 24 April 2009 (EDT)

I'm surprised they didn't attribute the distribution pattern of the primes among the set of integers to God. Mega 09:28, 24 April 2009 (EDT)

Apart from the errors already pointed out I can see at least two big mistakes in the article. There are also some minor typos and problems with the structure of the article. I would list these but as my contributions were not valued when I was a CP editor I don't see why they would be interested in criticisms I make here. There is also at least one piece of subtle parody in the article. Or is there? Maybe I'm just making this up! They'll never know. TK parody exposing powers are of no use to him here. They should just remove this FA to be safe and replace it with cp:Arsenal_F.C.. But that's probably full of parody too. Pity they have alienated any editors who could actually assist them with this. JoeDuffy 09:38, 24 April 2009 (EDT)

two is the oddest prime larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 09:47, 24 April 2009 (EDT)

I see ClementB has done some fixing. Andy really doesn't like it (clean forgetting it's not the Parthian Shot that kills a Userpage, but the effwit who wipes the slate clean of the User afterwards.) Clement gives this giant of the Internet a way around that. You would expect Andy to know all about c. and p. Nearly his whole site is built on it. AlanE 01:40, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

It makes me giggle to see only a diff or two later Andy's bragging about the education level of CP readers.

--Kels 01:54, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

The article isn't really that bad. It doesn't mention the Bible, Dawkins, or Hollywood even once. It's actually one of their better math articles, especially when you consider that it wasn't contributed to by any of Brichtigen, SamHB, William Beason, CScience, or Lemonpeel (though DiEB did contribute -- I forgive you.) The math Gestapo (Ed, Foxtrot, ...) may have used that as a criterion for its selection. Those people really can't accept that anyone else might know something about math.

The choice of a math article may also have been a sort of guilt reaction from the Riemann Integral fiasco. It seems that RI had been proposed for featuring, and SamHB suggested some improvements (by mail; he's permabanned.) TK got so flustered by this that he not only rejected the improvements, he deep-burned the entire article, along with Sam's user page and talk page. So maybe they decided to go with another math article. Apparently there was a flurry of email about this, because, of course, TK can never discuss anything in public. Sam seems to have started to post the messages on his aSK page, and was asked to take them down. I'm trying to get them. They might be as interesting as the User:EddyP/TheLifeAndCrimesOfETrundel material. Gauss 04:37, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Teh "improvement"

"Old Earth theories struggle to explain youthful characteristics of the earth, such as the massive fresh water Great Lakes." WTF! _and marmite 09:33, 24 April 2009 (EDT)

Well, without an old earth, there are no glaciers, hence no freshwater lakes. The problem takes care of itself!

Z3ro^talk 11:21, 24 April 2009 (EDT)

"Z3ro", support for Obama is so prevalent among abortionists that only liberal deceivers deny the connection. I looked at many of your edits before reverting them and you deny that the Triangle Trade is a liberal myth, so whether you admit it or not, I can tell you're a non-substantive editor. Like all liberals, you deny that conservative talk radio helps resist school shootings. Observation and logic dictate that there are about 40 Counterexamples to Evolution. If merely one of those is correct, then evolution is false. Are you credentialed in this field? If so, then state your credentials. If not, then forget about it here. Unlike Wikipedia, credential bullying is not allowed here. Godspeed.--aschlafly 12:15, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

How do you guys do it?

I've read this page just to get an idea of, strangely enough, what is going on a CP. I, however, haven't really bothered to follow links or read anything at CP in a long while. Well, I just did. How do you guys do it? I mean how can you read that stuff? Andy's ramblings are so loopy. He is the ultimate parodist. I am quite certain that he has become so insane in his writing only to keep us interested and talking about him. I'm sure that Andy believes the stuff that he writes... now. He's invested so much into it that he just needs to get crazier and crazier. But, I tend to think that he might have fallen into a craziness singularity. --Edgerunner⁷⁶ 09:34, 24 April 2009 (EDT)

I generally filter to Talk Pages or User Talk Pages: cuts down the guff & amuses no end. _and marmite 09:43, 24 April 2009 (EDT)

How do we read it? With lulz. For me, reading CP is a reminder that freedom requires a constant battle against those too stupid to understand why they are free (metaphorically, that is). Z3ro^talk 11:20, 24 April 2009 (EDT)

I'm usually drunk when I head over to CP. Otherwise it ends up becoming an intensely negative experience -- all the hateful and negative energy over there gets to me after a while. Booze helps. Lulz over here help more. Thee Nuttish ^Talk 19:21, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

I've stared down the likes of Cthulhu, Giygas, and Man-Faye. my mind has been adjusted to taking in the mind-raping levels of insanity and madness. Andy's nothing compared to that ENorman 19:39, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

It pleases me to imagine that Ken is Man-Faye. --Kels 19:53, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Gentlemen, a conservative I am not... I'm from 10 years in the future.

The horror! I'll be sure to Pray for you, ENorman. "Publius prays with his whole heart! A very subtle light engulfs ENorman and his friends." 21:47, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Dakota! Boing! --Arcan ¡ollǝɥ 22:02, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Only five can ladder. Vulpius 22:53, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

(undent)Holy shit you're amazing Publius. So if Andy is Giygas, TK is Pokey and Ed is Master Belch. ENorman 22:56, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Ed should probably be Monotoli, what with kidnapping Paula and all. Vulpius 22:57, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Ahahah, yes. I already cast TK as Pokey. PJR can be Liar X. Agerate. 22:58, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Ed would be Carpainter, since he's a Moonie. ENorman 23:14, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

TK as Pokey is the funniest thing I've read all week. --Yossie^{Spring in Fialta} 22:39, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Then we've done our job. 04:15, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

And renaming the battle theme "TK Means Business!" makes it more menacing. ENorman 04:21, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Epic win.

http://www.quantcast.com/conservapedia.com In the bottom Right Corner Audience Also Visits

The people who visit conservapedia.com are also likely to visit: Affinity

• rationalwiki.com 108.0x
• creationontheweb.com 61.4x
• academickids.com 50.3x
• citizendium.org 48.4x
• fff.org 32.5x

We are, by far, the greatest source of Conservapedia users. --Passerby25 00:36, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Or, of course, vice versa. ħuman 02:58, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

For anyone wondering why Andy thinks CP is close to wikipedia, that`s because he searched for wikipedia.com (roughly 140,000 visitors). Wikipedia.org, on the other hand.....75.5 million. EddyP 01:21, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

That is excellent! Eddy, to what do you refer? (Is it a wigo? I'll go look...) ħuman 01:26, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Omigod, that discussion is brimming over with win! [1] one diff or two before, Andy musus that CP is "bigger than Wikipedia"!!!!11123112121332eklevdkjhdfszillion! ħuman 01:31, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Great win, but what is "academickids.com" and why are their users going to CP? I would think it a valuable exercise to see if anything can be done to help those children find more trustworthy sources. Matt 01:52, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Someone points out Andy's error http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk:Main_Page&diff=prev&oldid=656366 TK http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk:Main_Page&diff=next&oldid=656366 well, you knew what he'd do, deceitful little man, there are more reversions to follow. LateralQuercus 02:04, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

I knew that it would be worth it to stay up a little longer tonight. :D Andy's comment really cracked me up. Then again, this sort of delusion was pretty much inevitable after the fiftieth or so "Rapid growth! More than eleventy million pageviews!" announcement. Also kudos to TK for hastily reverting anything that might expose Andy to cold, hard facts. --Sid 02:15, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

I love Andy's latest "the basic conclusion about Conservapedia attracting the "more educated" is still true." Reality: according to Quantcast they each have a 40% no college audience, however CP gets 42% college, 18% grad school to Wikipedia's 43%, 17% I would call the difference satistically insignificant. - π 02:58, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

OHMYGOD! Quantcast about Rationalwiki.com. People who visit this site are likely to visit these sites as well: ivanafukalot.com 2.8x -Redback^{is gonna bite you} 03:34, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

haha! thats great. I make a motion that everytime someone visits Conservapedia, they must immediately follow the visit to ivanafukalot.com so that it will appear in Conservapedia's "audiences also visit". All in favor?--Passerby25 03:40, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

She's actually pretty hot ;) But I don't have the quantcast toolbar, or whatever, so it ain't me. Although, it could be. (No blushing smiley found) ħuman 04:07, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Personally, I love that trend. --Shagie 04:03, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

OMG Andy is such a moron: "Evidently quantcast treats wikipedia.org differently, but the .org site is more likely to reflect referrals from Google, perhaps due to algorithms giving Wikipedia preferences unrelated to visitor interest." Gee, of course it does. The .org site is the encyclopedia, the .com redirects to it, you idiot. Oh, and it's all because the big bad Google ranks WP highly (on account of 8 billion in-links...). FUCKING MORON. But he's funny, I'll give him that! ħuman 04:09, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

I'm still trying to figure out how 51% male is more balanced than 53% male (CP versus WP). They are fairly close. What's worse is that someone could easily argue that WP attracts almost 1,000x more females than CP does. Numbers prove anything. --Irrational Atheist 04:25, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Just for the record the Quantcast numbers can pretty much be considered to be made up whole cloth. There is no reason to think they have any baring on reality for any site. They are fun to "play with" but are essentially made up. tmtoulouse 04:31, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

How so? ħuman 04:37, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Maybe we should have an article on "internet traffic ratings"? ħuman 04:40, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Start by asking the question, how do they determine what traffic goes where, and then ask how that information can be translated in to age/sex/education/income.....you will fine that it can't do either with any kind of accuracy. tmtoulouse 04:46, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

OK. I was invited by Neilson to install a "watcher" thingie on my 'puter, but I never followed through. What these ratings people do is get a sample of people to install their thingie, and get some basic demographics from them, and then track their internet usage. Many slips between cup and lip, obviously, are possible - it's not a "clean" poll. But if they have, say 10,000 correspondents, the only (huge) issue is who would sign up and why. IOW, I didn't, because I thought it was creepy, basically. So if you take all the "me"s out of the database, who's left? The less clued? ħuman 05:22, 25 April 2009 (UTC) Update: Or, the "more sober"? Cherish the thought. ħuman 05:23, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

That is not hoq Quantcast works at all though, they are data miners, unless you install html code on your site that specifically places cookies on your visitors computers that report to quantcast there is little to no direct measurement, only "trends" from analyzing things like link structures. A simple comparison of the actual traffic to RW shows that quantcasts assessment is very wrong. The next step of inferring properties of the viewership from IPs and sites visited is even more ridiculous. Take a look at what they say about RW, we average over 100k income in a predominantly young, university market. That doesn't make any sense. There is plenty of reason to reject out right the validity of any stat off that site. tmtoulouse 05:32, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

More important than the pr0n is the fact that a lot of you folks are going to www.drdino.com. I knew this site was full of closet Hovind apologists! Pay your damned taxes, you stupid hicks! The dinosaurs will walk side by side with you straight to federal prison! Corry 06:18, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Wow, unbelievable. How could ASchlafly possibly say that Conservapedia, ranked #15,342 with 98.2 thousand visitors per month, is anywhere close to Wikipedia, ranked #7 with 75.5 Million? and CP has more educated people? Plz to compare stats:

Conservapedia: 40% No College, 42% College, 18% Grad Sch

Wikipedia: 40% No College, 43% College, 17% Grad Sch

Very similar.

• http://www.quantcast.com/conservapedia.com
• http://www.quantcast.com/wikipedia.org

Maybe L'arron can make us a nice little chart... Refugee^{talk page} 08:08, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

OK, I see this info is already in "Latest" in WIGO voting. Redundant info - should have checked there first, sorry. Refugee^{talk page} 08:11, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Not only does he believe that he could catch up with a site that by all sources is some 3 orders of magnitude ahead of his little pile of digital excrement. He believes that he could actually serve the same amount of traffic for which Wikipedia needs some 350 servers with a single machine! Delusions of grandeur, Andy haz plenty... --Just passing by 08:18, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

I saw someone here cite a statistic that Wikipedia generates enough new content in just 3 days to eclipse the entirety of CP. Also I notice badpuppy.com comes up in related sites for RW... are these things pulled out of a hat? 86.20.32.48 08:34, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Yes, they are. See Trent's posts further up. Bastard evil Phantom Hoover! 08:40, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Yes, they are essentially pulled out of a hat. In the case where they have no data they go by "Site a links to foo and also to bar" type data, which for sites with relatively small numbers of links is more or less meaningless. Of course, it gets the RW-CP connection right, since I guess RW links to CP outweigh all other sources probably 10 to 1. Basically, for sites that haven't agreed to use the quantcast web bug, the stats are totally meaningless. Kendoll likes them because they flatter his ego, though. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 08:43, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

However it is safe to assume that WP beats CP traffic by several orders of magnitude. This is rougly confirmed by all available statistics (Alexa, Quantcast, Compete, Google trends,...). But maybe those numbers are all liberally biased. See also Ubuntu Conservative-Christian Super-Power seekrit edition. --Just passing by 08:49, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

I'd say that these numbers from Quantcast are highly suspect. For example they list "Michigan jobs" as the second most popular search that brings people to CP. JoeDuffy 11:47, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Heh, looking at the stats, the true difference between Conservapedia and Wikipedia is apparently that Conservapedia's audience is significantly whiter, older and richer than that of Wikipedia. Also, I wonder how the education stats are measured. Wikipedia has a very significant number of visitors in the 12-17 and 18-34 age demographics, many of whom are unlikely to have finished college (yet), let alone grad school. Does Quantcast filter or weigh for age on the education metric? Hydrogen 11:00, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

I thought TheArse always claimed he ran an educational site. To only be getting 40% non-college educated visitors is actually a failure of his aims. LateralQuercus 13:57, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Deleted article doesn't attract moar educated visitors. By that logic, shouldn't Andy basically delete the whole site? Z3ro^talk 14:30, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

I wonder how long it will take him to tire of repeating the tropes he injected into his brain from 8 seconds of looking at that quantcast report? ħuman 18:01, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

The stats for RW are interesting. 53% are under age 18 (most of them under 12), 56% have kids.^{— Unsigned, by: 67.171.19.10 / talk / contribs}

I don't trust that at all. Not to go into too much detail, but being one who prefers the company of men, there are certain *ahem* online communities I visit which according to Quantcast have a 38% female audience... ooookay. -Redback^{is gonna bite you} 22:21, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Conservative can help you to overcome your abominable behaviour. Matt 23:09, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Silly, he's not a snowman! ħuman 23:26, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

(EC)Given his obsession with homosecksyooalitee, I'm more inclined to believe he would be willing to help me indulge. That's right, I've got my man-scouting eye on you, Ken

. -Redback^{is gonna bite you} 23:28, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

CP vs. WP traffic

	Wikipedia	Conservapedia	Ratio
Quantcast, US monthly traffic	75M	98k	770 : 1
Compete, unique visitors	66M	120k	550 : 1
Compete, visits	240M	150k	1,600 : 1
Google Trends, daily unique visitors	20M	4k	5,000 : 1
Alexa reach, 3 month avg.	8.7%	0.0023%	3,800 : 1
Alexa pageviews, 3 month avg.	0.53%	0.000097%	5,500 : 1

(Rounded to one or two significant digits) Almost the same, isn't it? --Just passing by 10:48, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

academickids.com

If kids are going from CP to academic kids, I think they're doing just fine. I've had a quick look round: it seems to be what CP would have been if Schlafly had been serious about creating a homeschool resource. Eg:

1. The evolution article has a huge picture of....Darwin (Hitler pictures are on the Adolf Hitler page).
2. When the Atheism page addresses the knotty problem of why why people might be atheists it ...er...summarises atheist views and links to atheists explaining why they are atheists.
3. The Orwell page tells how Orwell joined a Marxist militia in the Spanish Civil War and later had to flee because of Stalinist/Trotskyist conflict.
4. It reports a conflict where there is a conflict of opinion without taking sides: “the axiom of choice is an axiom of set theory. It was formulated in 1904 by Ernst Zermelo. While it was originally controversial, it is now accepted and used casually by most mathematicians. However, there are still schools of mathematical thought, primarily within set theory, which either reject the axiom of choice, or even investigate consequences of its negation.”
5. There is no article on homosexuality

Toffeeman 11:18, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Seems to have died though? no new articles since July last year. Recent changes empty for last 30 days. _and marmite 11:24, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

They do give image source with the image too. _and marmite 11:25, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

academickids looks like a Wikipedia clone, especially when Template:Spoken Wikipedia shows on the page. - π 11:27, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

academic kids is listed as a wikipedia mirror. Pseudomonas 11:43, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Passersby

I don't know if this has been addressed, but 84% of the people who visit are passersby- meaning that they don't stay long, presumably because of a ban. -- 22:44, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

And sort of on the same subject, I have just counted 21 edits on CP in the last hour - and 55 here. (No point doing WP - the last 500 edits took a few minutes.) Three of their edits were TiggerK, doing what he does best. Yesterday I read through the talk page of something that had people's attention six months ago. Every single contributor on the page is now red. They are slowly grinding to a halt.AlanE 23:13, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Well, I partly read "passersby" as casual visitors - not people necessarily sign up. What's funny is about 20% of CP is "addicts" and we're only 1%. And, yeah, CP is grinding down lately. Their RC is just a merger of the user creation and block logs half the time. And with the Asok boycott in full swing, the only activity will be PJR and Ozzie buddy, no nothing in the USish daytime cause they're a-sleepin'. ħuman 23:30, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Does this really describe the average RWian:

“”This site reaches approximately 5,630 U.S. monthly people. The site is popular among a mostly Caucasian, heavily female, 60-100k HH income bracket, younger audience.

Генгис^{You have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you.} 14:34, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Ahh, I'm going to have to fix that. Genghis

So did I just enter Bizarro-Conservapedia?

Andy admitting he was wrong? Twice? Next thing you know Obama will be a far-right fascist and Rush Limbaugh the voice of the liberal minority. Jesus... ENorman 18:57, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Yes, amazing. I was dumbfounded. ħuman 19:51, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

?!...?!!!!... !..... ? Sincerely, 20:12, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

So, how long will the other editor survive? larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 20:17, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Who knows? Perhaps Andy actually did learn something when PJR left. (cue laugh track) -- 20:20, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

This is huge. Something shattered his confidence. I feel all the sudden guilty, as I always envied his ability to block out the rest of the world and its fancy reasoning. I would love to have such a powerful "I don't give a fuck" mentality to rid myslef of all traces of self-doubt and to be constantly reassured of my righteousness. Teabag 20:25, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

It's ok, it was only a momentary aberration... "...people who use Wikipedia are no better off than those who eat a daily diet of greasy french fries." [2] He's being coaxed back onto his mighty saddle. ħuman 20:41, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Andy is a parodist and manipulator, end of story. If anyone else were so overt as Andy, they'd be blocked immediately. --Marty 21:12, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

I guess it was temporary, his questioning WP in a great piece of hypocrisy. I guess we'll never know for sure if he's for real of not, Poe's Law and all. Teabag 21:25, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Am I reading this right? Is Andy really claiming CP is superior to WP because they force their wandals to log in before wandalising? --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 21:31, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

I missed that I guess... but, yeah, I think he thinks that - after all, everyone on CP uses their real names and posts a birth certificate before editing. ħuman 22:04, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Ed on off WP

Another Ed creation gets the boot from WP. _and marmite 21:06, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

You quite sure? Wikipedia typically doesn't mess with User pages. -- 21:32, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Human's comment made me laugh. User:Theemperor/Sig/Sig 21:34, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

I got warnded for it, too. You guys always get me in trouble. ħuman 21:57, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

You did ask for it really. Can't you just see him outside teh primary school gates though: "Hello kiddies, I'm Uncle Ed. Wanna see my fluffy kittehs?" Werry creepy! _and marmite 00:14, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

@CUR: Read & you shall be enlightened. _and marmite 21:36, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Human, what did you say that got you warned? Bluefish 03:31, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Look at my comment, and then my talk page (user:Huw Powell). Follow the links. ħuman 03:38, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, didn't know your wp name. They talked to you like you were brand-new. Bluefish

Yeah, I was going to mention WP:DTTR on Human's behalf, but would probably just get the whole "it's just an essay" thing. Dreaded Walrus 04:34, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Swine flu

What's their beef with swine flu? It's been on the news here. Are they worried the flu germs might have *gasp* evolved? PsyGremlin_Whut? 23:58, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

People who go abroad deserve all they get! Look for Joaquin^(sp?) being quarantined. _and marmite 00:16, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

What's their pork with swine flu? Sterile^{walkie-talkie} 02:48, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Special people

"The nice thing about logic is that it is not a popularity contest. Those who seek the truth are special people who reap special benefits for themselves and for all those to whom they communicate the truth.--Andy Schlafly 20:22, 25 April 2009 (EDT)" [3] Sometimes you just gotta wonder at his ego issues. ħuman 01:42, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

I think he's quite right, those who seek Conservapedia's idea of truth are indeed special. Special enough that they got to ride to school in the short bus. -Redback^{is gonna bite you} 01:59, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

As a person with mental retardation, I find your reference offensive. Fuck Ken

. He's not specialer than anyone. User:Nutty Roux/signature 02:06, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Kathy Ireland and Jpatt

Jpatt just added this nugget of knowledge to the growing encyclopedia. Jpatt assures us that Ms Ireland will inspire "adolescent teen girls"; can someone sock-up and mention that Kathy Ireland has already inspired generations of sweaty teenage boys?--Simple 02:59, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Where'e the "up" button? Dang. ħuman 03:31, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

He could have chosen a better picture. There are lots to choose from. AlanE 03:37, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Was there a picture? I didn't notice; I only read the articles.--Simple 04:00, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

I only read Kathy Ireland for the articles. --Yossie^{Spring in Fialta} 08:49, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Andy's statistical genius

Well, I don't think it warrants a WIGO, but I thought the following is worth examining more closely:

Conservapedia attracts "more educated" visitors and has a more balanced male-female distribution than Wikipedia, which is predominantly male. [4]

The website being used for comparison, www.quantcast.com, has actually quantified neither site, so the figures on which Andy is relying are "based on rough estimates" - that is, essentially worthless. But let's see if they say what he says they say.

The pertinent comparison is between "en.wikipedia.org" [5] and "conservapedia.com" [6]. Quantcast's estimates are as follows:

	Wikipedia	Conservapedia
rank	14	15,326
sex ratio	53% ♂, 47% ♀	51% ♂, 49% ♀
lily whiteness	74% caucasian	83% caucasian
education	40% no college/43% college/17% grad school	40% no college/42% college/18% grad school
monthly U.S. traffic	48,500,000	98,200

So Andy is "bragging" about a difference of a few percentage points in an estimate, while ignoring the much-more-likely-to-be-real racial differences, the rankings, and the numbers of visitors. Proving once again, if proof were needed, that he has no concept of statistics, or statistical significance. - Poor Excuse 04:29, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

I note with amusement that Quantcast thinks that the typical visitor to Conservapedia "reads nationalreview.com, watches PBS Online, and attends the University of Virginia," while Wikipedia's "typical visitor visits physicsforums.com and reads Science magazine." - Poor Excuse 04:33, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I was quite ashamed that so many from my alma mater read CP. Then again, maybe they're doing it for the same reason I do. Even Mr. Jefferson would enjoy these lulz. Stile4aly 04:39, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

You went to academickids.com? --Kels 04:43, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Most likely an epiphenomenon of the fact that, say, 2 of the 15 remaining contributors to CP go to UVa. I mean, how real can the idea that CPers watch PBS be? - Poor Excuse 04:44, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

look at the entry on Mesolithic

CP's entry on Mesolithic

...Isn't the very existence of such term blatantly opposes the very YEC worldview of Andy? (Time simply didn't exist before the creation date, which is claimed to be 4xxx BCE in YEC, IIRC, then why include things such as "9th millenium BC"?)

Or did someone brought that up already? Thieh 05:22, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

That's what happens when you have a live database that's understaffed and the staff that are there are a) clueless about 90% of the subject matter and b) too busy swaggering around bullying other editors to actually do some fact checking and general wiki-maintenance. (just look at their {{fact}} and {{merge}} lists. Add to that the fact that everything had to happen within the last 6,000 years and you've got Keystonepedia. Other examples that have cropped up include the Scots, Norwegians and Japanese who were all running around on their islands about 4,000 years before the creation. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 05:36, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

It’s there because it wasn’t noticed (except by Wes of course, who leapt out and stuck a cat. sticker on it when no one was looking (hi Wes!)). There are a number of these hanging around because they weren’t noticed – more and more time was spent with the important stuff like slamming liberals and Obama bashing and I don’t think any of the YEC crowd at CP has had a decent guddle through the Random page section for yonks. There are still many pearls to be found within its dark and furry recesses. AlanE 05:45, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

AlanE's comment FTW! (whatever it meant) ħuman 07:35, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

What AlanE said, and it isn't even just in the dark and furry recesses. There are blatantly "anti-creationist" statements all over the place in prominent articles. Probably never goat caught because fewer people, apparently even Conservapedians, want to get brain damaged on model airplane glue and claw their eyes out when they see references to rocks that are millions of years old, rather than mere thousands. User:Nutty Roux/signature 14:09, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I only categorized most of the articles that have my name plastered on the fossil record over there. I rarely bothered to read anything I categorized, just enough to put it in the right place. No wonder I'm still a liberal. Aboriginal Noise ^Punkrock 19:38, 26 April 2009 (UTC) 19:33, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

What I meant was that one can issue a dogma argue that Scots, Norwegians and Japanese simply does not exist before creation date (And possibly the devil implant the memories into their minds about some bogus ancestors other than Adam and Eve), but the use of time before creation date, if not simply as an illusion, simply means "Time existed before The Creation". I guess the explanation you guys give will yield the statement "The guys at CP didn't noticed time existed before The Creation." Thieh 16:35, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Mussolini

Skillfully using his absolute control over the wiki, he gradually built up the legend of the "Duce, a man who was always right and could solve all the problems of politics and economics. Conservapedia was soon a police state. With those who tried to resist him, for example the Socialist Ames Grawertti, he showed himself utterly ruthless. But Assolini's skill in propaganda was such that he had surprisingly little opposition.(Grolier Encyclopedia)

Mussolini was an influential figure in Italian politics even before WWI - in contrast to Hitler, who remained obscure until the 1920s. Just saying. larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 07:19, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

LArron; can you please not use the word "obscure" in my presence with anything to do with Andrew Schlafly; his words deeds or, um, anything else that he may have touched on since he was "allegedly born". You have to remember that Tchaikovsky is an "obscure" composer, as is Dvorak" and Verdi and most other non-Germans, and as for historical matters, everything to do with medieval England and France, all exploration other than the discovery of north and central America (Brazil doesn't count) is all considered obscure. Thus spraken Schlafly. He told me so himself. To say Hitler was obscure before the twenties, reminds me of James Cook and Vasco da Gama and Henry V who were obscure all their lives, as were many other people whom Andrew L. even in his omniscience, knew very little of and therefore deemed obscure. AlanE 07:46, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Alan. Alan, Alan, Alan. (17 bonus points to whoever spots the comedic reference.) Can I just say this. Andrew Schlafly has said and done many ignorant, petulant and reprehensible things on CP. But I honestly believe the treatment he gave you was the most ignorant, petulant and reprehensible of all. I used to sit there looking at my screen, open-mouthed. And you took it and took it and took it. I hope you can find something more rewarding to spend your early mornings on. Matt 08:39, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

"Alan, Alan, Alan, Alan..." Is definitely a quote from 'Bad News' - possibly from 'Bootleg'? - could well be something else as well of course :) Worm ^{(t | c)} 09:09, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

A-HA!!-- Kriss Akabusi^{AAAWOOOGAAAR!!1} 09:41, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Good get Kris. Would you like to sing an Abba medley with me? Matt 10:04, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Yup, let's go. Winner takes it all.-- Kriss Akabusi^{AAAWOOOGAAAR!!1} 10:10, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

I'm all for making the adjective "obscure" a blockable offense on RW. Junggai 09:06, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

In schlanguage, obscure means I had to look it up.... larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 08:39, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Alan just didn't show enough gratitude to be allowed to take part in an project of such magnitude as Conservapedia, albeit as a minor contributor. As those who dug the latrines for the workers of the Great Pyramids, he should have taken pride in his work, knowing that he helped in his humble way, even if the Pharaoh wasn't aware of his existence. Alas no, he wanted the attention of the Son of the Nile, and was burned by his grace.

Clement B. walks down the same road: He hasn't apologized for being right over the Sieve of Eratosthenes yet, and he drags himself into the presence of A. Schlafly, again.

larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 08:55, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

I just love how Andy tried to wriggle out of ClementB's argument by ragging on a misplaced preposition, not realizing that Clement's actually a native German speaker. Junggai 09:15, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Regarding Hitler, he was obviously well known in the mid-19th century, forty years before he was born. Otherwise, how could Darwin have cooked up those crackpot theories specifically so Hitler could use them? --Kels 16:37, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

I made the above comment then wandered off to bed or somewhere. Can't remember, it was a long time ago. Reading it now, I apologise if it reads heavier than I meant it to be. I think someone with a sock should insert "obscure" into CP's "Category:Dictionary" with a meaning that goes something like: any historical person, event, place, or deed that either (a)Andrew Schlafly is not familiar with (which is damn-near everything) or (b) does not concern America (which is damn-near everything else.) And whilst on the subject of that word, it would be hard to find anyone with as high opinion of himself and his "fame" as ALS who is quite so obscure in fact. AlanE 23:10, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

I didn't take offense: I can hardly open any text book on arithmetic, fearing to see the formula 2+2 = 4. And now you've linked obscure with Schlafly in the same way - so, I've to avoid this word in future for my own good... larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 09:47, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

I think with this Mussolini/Russia thing, Andy's finally revealed just how poor his grasp of world history is - even from a general knowledge point of view, never mind as a pedagogue. I can't even begin to think where he pulled that kind of info from. Hopefully the SATS (or whoever) board will have a close look at his course notes and marking. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 11:22, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Dean's blog

So, guess what I come across while trawling the blogospere? Yup, Crocoite has come up with his very own crock o'shite. Just don't expect any comments you make to appear - at least he's upfront about his conservative deceit:

“”Welcome to my blog. If you're not a liberal, feel free to leave a comment. When I receive comments from Ratwikians or other liberals, I'm not going to post them on my blog. They may have their freedom of speech on Conservapedia and the rest of the internet, but not on my blog.

--PsyGremlin_Whut? 08:02, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

DeanS: CP is the good. Liberals is the bad. RW is the ugly. ħuman 08:08, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

See thing is, he doesnt NEED our comments, as you can see the true conservatives are talking up a storm all ready. 216.221.87.112 08:32, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

You can't accuse dear ol' Crock o' Shite of not being well read. His vast library of one book contains all the classics of western literature. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 08:53, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Teacher, teacher, the other kids are making fun of me! Czolgolz 14:05, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

It's very nice of him to publicise (to his vast audience!) us, though. Isn't it? _and marmite 14:08, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

We even got our own tag/label! How thoughtful of him. :) --Sid 16:38, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

"Dean The Conservative" immediately reminds me of "Ethel The Aardvark" from the Python BookShop sketch - One day, Dean The Conservative was walking down the street...... Генгис^{Is the Pope a Catholic?} 17:10, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

"My book collection" - One book! And it isn't even the Book of Moron. Генгис^{Is the Pope a Catholic?} 17:16, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Think he goes quantity surveying? Here's your book, now buy it! Aboriginal Noise ^Punkrock 19:39, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Freakout - I was watching that very sketch while reading this. What are the odds!?? Etc 20:04, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, pretty creepy. Aboriginal Noise ^Punkrock 20:10, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

It's parody, folks. Mei 19:46, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

There is hardly enough on the blog to dismiss it as parody yet. Aboriginal Noise ^Punkrock 20:10, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

My Poesense was twigged when I first saw it. Don't know yet - Jury's still out. _and marmite 20:41, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, need more posts, and especially comment dialogue, to be able to tell. If it's a parody it's pretty "accurate", but probably won't really grow. If it's real, surely he will add to it, and see if he can at least get some conservapoes to join in the comments. Oh, by the way, 3.14 internets to the first person to Poe their way into getting a comment published. ħuman 23:47, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Oh course it is real, it s linked from his user page on CP for christ sakes. Fifth Horseman 17:21, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Then Dean was always a parodist. No wait, this whole universe is parody. Think about it. Mei 22:47, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

It's much more "What a plonker" than "Willie Wonka". I reckon BethanyS could right something more mature. He sounds just like a whining spotty teenager.  Lily ^{Inspirate me.} 22:18, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Does anyone find it amusing that DeanS at CP still sports a Donut War userbox? ħuman 21:38, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

sucked out my ass conservative words

Hmmm... looking at Andy's edit comment here and bets he conjures up another 9 words. And laissez-faire conservative? PsyGremlin_Whut? 14:18, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

To mis-quote 2001. "The thing's hollow—it goes on forever—and—oh my God—it's full of shit" StarFish 14:40, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

That front page item looks like it could have been ghost-written by Ken

. --Kels 16:31, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Oh dear God, you're right. But at least Andy admits that he is working towards a goal instead of doing the smart(er) thing and "noticing" a certain growth rate after adding the "last" item. --Sid 16:37, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

His "news item" is absolutely hilarious. They're so close to discovering the truth, that random words that Andy calls conservative and slaps into centuries according to Merriam-Webster's first citations proves the end of liberalism is near, all which represent... conservative insights? And he actually thinks he's conducting groundbreaking research, the shit! 17:24, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

He's just bizarre. He has his "insights" into all these wonderful things about conservatism, and for some reason he thinks that since they make sense to him, they must be true and provable. Trouble is, he has no clue at all how one actually goes about that, so he just sprays tripe all over his blog. ħuman 22:21, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

I thought CP had become boring forever until this Conservative Words business and the whole Mussolini thing. Reminded me why I still read WIGO. seventhrib 10:36, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

I'd like to see AssFly try to present his argument that "conservatism is winning because we're creating all these new words!" at some kind of serious conservative think tank. The only thing that would prevent him from getting laughed out the front door is the prominence of his mother in the conservative movement. ("Okay, this is Phyllis Schlalfy's kid. Just save the mockery till he goes home.") MDB 14:44, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

The words "serious" and "conservative think tank" really don't belong together. --Kels 14:59, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

US conservatives still seem to think Sarah "Fruit Fly" Palin is a viable future presidential candidate. Why would those people laugh him out the front door? They also got George "I was able to get a sense of his soul" W. Bush elected twice. Dendlai 22:35, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Pick your favourite battle?

What was Andy thinking when he wrote that question?! Even he must be able to see how distasteful a question that is. Especially when one student goes on to name a battle, listing the number of dead and wounded in the answer. Jammy 16:43, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Little Big Horn. Генгис^{Is the Pope a Catholic?} 17:12, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Agincourt!!! EddyP 18:07, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Bosworth. Broccoli 18:09, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Kent State.--Martin Arrowsmith 18:09, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Assfly contra mundum. Cantabrigian 18:24, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Ishlandwana & Rorke's Drift. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 18:31, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

The Battle of Jerusalem when the Crusaders took it, of course. </snark> -- 18:40, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Siege of Beziers! Broccoli 19:06, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

The battle of the pirate and ninja overlords!!! JĀvąṢ₡ä₰ hi there 19:13, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

What's a battle? Mei 19:47, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

My personal favorite is the Battle of Yavin IV. SirChuckB^{A product of Affirmative Action} 19:54, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Hey! That was mine! I'll just go with the Fields of the Pellinor. 'cause I don't think Order 66 qualifies.User:Theemperor/Sig/Sig 21:12, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Battle of HastingsLateralQuercus 20:48, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Battle of Corulag, but you'ld have to be really nerdy to know that one (or use Google).--199.20.64.195 22:34, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Gettysburg! Plenty of casualties there, and my great-great grandfather was there! Aboriginal Noise ^Punkrock 22:41, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Buttle of Britain (film version). ħuman 22:51, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Battlestar Galactica User:Nutty Roux/signature 22:55, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Battle of the network stars. (yes, I do date myself here) - waitingforgodot

Kathleen AlanE 23:27, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Battle of Alterac Valley (google it) -Redback^{is gonna bite you} 23:38, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Pharsalum.--Tom Moore^{fiat justitia ruat coelum} 00:07, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Thermopylae.-- JArneal 04:04, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Mboto Gorge. Strelok 07:20, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

The Fantastic Four vs. Galactus, Fantastic Four #48-50, aka The Galactus Trilogy MDB 11:46, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Koom Valley Silver Sloth 11:50, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Spion Kop. Waterloo. (Best Eurovision winner ever)  Lily ^{Inspirate me.} 12:25, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Darmak and Jalad at Tanagra! HumanisticJones 19:59, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

No one picked Stalingrad? Wouldn't that be considered the most horrific battle in human history? --Edgerunner⁷⁶_{Save me Tsisnaajini!} 13:35, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

The question lacks scope, IMO. Why not What's your favorite war? Hundred Years, Eighty Years, Thirty Years, Seven Years, 100 Days, Seven Days? La Guerre des boutons? larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 07:42, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Star Wars? Robot Wars? Cantabrigian 07:49, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Seven Hours War --Arcan ¡ollǝɥ 08:03, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Coke vs. Pepsi, The Cola Wars. --Edgerunner⁷⁶_{Save me Tsisnaajini!} 13:31, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Battlecat from He-Man. Bondurant 14:03, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

And homeschooler Kirstin picks Gallipoli. What next? What is your favourite genocide? Please support your answer with reference to the number of innocents butchered. JoeDuffy 08:27, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Does the Night of Blunt Knives count? --Kels 13:38, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Ay-up! Ay-up! Ay-up!

"I like the Battle of the Somme" says Isaac. I'm sure there are millions who'd agree with you Isaac. DogP 15:37, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Some of you may know that April 25 is "Anzac Day" in Australia and New Zealand, a day set aside originally to commemorate the Fallen during the WWI Gallipoli Campaign, but now a day of tribute to the OZ and Kiwi dead of all wars. It's ironic that Schlafly asked such a sensitively worded question at about that time. AlanE 21:03, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Favourite battle? Easy. Battle of Installation 04. Good training for the day when the Fundamentalists from Outer Space will eventually attack. --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 18:58, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Ken assaults the UK

Well, he'll never know it: half the UK's been blocked. _and marmite 20:35, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Wasn't one of Ken's comments when he blocked Oxford Uni something about not being pestered by Dawkins?LateralQuercus 20:55, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

If we're thinking about the same thing, that had been TK. Edit to add: Can't even see any rangeblocks in Ken's recent block history. --Sid 21:32, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Haha, how classy is Ken here, not only posting his ego-stroking on the front page, but pushing some of Andy's unjustified bragging under another of his own droppings. --Kels 21:36, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

"Move over little YouTube evolutionists dogs, some big, old YouTube creationists dogs are movin' in!" <-- Ken just managed to make me laugh more than my webcomics today (though it was Sunday, so few comics from my list updated). There's just something about this description being on the front page that got to me. XD --Sid 22:06, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

(EC x too friggin' many) Order of Tales updates tonight, so that pleases me greatly. Not terribly laugh-inducing, though. --Kels 22:34, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Hehe, yeah, anyone ever noticed that when TK posts borken news, if Andy's at the top, he posts his below? Ken, on the other hand, would take over the entire main page if they let him. Reminds me of the quote, the guy who plays Fr. Mulcahy on MASH was asked what MASH was about. He replied "it's about a priest in Korea". All CP is for Ken is some window dressing around his three giant projects (A, E, and H). ħuman 22:24, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Can we get him to pet-project-ify the Theism article? Then we could sum up all of his pet projects easily: HATE --Sid 22:27, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Which reminds me. There is a word for when the bull tosses the bullfighter in the air: "cogida", pronounced "coe-hee-ya". We need to use it more. ħuman 22:25, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Rough breakdown of CP:Main Page at the moment, Of 46 featured articles, including left side and right side sections, I make Ken being responsible for 11 of them, or abut 24% of the Main Page. Cool. I still think Hitwin should be on the top of the left column though. DogP 06:06, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Also his "unexpected creationist spamming 600 other creationists" item is on both left and right sides of the main page. Генгис^{Is the Pope a Catholic?} 12:47, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Can someone please teach Ken

how to make floating boxes?  I can just imagine a giant floating HITWIN following me around as I browse CP, captioned something to the effect of "Why not have a look at our Evolution article, ranked #5 on Google".  Theemperor

Now that idea is MONEY, Emperor! See, creative solutions like this are why we can be of so much assistance to Conservapedia! DogP 02:53, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

er... hang on

If memory serves, isn't the swine flu that CP is trumpeting on is borked news, the same swine flu that was being deleted as parody yesterday? --PsyGremlin_Whut? 22:47, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, iI think so. Someone WIGOed it that way, anyway. ħuman 22:53, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Not WIGO worthy but ...

TK miswrites & makes himself look (pre-?) pubescent thereby: "*Certainly. Your ignorance of Communism, to start. Your quarrelsome attitude and your snarky edit comments as well. They are certainly worthy of Wikipedia, and I suggest you stay there, where such qualities are appreciated by their mainly post-pubescent editor base." [my emphasis] _and marmite 23:18, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Now we know why Uncle Ed left Wikipedia. --Marty 16:35, 28 April 2009 (UTC) Heh, "Thereby". Good times.

A formative influence on Ken?

MOAR

Sooooo I was playing Wolfenstein 3D on my iPhone today (yeah, I know, how cool is that!!!) and stumbled across this graphic sprite, which appears in the later levels:

And there you have it - the likely portrait of KenDoll's youth.-Diadochus 04:47, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

You'd find it much easier to play if you held your phone horizontally. _(sorry) Dreaded Walrus 04:50, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

In Spear of Destiny (PC), that Hitler texture is on the wall of the room of the spear itself. You can then use the spear to skewer the sacred cows of evolution, olé olé olé. (The wall texture is right in the beginning of the video in case you miss it.) --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 08:11, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Wasn't it only a week or so ago that the bull represented atheism and the matador was the glorious personification of fundies (ole ole ole)? So how does this work then? I think Ken's getting his metaphores in a bit of a twist. Or maybe he's finally seeing the truth. No. That's not very liekly. StarFish 08:29, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Everyday I question his lucidity. I was arguing with him on his talkpage at ASK and suddenly he went from "the absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence" when discussing why you don't find African animals such as elephants and lions in Australia despite the similar climates, then in his next post he was saying "the burden of proof" is on the claimant about the fossil record so evolutionists are wrong. How he reconciles these two positions are beyond me. - π 09:09, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

I'm sure there's a name for the condition, but what he does is think with his fealings. He feals something is the case so strongly that he then twists logic around to fit in (or not) afterwards. It's human nature to do this to a degree (although Ken is quite - erm - special!) which ironically demonstrates as well as anything how we are partially evolved primates! StarFish 09:15, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

It's a bit Quixoteist. More and more, I'm looking at Conservapedia as the story of the fractured mind of Andrew Schlafly, with each of Andy's underlings personifying a different shard (I'm not saying Andy's mind is actually fractured, it's just a metaphorical construct). Ken's "think with his feelings" thing reminds me of Andy's "conservative words" project. --Arcan ¡ollǝɥ 10:07, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

subpages

Just something I stumbled upon, not worth to make a new subsection, but amusing nonetheless... larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 16:57, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Speaking of Kenservative and games, it has come to my attention that inbetween adding girth and length to his homosexuality article, Ken

still has time to create advertisements for WiiWare games. Vulpius 01:05, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Bump

http://www.composure1.com/operation.html A favorite of mine.

ħuman 02:18, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Crablogger / Anorris

Hardly a big suprise but there goes another one. StarFish 12:56, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

And another one gone because of insults (Hi Alan!). Join the club! I've come to expect it anymore. Aboriginal Noise ^Punkrock 13:37, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

And there goes Andy, gracious as ever. Admitedly the user in question wasn't creating the best articles but he was putting in hard work and maybe a little more in the way of guidence and a little less in the way of condescending tossary might have helped. I'm not certain but I think he really was genuine too. It would appear CP can now count genuine, non sysops on the fingers of one fish. StarFish 13:39, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

{EC}The man is an imbecile - 2 or 3 words of encouragement and he would have had an editor on-board writing decent stuff. Now he's lost another, and further sullied his own and CP's image. Way to manage your unpaid volunteers, moron. You aren't fit to manage a flipping toll booth never mind educate children. And a screencap of the Parthian before Terry rapes and pillages his talkpage. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 13:43, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

It wouldn't be Andy if he didn't misspell his own tossery. --Kels 13:50, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

I cannot help but wonder, why doesn't Andy ever manage to figure out that his being an asshole and not taking care of his own editors is one of the reasons there are so few people there... ĴάΛäšςǍ₰ yes, JAVASCAP 13:55, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

I've been watching that editor with interest because the name Crablogger struck a chord from my past. As a teenager during the sixties the father of one of my "best chums" at school was a TV scriptwriter, Z-Cars, Dr. Finlay's Casebook etc. as well as the Thunderbirds epsiode that featured the Crablogger. Well, I was the one who came up with the name Crablogger (I remember suggesting it during an art class) and he told his dad about it. My suspicion of a Thunderbirds connection was confirmed when the article cp:Supermarionation was created. Генгис^{Is the Pope a Catholic?} 13:56, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

hahahaha wow, what a remarkable connection. 194.6.79.200 11:25, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Crablogger was genuine. Look at his Userpage on enwiki. He has over 3500 edits, with his first being in 2004. Created bunches of articles too. If it wasn't for Andy being an idiot, Crablogger could have been quite a contributor there. Dreaded Walrus 05:03, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

and Cybill Shepherd was skinny and foxy in taxi driver. tis the way of the world. we are but transients. User:Nutty Roux/signature 05:13, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Assfly bitchslaps Daniel1212

Daniel1212, one of CP's most prolific homosexual obsessors, just got quite the bitchslap from Assfly, who reverted over 100 edits (and some 50,000 characters) of pure homophobic gold with one fell swoop.

Props to Assfly though, because that shit was truly unreadable. Neveruse513 15:03, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

...and Daniel1212 just goes on editing as if nothing ever happened. You gotta admire the dedication, at least. --Kels 15:06, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Quite. It must be said that for one who hates homosexuality so much, Dan sure bends over easily. EddyP 15:14, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

I want to meet someone like Daniel1212 IRL and come on to them. Just like I did with the cute Jehovah's Witness boys who stopped dropping by for some reason... Neveruse513 15:17, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

He did whine about it on Andy's talkpage, but then Andy sent smoke signals to TK, who muscled in (whatever happened to MYOB?) and bitchslapped him some more. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 15:24, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

What's funny about Andy's reversion of almost 120 edits by Danie1212 is that it is to a version by Ed Poor on 8 March, which in itself was the memory-holing of some edits by DrGuptaPhD. However, Daniel1212 had made about 150 other edits to the article prior to Ed over a period of nearly three months. Apart from Ed's stub of a beginning and a few minor changes by other editors, the whole article is the work of Daniel1212. So is it just the last 6 weeks that Andy doesn't like? What a complete arse the man is. Генгис^{Is the Pope a Catholic?} 16:46, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Menu of block reasons

I somehow like the cp:MediaWiki:Ipbreason-dropdown menu. In 2008 it was lame, only a dozen entries - but since TK is back, it became great: he added the first item on Jan 7, 2009, and today, only a couple of weeks later, there are over thirty reasons to chose from. So, cp:User:CollegeRepublican, have you read this one :

• Unused account with no edits after registration (removed without prejudice)

or even this

• Unused account with no edits for several months (removed without prejudice) ?

Will you remain silent? larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 17:21, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

My favorite is how they have that (removed without prejudice) on there. How, exactly, is it without prejudice? Z3ro^talk 18:04, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Note that Inappropriate edit to Obama entry is its own bloomin' entry. Yowzers. MDB 18:17, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Sadly lacking is the one which could cover everything: "I know it when I see it!" Why even go through the pretense of selecting one? If the list gets long enough, it will become irrelevant, and you might as well pick the first one there. How about "Andy wouldn't like this, even if it's true..." Jimaginator 19:03, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Wow, DAISNAID indeed! POV editing/Removal of valid content/Adding material without citation -- but like calories on your birthday, these reasons don't count if done by an admin or Andy. Junggai 21:08, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

And it's gone. Now you all needn't worry. Aboriginal Noise ^Punkrock 22:36, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

This little echo's still there. For now. LateralQuercus 22:49, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

"Coronated" WIGO

The originator needs to come up a clear explanation why TK is incorrect; otherwise, I'm voting this one down to -NaN. The dictionary link might indicate "coronated" as an adjective only; however, I'm not sufficiently confident in my understanding of the notation to be sure. Admittedly I am using my own knowledge as a yardstick for obscurity, but I think this particular lingual issue (if it is one) is sufficiently obscure that it doesn't make sense to castigate Conservapedians for messing it up. Can the original WIGO'er comment, please? Fedhaji 05:27, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

WIGOs suck or they don't, all on their own without commentary. This one probably sucks. You'll get used to this. User:Nutty Roux/signature 05:34, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

-NaN it is. Fedhaji 13:13, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Another remaining sane author?

I see Hsmom is back.. I wonder how long she will last though, seeing as she is already opposing Andy.

Also, I love how Clement's cold hard facts produce so much entertainment, since it totally disrupts Andy's flow of making shit up. --GTac 08:27, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, he has the uncanny ability to pick his battles, only commenting on the things where Schlafly is clearly wrong, and hammering them home over and over. ClementB gets my respect. Junggai 09:50, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Hsmom stays always polite, apologizing every time she has to contradict Andy. ClementB acts less humble, and seems to be a little bit annoyed by Andy's behavior. I like them both, but I think, ClementB's days are counted. larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 12:17, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

That's a fine post right there. StarFish 12:29, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

The "dominion" v "colony" debate (and that whole talk page, really) is classic Andy: He gets called out for not knowing what the hELL he's talking about, belittles the typos in the critical post, sarcastically claims he's right, is backed up by one of his few remaining sycophants, and then argues that Clement is making a trivial distinction and we can't confuse teh homskulars with obscure terms like "dominion." (Obscure?!?!?, dominion?) (And I love how he pulls out the "Are you this critical of liberals?" card. What does that have to do with whether you know anything about World War I, Andy?)

The Whirled History teacher doesn't seem to know or care much about the [micro]-evolution of the British Empire or modern Europe. Not American: doesn't count, I guess. He's perfectly satisfied with his knowledge of his subject, even though it is appallingly deficient, expecially for someone trying to teach. What an ignorant, conceited ass.Godspeed 12:35, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

I especially enjoyed Clement quoting back to Andy where he himself had used the word 'Dominion' in one of crappy lectures. Even that slippery customer can't wriggle out of that one. StarFish 13:07, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Sort of makes you wonder what Andy would do there if TK wasn't around. Say he'd picked that time to take a week off or something, Andy would be high and dry. --Kels 13:24, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

IF TK wasn't around, PJR might have been: he'd have mediated. _and marmite 13:27, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

What's so great about Andy is that "Are you this critical of liberals" is a real question that must be answered, lest teh Assfly accuse you of avoiding his "points". Neveruse513 13:28, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Did ClementB ever answer it? Or Hsmom? larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 13:46, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Yep. Neveruse513 13:49, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

I agree with LArron, ClementB's days are counted. He disagrees with Andy, refuses to concede and reveals Anyd's idiocy for what it is by quoting him against himself. And he didn't once kiss Andy's ass either! But most important, Andy can't fairly win an argument against him, so he's gone. I predict him blocked before the end of the day. I wonder what the blockreason will be though. Will it be:

1. Rude behavior
2. Member of a vandal site (don't think he is, but that doesn't matter for TK's deceit)
3. 9/10 rule
4. Multiple accounts (once again, doesn't matter whether it's true)
5. Not directly blocked, just a sneaky rangeblock from TK which affects him

I would've bet on the last one, except that TK probably won't do that anymore after he read this (hi TK!), just to prove us wrong by not doing what we say (take THAT, libruls!). My money is on 1 or 2. --GTac 14:22, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

2 or 3 with a little bit of five. Neveruse513 14:25, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Number 1, possibly with a direct reference to disagring with sysops, small possiblitiy of mentioning Andy by name. Z3ro^talk 14:34, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Depends: A foreigner, editing from unamerican soil, 5 it is.

Otherwise: 1

larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 14:45, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

I've about given up. I've tried really really hard to improve those lectures, rather than let kids be taught false information, but it takes endless conversation to prove the simplest points, and I'm absolutely amazed I haven't been blocked yet (especially with some comments bordering on "insults"). ClementBrown 16:49, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

I don't think you're him at all, I think you're just trying to bait a TK :-) --GTac 18:07, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Nice try, but ClementB's sig suggests that the B is for Bishop. However, don't let that stop you TK, go right head and be the small-minded, arrogant arse we know you to be.  Lily ^{Inspirate me.} 19:00, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

"Rationalwiki does not endorse or condone parody" LOL! Daust 19:02, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

...is a quote not found on rationalWiki. More Daustphail! Totnesmartin 20:28, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

TK! IT'S HIM!!! IT'S CLEMENTB!!1 BLOCK HIM!!! Neveruse513 19:03, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Swing and a miss, Not Jinx _{Hi NOT Jinx!} SirChuckB^{A product of Affirmative Action} 20:37, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

It's amazing how blind TK is to the little things- like sigs. User:Theemperor/Sig/Sig 21:25, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

TK seems to go for Rude behavior. Perhaps he'll has to add wiki lawyering to the block reason menu... larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 04:20, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Alger Hiss

Anyone else like watching the guy obsessed with cp:Alger Hiss? 570 citations and almost 1000 edits! Neveruse513 14:32, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

His obsession is bizarre. Although he's right at home there, along with the other one-trick ponies. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 14:41, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Maybe it's RobS with a sock. --Kels 14:44, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

I've often been tempted to try and edit that article. I'm guessing he's fairly protective of it. But as he doesn't involve himself with any of the usual nastiness that goes on at CP I'd leave him alone. JoeDuffy 15:51, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Reminds me of Bert. Wonder if he's got any personal interest? _and marmite 15:55, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Are we to assume that his name references the Freedom of Information Act? Could have meaning, seeing as the FOIA Reading Room is mentioned twice in the article (once as a ref, another as source for an image). Dreaded Walrus 16:13, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Also, it's not really mentioned in the CP article, but this and this also show how the Freedom of Information Act applied to the Hiss case. Dreaded Walrus 16:19, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

I'm impressed by the scope of the citations; almost every citation is from a different source. Either it's the most well-researched pointless article, or it's all made up (I'm too lazy to check which). Z3ro^talk 16:21, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

My favorite paragraph:

“”At some point in 1935-37, Chambers gave Hiss a rug from Bokhara, in Soviet Uzbekistan. Just before Christmas 1936, Soviet Colonel Boris Bykov, head of Soviet military intelligence in the U.S., had given Chambers $800 to buy four Bokhara rugs for Hiss, Harry Dexter White, George Silverman, and Julian Wadleigh, according to Chambers; Hiss would later claim that Chambers had given him his rug in 1935 in partial payment for rent. Chambers' version was corroborated by Marxist Columbia University art historian Meyer Schapiro, who confirmed that he arranged the purchase (and produced the canceled check dated December 23, 1936); by the Massachusetts Importing Company of Manhattan, which confirmed selling him the rugs (and produced the Bill of Sale); by White's widow and Silverman (who confirmed that they had received their rugs sometime between late 1936 and the fall of 1938); and by Wadleigh, who confessed to having been a member of Chambers' apparatus and delivering documents to him, confirmed that he had received his rug for New Year's 1937, and conceded that he understood the rug to be a gift from the Soviets.

Enthralling... Neveruse513 20:55, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

TK and Ironing

So TK posted the stupid OBama Jesus picture, and I've seen a few other conservatives trumpeting this around and I was thinking.... Does anybody doubt for two seconds that if this were a hard left artist creating this picture and meaning it, rather than some hack trying (badly) to make a political point, that instead of celebrating art, they would be all over him for blasphemy, showing disrespect to Jesus, and liberals in general? SirChuckB^{A product of Affirmative Action} 15:48, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Are you saying Jesus may have been black? Blasphemy! Bondurant 15:56, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

There's hypocrisy in politics? NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!111! Z3ro^talk 16:23, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

I know Zero, I was shocked too.... By the way, does anyone else think that, aside from the political points he's trying to make, this painting really sucks. SirChuckB^{A product of Affirmative Action} 17:29, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

To be honest, that was the first thing I thought too; I get it, but this painting is just not good. Z3ro^talk 18:33, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Awaiting response

Will they call him a traitor to the party, America, an anti-Christian neo-Nazi, or just stick with "libral hurrr!!!!"? ENorman 16:29, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

I can already hear it now...One word(?)...Four letters...RINO. Neveruse513 16:33, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Wow, that's a minor political matter, but its implications are huge. It changes the Democrats' strategy in the Senate, it changes the whole dynamic of Pennsylvania politics, and it suggests that the Republicans' slump is no brief and passing phase: they are settling in to be a small, hardline, angry party intolerant of dissent for the forseeable future. [EDIT] And no, Neveruse, RINO would be applied Specter before he switched. Now he's no longer "Republican In Name," so he couldn't be a RINO. Turncoat, maybe. Bluefish 16:46, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Minor political matter? He was elected as a Republican, not as a Democrat. What he should do is resign his seat and rerun as a Democrat. If he was really ballsy he'd stay a Republican and vote with the Dems or however he wants. Jrssr5 17:02, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

That's kinda what he was doing; he was one of only three Republicans to vote for the stimulus, for example. This is clearly a move aimed at future elections, not a policy change. His people are still represented accuratly. Z3ro^talk 17:15, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Let me make this clear, no. No matter what the dumbass electorate thinks, they vote for the person, not the party. Especially seeing as American congressmen have enormous autonomy compared to our Canadian MPs (who are whipped into line), he has every right to change his affiliation. 17:10, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

eh...No. Lots of people just check whoever has the right letter next to his name. I know plenty of them. Neveruse513 17:12, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

And you worry about them being accurately represented? Z3ro^talk 17:16, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

I know they think they're voting primarily for a party, but the law and system of government are clear. They are not. 17:18, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

It's cute you think they don't, but I can assure you, I know plenty that do. Neveruse513 17:20, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

I always thought American's voted for the one with the best hair.  Lily ^{Inspirate me.} 19:04, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Ah, so that's why our pathetic excuse for a governor got elected!Thank god he's gone. User:Theemperor/Sig/Sig 21:31, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

I usually go for whoever the cat person is. Ties get broken by whose daughter is hotter. Neveruse513 13:49, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

One significant part of this, of course, is that, assuming Al Franken is finally seated, which seems pretty certain, the Democrats have a sixty seat filibuster-proof majority. More significant is what Bluefish alluded to: Specter was one of the last prominent Republican moderates. The Democrats are capturing the center. Now, as far as the sixty seat majority goes, I don't think this is the result of any great ideological change on the part of Specter; this is a political calculus to help him in the 2010 primaries, where he was expected to face a tough Republican challenger. He'll still be a centrist vote, so it won't be that big a boost to the Democrats. Its still good news for them, though. MDB 16:58, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

I might add, as someone who has spent more than three-quarters of his life in PA, this is an amazing change. Sure, Specter has always been a moderate and PA has voted for him, but he has always been a Republican, too. This is quite a change. It'll be interesting to see how the "red" part of PA (between Philadelphia and Pittsburgh) reacts. Sterile^{walkie-talkie} 17:22, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

MyDD has a summary of some of the right's response. Sterile^{walkie-talkie} 17:30, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

here's the CP write up If Andy really thinks that changing political parties is the "ultimate act of cowardice and betrayal" I feel sorry for him.

EDIT: Strange, they don't seem to complain much about another poltician who changed parties SirChuckB^{A product of Affirmative Action} 18:08, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

MDB's comment sounds like politics is a game of Go! --GTac 18:15, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

When Coleman did it, it was the ultimate act of courage and open-mindedness, no doubt. Dreaded Walrus 20:22, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Aboriginal Noise and I are both from Pittsburgh. I'm happy about this and I think that I speak for AN too. Heck, AN might have voted for him (in the general) even if he remained a Republican (assuming he won the primary). I typically look at how my vote matters on the national level, so I look at the letter next to the name rather than the name. Along those national lines, I was reading some other stories that looked toward Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe of Maine and what they might do now. Collins seemed to hint that she might be next. --Edgerunner⁷⁶ 18:33, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

I probably would not have voted for him in the general, but have some respect for Specter. Aboriginal Noise ^{with 4 M's and a silent Q} 19:11, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

CЯacke®, (also from Pittsburgh, [I have a 65'' LED TV that was turned off during the superbowl, I made doughnuts instead]), would like to note that a Certain Sainted President was a DEMONCRAT afore seeing the light (of his second, read "final", wife and switching parties. But that's okay going from the darkside to the lightside...I guess. CЯacke®

I was amused by wp:Party switching in the United States and noticed that someone was listed twice. Alen Spector switched from Democrat to Republican in 1965. The dirty traitor! Welcome home. Can anyone do an intersection of Democratic Party (United States) politicians and Republican Party (United States) politicians on WP? --Shagie 23:44, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

You know Obama had to make final approval for this brainless, insensitive stunt...

Yeah, you just know it, don't you? I wonder what other pointless shit Jinx thinks Obama fucks with... Neveruse513 16:36, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Jinx, I know you read us, and I know you'll listen. A, Do you really think Obama, who was in a meeting at the time over the Swine Flu epidemic, personally signed off on this and said "hey, lets not tell anybody we're doing it." Have you not the read the numerous report that all indicate that Obama was furious when he found out? Or are you just so desperate to hate the guy that you'll attack anything he does? Jason, you are a FUCKWAD. Do you know that? PS, stupidest is not a word, I hope you were going for comedy, but one can never tell with you. SirChuckB^{A product of Affirmative Action} 16:44, 28 April 2009 (UTC) I would also think to add that prancing around an aircraft and declaring mission accomplished before fighting a five year insurgency is a little dumber than this.

They almost managed to write something that made sense until they tried to blame Obama personally for it. He doesn't oversee every minor detail, and there's nothing to suggest he personally approved it. But of course, it was a very stupid decision by whoever was responsible. Jammy 16:47, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Well where exactly does the buck stop in Rational world? OncomingStorm 16:50, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Oh, hello Jinx. Does Terry Koeckritz know you're still playing with us? --PsyGremlin_Whut? 16:55, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

I'm not 'Jinx'. I just pretend. OncomingStorm 17:00, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

For a photo op of the plane? Hopefully waaayyy below Obama. I wonder what else Jinxy thinks he does. Neveruse513 16:56, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Hold on now, the "buck stopping" metaphor is about responsibility, something the Right is very good at trying to slip. And Obama's White House did take responsibility and apologized. The question is, who made the decision in the first place, and that certainly wasn't Obama, no matter what bizarre fantasies Jinx thinks are real. --Kels 17:03, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

'something the Right is very good at trying to slip': Is this your equivilent of 'liberal nonsense'? Where's the difference? Where's your higher ground. OncomingStorm 17:07, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Not really a question, as Caldera already took the blame. But that just bolsters moar kenspeeracey theery. "FALL GUY! COVER UP!" Amirite, Jinx? Neveruse513 17:08, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

On the flip side, look how much Jinx is letting Caldera off the hook! He won't accept his admission of blame because he knows he's just covering for Obama. So Jinx does the honorable thing and places the blame square on Obama's shoulders where he knows it belongs. Jinx is doing this because he has integrity, not a grudge. Yay Jinx! Neveruse513 17:10, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Really Jinx, you're not making a lot of sense. Perhaps thinking in complete sentences would help? --Kels 17:23, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Jinx.... Er, Oncoming Storm, This may be hard for you to understand, but you've got to see that not everything that happens on a President's watch is atuomatically his fault. For example, Under GW, there were many political scandals that he had nothign to do with. For example, Bush didn't force Foley to go after young pages, nor did he tell Craig to get a blowjob in Minnesota. He also wasn't responsible for the draping of the statue of lady justice or the wholesale looting of Iraq thank to Haliburton (Bush assumed, incorrectly that the company wouldn't screw them and didn't set up any oversight... So maybe you could say he was at fault because he overestimated their integrity, but I think it's a strech). Do you see how that works Not Jinx? SirChuckB^{A product of Affirmative Action} 17:27, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Didn't CP also try to directly connect Clinton to the Gay Bomb? I vaguely recall a similar "Just because it happened during Clinton's presidency doesn't mean he personally approved of it!" debate... --Sid 17:46, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Oncoming Storm isn't Ken

? Colour me confused. 'Course, Ken

probably got Jinx to rewrite everything he (Ken

) was going to post on this site so his usual illiteracy wouldn't show, but still…--199.20.64.195 17:34, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Bush was far from perfect but he read the correct book. OncomingStorm 17:40, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

The Very Hungry Caterpillar? Neveruse513 17:43, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Yes OncomingStorm 17:45, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Ah, his favourite childhood book. pity he was in his twenties when it came out... Totnesmartin 17:47, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Sid, you are 100% correct. read and enjoy. SirChuckB^{A product of Affirmative Action} 18:11, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Isn't it amazing how somehow you Rationals have ignored the argument and started talking about children's books and President Clinton. Your lack of focus astounds me. The truth is my friends we are all going to suffer for almost another four years under this administration. Our President sanctioned this stupid stunt, there is no argument over that. His stupidity frightened a lot of people today. OncomingStorm 18:15, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

If you want us to focus on your argument, you have to make one in the first place. Where is your evidence that Obama sanctioned the stunt, given the evidence suggests he was furious when he heard about it? --Kels 18:17, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

I thought Bush's book was The Pet Goat. --Edgerunner⁷⁶ 18:19, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Every word I read from you people hammers home just how stupid you are. Is it not fucking obvious enough that "Oncoming Storm" is not Jinx? Are you all blind and severely brain damaged? Do you need everything spelled out? Do you want your hand held the whole time? Apparently "rational" means someone who believes whatever's most convenient. How sad that you then dedicate your lives to sneering at anyone who believes in something greater than himself. Truly pathetic. I won't be coming back here. Daust 18:18, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Awesome! Don't let the door...hell, just let it hit you on the ass. It'd be funny. --Kels 18:20, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

(ECX2)Isn't it amazing how we just explained this to you and you still don't get it? Isn't it amazing how we can make inferences like GWB talking about his favorite children's book, not his favorite childhood book? Neveruse513 18:19, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

(EC)Hey, Not Jinx and Not Jinx Redux in the conversation, I think the world may implode soon. PS, Jinx... Using a known sock to try and distance yourself from an obvious sock does not help your cause. SirChuckB^{A product of Affirmative Action} 18:21, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Is it not ****ing obvious enough that "Oncoming Storm" is not Jinx?' You're saying it's not obvious that I'm not Jinx. So you think I am Jinx? I'm not; I've said it so many times. Well done for making an important stand though. OncomingStorm 18:24, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

By the way, your "my friends we are all going to suffer for almost another four years under this administration" sounds like a not-very-bright teenager bitching because his parents came home early and now he can't eat ice cream for supper. --Kels 18:25, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Ok, so walk us through how you think this happened. A good start might be "A guy walks into the Oval office and says to the president... " Neveruse513 18:25, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Kels, Is that how challenged, ice-cream hungry adolescents are expressing themselves these days? I guess there's some hope. OncomingStorm 18:29, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Hey, I'm not the one bitching because the adults are home. But I'd love some ice cream, thanks. --Kels 18:32, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Or maybe you can just give us some perspective... "Photos of AF1 are as important as..." Neveruse513 18:33, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

(EC) Ok Not Jinx, please accept this message that is in no way intended for Jinx, who you are obviously not. In fact, you're so Not Jinx, that the other Not Jinx but really Jinx had to come on Wiki, at the same moment we were talking to you and declare that you are indeed Not Jinx.... I don't think anyone can argue with kind of logic... and Your insane right wing attitude, combined with your tendency to use foul language, added to your strange linguistic style in no way reveals a Jinx-like figure standing behind the curtain.... Wait, was I talking about? Oh yeah... Not Jinx, take a look at this. or this, or this, or how about this. All of them indicate the exact same thing. When Obama found out about this, he was furious. SirChuckB^{A product of Affirmative Action} 18:36, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

I would like us to come to the core of the problem here. Obama knew about this because Obama was lying because Obama is a liar because he knew about this. Neveruse513 18:38, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

That's close. As Jinxamarue sez at his blog, Obama is a moron if he approved it, and he's a moron if he didn't know about it beforehand. No matter what, Obama is a moron, and that's all you need to know.--WJThomas 18:47, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

So it's commonsense takes on an "anonymous White House official". Who wins this little battle? OncomingStorm 18:44, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Commonsense and the "aWHo" are on the same side, seems to me...--WJThomas 18:45, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

What anonymous official? The WHMO Director? Neveruse513 18:47, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Ah, the anonymous official who reported that BHO was furious. Yeah, I guess I can see how you would think BHO would tell the reporters himself. Neveruse513 18:50, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

The old stand by. Try and cast doubt on the source. I don't know if you follow modern politics, but Anonymous sources are pretty much the standard. In fact, it was an anonymous source who first reported that Obama knew about the AIG bonuses before they happened, but conservatives didn't really bother about it then. SirChuckB^{A product of Affirmative Action} 19:17, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

And the rules on blocking Rationals? OncomingStorm 18:57, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

I'm not suffering. Are you suffering, Jinx? EternalCritic 18:59, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Whoever done it, It was bloody stupid. Just seen it on t'news & I'd have been terrified. Whatever the idea, it was a stupid one. _and marmite 19:09, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

How come we have this long arse thread and no one has yet made a "permission to buzz the tower(s)" joke? It's wrong I tells ya, wrong. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 20:09, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

the length is deceptive though, the majority of it was fighting with a couple of Not Jinxes. SirChuckB^{A product of Affirmative Action} 20:14, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Hey, all the not Not Jinx _{Hi NOT Jinx!} out there, how is this for you? Not only has Press Sec, Gibbs confirmed that Obama was furious, but Obama has called for a review of the incident.... feel free to spin. SirChuckB^{A product of Affirmative Action} 20:50, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Moar taxpayer money! SPUN! Neveruse513 20:52, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

I am a soulless, vicious mocker, and consequently one thing about even Jon Stewart's anger baffles me: Okay, there's a 747 flying near Ground Zero. What, is it going to crash into it and...make the hole...bigger? --Gulik 23:53, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

There are still other buildings in the general area of New York City. ħuman 00:00, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

LIES! Well, yeah. But Jon Stewart mentioned Ground Zero specifically, which struck me as rather bizarre. --Gulik 03:25, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Colloquially, especially to New Yorkers, "ground zero" is not just the hole in the ground - it's their city - their home. A lot of them work in those tall targets buildings. ħuman 03:40, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

I'm laughing at the Republican Outrage

...AND eating ice cream. TOP THAT. --Gulik 21:19, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

I'm laughing at Republican Outrage, and eating Dominos Pizza and thus financing Jesus freaks. Oh, wait. Damn. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 21:37, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

I think Dominos left the control of the anti-abortion nut family a long time ago. ħuman 23:24, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

The benefits of a Conservative Education via Conservapedia...

...do not include good grammar.. 'Nuff said. --SpinyNorman 19:38, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

"to overcome inevitable obstacles, such as addiction and depression," In your world Andy.

Liberal Bias in Final Fantasy IX

This guy is pretty pissed about his precious Final Fantasy article getting burned. Any brave enough to remove liberal bias from the other FF articles? Jorge 00:23, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Ed shows his (willful?) ignorance about the Final Fantasy series. ListenerX^TalkerX 00:32, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Um... Ed dearest, we're all currently eagerly awaiting FFXIII (and FFvXIII), not to mention all the FF games that were not in the numbered series (tactics, mystic quest etc). Please try to do some research before you make bizarre statements. -Redback^{is gonna bite you} 00:38, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

PS. Love the editor's name - Leonhart, Squall from FFVIII's last name. -Redback^{is gonna bite you} 00:40, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

As a fan of the games, I hated Squall with the burning fire of a million suns. He was the first video game character I actually wanted to reach into the game world and beat bloody with a 2x4. And if there was an option to toss Rinoa off the damn train, I would have taken it. She never was a good character. --Kels 04:36, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

When it got to the part where Rinoa was hanging off the edge of the Garden, I really wanted her to fall (I mean, she only hangs there for half an hour or so). About half the game consists of "We have to save Rinoa from X!", just let the bitch die and go out with Quistits instead. As for Squall, whiny or confused teenager = template Final Fantasy character. -Redback^{is gonna bite you} 07:30, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

[...] --GTac 09:18, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

THE TRAUMA, IT BURNS! XD *totally wanted to reply with that, too* On a related note, I liked .hack//INFECTION for the PS2... right until the protagonist also replies to some statement with "..." - was SO close to throwing the controller at the TV then. --Sid 10:38, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

You have to remember that their original (now burned but some traces remained on the video games article last I check) FFVII article was a complete piss take because it complained that a black man adopted a white girl, therefore EVIL! Yet alone the environmentalism presented in VII. So they probably don't even think FF exists. But as an aside, I'm currently playing all of the games that I have (VI-XII, not including the online one), it got rather confusing when I tried to junction magic to Tidus, equip materia to Zidane, generally confused the controls of the liscence board and sphere board and forgot you needed to hold "x" to run. But I'm used to it now and it's a fairly enjoyable experience just to switch randomly and dick about on each one for a bit. ^{d hominem} 10:52, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

VI remains my favourite regardless. VII was a lot of fun, and the heroes of X (especially Tidus and Wakka) were big, adorable goofs. But something about the last of the SNES games really appeals to me. Can't wait for the DS port, given I've pretty much finished with IV and Chrono Trigger. --Kels 12:27, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

The Falcon's airship music FTW! Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 13:45, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

You liked Tidus? He is the reason I stopped playing that game, man that kid was annoying.. And this infamous scene was the worst. --GTac 14:37, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

(EC) That was the point. He wasn't a "destined hero", or even a hero at all. He was just some dorky kid in over his head. Yuna was a serious teenager who never really had exposure to this sort of casual fun before. Both of them were supposed to be awkward and stupid, and that scene was to show it. It's called character development, and I can understand how you'd be unfamiliar with it in most games. --Kels 15:12, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Hay. This guy I know called System Shock 2 called me and said to tell you 'bullshit'. Mei 20:45, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Although I am a HUGE FF fan. I still say that none of them beat Legend of Dragoon on PS1. SirChuckB^{A product of Affirmative Action} 15:11, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Awesome, I'll put that in line next after I finish Breath of Fire 3. --Kels 15:15, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

FF-X.. Character development... (╬ ಠ益ಠ) --GTac 15:30, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

It ain't Shakespeare, but it ain't terrible either. --Kels 19:01, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

To whoever hasn't been in touch with the series since a year or so: You must check this out. Flare^Talk 01:04, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Heard of that, although I don't have a PSP so I can't play it. And let us not speak of the game which must not be named. --Kels 02:52, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

UD) The guy has had a strop on WP (deleted shortly thereafter). _and marmite 18:54, 29 April 2009 (UTC)