Conservapedia talk:What is going on at CP?/Archive135

This is an archive page, last updated 4 January 2012. 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>, <133>, <134>, <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)

I know It's Been Discussed Before...

I know this is nothing new but I think this is just astonishing. It's up there with "2 meters" and was created by the same person of course. I really think we let this article off the hook far too easily. If ever I'm fealing a little bit down or fed up it always cheers me up. It's problems are legion. Amazing. Well done Ed: you make parody impossible. StarFish 13:05, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Ugh. I need a shower after reading that. Taytopacket 14:43, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Why is there no encyclopedia based on the assumption that Star Trek is factual and scientifically accurate? --Just passing by 15:01, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

I find it odd that of the few Star Trek (TOS) episodes that Eddybaby or anybody else has put up on CP, they have not yet put up "Bread and Circuses." This episode actually mentions Christ. Perhaps Eddybaby got bored...Jimaginator 16:09, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

My favorite part of that whole article is that, due to Ed;s live blogging, a person who isn't a trekkie will have NO IDEA what the episode is actually about... I had to go to a Star Trek Wiki to get a full synopsis. SirChuckB^{Obama/Biden? 2012} 17:32, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Well, you can do that... if you figure out what series the article's talking about. Flare^Talk 17:51, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Or that it's even a tv show. again, unless you know the context.--En attendant Godot_{"«Let the credulous and the vulgar continue to believe that all mental woes can be cured by a daily application of old Greek myths to their private parts. V.Nabokov»} 17:59, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Well, even if you're not a Trekkie, mentioning Kirk is a give away that it's the original... But better than this POS from ED is This wonderful bio on Washington Gov. Christine Gregoire where you don't know her position, her information or anything about her other than she's a married catholic democrat and is a DIRTY LAWBREAKING RACIST LIBERAL!!!!!! SirChuckB^{Obama/Biden? 2012} 18:26, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Kirk's in the movies, too. Could be one of them ;) ħuman 19:20, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

If CP is going to start attacking science fiction, I say we try to find a way to destroy their 'Absolute Terror' fields. That part just cracks me up.--Nate River 00:22, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

TerryH: Ayn Rand

The way TerryH is going through Ayn Rand, you'd think Atlas Shrugged was a history book rather than Fiction. _and marmite 14:40, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

It's such a massive sense of relief to find a book that says that it's OK to be self centred and mean and that you don't have to worry about those poor people because it's all their own fault that the desire for Shatless Rugged to be true overcomes objectivity. Silver Sloth 14:52, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

According to IMDB there's a movie in the pipeline which I'm sure will be very popular with the teabaggers. Maybe Ken is advising TerryH on likely linking to the movie on the internet and and attracting scores of fellow teabaggers on the internet so that they will become aware of Conservapedia's Atlas Shrugged article on the internet. Could the works of Ayn Rand rival the behemoth that is homosexuality at CP? Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 16:14, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Well, once you've accepted one book uncritically as fact, you might as well open the door for more. Me, I steadfastly maintain that Horton Hears a Who is an unquestionable tract on physics, cosmology and biology baraminology. --Kels 16:15, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

An Atlas Shrugged movie!? Awesome, the perfect cure for my girlfriend's insomnia. EternalCritic 17:47, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

I am open minded to the idea that Horton could have heard his Who, but I remain dubious that science never found it. That proves that science is incapable of being Open Minded, don't you know.--En attendant Godot_{"«Let the credulous and the vulgar continue to believe that all mental woes can be cured by a daily application of old Greek myths to their private parts. V.Nabokov»} 17:53, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

I wonder if Conservatives will forget to go to a Shatlas movie the way they've avoided going to other so-called Conservative movies in the past. --Kels 18:00, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Horton hears a who is nothing but Liberal claptrap. An overweight elephant who hears voices should be put away, not celebrated as a hero. Furthermore, this idea that a person is a person would be an excellent motto, but that horrible Liberal Dr. Seuss sent nasty letters to pro-life groups that used it on their letterhead and demanded they stop using it. Anyone who thinks Horton hears a who is worth the paper it's printed on is deluding themselves and should open their minds to conservative ideas, which prevent mental disorders. SirChuckB^{Obama/Biden? 2012} 18:30, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

I imagine that they are hoping to capitalise on the movie so that they can suck up the Google searches nearer the time. So I expect to see a lot more extensively boring articles about the various characters. However, you really need eye-candy to grab visitors' attention. With no previous adaptations which they could copythieve to illustrate them, can we expect them to skim the discussion boards for ideas and post pictures of Cate Blanchett, Daniel Day-Lewis or Paul Verhoeven who are being suggested as possible participants? Alternatively I could see them asking Karajou to get out his sketch pad like he did for the Sabre-tooth cat and make something up.  Lily ^{Inspirate me.} 18:36, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Not all that bad for an amateur, probably using someone else's work as a model. Or maybe, it's a self-portrait. --Kels 20:35, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Objectivists tend to be virulently anti-religious. Seeing them argue with Andy could be amusing. --Gulik 20:24, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

It's [NOT] another Schlafly Essay

I'm not sure why but this reminds me of the test you get outside Scientology centres. Go Schlafly you dark lord of Xenu! StarFish 15:40, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Correction. I just realised this is in fact very old. Sorry. StarFish 15:51, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

It's always good to look at the oldies but goodies. There's probably quite a few who haven't seen it. _and marmite 15:58, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Wow. That makes that whole "worlds smallest political quiz", you know, the one where all the questions are slanted to make you a libertarian, look positively objective and useful. Indeed, I haven't seen it before. Som much stuff just gets burried on wikis. ^moral 16:08, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Robert Anton Wilson did a pretty good 'test' once in which none the questions can be accurately answered with just "true" or "false". Sadly, I can't find a copy of it online. --Gulik 22:27, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Quantifying Obsession

Quantifying Obsession

Okay, so I got bored a few days ago. Like, really bored. And then I noticed Karajou adding to the Batman article on CP.

"Hm, wow, that article sure looks long! I wonder if it's longer than some other important article."

And so it began. I got out Paparazzi and made a few snapshots of articles. And then I resized and rotated them and ordered them by visual length (as opposed to "number of characters" or whatever).

The results?

• Alger Hiss and Korean Airlines Flight 007 are longer than two of Ken's pet articles. The third pet article still comes out on top, though.
• The Obama article is longer than the Jesus one.
• The McCain article is smaller than Obama's, but longer than the ones on George W. Bush or the Bible.
• Bias in WP is longer than the article about Jesus. In related news, Batman's entry is a little bit longer than the one on God. Think about that one for a minute.
• The article about Michael Chertoff doesn't even fill one page (the left-hand navigation column is longer than the article)
• The Alger Hiss reference section is longer than the Jesus article.

(All snapshots taken late April 29 at a fixed width of 1000px.) --Sid 16:58, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

I find it hilarious that they've spent more time breaking down Obama than Jesus Christ, The Most Important Person Who Has Ever Live. Also that God is equal to Batman. --CWaddell 17:25, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

The only possible thing that could improve this graph is to add women in pants as the very last column. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 17:30, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

(EC)Blasphemy! The Bat is much better than God. At least his fans are willing to admit that he's a work of fiction.--199.20.64.195 17:31, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Brilliant work, Sid. So what happens when TK's block list is longer than the longest article on CP? I'm actually a little worried about what might happen when his block list contains more bits than there are atoms in the universe.--Simple 17:33, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Yay! Richard Dawkins trumps God! Maybe include creation/YEC article to compare to evolution? Thieh 17:50, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

If given enough time, Batman could make up a plan to take down God should the two ever meet. ENorman 17:55, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

And if you close close enough, you can see all the little pictures of Hitler! ^moral 18:00, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

This is really incredible. Really. Corry 18:25, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Great work Sid. It looks as though 45% of the AHiss article is references. I would also have liked to compare those with Ken's user page before he was embarrassed into deleting it. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 18:44, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

I believe that there is a full-length screenshot of Ken's userpage somewhere around here. Sid could plunder it and add it to the chart. Bluefish

<- Well done! I really like it --larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 19:55, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Sid, if you'll follow me to the Saloon Bar, there's a round of drinks for you and your friends on me. In fact, I'm buying - everyone to the Saloon Bar! DogP 20:48, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Add to Conservapedia? --Just passing by 10:22, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

I am working on a spoof/parody

It's sitting at here, and I need opinions/inputs, as a whole and specifically #'s 7,8,20,27,29,31,34-36.

Original Article can be found here.

and where should I put it when I am done? Thieh 17:40, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Considering it's a rewording of the CP article, probaly in the Conservapedia space when it's done. The strikeout thing makes it clear that it's just parodying the logic used on the original. ^moral 17:57, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

I am having problems doing #'s 7,8,20,27,29,31,34-36. Requesting help/input please. (I am trying my best to keep the words on the article in CP through italics(I can shange it to underline) and strikeouts so that it looks similar) Thieh 18:03, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

What about this:

35. It is okay to demean an African-American if they are a conservative, but if theyyou are a liberal then you are a racist.

36. It is okay to demean a woman if they are a conservative, but if they are liberal then you are sexist.

--GTac 18:02, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, 34-36 done. Thieh 18:28, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Done except #7 and #27; I have problem understanding "switching from heterosexual to homosexual is customary". Thieh 19:42, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Don't forget a permalink to the version you copied to build this, noting the date of retreieval. ħuman 19:43, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Done~! Yeah~! Thieh 22:12, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Is Andy a closet racist?

I am really curious. I usually give people the benefit of the doubt, but I really question it here. He always rails against "Political correctness" and "Anti-American multiculturalism" and whatnot, which in itself isn't bad if backed up with specific actions and constructive criticisms, but being against them has become a codeword for racism. Ask Racist groups why they are racist and they will probably say "Because I am trying to protect our heretiage (SP?) and culture from those who are trying to taint it". The fact that Andy seems to hate Political correctness and Multiculturism so much, attacks them with so much passion, yet never offers legitimate criticism of their social impact, makes me think that he may be a closet racist. What do you guys think? Oh, and what made me finally put this on here is the news thing about Youth for Western Civilization. --Passerby25 17:50, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

What? he hasn't come out of the closet for that yet? Thieh 17:51, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

I don't think he was ever in the closet with respect to racism. ^moral 17:54, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

I gave up the last remnants of the idea that "political-correctness is good" the day I was told that if a woman stumps for creationism, telling her how idiotic those ideas are is "gender-oppression." ListenerX^TalkerX 18:22, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

(EC)Not even close to the closet in regards to racism. The only reason Stormfront doesn't link repeatedly to Conservapedia is because a) Andy keeps on calling Nazis and Neo-Nazis liberals liebruls, and b) Stormfront probably hasn't heard of Conservapedia, at least not in any substansive way (although funnily enugh they have heard of Drizzt Do-Urden {they are against, because he's black (actually a blue black colour to his skin, but these bigoted idiots are like Andy in not letting facts stop them in the middle of a good hate session)}, and Heroquest (they are for, because all the heroes are white, and anything with an alternate skin colour in Heroquest is a legitimate target for a good lynching beating and killing)). That Nazis are into one of my favourite games of my childhood is just wrong.--199.20.64.195 18:25, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Actually, does anyone care for "political correctness"? I can't think of a single person I know that is "for" it per se. ^moral 18:46, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Comedian Stewart Lee does a good piece in defence of political correctness, if you have 9 minutes [1]. Taytopacket 19:03, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Andy isn't a closet anything: he's avowedly racist, he just uses code words, or alternate ethnic groups. He's against "Muslims" - specifically, one black Muslim - but not racist. Wink?-Diadochus 19:04, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

You missed out that said black Muslim is a lib-burr-rul, which is enough to make Mr. Schlafly oppose him whatever his race or religion... ListenerX^TalkerX 19:08, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

For me, it was when he was discussing that Native Americans looked nothing like Asians (actually, if you compared Siberian peoples with Native Americans, they DO look a lot alike), but it wasn't even that, horrific and stupid as it was. In that same conversation, Andy said that intelligence was an inherent racial trait... you get the idea. Photovoltaic Array 19:43, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

I don't think Andy is racist per-se, but in attacking what he perceives as liberalism he is willing to consider no attack out of bounds. So using attacks that would be considered racist (like calling Obama an Affirmative Action President) are ok in Andy's book because Andy doesn't hate Obama for being black, he hates him for being liberal. All that being said, I expect Andy is of the sort that believes that people ought to stick to their own kind. I expect a lot of our parents probably are like that (I know mine are). Stile4aly 20:32, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

I don't think he is overtly racist, but he has some issues against minorities for sure... Consider he always harps on how some cultures are better than others... Oh yeah. SirChuckB^{Obama/Biden? 2012} 20:38, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

He's definitely not overtly racist, and he's taken a few stands against racist postings in the past. I'd say he's clearly got some issues, but it's not a cudgel I'd choose to beat him with, myself. However, you can have either my Xenophobic Cudgel, my Stupid Cudgel, my Bigot Cudgel, or my Statistics Cudgel, none of which I'm planning to use over the weekend, if you wish. DogP 20:53, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Isn't Andy just the archetype moneyed, white, godfearing American? He's scared (rightly) that his class is in danger of losing its all powerful position in the things he values most: economy, politics and religion. He can see the future and it terrifies him. He's a cornered rat. _and marmite 22:43, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Mr. Schlafly is atypical even of the "God-fearing" lot, and is wildly atypical among rich white Americans (most of whom are not wingnuts like himself). ListenerX^TalkerX 23:27, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I know, sorry all you rich, white, American, RWites. But I think that is his reasoning. He has nothing to back him up but his money, his skin colour, his god and his nationality: he can foresee all of these becoming less influential and he's biting back. _and marmite 23:34, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Don't forget god-fearing (there are a few of us around). (I'm also American and white, definitely not rich.) Bluefish 00:33, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

I think Mr. Schafly is one of the polite-White People-don't-say-n***er type not the chest banging "Aryan" of the neo-Nazi brand. Like a guy who grew up in/before the 1960's around average parents (almost everyone's parents have let something slip once).--Snotbowst 20:33, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Pardon me for interrupting with this here edit button but

I thought Roger might be a bit on the racist side with some of the things on this ahere page. But it could equally be the Schlaflys' inability to back off and issue once one is engaged. CЯacke® 01:16, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Yikes. That was a while ago. I can't believe I took his bait... repeatedly. Bluefish 04:32, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Not exactly CP...

but still Ed-related, On Wikipedia Ed created an entire template whose only purpose is to contain a single quote which will likely only ever be used on one article. For less than three hours. Oh, and in case anyone had almost forgotten the number of articles Ed has "started" which haven't been deleted, Ed reminds us, in the aftermath of his "Newbie club" being moved into userspace, that it's 1,100. Which is good, as I'd almost forgotten. Dreaded Walrus ^{t c} 18:11, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

I think a more interesting statistic would be how many of those articles still contain a single word of what Ed originally wrote? I think I'll baggsie zero in the sweepstake now. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 18:17, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

I remember not that long ago he was bragging about this template that he'd started that was still in use all over people's userpages. He neglected to mention that other people had to step in to make it work properly, and a great many more to make it into the version that's widely used. Ed didn't do much of anything except leave a mess for others to clean up. --Kels 18:21, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Yes, that was the "age" template, I remember looking at the edit history. Ed stubbed it, with a non-functional version of course, and other people actually "wrote" it. ħuman 20:02, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Exactly. He "started" them, but very early on they changed majorly. The very first article (that still exists, anyway. I'm not an admin so I can't see deleted contribs) he created was, unsurprisingly, Intelligent design, which claimed it to be "a theory of evolution". The next day, the page was completely revamped. His second new page was "wp:Evolved", which contained the gem "Darwinism, generally referred to as "the theory of evolution" as if it were the main (and correct) one". A couple of hours later, someone attempted a minor NPOV edit. Ed later added the curiously-worded "About one in ten Americans believes in Darwinism". It was then redirected to Evolution. I can't be bothered typing up the articles created since then, but they're all hilarious. Also, I like how he mentioned the 1,100 number in the most recent article he created, too. Dreaded Walrus ^{t c} 18:47, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Ed's such an idiot. ħuman 20:00, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

I can't decide whether it's stupidity or dishonety, actually. I mean, he could think he's totally awesome, and people wanna know about it. That would be stupidity. Dishonesty would be him using that as a way to intimidate newer editors who might resist his little POV insertions, in a "well, I'VE done this much, what have YOU done?" sort of way. --Kels 20:27, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Hanlon's Razor. That and he likes waving around his e-penis. ENorman 20:59, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

I think it is blinkered idiocy. Ironically, there are several Ed things that I do habitually here - and wince each time, but I still do them. One is to create a stub and promote it somewhere, to get something written "the easy way", like I did with that racist campus group the other day. Even lazier is to say "kan we haz artikle" and let other people do all the work, to say "someone please archive this pig" on here (OK, to be fair a few weeks ago I paid my dues by doing a handful of needed archives myself, for once). He has an odd habit, that in some ways is "like" leadership, and even perhaps has value on a wiki - like the "age" template. He had, and still has, no idea how to make something like that work, but at least he came up with the "idea" of a template that, given a birth date as input, would return the current age of a person. But he is far lazier than I, with his crummy stubs. Also remember that back in the day, he got a lot of positive feedback on WP, so it probably permanently affected his wiki-self-image. Just my .06 or .07 or so. ħuman 21:02, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Yes, H, but at least you don't remind us at every opportunity just how constructive you are (in Ed's case it'd be "once were") and take credit for the end result after the original's been obliterated. _and marmite 23:37, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Human, if you're ever feel the need to compare yourself to Uncle Ed, just read this. Let the stupidity be your bridge over troubled water. Corry 00:07, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Hehe, thanks, guys... ħuman 00:50, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

But remember, if the pants are extremely short, they are apparently not a biblical abomination. Gauss 02:37, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

And then there's cheating - skorts. You can't see up them, even though they look like a short dress. Gawd, I'm a worse pervert than Ed. ħuman 02:48, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

? Presume you mean "divided skirts" (which are abominable), H. _and marmite 20:40, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

I (read: someone else) should make a pants medal and give it to a few lucky ladies. Neveruse513 05:02, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

That reminds me

Can someone archive this pig? Kthxbai. ħuman 00:06, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

WP has a bot that archives old threads. We could try that. Totnesmartin 09:24, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

I suppose it wouldn't hurt to ask the creator if the source is available for adaptation to other wikis. Dreaded Walrus ^{t c} 09:32, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

(EC)I am in the middle of trying to develop Pibot to do this, hence the trashing of its talkpage. However I spent my spare time today fixed up capturebot so that it moves the "earlier entires" heading so that it is always 5 wigos down from the top after a run.</boast> - π 09:38, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

I've got Misza's code. - π 12:00, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Oh dear. . .

Google for Homosexuality. Evolution. Yes, I know. The articles are bad. But something inside of me doesn't like Conservapedia getting the top results for anything besides Conservapedia or a pile of lies. Can't we do something about this? -- 20:18, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

The only thing that will probably come of this is Ken

gloating on another one of his Red Telephone pages. ListenerXTalkerX 20:30, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Why do you keep posting CP stuff here? There's a talk page for it, you know. Please move this... ħuman 20:34, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Done. ListenerX^TalkerX 20:46, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

As most of us keep saying, this is excellent news. If you haven't figured it out yet CUR, "the best disinfectant is sunlight" or words to that effect. What we want to see is CP's Evolution and Teh Gayz article at #1 on Google. Nothing - NOTHING - could strengthen the cause against them more. Remember the average member of the public is an all right sort really, and most of them when confronted with these articles, packed to the gills with batshittery, will go "Oh. Well, I think these particular people are CRAZY, I definitely can't side with their arguments" and move on. You think the TimeCube belief system is increasing or decreasing around the world? DogP 20:59, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

What always works to cheer me up is to type 'online encyclopedia' into Google and see how far down the list Conservapedia is. There are times when Conservapedia doesn't even make it into the search results, which is always cool.--199.20.64.195 21:30, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

I'm a little curious under what circumstances someone would Google "homosexuality". FernoKlump ^{What the fuck Mr. Assfly??? That bastard DeanS deleted my petition!} 22:07, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Either trolling for an anonymous trick or if you've just woken up from cryonic suspension from the year 1924 BC. Stile4aly 22:24, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

I think DogP is right. An impartial, undecided reader who stumbles across a Ruy Kenservative scree is unlikely, I think, to be moved by his unique method of persuasion. They will most likely get half a page in, think "Nutcase!" and move on. Ken might be able to find some guys on Youtube that already agree with him to make lousy videos with Hitler pictures advertising his articles, but I challenge him to publish testimony of one person whom he convinced that the theory of evolution is false who beforehand had accepted it as a valid explanation of observed data. Or, for that matter, the testimony of one person who is "formerly gay" and was prayed back into the closet "converted" after reading the homosexuality article. Corry 22:30, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

And what about kids who are looking up evolution for a research project? -- 22:35, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Then they'll get very poor marks and learn a valuable lesson. Ace McWicked^{The Liquid Room} 22:37, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

O! Won't Anyone Think Of The Children??!?!?!? They need to learn about how to evaluate sources properly; CP is the least of their problems--there's lots of bad shit online and in print form. Amin7b5 22:38, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Agreed. I want to see these articles hit #1. Exposing the whole world to lulz? Awesome. 22:50, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

I was going to write something incredibly witty but was diverted by another thread and now it seems to have gone. :( Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 23:30, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

why are start=10 and the language restrictions in your urls? are you the OP wasnt a sock of Ken? ^{— Unsigned, by: 131.107.0.75 / talk / contribs}

? _and marmite 01:25, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Look at the urls CUR posted, they aren't "clean" searches. ħuman 01:30, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

He has been reading again

Nice too see we are the source of all his ideas. - π 02:54, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

"We can then list the article in popular articles at Conservapedia as I think it would be a popular article." ENGLISH, MUTHAFUCKA! DO YOU SPEAK IT? --Kels 04:02, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Typical Ken, he suggests to Andy that conservapedia [sic] creates two articles but doesn't say how they should be created. Is he hoping that Andy's going to do it? Or can the MediaWIki software just magick them up? Why doesn't he write them himself as all he seems to do now is shout at us from behind his curtains. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 11:45, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

TK vs Jon Stewart

TK doesn't seem to get parody, in criticizing Jon Stewart for calling Truman a "war criminal." And, even if Jon's comment wasn't parody, he apologized for it, saying he didn't mean it. Can someone with a sock explain this to TK?-Diadochus 22:37, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Hard to say if he's doing it on purpose and trying to make the front page look ridiculous (can't see why he'd need much effort) or if he actually doesn't realize Stewart's a comedian. Either way, it's funny. --Kels 22:44, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

What do they mean by "radical"? John Stewart? They have a really low standard if he is a radical. I think you need at least 2 layers of <insert identifer for nutjobs> to fill the gap. Thieh 22:58, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

For TK to realize parody, he would first have to adapt a more liberal way of thinking (ie. stop taking things at face value, think of the whole picture TK) and not react to what he hears before thinking about it--Nate River 00:16, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

OK, taking for granted that TK doesn't need a CP sock to read this talk page religiously, you already told him. Also!!! For the win, TK linked to the video of Stewart apologizing for the comment. Might want to fix that... ħuman 00:19, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for wigoing it, NoPetrol! ħuman 00:52, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

I noticed in TK's style that he refers to the left as a whole as "the radical left". It's as if the moderate left doesn't exist. ENorman 01:11, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

It's not really "TK"s style - it's the CP style. Keep in mind that TK is just a hired gun, his politics are virtually dead-center. ħuman 01:21, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Moderate left in CP exists alright. That's the group of people we call moderate right. Remember you have to relocate their wingnuttery as if it is the centre. Thieh 01:40, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

I challenge you to find one reference to "moderate left" on CP. ħuman 03:56, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

this little gadget says "none found". As if we needed it... Totnesmartin 12:09, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

I digress. CP clearly has it being moderate is hard left. Thieh 15:49, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Color me surprised

[2] Do we have a decoder ring for this? Mei 02:49, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

It's at the bottom of the jar of kool-aid mix. You obviously didn't finish yours. Liberal. Neveruse513 02:57, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

What time is it in Andyland? Did he just wake up and eat a whole jar of mayonnaise? Mei 03:03, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

That's seriously the funniest thing I've seen all week. --Kels 03:59, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Andy is using his "if there wasn't a word for it, it didn't exist" logic again. And you gotta love the comment of fission. The idea that it is even possible to break a nucleus is new. -- JArneal 03:09, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Excellent find, great wigo. Andy needs a better dictionary. ħuman 03:14, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

He seems to think that fission could only ever apply to the nuclear process. I guess he didn't pay too much attention during biology classes back in school, but then we knew that already. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 03:20, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Tomorrow I will come here and make a fission/fishing joke, and you will laugh. Mei 03:26, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Such a strange obsession with the origins of the English language. Neveruse513 03:28, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Fission means anything that is split into two or more parts. It is nearly identical to the Latin root word "to split"! So it's been around a long, long time. Andy is not a linguist nor an etymologist. Much like everything else he declares himself an expert in, he's shocked that he doesn't know shit. --Irrational Atheist 03:37, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Andy's "linguistic" skills consist of using a Merriam-Webster (probably abridged, probably twelve years old) dictionary to "research" the history of the English language. ħuman 04:19, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

He does like to cite good ole Uncle Noah, doesn't he. FWIW, my Merriam-Webster (Collegiate version, 2004) gives:

Bill of rights - 1774

Fission - 1617, same as Arsey

Flagpole - 1854

Worldwide - 1632, also same as AFly

Of course, the dates don't give the date the words were coined (who could possibly find that out?) but rather, "the earliest recorded use known to our editors of the first entered sense of that entry." A subtle distinction that would no doubt confuse the homeschoolers (read: it confuses Andy). Bluefish 04:40, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

And of course he is *still* working under the America The Great assumption that if it's not coined in english, it must not possibly exist elsewhere. (oh, flagpole, you idiot andy, was a flagstaff... but that woudl require one think for a moment).--En attendant Godot_{"«Let the credulous and the vulgar continue to believe that all mental woes can be cured by a daily application of old Greek myths to their private parts. V.Nabokov»} 15:49, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

The OED asks volunteers the world over to submit examples of the earliest known usage of words. So if there's an essay from 1530 that uses the term "worldwide," the OED makes sure it's legit first, updates the history of the word with the passage and what definition it had then. Look up the term "toilet" in the OED and see how it's warped from its original meaning to its current meaning. --Irrational Atheist 16:01, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Andy: "bill of rights - 1798 - Wow!"   Ssh, nobody tell him about the American one. --Marty 05:36, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

And definitely don't mention this one. Totnesmartin 12:12, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

What in the hell!? He really never ceases to amuse. What did they hang a flag on before the flagpole? A FLAGSTAFF. 05:42, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

I went to a fun-fair the other night and my friend insisted that we try out the glass maze after we'd had a few beers. Schlafly seems to live in his own glass maze but comprising walls of ignorance and he is forever bouncing off facts as he makes his own drunken way through life. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 06:55, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Wow, that's as if Andy and Ed had fused together into a big mass of moronic nonsensicality. Vulpius 11:34, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

"One can learn history simply by skimming a dictionary that has the origination of terms." Andy genuinely believes that a friggin' dictionary can be used work out historical facts. What was the scale of the Native American genocide? Well, no need to waste time doing any historical research, because we can just pick up the dictionary and find out that there couldn't possible have been a genocide because no-one had come up with the word yet. Brilliant! Bil08 16:49, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Well, they can't use Conservapedia. Important but not widely known historical pages either don't exist or are too limited to be of any use. The dictionary isn't too liberal, and it has very little anti-Christian spin. Therefore, it's much better to use when Conservapedia lacks information on history. --Irrational Atheist 17:33, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Have you noticed...?

Ever since they upgraded mediawiki, CP has been echoing escaped HTML to their difflinks so they don't particularly work and look all messed up. How long will it take for them to actually notice or care that they fucked up the upgrade? Yet another reason why you probably shouldn't staff your wiki with a bunch of ideologue incompetents. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 03:18, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Be nice, I think CPwebmaster is actual a kid, probably at the most a few years older than CUR. - π 03:30, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

First of all, it's Arthropleura, second of all, if he is, he's definitely better at programming. -- 22:09, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Tsk, running your wiki on child labour, Andypants? --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 03:50, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Sometimes it takes a kid to see through the deceit. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 07:02, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

== Look in the frickin mirror, Ken

==

Obsessional? Moi?

Ken

makes note of how Darwin "clipped, catalogued and indexed hundreds of offprints, about 350 reviews and 1,600 articles, as well as satires, parodies and Punch caricatures, with which he filled hefty scrapbooks". Yeah, because that would be weird if you obsessed about every time some wanker mentioned you...oh wait... Neveruse513 03:32, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Why is he going on about rattling our cages, anyhow? We all know it's TK who gets off on cages. --Kels 03:56, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

OMG!! My first shoutout!!! Hi Ken! Thanks for reading! Neveruse513 04:10, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

I love this (ah WIGOd I see). Ken: "For example, it appears as if Conservapedia scared a atheist/evolutionist. The atheist gentlemen in question also claimed he became nauseous after reading Conservapedia's atheism and evolution articles." Atheist is question: "Conservapedia, scares the living daylights out of me. I can’t find a single thing that I like about this site. I really want to look for more, but it’s making me nauseous. I have to stop reading and never again visit this site." Ken, Ken, Ken, don't you know we also puke our guts out after trying to read your dribble? --PsyGremlin_Whut? 04:25, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

“”It appears as if some atheists/evolutionists get nauseous when their nonsense is shown to be nonsense.

You know what makes me nauseous? Sentences like that. As Kels quoted above "English mother fucker, do you speak it?" - π 04:42, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

I just want to know what Ken thinks will happen if his article gets number 1 on a certain search engine starting with G? Will everyone renounce evolution? Ace McWicked^{The Liquid Room} 04:59, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

(ec) One of the God and State blog ads leads to this: Muslim mail order brides. Hot. Corry 05:01, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

I can haz Michelle Obama? --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 05:14, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

You can't afford the shipping, trust me. Corry 05:16, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Ken

has burned the page already. If he spent less time reading RW and more time thinking about what he posts at CP, there would be far fewer lulz for us. --Irrational Atheist 06:13, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

And it's back again, this time with added emphasis, formatting and speeling. Ye gods, I think Ken

might be learning to use the preview button. It's rather like watching a monkey learn to use tools. --JeevesMkII The gentleman's gentleman at the other site 06:34, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Dear Ken

, I don't know if Darwin was gay too, but I bet he would have let you stroke his beard. But uploading 9 copies of what appears to be the same photo of Darwin in 8 minutes won't bring him back, Ken. You can find a real-live man-bear to love, I know you can. Your pal, User:Nutty Roux/sigtalk 13:24, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

What kind of news do the people at CP read/watch?

Arlen Specter is still a republican Enough said. Thieh 05:23, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

TK is watching. Always watching. He sees you while you sleep. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 06:11, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Oh TK, you still need us then? Funny how you ban anyone for mentioning us but you depend on us to correct your mistakes. Wouldn't be better off worrying about this instead? Totnesmartin 12:24, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

So finally no more moderate republicans (by the refusal to give an example that is currently still a moderate republican)? Thieh 17:22, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Hey TK, while you're watching us and being a general dick. How about one of you fucktards actually creates an article about PEREZ HILTON. You shit yourselves attacking him on the Miss California page and don't ever actually tell who he is.SirChuckB^{Obama/Biden? 2012} 18:57, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

That's the goofy heiress who made John McCain look like an idiot over energy policy, right? That was hilarious. --Gulik 08:22, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

I do not think that word means what you think it means...

This is kind of random, but I can't help but giggle when I see Conservapedia or some other non-reality blog whine about the MSM, because in medical and epidemiological circles MSM is an abbreviation for "men who have sex with men." Corry 05:49, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

I get the same lulz when people talk about DVD audio. Now there's a format with an unfortunate acronym. It wouldn't happen if I wasn't a purile lib'rul. Conservatism and some down home country christianity will cure me of a sense of humour, I'm sure. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 06:03, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

It's too bad that the next gen medium wasn't called "DVDA." Corry 06:07, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Um, it is. That's the point. Not that the format will ever actually go anywhere, yay internets. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 06:13, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

I know, I know... Either way, I still cherish my Betamax collection. Corry 06:16, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

C word

Anyone mind if I asterisk out that word on the WIGO? Matt 07:28, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Yes. If you are offended by a word totally devoid of any context directed at you, you really need to be a little less small minded. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 07:47, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Ooh. I guess that told me! Matt 08:56, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Good job Jeeves, insulting someone who asks to remove a swearword. You sure told him! --GTac 11:58, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Well, sure. Stop for a moment, and just consider what he's asking to do. He doesn't want to remove the work "cunt", he wants to replace it with a symbol that everyone recognises as being synonymous with cunt, but he somehow believes is less offensive than the actual word for reasons that are totally unexplained. Please, if you can tell me why adding asterisks that alter the meaning of the word not at all somehow modify it, I would like to hear the explanation. I'm not being obtuse, it genuinely baffles me why people think this, and I don't think there's a sensible reason.

Second, he wants this not because he is offended personally by the word, but because others might be offended. Quite frankly, I think you'd struggle finding anyone at least at this wiki who would be offended by the word. If you can, then please have them come and tell me why they are offended by it. Again, I can't think of a single reason why the word alone should be offensive. Haven't we left the stupid taboos about speaking of sexual organs in the past? "I'm not offended, but someone else could be..." is the epigram that starts the NIMBY's manifesto, the excuse that allows you to be prejudiced without appearing to be prejudiced. Let people who are actually offended speak for themselves. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 12:50, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Jeeves, I wish I'd never said anything. It wasn't all that big a deal at the time, if I'd realised what an issue it was for others I wouldn't have mentioned it. Can we just forget it please? Thanks. Matt 13:01, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, sure. I just don't like people blindly following social convention even when it isn't backed by solid reasoning. Smacks too much of religious thinking to me. Sorry, one of my personal triggers I guess. (Though if anyone can actually answer my questions above, I'm actually genuinely curious, you can do it on my talk page or in email if you like to avoid provoking flamewars.) --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 13:09, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

I don't care about your personal philosophies or your problems in comprehending why other people would be offended by words. They don't give you an excuse to insult someone who politely asked a question. --GTac 14:11, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

It may have escaped your notice, but WIGO is all about insulting people for offering stupid opinions. I'm not sure why you'd think what's good for the goose ain't good for the gander. I offered him an extremely mild insult, which he doesn't seem terribly bent out of shape about. The argument did not continue, since he doesn't find it important enough to waste his time pursuing. Do you have anything actually to add, or do you just want a pointless slanging match? --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 14:33, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

You people are so damn sensitive...Matt never said "cunt" in his original post before Jeeves got all up in his grille...I assumed he was referring to "Conservative." Y'know, a really offensive "C-word" Amin7b5 14:47, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Just pointing out that for a guy called Jeeves, you sure could use some manners. WIGO is about laughing at people, it's weird that you think this means you're supposed to insult people for no good reason on the talk pages or that it doesn't count if they aren't really hurt by it. You're really acting like Andy like now. --GTac 15:02, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

I'm getting bored of this now. I offered what I think are two very good reasons, if you don't think they are good then SAY THAT, attack the damn message rather than than getting huffy about the way the message was delivered. Oh yeah, and complaining that I insulted someone by insulting me... really thrusting home the hypocrisy message there. Nice. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 15:12, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

I'd be perfectly happy to have the UNT asterisked. I don't need certain unexpected words floating around onscreen when my kids come up behind me while I'm at the computer--especially when said word is italicized and colored for greater visibility--as happened just as I pulled up WIGO. "Daddy, what does c*** mean" is a question I'm perfectly willing to answer, whereas "Daddy, what does cunt mean" is one I'd rather forgo for a few more years. I daresay that covers both the censoring objections raised above--out of context, it's still a troublesome word, and I'm not so offended by it that I think it should be stricken from the English language, but it is certainly innappropriate in certain situations. And yeah--it was CP-like to jump down Matt's throat and insult him for raising a perfectly decent idea rather than using it as an opening for discussion.--WJThomas 15:40, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Well, at least someone here can actually form a coherent argument. I'm not terribly sure how serious you are about that, since there are four variations on the word "fuck" on this page, only one of which was from me and two of which are in large face. If you have this objection, then I would guess not browsing WIGO in front of children rather than attempting to make WIGO child safe is the better solution, but hey ho. I'm sick of arguing about it. Go ahead and perform your ridiculous censorship if you're so inclined. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 15:55, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

RW is appropriately littered with four letter words. WJThomas is veering close to demanding that the site be age appropriate for whatever age his children are when it's clearly written for adults. This is the marketplace of ideas. They're not always pleasantly or tastefully presented, but they're here and in the several months I've been on this website I've never seen someone even suggest censorship of four letter words. If you've got a problem with explaining what fuck and cunt mean to your kids, practice alt-tab. If you've got a Mac and a Mighty Mouse, set it to show the desktop when you reflexively squeeze both sides of the mouse when your kids walk in. Works for porn too, but only puts away naughty things on the computer screen. User:Nutty Roux/sigtalk 16:08, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

I've commented on Jeeves talk page. _and marmite 16:12, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Oh, I might add that by starting a section "Cunt" on Jeeves page, Matt has successfully got the word all over recent changes! ;-) _and marmite 16:14, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Or you could get one of those boss foot pedals that minimises your browser at a seconds notice, works for porn too (oops, now you have to explain porn to your kids too :) On a more serious note, I'm sure there are bits of filtering proxy software both for pay and for free that do this work just for you, rather than imposing it globally on everyone. There's even a greasemonkey script for it. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 16:23, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

I did this just to see how they would justify the need to allude to the word cunt on a Christian, conservative, family-friendly encyclopedia. It was clear that since it was already there, and already added by a sysop, that it was "right" and staying. I liked Addison's explanation that it is needed to see "just how bigoted he is" (even though the article isn't about him). Also interesting that they spotted it as a troll with such a brief exchange (I think I made 3 comments and took my ball) for something that I personally feel is an innocuous (and justifiable) request. Just goes to show you how insular CP has become. They will attack anyone for anything. I wonder if they will accept this admission at face value or if I'm going to get some random mom banned... I really wanted to push Addison with questions like "How far is too far?" If Hilton had said "cum guzzling whore", would he have just thrown some asterisks in? It become more about painting Hilton in a negative light than putting Prejean in a positive one. This is SOP for CP. Neveruse513 17:59, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Yep Toast, I shouldn't have done that, it was childish. I was a little bit miffed at the time. Matt 21:33, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Am I the one who find it weird again?

Look at some entries of Essay:Best New Conservative Words on CP and the comments.

• CP has no comment that americans has no dream until 1911;
• Junk science somehow is a "Conservative" word;
• There is no concept of responsibility before 1737;
• Have problem classifying "affirmative action";
• Classifying moderate as a liberal term;
• Classifying enlightenment as a liberal term.

Even better, check this out: (when commenting on the word imperialism)

“”a clever term later used by liberals to interfere with Christian missionaries and stopping anti-Christian tyranny

—Ashlafly

(I wonder what "stopping anti-Christian tyranny" means) Thieh 15:59, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

"Stopping anti-Christian tyranny" with "imperialism" seems to imply that what "liberals" call imperialism, Andy sees as overthrowing tyrannical governments that do not allow Christians to do whatever the hell they want. See: USA versus Iraq, Afghanistan, etc. --Irrational Atheist 16:05, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

My favorite is moderate: "the original term dates from the French Revolution, but its meaning today is a euphemism for someone who favors abortion and/or supports censorship of Christianity in some ways". Why not just say it's another word for liberal, Andy, as we all know it's all or nothing when it comes to being conservative. Z3ro^talk 16:15, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Wouldn't stopping (and the lack thereof) the anti-Christian tyranny both conservative actions? Stopping it spreads Christianity; not stopping it is the status quo. Thieh 16:16, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

It's all Andy's ad-hoc defining of words. People criticize his blog wiki? They must be Liberals who hate Conservatism. Someone says they're a moderate but criticizes him anyway? Moderates are Liberals too! Conservatives criticize him? They're Liberals pretending to be conservative! Someone's against a war supported by Conservatives? Liberals. They say it's imperialism? Then imperialism means being against what Christians do. And on and on... --Kels 16:47, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Duplicate WIGOs

Can someone who can actually work a wiki condense the two WIGOs about the bill of rights at CP down into one? Thanks. Z3ro^talk 16:13, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

The newer entry is completely redundant and not funny. It can be removed. Or it can be voted down to embarrass the person who posted it about adding a redundant WIGO entry. --Irrational Atheist 16:21, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Removal of duplicate entries is usually prefered, but I'd rather not bork it by doing it myself. Z3ro^talk 16:49, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Dun! _and marmite 17:01, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

I was under the understanding that commenting out dupes was preferred, just to preserve the numbering system. --Kels 17:21, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

I have commented it out. _and marmite 17:24, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Well, then. Good job. --Kels 17:45, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

JessicaWatch

Not WIGO worthy, but it has now been 48 hours since JessicaT got stripped of her rights for being dangerously furrin liberal and argumentative, and not a single edit from her. I wonder how long it will take before such inaction sees JessicaT forcibly retired.--199.20.64.195 18:35, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Wonder if the e-mails have been hummin' and if anyone's come to her defence thereon? _and marmite 18:46, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

No scuttle on CP because defending Jessica will result in a banhammer from TK and everyone knows it. However, on aSK, she basically tells TK that he can suck it. Stile4aly 19:05, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Who was it around here that was all Titerpated (to quote the genius of Walt Disney) over her? Was is Ace? Well no matter. I suppose you can invite her back here, though she'd probably be in for a cold reception. SirChuckB^{Obama/Biden? 2012} 19:08, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

She's gone. Good for her.-Diadochus 19:14, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

I wonder if it's sinking into Andy's head that suddenly there are very few editors on CP. I've had a quick look at their recent changes (edits only) since midnight and we have:

• Total edits = 268
• Editors = 22

Of those, 9 were sysops, making 96 edits.

Iduan, JY23 and Avalerion (who obsesses over his user page) have made 123 of the remaining 172 edits (71%). If Andy hasn't realised yet that that he's running out of editors, then either he's a bigger idiot than I ever imagined, or it's proof that CP is no longer an attempt at an encyclopaedia, but rather just a blog for him to spout his lunacy. I also wouldn't mind betting a few editors left (or were convinced to go) along with Jess. PS It was Norseman, wasn't it? --PsyGremlin_Whut? 20:25, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Yes, it was me. :P She was super cute! Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 15:06, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

I must admit that I'm rather partial to Asian babes but have largely managed to keep it quiet in wiki-space. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 20:32, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

_{Vely intelesting.... Mei is amused}

I must show you pics of Maria Ozawa sometime. PsyGremlin_Whut? 20:46, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

I have seen them and she's totally HOT she looks like she has a nice personality. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 21:19, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

_{Mei agrees}

I could never handle Asian pr0n. The girls are pretty and all, but none of them look like they're having any fun. --Kels 21:28, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

I sincerely doubt that Jess is returning to CP. CPalmer removed her from his list, even though she hadn't been blocked, implying that she sent him an e-mail saying she was finished and that it would to him no good to associate himself with her. I did the same thing with ETrundel. EddyP 20:40, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Of the remaining 49 edits how many were reverted or parody? ENorman 20:56, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Who needs editors anyway. CP is already PERFECT as it is. Heck, they have even retranslated the Bible! Well, most of it. Some. A few paragraphs. Anyway, it's perfect, no need for stupid editors messing up everything. --Just passing by 21:13, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, her return seems to be unlikely. --Sid 21:16, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

I'm curious how those home-schoolers will act after the great world-wide-history extravaganza: then, they don't have any reason left to stay with Andy, unless, of course, Andy offers his great maths lecture - that would be fun. larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 21:44, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

God, Critical Thinking In Math would be awesome. And I don't really recall any homeschoolers (other than those who were already active sysops) actually doing anything on the wiki other than submitting homework, but I could be wrong (since I didn't really keep track of who is in the class). --Sid 22:03, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

AddisonDM? larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 22:08, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

On t'front page there's:

• Conservapedia:American Government 101
• Conservapedia:The Supreme Court
• Conservapedia:Critical Thinking in Math

Still on offer. _and marmite 22:11, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

"(other than those who were already active sysops)" --> I thought AddisonDM fell into that category, but I admittedly didn't check the timing. --Sid 01:54, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, I misread ^{Wer lesen kann, ist klar im Vorteil!} larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 09:12, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Wenn ist das Nunstruck git und Slotermeyer? Ja!... Beiherhund das Oder die Flipperwaldt gersput! --PsyGremlin_Whut? 09:30, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Careful here, that's dangerous talk - only Jesus could tell this joke without getting hurt larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 09:44, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

I'm ba-a-ack! --PsyGremlin_Whut? 10:12, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Gentlemen Behold

File:Hitlercat.jpg

Remember, it is often the cat that get hit by the jew yelps loudest

I have learned through the grapevine that our own Ken

was recently spotted in a Buffalo NY pet store, where he found the perfect little cat for his home.  I now present to you, Ken's favorite cat SirChuckBObama/Biden? 2012 04:45, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

It would be rather disturbing to share a home with that animal. It would just sit there, looking at you the ways cats do, and that would be weird. 07:08, 3 May 2009 (UTC) ^{(why use 4 tildes when 5 will do? )— Unsigned, by: Doggedpersistence / talk / contribs}

Nice joke Chuck, but everyone knows that Ken ignores pussies. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 07:44, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Thought I'd drag this outa the archives for no particular reason. (it's Ames cat, btw) _and marmite 08:11, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

I'm assuming the moustache is photoshopped, right? The fringe? DogP 18:38, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

I don't know... I didn't photoshop it all, I just did a Yahoo image search for Hitler Cat... I don't see any obvious photoshopping marks, which usually accompany any kind of ____Cat picture and I've seen cats with a little color spot under to nose, so I don't know. SirChuckB^{Obama/Biden? 2012} 22:17, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

You all clearly haven't seen http://www.catsthatlooklikehitler.com/. Ames' cat is a "kitler" in the local parlance. For the lulz, yo. User:Nutty Roux/sigtalk 22:28, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

HA!... Nutty, you just made my day... I love the hate mail they received "I myself think this site is a disgrace.:( Hitler killed everything living thing there was and he would kill these cute cats if he was still here. Thank you.

- Rockell" You know, except that Hitler was a vegetarian and had several dogs that he was said to treat like they were his own kids..... I love when ignorant people get offended. SirChuckB^{Obama/Biden? 2012} 22:41, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Homework 12

What in the hell does this even mean: "Hey, I wonder when "scapegoat" became a verb?! 1943!!!! Bingo - your argument is proven" [smacks head] "Yes, I think humans are devolving now also. I'm convinced that people were smarter earlier in time. Evolutionists will deny and censor that, but all the evidence is against them. Just read the quality of Civil War letters only a 150 years ago and compare that the writings of average people today. The Federalist Papers 220 years ago was merely a series of newspaper articles! Today it is a college or graduate text." What in the hell are you talking about Andy? Civil War letters cover a wide variety of intellectual capability. It may seem that people were more educated, because the well-written letters are the ones that get published. Similarly, in 150 years, my late-night comments on rationalwiki are probably not gonna be published and read. And yes, the Federalist Papers were newspaper articles. That happened to be written by the best and brightest of the generation. And they're not college and graduate texts solely by virtue of their literary complexity but because of their historical significance. [smacks head again]. Idiot. --CWaddell 05:03, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

For somebody who's so picky on people's grammar and spelling, Andy's pretty loose when it comes to facts. "Specifically, Churchill allowed an air attack on the city of Coventry rather than defend it so that the Germans would know we broke their code." No, numbnut, so it's that they wouldn't know the code was broken (and it had a name too, you know). And that UN answer is just wrong coming from a kid. This is the best paper Andy's seen? And in terms of factual content it still gets a failing grade. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 06:20, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Let me add my own personal disdian.

“” 2.The greatest difference between communism and fascism is that communism is international while fascism is extreme nationalism. Also, communism does not focus on national identity but on equality among classes and all people. Fascism sees its nation as being above other nations, its people as above other people, and it encourages or at least does not interfere with class differences. But perhaps what unites them is greater than what divides them! Both stress the collective and squash individual freedom, both encourage some form of government control over the economy, both display a disdain for human rights, and both command complete allegiance to a dictator.

NO! Communism does not command complete allegiance to a dictator. Communism and Dictatorship are both forms of government. That's like saying Democracy demands a king or queen. Furthermore, Communism does not "squash individual freedom" but rather it recognizes that everyone's individuality is important. Just sayin. And while I'm at it: "If we had not entered, there might be no Europe at all today!" How the fuck does a poltical conflict affect Geography in any way? SirChuckB^{Obama/Biden? 2012} 06:34, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

if they're defining Communism by its practice rather than the theory, then there's not that much difference - Stalinism was basically "fascism in red trousers", as someone put it. Totnesmartin 07:09, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Or as I once heard it, the only difference between Communism and Fascism is that under Fascism you get to keep the title to your property. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 07:20, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

If you're arguing how communism turned out in practice? Yes, but that is no more communism than Libya is Democracy. SirChuckB^{Obama/Biden? 2012} 07:30, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Of course, that's what I meant. Real Communism would never work as it is idealistic and tends to ignore much of human nature. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 08:02, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

'The greatest difference between communism and fascism is that communism is international while fascism is extreme nationalism.' That part of the answer muddies the question of communism in theory or practice. An international brotherhood of workers was an ideal in the classical theory of Communism (in an of itself, by the way, evidence of Marx assuming humans to be better than we are), but it wasn't really true in practice. Did Andy not cover Stalin's doctrine of "socialism in one country" that totally went against the ideal? Or that Stalin's idea of spreading communism seemed to a matter of simply making sure that the USSR was armored against invasion by buffer states that marched in ideological lockstep? (yes, those are merely rhetorical questions) Kaalis 15:57, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Of all the things to criticise the UN for... handing out condoms in Africa was number one on the list? It almost makes me wish there were a hell, so these muppets could go there. If you want to talk about genocide, how about letting otherwise productive adults die of AIDS in a countries that are already in pretty dire shape economically, just because your stupid cult has a morbid fear of sex? --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 07:31, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Hee Hee Andy's comment: "Superb! However, I doubt that the bombs could really make the entire earth inhabitable. It certainly wouldn't be pleasant!". A tyop, I know but ... (you might need to read it twice) _and marmite 07:37, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

I had to read it eight times before I finally didn't "autocorrect" as I was reading! ħuman 21:53, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

(EC)I like how he basically says "I'm all for international organization, as long as they can't make treaties or tell anyone what to do." In other words, the ultimate international organization is some kind of country club where all the nations meet for golf, talk about their hottest citizens and then go home. SirChuckB^{Obama/Biden? 2012} 07:40, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

What's the United States of America? Basically its an organisation of sovereign states that have joined together for the mutual good. - OK so that's an exaggeration, but it's how the USA began, isn't it? _and marmite 09:23, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, basically. ħuman 21:52, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Just in passing, reading a few pupils' answers, do you get the idea that one or two have ... er ... collaborated? _and marmite 07:42, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

I was wondering about that myself. EddyP 08:55, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

That would be deceit. Say it isn't so. Matt 09:00, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

I suspect that they're starting to get the hang of this online home-work thing. Генгис^{You have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you.} 09:36, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

I'm beginning to seriously doubt Andy's basic literacy, is he now having to look up every word in a dictionary? - Note: warfare is one word - originating in the ... 1400s. Wow, that's an old word! [3] Генгис^marauding 09:43, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Not as old as "joke" though - Jebus came up with that. (Actually I can kinda picture him on the Mount going, "...and verily, the duck asketh, "What man?" *Ahem* Blessed are the cheesemakers...") --PsyGremlin_Whut? 09:51, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

So by Andy logic, we can determine when Jesus lived by looking up "joke" in the dictionary? Maybe in the 1800s? (Just guessing.) --Just passing by 10:04, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

I've just been reviewing the Model Answers (incomplete) and found this gem:

The "Enigma". Explain and comment.

The German enigma was a machine that created coded messages that the Germans thought was unbreakable. They were wrong because shortly after the allies found out it was Broken.

Also if you are going to include students' work shouldn't you at least correct the spelling? - Lightening speed for example. I suspect that Andy only corrects their spelling if it's flagged red by Firefox but homonyms tend to fly under his radar (Another Conservative word - Gosh who would have thought it's only been around since... 1957?). Генгис^{Our ignorance is God; what we know is science.} 10:13, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Speaking of that answer, why the hell are they all so obsessed with Patton over there? As for uncorrected answers, I think my favorite is: "They were wrong because shortly after the allies found out it was Broken. i think the enigma was an amazing machine to be able to scramble the messages in to an almost unbreakable form."

RE Patton: "General George Patton was incredible at maneuvering tanks at lightening speed. With out his technological talent, the Allies may have never won the war." - So Patton was a technologist not a general? Генгис^{You have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you.} 22:07, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

I can't decide what my favorite question from this rediculous homework is. "World War II: when, where, who and why? Explain" is a book topic, "Describe any aspect of the Cold War or the Korean War or the Spanish Civil War (with reference to Orwell, if you like" is just strange (what's the obsession with Orwell?), and "(counts as two answers) Explain the mathematics of how the Enigma was broken (decoded) including (if you like) some words about the field of cryptology today" is simply insane to ask high schoolers. --CWaddell 13:29, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

I', still replacing the burnt-out parts in my irony meter caused by Andy's "Just read the quality of Civil War letters only a 150 years ago and compare that the writings of average people today." An instant classic from "Professor" Andy. --SpinyNorman 21:35, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Did anyone notice how the answer Andy just loved by Student Seven, longtime Conservapedian and homskollar DeborahB, about the Enigma was almost completely copied and pasted from CP's own article? Andy didn't! --Kels 17:52, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Unlike Addison she didn't wiki-link anything so that probably helped. But look at her answer to question H5.

Your view of the United Nations, please? I think the United Nations is terrible! Everything that it stands for is taking away the freedoms of the people - freedom of parents, freedom of religion, freedom of speech and expression. It is all for one huge world government, and no individual governments based off of the people.

Excellent.

Is this really the future of teaching? Генгис^{Is the Pope a Catholic?} 19:01, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

In addition to what's WIGO'd, I do like what Assfly thinks is an 'excellent'answer for Q6 given by Student 10:

6. Technological advances helped the allied forces because it gave they better weapons and armor then the enemy. The Allies also developed radar which allowed them to know the positions of enemy ships, tanks, and planes.

Nope, sorry. Whilst the allies did develop radar technology, Germany also independantly developed their own version (as did Japan, though they lagged far behind both the allies and Germany). In terms of the quality of weapons, armor, etc, the two sides were pretty evenly matched - for example, the German Panther tank set the benchmark for post-war tank development, and the German Tiger and King Tiger tanks had extremely good armor and guns on them. In contrast, he US M4 Sherman was lightly armored, had a relatively light gun compared to the German tanks, but was very fast and could be produced cheaply and quickly, allowing for large numbers to be fielded, as well as easily being redesigned, giving rise to large numbers of variants, suited for different roles. In the air, the German planes competed closely in terms of performance with the likes of the Spitfire and Hurricane, and Nazi Germany was the first nation to use a combat jet aircraft, the Messerschmitt Me 262. On the ground, we have such things as the German MG42 machine gun, which was lauded for its very impressive ability to put out suppressing fire, whereas the US M1 Garand was the first semi-automatic rifle to be standard equipment for soldiers of any nation. Zmidponk 04:16, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

RC - May 3

What manner of illiteracy is this?:

“”Obama birth certificate lawsuits‎; 00:30 . . (+68) . . Jpatt (Talk | contribs) (→Case: $1 million 66,000 paid to lawyers to protect Obama's birth records)

Генгис^{Is the Pope a Catholic?} 09:55, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Ah, JPatt - probably the shining example of a home-schooled education, combined with baby-shaking. Or just a first-class fuckwit. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 10:03, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

This website is hilarious, do they really expect us to believe that people who use so many exclamation marks have $25 million dollars? --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 10:17, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

"Inquiries may be sent to: megagenius@verizon.net" - Spoof? Генгис^{You have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you.} 10:33, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Doonesbury creator Gary Trudeau once offered a sizeable award for proof of Bush the Lesser's military service. You can offer a bazillion dollars if you're sure no one will ever collect. Czolgolz 17:22, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Indoctrination WIGO

Didn't we have a rule against WIGO-ing the kids? ENorman 17:14, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

I think Addison is kind of a special case. Neveruse513 17:24, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

I don't think anything's writ down anywhere, just a tacit agreement not to involve the students too much, considering half the online "students" are Ames, Trent, Icewedge and meself...well. CЯacke® 17:28, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

I say keep the WIGO - that's the most Andy-like I've seen Addison. More blind America-good than usual in his homework. But then again, what can you expect from someone forced to learn from a lecture which contains no mention of Stalingrad, Kursk or even the Battle of Berlin? If my only resource was such a lecture, I daresay I'd come out with the impression that the Yanks *sniff* saved the world all by themselves and good ol' Uncle Sam *sniff* came through once more! *sniff* *silent weeping* EddyP 17:46, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

World War 2 began in 1938 for Europe? I thought 1939. 142.59.186.243 19:23, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

the brits did extremely well in both wars , but they did have Biggles in WW1. Dunkirk could have been a bigger disaster though , cept for the little boats Hamster 22:58, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Secular Coalition of America

This excellent-sounding organization got a mention in a NY Times article posted to WIGORW, and it deserves a bigger audience than it'll ever get over there. Those of you with some money to spare might like to help boost our chances of lobbying for fairness in representation against 3000-member churches which collect plates of tens and twenties every Sunday. Let's face it, it's not a bad mission. I got out my card, so should you, if you can. If you can't, sign up for the mailing list etc etc. DogP 18:32, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Seems to have the same problem as the British secular society, confusing secularism with atheism. I'm all in favour of promoting secularism, but they really need to get the religious on board with the non-religious. It's in everyone's interests that the state doesn't legislate belief, either for or against. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 18:57, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

But people, usually Christian people don't see that. The thing is, as long as it's their beleifs that are being pushed by the state, people love it. Look at the uproar when it was reported (incorrectly) that fifth graders were being taught and reciting the Muslim Prayers. All of a sudden those same Christians were all into no prayer in school. SirChuckB^{Obama/Biden? 2012} 22:27, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

When I was an atheist, I was very annoyed by secular-humanists who conflated their beliefs with atheism in general. ListenerX^TalkerX 02:48, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Pat Tillman was not an atheist

By none other that JPatt. This is so fucking ridiculous I can't even think of a we-go. Neveruse513 02:01, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

The argument seems to be, "Tillman wasn't an atheist because I can't believe that he would be." `Bluefish 02:16, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

His argument is; "Tillman was a great person, atheist are not great people, therefore Tillman was not an atheist". He is a parodist right? - π 02:19, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

"At age 17, he was arrested for assault and spent 30 days in jail. There is no doubt, his life would change for the better. He left behind all that was wrong (atheism) and he strove to be the best at whatever he did." Is this based on any ... you know .... facts? Aborted Fetus 02:30, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

It is all based on JPatt's wishful thing and prejudices. - π 02:33, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

JPatt has to be a parodist. Hey, Jay - if you are, feel free to contact any of us with information for accessing Andy's seekrit discussion group! We know he has to have a new one.-Diadochus 02:48, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

He does, and the name is bizarre and unrelated to the CP sphere. Go fig. 24.22.135.175 02:56, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

I never thought of JPatt as a parodist, but this stunning example of the no true scotsman tautology requires a re-evaluation.--Simple 03:59, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

The Tilllman case is a weird touchstone for the Batshitters - they simply can't comprehend that the story of a handsome square-jawed football player American patriot-type chap could be anything other than the prime example of their values, so they're just going to rewrite the story to fit the thesis. Waaaaaay back, I got involved in the Pat Tillman thing over there, pointing out that a three-star general was publicly censured by the Army for lying in the cover-up of the Tillman death case, and that this was an example of Deceit. (There's no record of that as Andy blitzed and recreated the page later to remove some other facts from the page history). Brief discussion followed, but Andy would never allow that information into the article, even though it was fantastically relevant. Even now the Death section of the Tillman article fails to mention it, despite mentioning that "charges of a cover-up surfaced". It's a perfect example of how their encyclopedia is untrustworthy on even non-political or religious articles. Deceit can only be done by liberalz, y'all. DogP 04:31, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Hm, the argument in last paragraph is even more incomprehensible. Seems to be:

1. Mr. Smith said that Tillman followed his "convictions".

2. Atheists have only one conviction, namely to remove God.

3. Tillman was not seeking to remove God.

4. Therefore, Tillman could not have been an atheist. QED

Now, I'm not an atheist. But the atheists I have known have, on occasion, devoted time, energy, and brainpower to ends other than battling against God. Just saying.

Oy, and the other buzzwords - atheists, "leftwing"ers, "Bush hater"s, "haters of America" are all conflated. To be one means to be all of them. Painful to read, let me tell you. Bluefish 05:30, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Never heard of the guy (Tillman) before, (I've googled & read since) but that "Essay": ye gods, what is JPatt's mental state. Talk about wriggling round the fact to make a point! Of all the hypocrisy I've ever read, that takes some beating. _and marmite 05:54, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

And don't forget the corollary: Hitler was nasty; therefore he was an atheist.^{(Sorry Mr Godwin)} _and marmite 06:20, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

The stupid on the talk page grows exponentially with each post. He ends up saying something completely contrary to the "logic" of his essay. - π 06:29, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

I gave up on the talk page. Too many convolutions to follow. _and marmite 06:41, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Gah, I can't stop thinking about this, it's making me so mad. So that last sentence, "He was a hero, not a leftwing zero"... OK, say what you will about Pat Tillman. How about those soldiers who do follow liberal politics, opposed the Iraq War, or are not Christians - are their accomplishments invalidated? Is he saying that Tillman is a hero only because he happens to agree with Jpatt ideologically? I have to think that this sort of crazy is not limited to jp. Is there _anyone_ on the left who would ever take this sort of attitude? "Oh sure, he cured cancer, but he's a conservative." "Yeah, the Nobel Prize in Literature is all well and good, but did you know she's a creationist?" Does anyone besides Jp actally think that way? Bluefish 10:18, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

In conserva-world, apparently, you could have gotten the Medal of Honor, but if you were a liberal, said Medal should be taken away by the Pentagon. Remember Rush Limbaugh and the "phony soldiers" remark? Heck, the first US casualty during the Iraq War was Eric Alva, a gay Marine, who lost a leg. Now, you'd think the first casualty of a war would be, well, a hero. But unless you follow the accomplishments of gay people, as I do, most people don't even remember that. MDB 11:04, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

He was a marine, hence a christian and a republican (or possibly a jew). If he wasn't he wouldn't have been a marine. Do you deny that 2 + 2 = 4 too? The only thing "gay" people accomplished was the fall of Rome. Dendlai 11:24, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Don't forget all the young people we've recruited to our hideous lifestyle. I already have a toaster oven, a blender, and a microwave. One more and I get a stainless steel refrigerator! MDB 11:31, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Looks like JPatt is experiencing something we call "growing up" (note that I have no idea how old he is.) Part of maturing is learning that people we admire may have traits we do not find admirable, and learning how to cope with such an uncomfortable fact. Its good for you, JPatt. You need to learn that nobody's perfect. MDB 11:04, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Sadly, I believe JPatt is older than you think, which makes this entry even sadder. Then again, looking at the rest of the man-children running around there, he's actually well within the average mental ago the admins. (Or a parodist supreme). --PsyGremlin_Whut? 12:22, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

JPratt, what a moron. Seriously, would you buy a second hand X-ray machine from the guy? If it found an atheist bone in your body you'd be microwaved. Генгис^{Is the Pope a Catholic?} 13:06, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

"At age sixteen, most people don't know enough about life to make a profound decision such as that, a young mind still growing. If you look where he was at the time and how he ended up, it is a certainty that he was never an atheist." LOL irony meter there. It's okay for Jesus Camp and brainwashing kids into believing some "holy" spirit (respectively?) at an impressionable, young age... but 16, and atheist? Oh hell no, better better call out the "he's too young!" defense. This is gold. Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 14:59, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Pure gold, but par for the course at CP. Nothing wrong with indoctrinating children with religion, forcing them to pray at school, and continually calling them "Christian," "Muslim," "Jewish" or whatever just because that's what their parents are. But of course when a 16 year old appears to have come to questions of athetism all on his own, rather than by force of having been infected by his parents' indoctrination, it's evidence of nothing. He was only confused. Too young for such heady ideas in Jpatt's world. Inconsistent any? User:Nutty Roux/sigtalk 16:07, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Of course, if a 16-year old atheist converts to Christendom, then he is a wise and mature person. An atheist converting from Christianity, is foolish and immature. The Emperor_{Kneel before Zod!} 16:16, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

What a steaming pile of self-serving, bigoted shite. Pat's family says he was an atheist & liberal, his colleague says the same, but JPatti can't believe it because of his own rabid prejudices. I would love to a side-by-side on this but personal matters mean I am unable to hang around here for long at the moment. Anyone else care to have a go or at least come up with references for his friend and family quotes in addition to the two articles cited by Captain X-Ray (yeah, I Googled him. Not too many Pattis in Ohio).  Lily ^{Inspirate me.} 17:57, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

I was trying to be a bit subtle with my X-ray references but you've pretty much outed him now. Генгис^{You have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you.} 18:06, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Sorry chuck! Was it meant to be a secret? Me and my big gob.  Lily ^{Inspirate me.} 18:12, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

And now he's going with the "It's Just My Opinion" defense. Since when is ignorance a point of view? --Gulik 18:39, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

I don't know. Since when is it acceptable to use your OPINION when describing the life of someone else? I mean, "I like tomoatos" is one thing, "in my opinion, you do not like tomatoes despite claiming you do" is quite another.--En attendant Godot_{"«Let the credulous and the vulgar continue to believe that all mental woes can be cured by a daily application of old Greek myths to their private parts. V.Nabokov»} 20:02, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

90 million!

Well done Andy! 90 million views and 9 editors. Did he include clickbots in this? Broccoli 12:36, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps because we have to read it in order to make fun of it? Thieh 12:48, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

But all 9 of them have zero in mental problems. You know, except their severe and crippling lack of empathy with most of the human race who aren't striving to become clones of Ronald Reagan. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 12:55, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

I've always wondered if JY23 wasn't given rights due to his mental problems. Neveruse513 15:08, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Nah, he'll be up for sysop at the next eventually. He's the only candidate (Jinx has lost Andy's favour, and TK's playing with him). EddyP 15:38, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Schlafly is very proud of having 'no admins with mental problems'. If he let JY be a sysop, he'd have to retract that statement or weasel around Asperger's being a mental problem. I don't think he'll attempt the latter and the former is even less likely. I dunno... Neveruse513 15:49, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Will he promote a bureaucrat at 100 million pageviews? Oh god, I would love to see Ken

or Terry Koeckritz with User Rights Management.  The EmperorKneel before Zod! 15:52, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Gentlemen...start your clickbots! EddyP 16:04, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Charging component beams! The Emperor_{Kneel before Zod!} 16:26, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Wasn't it 'users with 0 mental problems'? I know I was 'accused' of having Asperger's during that thread at CP.Not that Aspies have mental problems Aboriginal Noise ^{Theist, barely hanging by a nail} 18:19, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

The answer is yes, because when he deleted a couple of my articles, with a few million hits between them, the count remained, and millions of other hits remain untouched. 17:16, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Gentleman Publius, was that before the MediaWiki upgrade? I had noticed the same thing but the site page count was reset after the upgrade and I was just wondering whether the counting method had been changed or not. Генгис^{You have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you.} 18:17, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Indeed, twas before. But how was the page count reset? Did Andy just modify it back to its old self? Otherwise it would have dropped by millions (perhaps tens of millions) from deleted pages like the football team that was oh so popular. 18:37, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Andy's data

hits per week

--larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 06:39, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

A Personal Message

Hey TK, psst... TK, over here...Just wanted to let you know, I have socks, we all have socks, and we're in your Conservapedia, wearing our socks. So you better get out that Checkuser and ban every IP within a hundred miles of Denver just in case... Oh, and drop Salt Lake City while you're at it, because that'll certainly do something to affect it. You know Terry Koeckritz you remind me of Ghostbusters:

• Stantz : "Everything was fine with our system until the power grid was shut off by Dickless here."
• Mayor: "Is this true?"
• Venkman: "Yes, it's true. This man has no dick."

Just another friendly message from SirChuckBNote: opinions of SirChuckB may not represent Rationalwiki as a whole, although they probably do. SirChuckB^{Obama/Biden? 2012} 17:59, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Do we really need to make TK any more paranoid? Terry Koeckritz there are no socks, we jus want to help impruv teh Trusworthy!!! Jorge 18:10, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Hello from Littleton, CO TK!!!! 207.67.17.45 18:22, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Aww, that was nice of him. Hi Terry! Suck cocks! :) 207.67.17.45 20:20, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Can't help noticing that TK still doesn't have the whosits to try blocking the IP address on the right of this message. Can't imagine why......--199.20.64.195 00:31, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

My IP address is blocked on CP and I'm sad because of it. I love Ghostbusters. "This man has no dick... at least that's what I heard!" SJ ^Debaser 13:52, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Chippeterson plagiarism ‎

He's still nicking articles wholesale changing a couple of words and then posting them as a 'New'. Matt oblong 18:28, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

If they're substantial then perhaps you could add them to Conservapedia:Blatant_Plagiarism. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 18:34, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Creepy Ed fails computer science

As a computer scientist, this gem gave me quite the chuckle. Apparently what really trips him up are boolean expressions. Wow. Neveruse513 18:32, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

True and false are hard concepts for everyone at CP. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 18:36, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

To me it looks like a question of basic syntax rather Boolean expressions. Even so, for a guy who once claimed to be earning $70K a year from computer programming it's a pathetic admission - "Oh dear, am I using a curly brace language or not?" Генгис^{Is the Pope a Catholic?} 18:39, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

(EC) If you don't use a Curly Brace, will the Mimigas be doomed? --Kels 18:42, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

*hands you the tow rope, just in case* --Sid 19:11, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

It feels good to know I wasn't the only one thinking about that. Flare^Talk 12:32, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

True, false, equality, equivalence... yeah. Way to go Ed. Neveruse513 18:41, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

I guess I'm just being a C stickler, but Ed is still a moron... Neveruse513 18:50, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Someone needs to write him a computer language that uses "Liberal" and "Conservative" instead. He'd do fine with that. --Gulik 18:43, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Apart from all that, he never defines "Test for Equality" he shows its conditional usage but not what it actually is. _and marmite 18:52, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

It's like he started an article about the if-then-else control structure, then remembered how he gets tripped up on equivalence and just made the article about that particular bit of syntax. Neveruse513 18:55, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

I was wondering the same thing. The article is entirely about conditional statements, not equality tests. ListenerX^TalkerX 19:01, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Somehow I feel that Andypandy "No two religions/languages/buildings/turds-I-took-this-morning are equal!" got a hard-on when seeing the title but was gravely disappointed when reading the article. Vulpius 19:08, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

I'm not a programer, of even the most BASIC kind, but tell me it's not really called "curly brace" languages?--En attendant Godot_{"«Let the credulous and the vulgar continue to believe that all mental woes can be cured by a daily application of old Greek myths to their private parts. V.Nabokov»} 19:57, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Sorry to disappoint you. They are indeed. Neveruse513 20:05, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Here is a Wikipedia article about them. ListenerX^TalkerX 20:44, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

What would Eddybaby do with this common expression: x = x + 1?

Better yet, how "tricky" does he think x += 1 is? Neveruse513 20:54, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Will a^=b^=a^=b; cause his head to explode? --Shagie 20:55, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Ewwww VB Neveruse513 21:02, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Disregard that, I suck cocks. Neveruse513 21:11, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

C --Shagie 21:03, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Oh, I thought we were still talking comparison operators. I don't want to know what Ed thinks of bitwise operators. Neveruse513 21:06, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Unless you are one of those evil people who uses the return value from an assignment and tests that ( ex: if ( x=y ) { stuff; } -- assign x the value of y to x and test if it is a true value ), we haven't been dealing with '=' as a comparison operator since the start of this indent level. --Shagie 21:19, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

1st, making assignments in boolean expressions can be fun. 2nd, I have a short attention span. Neveruse513 21:23, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Of course, these days the compiler is too clever by half and tells you you probably didn't mean the assignment operator, but rather the comparison and you either have to put an ugly pragma in to suppress the warning or rephrase the code. Damn spoilsports. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 21:34, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

That's part of why I love C so much. It might tell you, but it still lets you do it. Neveruse513 21:35, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

I wonder if a pragma is needed for variable lvalues? &(foo?*bar:*qux) = 42; --Shagie 21:42, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Yah, in no other languages are loops of the for while (*x++ = foo()); commonplace. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 21:43, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

My favorite is doing arrays backwards. 4[b] rather than b[4]. Though C++ broke it because you can overload the [] operator. --Shagie 21:50, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Well slap me silly and call me Susan. I'm no programmer - I dabble, and I have a BSc. in the subject, but I'd never call myself a 'programmer' - but A test for equality in computer programming is one of the trickiest tests used to control a computer program. really? trickiest? what kind of dumbass programming is he doing? I admit that it's very easy one to slip up on - particularly if you're switching around between languages, but as a concept it's far from tricky. It's pretty much the most basic test there is. I particularly like the way he massively confuses the issue by wrapping everything up in IF clauses. Totally unnecessary and what does it add? Worm ^{(t | c)} 16:37, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Creepy Ed on CS and Andy on language

What would they make of Perl Lingua::Romana::Perligata? Would Ed have a cerebral hemorrhage? Would Andy argue that this is inferior because it is an old language? Or would he argue that it makes Latin a better language because it can have this done to it? --Shagie 21:48, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Anything by Mad Dr. Conway would make Ed's head explode. Unless you also read a soothing haiku. A random side note: The cp:Computer Programming article is in a sorry, sorry, sorry state. --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 11:31, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Glancing at the name I remembered another project, and so looked... Yep, Acme::Bleach] is also written by the mad doctor. I've been half tempted to redo some code with it prior to handing it off to overseas outsourcing. In the meantime, Contextual::Return] looks sexy! --Shagie 05:57, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Quote salad

Latest headline is a new species of word salad. Jaxe 18:45, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

So is the whole front page. And all the namespaces. --Kels 18:54, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Head to desk, head to desk

Am I the only one smashing my head on my desk as a result of this week's homework? I know they're usually ill-informed and of a poor standard, but this week is much more so. His students genuinely seem to have no idea of the massive role played by the USSR, and that it was the USSR who won the war in Europe; it's all 'the US was the only chance to stop Germany' or 'Germany would have conquered the whole world' if not for the USA entering. For fucks sake, the bloody lecture itself says of the war in Europe 'Just as the American soldiers had defeated Germany in World War I, the Americans did it again (this time with help from the Soviet Union).' No, you stupid cunt! It's the other way round! Germany surrendered after the USSR captured Berlin and trapped Hitler in his bunker, forcing him to commit suicide. Of this, Andy says 'Soviet and American troops met at the Elbe River in Germany; Hitler and his wife, Eva Braun, committed suicide.' No mention of Stalingrad, no mention of Kursk, no mention of the fact that by D-Day the Germans had been on the defensive in the East and losing ground for over a year. And seeing as how the real homeschoolers don't mention those battles either (only the bloodiest battle and greatest tank battle of all time (and greatest air battle in a single day), for God's sake), it seems as though he either doesn't mention them or doesn't give them their due in his real classes either. Where the British Commonwealth wins battles (the battles of El Alamein, though some Greeks and French in the second), he describes them as 'the Allies'. Where the Allies (America, Canada and Britain) won battles (D-Day), Andy says 'the Americans'. Oh, I found a mention of Stalingrad. How silly of me to think that the battle was over by the 2nd of February, 1943. Andy reliably informs me that the battle was still going on in May 1943, and that the Soviets 'were holding their own'. That is all. You'd never guess that there were two million casualties in that battle alone. For the love of God, someone block that SES application. Rant over. EddyP 19:34, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Am I the only one smashing my head on my desk as a result of this week's homework? No. _and marmite 20:06, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

We all are. I just can't bash it too hard because the fuckers who run the dorms here charge $500 per piece of damaged furniture. ENorman 20:57, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Do what I did. When I filled out the damage report upon entering the dorms, I added a bunch of damage I hadn't gotten around to yet. Czolgolz 01:06, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Eddy, Eddy, calm down. Remember, it's not about important battles, it's about favourite battles. DogP 02:48, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

So your point is that Andy is passing on his ill informed views about WW2, which he got largely from watching reruns of Hogan's Heros, to the children who probably have well off idiots for parents who don't know better themselves? - π 03:00, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Did you guys not see Band of Brothers? America jumped out of the airplanes with freakin' parachutes and shot all the Germans. Then there was some snow and the war was won! The End. Jorge 03:20, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

"EddyP" (if that is your real name) you need to open your mind from the liberal public education you've received. If you won't accept that America is the best country in the world there's little point holding a rational discussion with you. Godspeed! Aschlafly

Paranoia to new levels?

Check out this user's four contributions. TK reverts them all and blocks the user for "POV editing/Removal of valid content/Adding material without citation: Lying." The thing is, he seems (to me at least) to be adding conservative POV. What gives? Am I missing something in those edits? Neveruse513 19:52, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Disregard that. Neveruse513 19:55, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Advice?

Any advice for editors trying to get block rights on CP? So far it doesn't seem to be working. Dwain 21:29, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Is it because you trained at the CUR school of sock puppetry by any chance? --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 21:37, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

What would be the point? There aren't even any real editors left over there anyway. Z3ro^talk 21:43, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

In the off-chance this is the same person from CP, I offer this. There are two roads that seemed to work to earn rights. Either a) get your name out there on the "recent changes" list by working hard and avoiding trouble, and b) by reverting vandals and coming to the defense of the sysops during trolling sessions. Aboriginal Noise ^{Theist, barely hanging by a nail} 21:52, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

AlanE recently suggested that it's pretty much impossible now, and I'm inclined to agree. The only way you could get rights was by defending Andy in discussions with "liberals", which have all but dried up. Andy is seemingly much more paranoid about sycophants now, since FP and I turned out to be fake, and TK is quick to block anyone. As Zero points out, who the heck would you even block? I at least had fun trying to kill Dinsdale. 21:58, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

I wrote about this in my experiences with ETrundel. I suspect that certain nationalities are looked upon with suspicion from the word go now (Brits, for example). EddyP 22:07, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

And Germans/Austrians. It used to be just Sid but now there's ClementB to worry about. Генгис^{Our ignorance is God; what we know is science.} 22:47, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps ClementB is Sid, you ever think of that? --Kels 23:03, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Who to block? I feel like half the editors there are vandal/parodists who are disciplined enough to stay out of trouble, and the other 5 are those Trusworthy souls that have personally sucked Andy's cock. I think even well-meaning Christian conservatives are turned off enough by this site to stay clear of the deceit. Jorge 22:52, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Why would you even want to try as it seems even posting on CP is a blockable offence these days. Ace McWicked^{The Liquid Room} 23:19, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

CP may not be dead--but, to quote Frank Zappa, it smells funny. I'm pretty sure that nobody else is ever going to get rights ever again Dwain. Try taking up knitting, if you need a hobby. Amin7b5 23:23, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

America's move to true conservatism

America is *more* conservative than when Regan was president. That's why we elected Obama & Biden instead of the more liberal McCain and Palin.--En attendant Godot_{"«Let the credulous and the vulgar continue to believe that all mental woes can be cured by a daily application of old Greek myths to their private parts. V.Nabokov»} 21:31, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

The Republican Party, at least, has drifted to the right of Reagan. All they have left is hard-core conservatives. MDB 21:33, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

(Oh, it's also why states are being forced to write laws against gay marriage, since the populace is getting more and more tolerant each year. -- But that one andy can be forgiven. he would see the laws as proving we really *are* more conservative, instead of understanding that laws are the last line of defense as things change).--En attendant Godot_{"«Let the credulous and the vulgar continue to believe that all mental woes can be cured by a daily application of old Greek myths to their private parts. V.Nabokov»} 21:34, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

I like it on Andys Dictionary Skimming project where he talks about the "inevitable triumph of conservatism over liberalism". Is that so Andy? Ace McWicked^{The Liquid Room} 21:45, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Just once Winston caught a phrase — ‘complete and final elimination of Goldsteinism’ — jerked out very rapidly and, as it seemed, all in one piece, like a line of type cast solid. Totnesmartin 07:55, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

What exactly are the Reaganite principles which, according to Conservapedia and the Republicans, the country has both drifted towards and needs to return to? Giant deficit spending and running up of huge debts? Greatly increased military spending? Unneccessary tax cuts for the rich? Fostering a culture of greed? Deceptive, illegal, hypocritical and belligerent foreign policy? Loony, bigoted social policies? I just can't work out what the hell conservatives are on about when they talk about "the principles of Reagan" which apparently Bush deviated from and the people have come increasingly to accept (and that's why he got low approval ratings). Bil08 21:52, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Congratulations, you've summed up the entire Republican parties problem quite nicely. Have 1 internets! Z3ro^talk 21:55, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Reagan was the greatest statesman of the 20th century, nay, all of history. From humble beginnings in Real America, he rose to his position of power and singlehandedly ended the Cold War, perfected American morals, revitalized the economy, created a perfectly secure world, and did not have anything to do with anything ending in -ran or -ontra. 22:01, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Oh no, they totally did Iran-Contra, but it was totally legal and moral because the Contras were a real nice bunch of boys and they knew that some day Iran would be our good buddies and Iraq the baddies. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 22:09, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

"Reagan was the greatest statesman of the 20th century, nay, all of history. From humble beginnings in Real America, he rose to his position of power and singlehandedly ended the Cold War, perfected American morals, revitalized the economy, created a perfectly secure world, and did not have anything to do with anything ending in -ran or -ontra." And when he did baseball broadcasts for the radio the man knew how to fill in half-an-hour whilst waiting for the correspondant at the baseball park to phone him at the broadcast studio and let him know what was happening (basically the half hour of filler material by Reagan was foul ball after foul ball being hit for that half hour). See, even at a much younger age Reagan knew how to fill in gaps of complete knowlessness with complete wads of steaming horse crap.--199.20.64.195 00:29, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

And don't forget, Reagan knew exactly how to the help the poor unfortunes stricken with AIDS: Ignore them, the homos deserve whatever they get. He knew how to help the struggling minorities: Have the CIA supply crack to the major cities and then lock up the addicts under the "War on Drugs" label. Regan was easily the worst president in the modern era (and yes, I'm including Bush in that) SirChuckB^{Obama/Biden? 2012} 15:56, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

It's worth remembering that if Nixon tried to run as a Republican today, they'd excoriate him as a filthy Liberal. He started the EPA, lost Viet Nam, and talked to Communist China, remember. --Gulik 04:06, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

I think the edit summary shows JPatt at his most Orwellian: "nonsense. liberalism is dead. America voted for liberalism, what are you smokin?" Can you find moar cognitive dissonance anywhere else?

More Jpatt wisdom

Following up on his astonishingly insightful Pat Tillman essay, Jpatt favors us with more of his wisdom in the form of a new essay. It's hard to know just how to respond. The internets without Jpatt would be like a fish without a bicycle? --Simple 02:08, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

More like this internets with one less moron. Although it does make you think of this, doesn't it? --Kels 02:21, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

I know this isn't talk wigo aSocK, but it's more applicable here: Mssr RuyLopeZ, please, please write the "Homosexuality and various diseases at aSK and RW" article on CP! ħuman 02:32, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Is that the Murcan spelling? Over here "Advise" is a verb & the noun is "Advice". _and marmite 03:51, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

I see it's already been WIGOed. _and marmite 03:54, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

That was my first reaction was that it was USian spelling, it wasn't until ListenerX started trying to draw attention I checked. - π 04:12, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

No, it's just a misspelling. Advize isn't even a word here. Advise is a "verb". "Advice" is the noun. My thoughts on reading his "essay"? If this is the other side, winning will be easy. ħuman 04:20, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Unfortunately Conservapedia is at the bottom end of the fundamentalist and anti-science movement. <insert bowel movement jokes> - π 04:34, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Given the eloquent argumentation and insightful discourse we saw from the protesting teabaggers, it would appear CP is fairly par for the course among grassroot conservatives. 04:40, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

No, no, the tea-bag people are only the ones who had enough ants in their pants about taxes to get out and protest. ListenerX^TalkerX 04:43, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Actually, PI, they are pretty typical of those two fringe groups. And the teabaggers... well, let their words speak for themselves. ħuman 08:58, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

.....'the Republicans only lost by 6 million votes'....'if the liberals win it's the election cycle, when conservatives win its the nation embracing conservatism'...keep the laughs coming Jpatt Jammy 08:54, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

That's more than 12! ħuman 08:58, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Note that one of the "liberals" he cites is Peggy Noonan. Yes, the flaming liberal who was a speech-writer for hard core leftists Ronald Reagan and George Bush (the Elder), campaigned for the reelection of borderline Marxist George Bush (the Lesser), and currently writes a column for the radical socialist Wall Street Journal. MDB 14:08, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Another irony: after boasting how big the Republican "tent" is (US term meaning the party incorporates a broad range of people and ideas) he goes off condemning people as RINOs (Republicans In Name Only, a US conservative neologism for Republicans deemed ideologically impure). So which is it, J? Big tent, or party purity? Bluefish 16:54, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Editors at CP, RW and aSK

CP

RW

aSK

Just for your amusement. larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 06:55, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

I like how Ken

is isolated in a little ghetto of his own on both the CP and aSoK charts. Art mirrors life? --JeevesMkII The gentleman's gentleman at the other site 08:04, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

I would be interesting to see where he is in that mess of black writing that is ours. He has only edited about 2 pages here because we wouldn't turn the evolution, homosexuality and atheism articles over to him so he can be the sole editor without defending his position. I am still pissed about the way he ran at ASK today. - π 08:08, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

CP's graph looks like a tumbleweed.-- Kriss Akabusi^{AAAWOOOGAAAR!!1} 08:41, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Was he User:Conservative!? Or did he use some other name? Here is the picture for RW again. While the first one included the names of all our sysops, this one has only a selection of the more active ones, plus User:Ed Poor, User:CPAdmin1 and User:Conservative!.

For the scaling, have a look here.

larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 08:46, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

I resent this talk of "isolated ghettos" just because our dot(s) is (are) an (is) outlier(s)! Aren't I about to hit 4,000,000,000,000 edits with no mental process soon here? ħuman 08:53, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

So, I have a dumb question. When graphs like this are made, do they include or exclude the talk pages? I ask, cause here we talk a lot, and over "there", it's rather discouraged (which is sad for a so called wiki, but whatever).--En attendant Godot_{"«Let the credulous and the vulgar continue to believe that all mental woes can be cured by a daily application of old Greek myths to their private parts. V.Nabokov»} 14:44, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Not dumb at all! I included the talk pages - first, because it is easier not to sort out where the edits are made and secon, because of the reason you stated... larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 15:21, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

And the complementary pics of articles at CP, RW and aSK:

CP

RW

aSK

larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 11:40, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

I can't believe I just saw that

In Other News,

“”The future is now for homeschooling. The Public Schools are failing a whole generation of students with bad teachers that cannot be fired. [4]

—JPatt, Conservapedia "In the News"

Anyone find that odd where Andy is still teaching, and failing that job miserably? Thieh 13:37, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

As devil's advocate, I have to point out that just because the Assfly is incompetent at a job doesn't mean that everyone is. By all accounts he was a pretty crappy lawyer too. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 13:40, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

I mean, aren't these guys the least qualified to issue such opinions with Assfly being a in-house teacher (CP is harbouring a teacher as bad as that one)? Thieh 13:49, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

I'm sure my sister-in-law, whose a teacher who just lost her job to budget cuts, would love to hear that public school teachers cannot be fired. Ass. Z3ro^talk 13:58, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

There's a difference. "Fired" generally has the connotation of "for cause", and that's why job cuts for budgetary reasons are termed "lay-offs". That's very important if you want unemployment benefits; you often can't get them if you were justifiably fired. And it is fair to point out it can be very difficult to fire public employees in many jurisdictions at all levels of government. (My condolences to your sister, BTW.) MDB 14:18, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks; I understand the difference, but I don't think they do. While it can be hard to fire a teacher, it's certainly not impossible. And even if you could, firing a teacher for anything other than misconduct is unjustifiable. How, exactly, are you supposed to justify firing a teacher, for example, for low student test scores? These people just make me so mad. Z3ro^talk 14:32, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Not to give Andru any ideas, but why doesn't he just advertise his hoamskool sirbices on his blog, I mean, wiki?

Zero is right about that, coming from education, I've seen some horrible teachers still working. However, it's not a burning desire to keep incompetent people, it has been (until recently) a lack of qualified people to replace them. Teaching is hard work. It's a minimum four years of college, plus certification, continued schooling for life and 50-60 hour weeks. On top of that, you have to deal with low pay, angry children, snotty parents, arrogant administrators and you know that, should some controversy come up, your school board will probably throw you under the bus. As such, not a lot of young people are going into teaching, and those who do generally leave within 4 years to find a new career. So it's not like there are hundreds of qualified people just breaking down the door. SirChuckB^{Obama/Biden? 2012} 16:05, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Speaking as a teacher myself, you can certainly be fired. In your first five years with a district your contract may not be renewed, and no one has to give a reason. After that, it's harder, but any administrator worth their salt could get rid of an incompentent teacher. Czolgolz 16:39, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

It's not WIGO-worthy, but WTF?

Ken, how the hell is it front page news to "unexpectedly" find an individual in the UK who is zealously opposed to evolution? --SpinyNorman 16:10, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

I love the incongruity of scale here. Discovery: "I found a single fellow nutjob in the UK." Result: "Let Operation Stampeding Churchill commence! This is worthy of a totally incomprehensible news posting." Also, what is with him and "stay tuned for further details?" There are never any details, and definitely never "further" details. 16:13, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Just imagine if he's still doing this in a few years. "Gentleman! I have recently rediscovered an article from the 1998 Journal of Creation that will eviscerate the scientific community!!! :)" Neveruse513 16:16, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Publius caught something I should have noticed a while ago - since when is "stay tuned" relevant regarding a website. "Set your dials to Conservapedia folks, you ain't seen nothin' yet!". --SpinyNorman 16:19, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Well, I need to read the Talk page first before WIGOing. I love the delusion, but also the five edits to get it right. Ken

, the "Show Preview" is *right next to* "Save page." C'mon, man, you've been doing this for years. --Irrational Atheist 16:21, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

BTW, Ken

has burned his "Gentlemen" page. He hasn't recreated it yet. Expect more lulz later. --Irrational Atheist 16:22, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

And it only took him 5 edits this time! ENorman 18:29, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

I took a quick peek at Ken's recent "contributions", and was surprised to see him edit an article that wasn't one of his three obsessions. I shouldn't have been surprised. --Kels 18:33, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

I think "unexpectedly" is the new "likely". Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 18:53, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Quite apart from Ken's embarassing typing skills, just remember this with regards to Creationism: where the US goes the UK follows. OncomingStorm

You expect the UK to follow the US into a downward spiral of scientific ignorance and religious zealotry? Well, at least Europe is on the up. Ace McWicked^{Disco Jesus} 20:29, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Actually we shipped most of our religious nutjobs across the Atlantic and we ain't letting them back in. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 20:38, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

You only have to look at icecream. OncomingStorm 20:45, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

You mean the Italian stuff? _and marmite 21:23, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

I just like looking at icecream. OncomingStorm 21:25, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

I've a good idea where you're coming from. Генгис^{You have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you.} 21:30, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

I don't want to look at you scream, Jinx. Vulpius 23:23, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Please keep your perversions to yourself ♥ J i n x D o l l ♥.--199.20.64.195 23:36, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Ed's plea

Remember when Ed got bitchslapped at WP? Well he kept on editing. And he wants Kotomi-San to do the same thing. Neveruse513 16:49, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Of course, he headlined it well...86.163.254.19 17:39, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

The difference, of course, is that Ed fully deserved what he got. --Kels 18:35, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Jessica, when I was desysopped [at] Wikipedia I continued to contribute. Take it in [your] stride. economical with his word usage.

Ed's continued contributions amounted to more POV-pushing. And he was desysopped for flagrant abuse of power rather than standing up to TopKunt. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 18:48, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

There is no way Jessica should continue to contribute at CP if she has any self esteem. I hope she doesn't, look at another editor who got banned and came back, I cringe every time Iduan breaks his back for hours doing some technical chore that no one else is smart enough to do, then begs TK to look at what he's done and tell him if he thinks it's any good. Come on Iduan, stop wasting time where you aren't appreciated! Refugee^{talk page} 20:28, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Jessica is Japanese and accordingly bound by the concept of face and honour. She would probably commit seppuko rather than return under a cloud of humiliation. Of course I don't expect the likes of Ed (or his anti-multicultural bigoted pals the two Terrys) to have any understanding of that. Генгис^{You have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you.} 20:45, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

That headline gave me douche chills. It's like he wants to give us material. --Yossie^{Spring in Fialta} 23:47, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

At WP, desysoping is one thing, you can get it back. At CP, it pretty much is for life (unless your TK) and non-sysops have no power whatsoever. Ed, REALIZE THIS!--Nate River 01:23, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Aw man... I just got to the office, now I need a shower again. urgh. Ed gives me the willies. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 06:57, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Hmmmm

This is an interesting snippet. Генгис^{You have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you.} 19:41, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

It's like watching two people who absolutley despise each other forced to dance together. EddyP 20:12, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

La tango tiqué. --Yossie^{Spring in Fialta} 23:35, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Wow. Watching Team Killa miss the most obvious MP setup ever is really embarrassing. --Kels 02:25, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

He should have given the Jinx handle up once it was compromised. Kids these days don't know how to be a parodist worth their salt. Back in my days we sucked up to Andy, got block rights, blocked everyone and gave up when we were ahead. You can play the long term game, Jinx was always good at inserting dirty words into CP but really it is over. I'll have another word with him he is just going to bring TK back here again. 02:41, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

"The course of history is a slow but steady movement to the right"

So Sayeth The Andy.
I honestly don't even know where to BEGIN unpacking this. I'd probably start by pointing out that he's factually mistaken since "Conservative" causes like racism, homophobia, theocracy and the subjugation of woman keep losing out, and then move on to asking what "right" values ARE when he says those aren't them. And then I'd get banned for disagreeing. --Gulik 20:31, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Gulik, everyone knows that it's the LIBERALS who are the racist homophobic bigots who beat their wives. Deny that and lose all credibility. EddyP 20:37, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

The funniest thing is comparing this with Marx claiming that history leads to communism everywhere. Conservapedia: takes the dumbest part of every politic theory. Barraki 20:39, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Andy probably makes one of the classic mistakes of right wing arguing -- declaring positions to be conservative based on modern standards. Three hundred years ago, the idea that "the people" as a whole were capable of governing themselves, as opposed to a divinely appointed monarch was so shockingly liberal, you had to have a revolution to establish it. Black people being able to participate fully in democracy? Liberal, fifty years ago. (Witness the attempts by American conservatives to claim MLK as one of their own.) Hell, one hundred years from now, that era's equivalent of the Assfly will probably try to claim "it was conservatives who wanted gay people to be able to marry!" MDB 21:16, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Ah, but you forget that all of those things are more properly defined as progressive, not liberal. Liberals are all evil facists who want to destroy America, therefore liberals cannot accomplish anything good. If something good happened, a conservative did it. /Andy Z3ro^talk 21:19, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

"It was conservatives who wanted gay people to be able to marry!" - No, it was conservatives who forced gay people to marry! None of that sex outside wedlock thank you very much. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 21:33, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

I think you've hit on the argument they'll be using a century from now: "marriage is a conservative value! Therefore, it was conservatives who brought gay people the right to marry!" MDB 22:18, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Right, but noted Creationist, God, muddied the waters with His spirit wafting over the face of the deep and like that...Creating "something" out of "nothing"...but see that after things "happened" "God saw that it was good". IOW, He didn't comment on the "goodness" until it had time to set a spell and be Conservative approved. CЯacke® 21:38, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

At risk of taking this guy way too seriously, I was trying to see how Andy's suggestion here relates to his general theory of history - you know, the whole amateur linguistics and geometric rate of increase of Conservative terms thing. Apparently, new terms allow people to think in new ways, and often allow things (like genocide) to exist. But many of the new Conservatives terms are bad things, like "vandalism", "negativism", "politically correct", "newspeak" and even that darn "Murphy's law". The conclusion here is one that Andy does not want to reach (and it's not that Conservatism is on the rise). Bil08 22:13, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

The problem isn't that you're taking him too seriously, but that you're approaching his "philosophy" as if it was somehow internally coherent. The language stuff is all contradictory bullshit, especially given his hard-on for Latin and claims about english devolution. Leaving aside that he knows jack all about history, his theory of history takes the typical pseudo-marxist/providential Americentric approach, but overlooks that the United States is the grand creation of enlightenment liberalism, and as MDB pointed out, once conservative views are now abhorred. Where this latest claim is coming from is anyone's guess, given that the US is probably more liberal than ever before. It probably clicked once he vomited discovered his geometric word increase. 22:47, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

The return of Phyllis the Younger

And writing about... relativity? --Shagie 22:53, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

The prodigal daughter returns! Not only is she an EVILutionist, but she's a shill for that bastard Einstein who never ever won a Nobel prize for relativity so there ha ha. </ASchlafly> On further reading, it appears she may concur with Pa on the Einstein question. --Yossie^{Spring in Fialta} 23:31, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Does Empress Cixi Phyllis have an account? The Emperor _{Kneel before Zod!} 23:33, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Don't think so...even she has standards, apparently. --Yossie^{Spring in Fialta} 23:36, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Does anybody else find that paragraph about circular reasoning odd? *frowns lightly* --Sid 23:37, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

You mean how it's wrong, and all that? ħuman 00:23, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

I'm kinda proud of Phyllis. It's an argument worthy of a fine Sophist. = "How does evolution explain the formation of the eye?" "Well, small adaptations that are beneficial in themselves are selected over time, so that gradually a complex organ like an eye is built up" "Ah, but your belief that small beneficial adaptations are selected over time involves accepting evolution" "Yeah..." "So your argument is circular!" "?!!?". Bil08 01:01, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Maybe stop at the "Yeah" and ask them what they define as evolution. Then accuse them of war on words/moving the goalpost/no true scotsman/other fallacies after they redefine their words. Thieh 01:16, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the confirmation. I wasn't 100% sure that I hadn't missed some special meaning or whatever (I never trust myself 100% after midnight when it comes to science and semantics). --Sid 01:20, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

What she said is perfectly correct. A spacetime diagram doesn't "prove" relativity, any more than a Feynman diagram "proves" quantum electrodynamics. They are diagrams used to illustrate and understand the principles of their respective theories. It's a little like saying "This is the equation E = m c². It is used in relativity. But it doesn't prove relativity."

The question is: why did she write that sentence at all? Or why did she write the article at all? She seemed to be casting about for some way to show some amount of scientific knowledge. Maybe she just got her physics midterm exam back, and spacetime diagrams were involved, and she got a good grade, and she wanted to celebrate. Gauss 16:21, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

The phrasing is kind of suspicious. It hints that the apparent paradoxes can't be resolved without resorting to flawed circular reasoning (via tricksy spacetime diagrams).--Bayes 17:01, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Perfectly correct? Gauss, could you explain how using an illustration of the underlying physics/math of relativity to solve an paradox of relativity is circular logic? I agree that a pretty picture alone is not proof, but that doesn't make using it to illustrate the solution circular logic. How are we supposed to solve a paradox/challenge of relativity without using relativity? And how is solving the paradox "proving relativity", anyway? At best, she just used extremely bad phrasing in an attempt to make your point. But as it stands, I can't call it "correct", sorry. --Sid 17:05, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

On second thought, Sid's right. She seems to think that apparent paradoxes shouldn't invoke the hypothesis itself in order to see if there is internal consistency (even though that's the whole point). Flare^Talk 18:00, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

She's also put this

“”==Social Skills== I think it is worthy of note that whereas some of the facts about public schoolers are true, in general public schoolers have much better social skills than homeschoolers. Also, don't you think it's rather unfair to list all of public schoolers' bad qualities and omit all of their good ones? [[User:PhyllisS|PhyllisS]] 20:35, 9 May 2008 (EDT) Thanks for the PhyllisS. I added a few good points which were reverted by Aschlafly including development of social skills. [[User:AdenJ|AdenJ]] 22:58, 9 May 2008 (EDT)

—http://www.conservapedia.com/Talk:Public_school_culture#Social_Skills, I've included AdenJ's response

Shows that she's got some independent thoughts in her pretty(according to Kettleticket) head. _and marmite 16:31, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

And creepy uncle Ed thinks she shouldn't "...make any more of these articles in main space, please. _and marmite 20:41, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Andy Gives a Creepy Warning

Wow. Andy really doesn't like to have his grammar checked [[5]]. Of course, it is another foreigner, and so automatically not to be trusted. Kaalis 01:36, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

wow does he have to do back flips to protect his ego and never be wrong. "oops, you're right, thanks". vs... if it was 2007, in some convoluted world wsomewhere that would be acceptable grammar. Though I'm not sure where. "On may 5, 2009, Kip writes in her journal". um... well, not really. The only possible way to write that would be "Currently, mr. schafely teaches at", cause any time you stick a date with it, even if it *is* that date, it's awkward at best. Damn that man's ego is fragile.--En attendant Godot_{"«Let the credulous and the vulgar continue to believe that all mental woes can be cured by a daily application of old Greek myths to their private parts. V.Nabokov»} 01:56, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

I like the not particularly veiled threat of banhammer. What a sad, sad little man. Corry 01:58, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

That's kind of what I was thinking. I guarantee swinging his conservabans around is the only way he can look either Mrs. Schlafly in the eye. I mean, come on - surely they all know it's a joke by now. Kenservative alone makes the site an abortion.-Diadochus 02:24, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

You know, the really sad part is that the original idea of conservapedia, as a sort of homeschool-opedia, was actually a good one. And with Andy's mom's name, he could have even turned it into a great resource, which could have been a well-known homeschooling resource, rather than the terrible catastrafuck it has become. Just sad, really. Z3ro^talk 02:34, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

True that, Zero. He could easily have eclipsed, say, Drudge, as the conservative go-to site. Instead, it has evolved into an atheist homosexual abortion. ħuman 02:43, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Dang, I forgot to link homosexuality, abortion, evolution, and atheism for obvious SEO purposes. I fail at Ken

101 ħuman 02:44, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

In Andy's defense, I'd be a little edgy too if I was surrounded by conspirators. Jorge 02:48, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Et tu, Brute? ħuman 02:51, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

At a complete tangent to the above subject, but when I looked at the edit under discussion I noticed TopKnut calling Bert (the KAL007 obsessive) "Brent". Is he just dyslexic, lazy or being a noxious bastard (I realise that I may have answered my own Q.) Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 06:33, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Ken is a freak

This has to be the saddest series of edit I have ever seen. Fuck it, I'm going to get my lunch. - π 02:45, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Did we just got evidence of someone having a serious case of OCD? Although he never tries to hide it though. Thieh 03:31, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Ken could save himself a lot of embarrassment if only he would use the preview button and realize how insignificant most of his edits are. -- JArneal 05:05, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

But then he wouldn't be able to look at his edit numbers and congratulate himself about how productive he is. With him it's all about the stats, and never the content or quality. Kaalis 05:27, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Seriously though. I have more edits than assfly on CP here (who cares?), and if I'm not sure what size I want an image I USE FUCKING PREVIEW! I actually am embarrassed when I miss some crap and have to edit 2 or 3 times to fix it. I really think Ken simply doesn't understand what "preview" means. It's not like he can be worried about ECs and wants to get his work in before it gets to be a pain - he only edits protected pages! ħuman 05:32, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

He has dropped us a message. ListenerX^TalkerX 05:40, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

"gentlemen, I want to make the picture a little larger. may make it a little larger tomorrow as well. :)" (upped it to 474px). You know, if he wasn't so weird, he'd be the funniest person on CP. Wait... Seriously, he is playing games. He couldn't have been seriously increasing that image one pixel at a time. Poor guy is lonely (and I have a list of 17 reasons why) and just wants us to be his friends. ħuman 05:53, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

I think Ken likes to have a lot of entries in RC as it highlights whatever he has done. If he got it right first time then it would probably just drop of the screen without anyone noticing and that would be an anathema to him. Let's face it we are the only ones who notice what he does at CP. If he makes a suggestion on Andy's talk or changes one of the mainpage templates the response is nearly always a deafening silence no matter how loud he says Ole! Ole! Ole! Генгис^{Gum disease} 06:44, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I guess you're right. It's sad, though, isn't it? I'm not an RC junkie, here or there (ok, sometimes if I'm bored, there), so I don't care. I use my watchlist, which only shows the latest edit to a page, enough for me, I guess. You really think Ken does his stumbling 12 edits to fix typos and syntax on purpose? You may be right, I may be crazy... ħuman 07:14, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Given Ken's staggeringly poor ability to write more than one sentence in English without becoming linguistically constipated, then I would have said that all those excruciatingly small edit changes were just down to some mental impairment (here I'm imagining the start of Ice Age where the squirrel is repeatedly and unsuccesufully tring to bury a nut in the frozen ground). Although it took him a long time at CP (what was it, 6 months?) to learn how to upload an image I had attributed his failure to master the preview button to be down to a low IQ. However, to adjust a 470px image by just 1px where the change on screen is miniscule and then save it, not once but several times, is an obvious plea for attention. Генгис^{Our ignorance is God; what we know is science.} 08:03, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Ken's inability to use the software staggers me. He was a sysop at Conservapedia before I made my first IP edit to fix a typo at WP, yet he can't even do a simple thing like link to the subsection of an article. He is constantly trying to link to something like the religious views of Charles Darwin so instead of Charles_Darwin#Darwin_and_marriage he uses an external link. I am sure I have tried to give him instruction via red phone messages how to do this. Although when it comes to dumbass things Ed's copying a 280,000 character javascript file from WP to aSK, given his 8 years using the software, without think that the script might be installation dependent was amazingly stupid to say the least. - π 08:08, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Link please on Ed stupid? ħuman 08:37, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Here is Sid and me explaining to Ed he is stupid. Here (cation may cause computer to explode) is Ed being stupid. The left hand side is ridiculous as he is trying to include a script from a Wikipedia user on his ASK monobook (I doubt PJR has installed the extension that would allow you to include ones on ASK either), after failing he copies the whole thing over. - π 13:21, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

RE: the warning: It did mine: stopped FFox & ran both CPUs @ 100% simultaneously. Had to kill PIDs to regain control. _and marmite 15:44, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

One thing that his latest news item (the random guy in the UK) makes me think is: Great. This lonely bastard found a friend. Good for him. Seriously. He fucking needs it. Neveruse513 13:09, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Has Ken ever opened up on these mysterious contacts etc of his after trumpeting them loudly (there was one I know but only one that I can recall). If they're so brill, why doesn't he identify them. Or are they just figments of his infantile imagination? _and marmite 15:42, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

CaptureBot

Hi all, I have two questions to raise about Capturebot.

First of all, the original Capturebot is nasty when edit conflicted. He will just run straight over you. I can fix this up but it makes it run slower and use up more of both RationalWiki and my own bandwidth having to upload and down load the text with each tweak. So the question is do you want me to rewrite Capturebot so that it won't stomp too much during an edit conflict or do you want me to rewrite Capturebot to leave a message at the top when it is running?

Second. We have links to CP all over RationalWiki which are being broken either through page deletions (admin, malicious or stupidty) or because sometimes the revision numbers get mixed up during server moves, database things and software upgrades. If was to under take the mammoth task of writing an all purpose Capturebot, would people be inclined to use it? - π 08:20, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Last question - would we run it ourselves? I would, as long as you please to install the [brains:human] extension. First, I dunno, it's been running pretty smoothly lately as far as I can see. Is there and ideal world where it would run automatigically after each WIGO edit? Not sure I know what I'm talking about, here, though. ħuman 08:32, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Capturebot2 can patrol WIGO CP and check it every minute to upload any missing images, and it doesn't have to edit the page. I simply didn't have the time to fix the bugs (pages that are too large hang it because of a bug in Webkit, and it should capture only the diff part in diff links). I think the best way to do this here --  Nx/talk  08:37, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

My idea was you place a template on the page saying "this page needs capturebots attention" which would put it into a category "pages that need capturebot attention". I run the bot, it finds every link on the page, follows them and makes the picture, gives it a name based on the page and revision ids, uploads the picture and puts a little img tag next to it linking it to the picture. Not high tech as a scanner and an extension of the img tags but with a few hours of work and swearing I can get it to run. The only thing that would be a pain would be all the img tags in the source code. - π 10:18, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

That's a good idea too. One thing: Let's make the image names a hash of the link (wigo3 and CB2 use crc, but MD5 is better I think), so they can be shared, i.e. once it's uploaded by CB2 because it's in WIGO CP, it doesn't have to be uploaded again. --  Nx/talk  10:23, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

/8!

Congratulations! An important milestone is achieved. Today, 16,873,762 individual IPs are blocked at CP - that's more than there are in a /8 range (16,777,216).

range blocks

rir

TK took tremendous efforts to make this possible: we have to thank him for almost tripling the number of blocked IPs over the last four months alone.

One may say that this is only 1/256 of the address space of the IPv4 (and TK will say so). But I can't imagine that there is any other blog - or wiki - which has excluded more IPs from contributing than Conservapedia. The strategic blocking of foreign ISPs and universities, schools, and colleges at home has interesting effects. I doubt that one of those former homeschoolers who now attends one of the better universities will ever try to edit from there, but if he tries to do so, he is in for a surprise...

Conservapedia couldn't be reached for a comment.

larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 08:48, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Nice work. I edited your prose in one place. ħuman 08:58, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 09:04, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

File:Ipblock-range-contrib-Conservapedia-20090125.png IP blocks

IP blocks

"block speed"

Just to show what a busy beaver our dear TK is. larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 09:48, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

A historic day indeed! I wonder if CP now has the most IP block of any site in the world? --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 11:06, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

I wonder when will the collateral damage hit Andy and TK.(Quick, someone use a anonymous proxy in their neighbourhood!). Thieh 11:58, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

IP assignments are done by companies purchasing block of address, normal (although less common now) either a 24 - 256, 16 - 65,4536 or an old class A 8 - 16,777,216, they are not assigned by physical location. You would need to know who their ISP is and what part of the network they are in. Seeing as there is such a limit to the number companies usual by multiple 256's meaning that you can have the same ISP and not be in the same contiguous block. This is why TK block /24 and /16 because he is trying to remove the old class B and C network. - π 12:59, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

I think that given the recent changes is the admins, Bert, Jinx & Iduan, I'd say it's already hit. All Terry Koeckritz has to do now is chase away the remaining admins and he'll succeed in shutting down CP.

I propose we block all of the 192 network from RW in his honor. Neveruse513 13:06, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Is it possible to develop a trend line from the available data? We might be able to extrapolate the fall of the Empire. EddyBaby may be able to help with the math...Jimaginator 13:17, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

if no new blocks were made...

It's hard to make such a prediction. Even if TK could keep up his speed, it would take some eighty years to block the whole of IPv4 (including 127.0.0.1 :-)

And after TK had started to his new vendetta in Dec 2009, he chose the block lengths erratically. Now, he has to live with the consequences: over the next months, quite a few of his /16 blocks terminate (see picture), so he'll be busy reblocking. But perhaps, this task will be delegated to Karajou, who only know ∞ ...

larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 14:03, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Oh well, it was a thought. Thanks. Jimaginator 14:14, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

That reminds me, I sure hope TK doesn't find out that liberal trolls/vandals/socks access CP through that well-known proxy localhost. It sure would be a shame if TK blocked 127.0.0.1. --Simple 15:05, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

What does 10 billion dollars buy you?

Stupidity. Proof: "1.5 million Homeschooled children saves taxpayers as much as $10 billion dollars annually"[6]

Output: Homeschooled kids, like the kids at CP.

Q: Why can people save 10 billion dollars annually by homeschooling?

A: People still spend money to host debate on the following matter:

"Textbook bias on Evolution vs. Creationism: video shows how textbooks are still wrong."

Corresponding News from CP

Maybe someone can rewrite that and put it up? Thieh 15:58, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Wow. Just watched that video. Apparantly, the Discovery Institute, you know, one of the most prominant and well-known creationist organisations in the US, 'does not support the teaching of creationism', according to Casey Luskin. Well, fine. What's all the shouting about, then? If you now agree that creationism shouldn't be taught, where's the 'controversy'? You can't 'teach the controversy' if there isn't one. Zmidponk 19:12, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

We at the discovery institute fully support the teaching of creationism intelligent design the controversy the strengths and weaknesses of evolution. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 21:11, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

I want to verify...

Is is just me or is account creation blocked altogether?

File:Nocreateacct.PNG

Thieh 16:29, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

It happens quite a lot. comes on with night mode, I think. Is night (no edit) mode still on? _and marmite 16:35, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Just checked & night mode is OFF. I can edit so it's just paranoia. _and marmite 16:36, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

I fear I may be partially responsible for that. It'll be turned on again in due course. DogP 16:55, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Bad dog! you haven't been socking up over there have you. What a very naughty thing to do! _and marmite 17:05, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

We need somewhere to put Ed's WP antics

He's just edited several times on Wp:Denial-of-service_attack. Note that: "As of May 2nd, 4chan's /b/ board is down due to a DDoS attack which eventually affected all other site boards." (not Ed's addition BTW). Wonder if he's a /b/ regular & that's what brought it to his dirty little attention? Fits with my creepy image of him. _and marmite 17:03, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

it bothers me a little that a nice religious person like ED would even know of 4chan much less /b/ [the source of all evilness on the interwebs] - maybe it was a mistake when he searched for more Sailor Moon stuff Hamster 17:27, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

I never said he did, but it's a creepy coincidence, isn't it? _and marmite 17:44, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Toast, you should be thankful that you are of senior years. If you were sixteen again I can imagine "Uncle" Ed taking an abnormal interest in you. BTW is it just a Brit thing that calling someone who isn't a relation "Uncle" has creepy connotations? I'm thinking of Uncle Arthur in Dad's Army, the loanshark in East-enders who was called Uncle, Uncle Ernie in 'Tommy or the term Dutch uncle who is someone who delivers stern lectures. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 18:31, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Well 'samatteroffact I wear a lot of kids' clothes (on account of not being very big [to say the least]) as a: they fit! & b: they're cheaper, being VAT (that's a tax for you Murcans) exempt. From the head down I could be, indeed have been, mistaken for a twelve year old. Do you think I could 'tice him with a couple of snaps. Yes: the "Uncle" thing's very creepy in the "come and see my fluffy puppies, little girl" sort of way. _and marmite 18:47, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

He's probably fed up with the /b/ folks flooding into other channels and spamming around. They're interrupting his /cgl/ or /gif/ or something. >.> Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 02:14, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Creepy Ed advises cooperation then immediately permabans

12:31: Please cooperate with conservative 12:36: Permaban. Neveruse513 17:36, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

12:42: "Fear not, Ken! This user has been removed!" (not that Ken cared - the entire incident had been ignored by both sides for roughly two weeks by now) --Sid 17:58, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

I do not agree that "the minor genetic influence on homosexual desire is easily controlled by willpower," and I no of no scientist who says so. It's only a typo I no but LOL. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 18:02, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Comprehending "...and I no of no scientist who says so."... Head... hurts... (I know one of the "no"s is the word "know", trying to tell which one... ouch.) Thieh 18:04, 6 May 2009 (UTC)