Conservapedia talk:What is going on at CP?/Archive137

This is an archive page, last updated 14 April 2010. Please do not make edits to this page.

Archives for this talk page:

<1>, <2>, <3>, <4>, <5>, <6>, <7>, <8>, <9>, <10>, <11>, <12>, <13>, <14>, <15>, <16>, <17>, <18>, <19>, <20>, <21>, <22>, <23>, <24>, <25>, <26>, <27>, <28>, <29>, <30>, <31>, <32>, <33>, <34>, <35>, <36>, <37>, <38>, <39>, <40>, <41>, <42>, <43>, <44>, <45>, <46>, <47>, <48>, <49>, <50>, <51>, <52>, <53>, <54>, <55>, <56>, <57>, <58>, <59>, <60>, <61>, <62>, <63>, <64>, <65>, <66>, <67>, <68>, <69>, <70>, <71>, <72>, <73>, <74>, <75>, <76>, <77>, <78>, <79>, <80>, <81>, <82>, <83>, <84>, <85>, <86>, <87>, <88>, <89>, <90>, <91>, <92>, <93>, <94>, <95>, <96>, <97>, <98>, <99>, <100>, <101>, <102>, <103>, <104>, <105>, <106>, <107>, <108>, <109>, <110>, <111>, <112>, <113>, <114>, <115>, <116>, <117>, <118>, <119>, <120>, <121>, <122>, <123>, <124>, <125>, <126>, <127>, <128>, <129>, <130>, <131>, <132>, <133>, <134>, <135>, <136>, <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 don't know why I always think of this...

but I often envision someone coming up to me and saying "AHH!!! I have a paper on Alger Hiss due tomorrow!"

And being all like "Hey man, it's cool - I happen to know the location of the largest collection of Alger Hiss information known to man."

One day... ^{— Unsigned, by: Neveruse513 / talk / contribs} 15:19, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Ah, but would you be able to recommend it without the caveat that you have to check every single word to make sure it's not tainted by bias and/or parody? --Kels 16:22, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

No one will ever know if there is parody in that article. It is simply too long to be read. ^{— Unsigned, by: Neveruse513 / talk / contribs} 16:34, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

I never could get up the gumption to read most of the articles there, let alone the novelette that is Alger Hiss. Aboriginal Noise ^{Theist, barely hanging by a nail} 16:36, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

If I could summon the energy for wandalism, I'd be tempted to employ CSS' shiny new opacity filter to put a big, repeating "TL;DR" watermark in 180pt bold over the article. ^{— Unsigned, by: JeevesMkII / talk / contribs}

I was chuckling at "novelette", then thought "nah, it can't be that big, can it?"
% lynx -dump -nolist http://www.conservapedia.com/Alger_Hiss | wc -w
*mash enter*
31528
WTF? --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 14:08, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

windmill ministries evolution article

http://www.windmillministries.org/theory-of-evolution has a nice soundtrack of Hitler speaking presumably German. The article looks like something Conservapedia wrote. Anybody want to count the mistakes ? Hamster 17:06, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

It's definitely not Ken's writing. It's readable by humans, for a start, and it's way too short. Full of lies, certainly, such as how scientific consensus says abiogenesis is impossible. Although other than Ken crowing about it, it's still a garbage article on a forgettable site, so probably not worth spending much time on. --Kels 17:21, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

I wasn't able to read it because it blared Hitler at me when I opened the page. I think this is a great reason for the CP webmaster to install sound and video extensions. Ken could kill CP stone dead in a week if he were given those toys to play with. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 17:39, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, that's German. And yes, I also support enabling autoplaying sound on CP. Nothing says "This is an honest article!" like Hitler manipulating the masses with one of his speeches. --Sid 19:18, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

I note that "The Producers" is getting its German Premier today. No swastikas in the ads but OK on stage. Don't you have to be careful about blasting Der Führer out of your pc there Sid?

Springtime for Hitler would be a nice CP addition Hamster 19:45, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

The Producers is probably Mel Brooks' funniest work. I almost wet myself the first time I saw Springtime for Hitler. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 20:14, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

OMG, I can't believe I never watched that before! *giggling like mad* XD --Sid 20:59, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Well, we allow Hitler audio/video (with all Nazi symbols uncensored) for documentaries, lectures and stuff like that, so it's not like people will call the police the moment they hear his voice. But it would've caused a few raised eyebrows if I had accidentally opened this page in some public space or with my windows open, of course: "Dude, WTF u doin'?" - "It's cool, I'm just reading about evolution." --Sid 20:52, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Dontcha think the swastika looks like a windmill? Генгис^{Is the Pope a Catholic?} 20:59, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

As a European who lived in India for a good long time, you never get over the vague sense of guilt every time you go to the store and buy a bag of swastika milk. This is even after you get over the double take of milk being sold in bags in the first place. It's kind of bizarre to see this symbol that in the west we always associate with mass murder being used on such mundane products. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 21:49, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

the swastika predates hitler by quite a bit. There are versions which face the other way too. Its sad to let one whackjob define the symbol Hamster 21:54, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Having been reminiscing about my days in the Boy Scouts, I should point out that on the side of the Methodist church where the meetings were held a swastika was one of the symbols carved on the wall. Генгис^{You have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you.} 22:26, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

This bit is not to be missed , not hitler related or about evolution but good for a laugh.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BkYBJId7WZs&feature=related Hamster 21:38, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

"Mel Brooks, though, is a genius: he knows that the best way to diminish someone is to ridicule them." - the most recent comment for that clip. Which rather sums up RationalWiki, I think. Генгис^{You have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you.} 22:26, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

I see Ken has posted a lame windmill picture on the front page. What made him choose a broken one with only three sails? A subtle message there I think.  Lily ^{Inspirate me.} 11:12, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

You know I have always thought that Ken knows better, he is just one of those "take it all or leave it all" Christians. Either the whole bible is true or not, so he spends a lot of time trying to convince himself that evolution is false, despite all the actual evidence. What I find interesting about Ken's articles is there is not a single false line in them. Each sentence is factually correct, that person did indeed say that quote, he just string it together in a way that is overall false. - π 11:20, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

I dunno about the "not a single false line" thing, but yeah, it's a pure spinjob. Everything is twisted to make the target look bad, every quote is carefully mined, tons of fallacies are used, and sourcing standards go straight out of the window. If you're trying to learn the technique, it's a quite fascinating piece, really. --Sid 11:54, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

TK don't know statistics either

I was about to WIGO this, but items of this type seem to be destroyed in the voting, so I moved it here. Terry Koeckritz trumpets the good news for all to hear: America is a Pro-Life Nation!!!!! by a whopping margin of 51-42 with 95% confidence of a =/- 3 point margin of error... Terry Koeckritz will forgive us if we don't hit the streets. SirChuckB^{DMorris for new Jinx!} 20:45, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

...And while there was a bit of a jump in anti-abortion/pro-choice self-affiliation stats, the underlying opinions didn't move much--a decided minority think that abortion should be illegal under all circumstances, which is the way it's been for umpteen years.--WJThomas 23:34, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

No-one over there has a single fucking CLUE about stats. Baboons in the zoo know more about stats than the lot of them put together. "Selection Bias? Don't you dare accuse me of that, you liberal you. What is it anyway?". DogP^{Marmite Patrol Info here} 23:38, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Since when do they stop using some number line to describe the political position? (As far as I remember they can use a number line for almost anything) [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 02:56, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Remember that guy...

FellowChristian who went to CP to escape the "persecution" of Christians on wikipedia? The page he created and was deleted - you can see the remains of it at cp:Conservapedia:AFD Examples of Absurdities in Wikipedia if any refresher is needed. Well, he's gone now. Parthian shot left in edit comments[1]. TK is doing a good job at even chasing away the true believers - he was exactly the type that CP should have tried to hold on to. --Shagie 22:30, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Nope, nothing informative found on CP. Seems like a disgruntled WP user who got rejected by CP as well. [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 02:53, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Sorry if this is old gnus...

But is this anyone here? Amin7b5 01:20, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Heh! dunno. But JMcH is interested, wonder hoo that is. _and marmite 02:35, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Too contemptible for a WIGO

TK brings up 9/11 in the torture pictures debate. Anything to get at the Obama presidency. ^{This message brought to you by: respond}_and honey 05:06, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Oh wow. I wonder how much lower TK can go. I love that he points out the Obama Administration doesn't shove pictures of the Towers under attack down our throats. He's right about that, that's a badge of honor you can wear all on your own TK, HollowPsycho 07:38, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

You know I never really thought about it before but TK's return was a bit over a week after Obama's election. I wonder whether he was hoping to use it as a lever to get his power back or whether he is actually upset about it and decided to use CP as an Obama bashing platform. That is fucking low which ever either way, using the death of 2,900 fellow Americans to do a highly partisan attack your democratically elected President. - π 08:42, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Heh, there's some implied CP Redefinition going on there: "Torture? That's something terrorists do! We merely use coercive interrogation, nothing to see here!" --Sid 11:40, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Torture pics can be fun. Etc 12:18, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

No Parodists. Nope, Never.

That new WIGO is great. "There have never been parodists"? Is that so TK? hehehe. Bonus lulz at the fact that now TK is replying to Andy's mail. Ace McWicked^{Disco Jesus} 22:01, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

What do ya wager that "behind the scenes discussion" was Terry Koeckritz just making it up on the spot. Z3ro^talk 22:05, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Since TK and Andy are pretty much the only "senior admins" left, that's a fair bet. TK's main activity of the day was casually disposing of another quarter of a million Europeans. It's rapidly turning in to RJJensen wiki, with TK making sure he's entirely undisturbed by anything like a community forming. Kendoll is taking over the front page piecemeal, while the news becomes ever less newsworthy. The glorious leader has retreated in to his own private madness, and is seemingly oblivious to his state crumbling around him. It's almost worthy of its own greek tragedy. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 23:30, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

RJJensen - what it must be like to be retired and have enough spare time to inundate CP with so much rubbish that no-one has the time to read through it all. Генгис^{You have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you.} 23:54, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

I don't get RJJ. All evidence points to him being a real historian. Why waste your time on CP? There is WP, Citizendium, or who knows what else he can spend his time on. Maybe even, I don't know, publishing books? But here he is on CP, basically nullifying anything worthwhile he has ever done in his profession. It's very sad, really. I hope that when I retire I don't punctuate my career with a gigantic turd. Corry 02:54, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

He used to be on both WP and Citizendium, he doesn't write much new for CP just copies what he wrote there. His presence at CP is odd, he does all the actual good work and is general treated as a tolerable nuisance, he is generally distrusted by the other sysops as being a "liberal", e.g, he is a conservative but still has his brain in gear. - π 04:34, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

He crossed blades once with Andy, over Niccol Macchiavelli, but he avoids Andy's lectures: he really wants to stay at CP and makes compromises for this. When Clement B. asked him to give his opinion on Prussia is just another name for Germany, he took great pain not to contradict Andy... larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 05:03, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

So he's just another loser on the internet, like the rest of us? ;) ħuman 05:27, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

RJJ reminds me of a man trying to decorate the living room with a Persian rug while in one corner, someone else is digging a latrine (as he is entitled to do, because he owns the place :-) larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 05:33, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Please, let's not talk about RJJ. Editor at CP^{Oh, Finland! Why?} 08:50, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Why not? He may be the most amiable and knowledgeable of the sysops, but he allows for all the ignorance and unkindness to happen... larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 15:11, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

He allows it to happen for reason. Let's let him work there and see where CP is headed with him. --Editor at CP^{Oh, Finland! Why?} 18:23, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Also note that TopKunt has gone back to referring to himself as a "senior admin". --PsyGremlin_Whut? 10:10, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

I like how TK assumes no one can use dictionary.com:

–noun
1. a humorous or satirical imitation of a serious piece of literature or writing: his hilarious parody of Hamlet's soliloquy.

2. the genre of literary composition represented by such imitations.
3. a burlesque imitation of a musical composition.
4. any humorous, satirical, or burlesque imitation, as of a person, event, etc.
5. the use in the 16th century of borrowed material in a musical setting of the Mass (parody Mass).
6. a poor or feeble imitation or semblance; travesty: His acting is a parody of his past greatness.

–verb (used with object)
7. to imitate (a composition, author, etc.) for purposes of ridicule or satire.

8. to imitate poorly or feebly; travesty.

Junggai 13:09, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Cache question

A user just asked if there was any update on the FBI incident, which TK predictably deep burned. And then blocked the editor and his city. It's somewhere in my browser cache but I'm too dumb to get it out. Please to halp me wif the FF cachez? User:Nutty Roux/sigtalk 02:57, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

here for the talk. too bad the cache is too old. [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 03:01, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Ya is burneded. :( User:Nutty Roux/sigtalk 03:03, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Back should work some of the time if you haven't close the tab yet, in case you haven't tried. [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 03:05, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

in firefox you can open a new tab and enter about:cache in the address bar, at the bottom is a list cache entries link , depending on your cache settings stuff will stay there for the session or till you clear the cache. Hamster 03:25, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

The answer was "Work Offline" then check your history for the page. Magic. User:Nutty Roux/sigtalk 13:54, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

MOAR FBI

Here and here. Deep burned. User:Nutty Roux/sigtalk 03:34, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Nice work, folks. ħuman 03:51, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

LMAO, since when did asking question be considered lying? Or did TK becomes illiterate as well? Or did TK mean lynching? [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 04:07, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

TK has a "style". For instance, when he extended my block to infinite, he accused me in the reason of sockpuppetry. No one will ever look beyond his reason, so it's a fait accompli that as far as CP knows, I was involved in running multiple socks there. He's manipulating their system in order to destroy them from within. Just be glad he's on their wiki and not ours. EDIT: Or is he? hehe ħuman 04:39, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

TK's words define reality on CP. Someone points out he is copypasting? "No, I am not!" And poof, he's not! Someone shows how he was wrong about something? "No, I was not!" And poof, he wasn't! TK says someone is a troublemaker/sock/parodist/vandal? Poof, he is! TK alone opposes a whole group of editors and claims that his view is the consensus? Poof, it is (and the opposing group is banned)! --Sid 11:48, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Sid it sounds like you're saying TK's a raving poof. Генгис^{Our ignorance is God; what we know is science.} 18:50, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Hmm...

I found this on WP, and I think it more or less sums up CP's administrative policy. Wisest stupid Hoover! 12:08, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

I reckon number 3 is actually official policy at CP. - π 12:16, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

The lot's spot on. ^{This message brought to you by: respond}_and honey 12:18, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Check out the bolded one. - π 12:25, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

And this is even more explicit:

• Wikipedia's "Five pillars of evil": Avoid edit wars with admins, as they are always right
• Conservapedia's "Editing etiquette": Do not revert an Administrator's changes without first discussing it with them, and gaining their permission. Administrators are in charge of deciding the editorial policy of Conservapedia. Their instruction(s) on such matters are always to be followed.

Really, did they TK and Dean (mostly) look at that Wikipedia page to design the enforced CP rules? --Sid 18:47, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

It was started June 2007, so CP had a head start. Maybe it was based on CP in the first place?

Ole ole ole

Ken has come out with yet another Red Telephone, this time encouragin us to do a side by side of a CreationWiki article. Oh dear. The Emperor _{Kneel before Zod!} 19:15, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

PS Ken, you might want to watch this Youtube video on Intelligent design.

These shoutouts are more or less all Ken ever does now. Do you think he's found a boyfriend who's taking up all his, ahem, 'energy'? EddyP 19:30, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Operation Power Piston is quickly approaching its climax! Stay tuned for YouTube videos, fellow believers! --Sid 19:34, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

*checks article history* Ah yeah, totally forgot that Ken masturbated on CreationWiki (under the creative name "Creationist") before joining CP. --Sid 19:34, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

I went and Schlaflied skimmed that CW article, it's appallingly bad. Most of what they claim, that I read, was stuff that could be simply observed over time (kosher diet, lions killing, harvester ants...). The list in my homskollar YEC "science" book was much better, although twice as silly and not even supported, in most cases, by the verses referenced. ħuman 22:15, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

I'm impressed- 25 minutes after Ken creates his Gentlemen- and not one tedious, minor edit. The Emperor _{Kneel before Zod!} 19:38, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

ROFLMAO whoever did that just taught Conservative to lock his shoutouts down a little tighter. Good show. User:Nutty Roux/sigtalk 20:00, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

That's absolutley hilarious. The Emperor _{Kneel before Zod!} 20:13, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

What's beautiful is that Andy was busily reverting other obvious vandalism and left this to stand. Just goes to show that not even he looks at Conservative's edits. This is a true indicator of Ken's lack of relevance. User:Nutty Roux/sigtalk 20:29, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Probably Andy didn't notice the difference. After all, the content is the same as the genuine shoutouts... only better written. --Just passing by 21:05, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

God, it's been there 40 minutes... The Emperor _{Kneel before Zod!} 20:30, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Should we really be bringing attention to this? It'd be brilliant if he left it like that. EddyP 20:38, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Actually, that would explain why Ken's been away for 50 mins and left that up there... EddyP 20:42, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Gone, after no less than one hour and nine minutes. Now I can finally go to bed :D EddyP 21:04, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Hello, Addison! Corry 21:05, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Wait a moment... Ken claims that

“”"The percentage of people in the country who accept the idea of evolution has declined from 45 in 1985 to 40 in 2005. Meanwhile the fraction of Americans unsure about evolution has soared from 7 per cent in 1985 to 21 per cent last year."

If the people believing in evolution declined by 5%, but the amount of people "unsure" increased by 14%, then the other 9% musy have come from th Creationists. Therefore, we can assemble this table-

Group	%belief in 2005	%belief "last year"	%change
Evolution	45	40	Down 11%
Undecided	7	21	Up 200%
Creationist	48	39	Down 19%

Wow, Creationism has lost twice as much percent-wise as Evolution has, and is now, in fact lower. Looks like Ken's glorious victory is Pyhrric in nature. Epic fail. The Emperor _{Kneel before Zod!} 22:49, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Wait, that makes no f**king sense. First we have to adjust for change in population as well, since the base year is 1985 (then the evolution group compares to 2005 while the unsure group is "Last year", which may be different.)

assuming "last year was 2005", then we have:

Group	# in 2005	# in 1985
Evolution	118,564,162	107,065,708
Undecided	62,246,185	16,654,666
Creationist	115,600,057	114,203,421
Total	296,410,404	237,923,795

Which may pretty much be a difference in reproduction rate. [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 00:29, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Ken on the net

He is back telling us he is annoying other people on the net. You know what Ken a bit of time of the net would do you some good. You have become obsessive. Go out, meet people. Who knows at the far end of the bell curve there probably is a woman for you. Any way I have finished my bot runs for this morning, I am going to follow my own advise and I am not going to be on my computer again until this evening. - π 01:48, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

A woman? The Emperor _{Kneel before Zod!} 02:04, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

TK needs this...

... to assist in his "blocking the world" quest. (It's Friday and I'm bored. Wait... it's not Friday. Crap!) --PsyGremlin_Whut? 13:27, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

America should be bigger! And in the center! And shaped like a cross! Damn Liberals. Jimaginator 14:11, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

traditional

xkcd:Map of the Internet

a la xkcd

To use a Peano curve to map the IPs is a lovely idea. I used it for the range blocks which are in place at CP. larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 09:14, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

For the first version, I made an error when calculating the Hilbert curve. Sorry. The new curve is corrected, and agrees therefore better with the xkcd comic... larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 18:26, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

(The gray points indicate blocks: the darker the color, the more of the 65,536 IPs in the square are blocked larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 18:40, 14 May 2009 (UTC))

Terry Koeckritz's record is impressive:

Number of Active Range Blocks at CP on May 17th, 2009

Range	/16	/17	/18	/19	/20	/21	/22	/23	/24	/25	/26	/27	/28	/29	/30	/31	/32
IPs in Range	65536	32768	16384	8192	4096	2048	1024	512	256	128	64	32	16	8	4	2	1
#Blocks	264	20	38	61	77	10	153	16	190	3	3	3	2	9	0	0	878

larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 10:08, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

If I add the product of the IPs in a range and number of blocks per range, I get a total of 19.6 million IPs blocked. Is that right? Or is the fact that Ed taught me maths starting to show? --PsyGremlin_Whut? 11:17, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

In the table, you find all current blocks. However, due to liberal deceit reactionary brilliance, some blocks cover the same ranges, as the may overlap (e.g., here) or be nested (e.g., these two). For the pretty colored pics, I take this effect into account: an IP is counted only once even if it is covered by different blocks. larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 11:40, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

9-11 WIGO

Jesus Christ, that wasn't even a proper complete sentence. I've changed it into something that at least makes sense, but if that wasn't the gist of what the original author was trying to say, please discuss...Amin7b5 18:21, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Yes let's discuss 3 or 4 incidences of you engaging in arrogant and patronizing grammar naziism by going out of your way to insult people with gems like "learn how to write." Such posts are tons more irritating than bad writing. Stop being such a dick. User:Nutty Roux/sigtalk 19:08, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Dude, this isn't just about "there" vs. "their" types of grammar Nazism--there are a few people leaving tonnes of work behind for others to do by writing stuff that doesn't even make sense because the sentences are so poorly put together. Fixing that kind of stuff up is tedious and often can leave a simple-minded fellow like me worrying that he's completely changed the meaning the author had in mind. No fun at all. Amin7b5 19:13, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

I can assure you nobody on the receiving end of angry and hateful "learn how to write" and "jesus who wrote this" messages, of which there are actually more than half a dozen in the last few days, likes it. One such recipient is a kid. Is that fun for you? You think that's productive? I've seen some examples of what you fixed and can only say that you're being more than a little melodramatic. User:Nutty Roux/sigtalk 19:20, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Then don't edit it. Its not like it was in your contract to fix things...--En attendant Godot_{"«Oh, my Lolita, I have only words to play with! V.Nabokov»} 19:22, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

I do I need the consent of the grammar we have a sense of fun is not in here? --Just passing by 19:26, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

What's funny/ironic is that the human mind is far more able to understand things than grammarians would want you to believe. I remember someone showing a study that if most of the letters in a sentence are correct, the mind can fairly easily understand the words in that sentence. Oh well, such is the life of Grammar/Spelling Nazis forever having to clean up the works of people such as myself. --En attendant Godot_{"«Oh, my Lolita, I have only words to play with! V.Nabokov»} 19:31, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

That wasn't a study, it was a paragraph carefully chosen and altered to be readable despite all the letter switching. ħuman 20:54, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Hah, I had the same argument with a colleague just three days ago. A case of one example being the rule. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 00:13, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I agree. IF the grammar is wrong, fix it with an edit comment saying grammar fix or some shit like that. Don't pull out the textbooks and lecture everytime you fix something. Here's a newsflash: People type fast. They make spelling mistakes and grammar mistakes. Being an overall dick and annoying people isn't productive. That's the type of thing we accuse CP of. Yes, I am aware that I just made a major grammar mistake. It was on purpose.... As a joke SirChuckB^{DMorris for new Jinx!} 19:39, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

The "rule" against ending sentences with prepositions is right up there with "no split-infinitives" for ridiculous grammar rules. Or do you lot like to go boldly? -- Yossarian^{The Man from the USSR} 23:26, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

I think there is a bit of a difference between main space and talk. With the article (including WIGOs) then there should be a little more attention to detail. I am quite happy to overlook other editors' spelling/grammar in talk pages so long as the meaning finds its way through. Генгис^{Is the Pope a Catholic?}

Just my 2p: I find it impossible to take seriously anything with obvious spelling or grammar mistakes (always excepting WfG, of course) in article spaces. It shows a degree of contempt for the reader: indicating that they're not worthy of attention. In the days of spellcheckers there's no excuse for splelinge mystayks and grammar is something what should at an early age inculcated be. ("spellcheckers" fails the spellcheck! Hee!). ^{This message brought to you by: respond}_and honey 07:59, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

If the frsit & lsat ltertes are crecort & all the ohter lertets are trehe, msot poplee wlil esaliy raed a stnencee at naer nmarol seped.

If the first & last letters are correct & all the other letters are there, most people will easily read a sentence at near normal speed.

The Hhuman brain is wonderful. ^{This message brought to you by: respond}_and honey 08:14, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

If the fsrit & lsat leertts are cceorrt & all the oehtr leertts are three, msot plopee wlil elisay raed a sceennte at naer namrol seepd. Not quite as easy, huh? (Of course your brain will already be disposed to reading this in its correct form). The human brain is good at matching patterns and to make this urban myth work you need to keep some patterns in place - like the "ence" in "stencee". If the letters make a different pattern then the brain is mis-directed. Генгис^{Is the Pope a Catholic?} 09:30, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Fniixg taht knid of sfutf up is toudies and oetfn can lavee a splime-mendid floelw lkie me wroynrig taht he's cellotempy cgnehad the minenag the ahutor had in mnid. (see above) Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member}

People being able to piece back together what you probably intended to write, or "typing fast" aren't really good excuses for not taking a few seconds to check your WIGO before submitting it. It's like going "JEEZ WE AINT IN SOME KINDA FANCY CHURCH" when people comment on you wearing a never washed mustard stained wife beater in public, like Ken does. --GTac 11:04, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

My issue is not fixing the issue... By all means, fix away... But you don't have to be a dick about on the talk pages as if you've never made a typing mistake. SirChuckB^{DMorris for new Jinx!} 11:47, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Gallup Poll

I like CP bragging about the US being a 'prolife' nation. Let's check the details, shall we? The Gallup Poll does, indeed, say that more people self-identify as 'pro-life'. However, the next graph shows that, although the percentage of people who think it should be legal under any circumstances has fallen, and the percentage of people who think it should be illegal in all circumstances has risen, the percentage of people who think it should be legal in some circumstances has remained more or less unchanged - and that figure is 53%. Also, if you combine the total percentages of people who think abortion should be legal at all, this means that, according to CP, the US is still a 'prolife' nation, even though 76% of people agree abortion should NOT be made totally illegal, even if some of those people self-identify as 'prolife'. Zmidponk 20:36, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

What makes you think that CP would care what any study shows? 78.32% of studies are done to make liberals look good. 54% of people know that --Nate River 22:11, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

How can we trust you? You might be one of the 97% of liberals who practice deceit. Merely 12% of them admit to it. EddyP 15:32, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Right now I hate Ken soooo much.

Ever since my folks took me to see Jaws when I was about 8, I can't take sharks in any shape, size or format. And now Ken goes and plasters a friggin' huge Great White on the main page (which I assume only eats atheists). Ah well, one less page I have to look at. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 13:35, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Faith in god will help you overcome your fear. EddyP 13:54, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Couldn't you at least be scared of something reasonable? You know, like clowns. Or Christians. Or Christian clowns. Oh wait, then you'd be afraid of Ken. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 14:12, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

"Conservapedia's evolution article is making evolutionists run away in fear! Ole Ole Ole!" Vulpius 14:32, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Wow! Hey, Ken your Hitwin pics really scare me too. And I'm terrified of windmills. and clowns --PsyGremlin_Whut? 16:13, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

To the Creationist Gentleman at The Other Site

In regards to my recent statements on the irrelevance of a certain gentleman at CP, I retract my recent statements. Over the past few days this gentleman has provided much of the entertainment at The Other Site, and I was particularly amused by the aforementioned gentleman's recent news item, written in no less than fourteen edits. I wish him luck in his valiant struggle against the forces of the filthy evolutionist TK. Taking into account the above, I therefore decided to retract my recent statements about a certain gentleman's irrelevance at The Other Site.
My most humble apologies to the gentleman at The Other Site.
Sincerely,
EddyP 20:49, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Note to JDWPianist

That's actually not parody--you should read up on Monk--weird hats were a trademark of his (there's footage in Ken Burns's Jazz of Monk performing in an Asian "coolie"-style hat); moreover, Bud Powell did suffer from mental health issues, and some people have speculated that Monk may have as well. And you're wasting your time editing those sorts of articles on Andrew Layton Schlafly's blog; if it isn't guns, God, abortion, vaccines or gays, nobody cares--that's why you were (and will probably continue to be) talking to yourself Amin7b5 22:53, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Sublime v ridiculous

The juxtaposition of Rjj's learnéd entries on India with Ken's additions of silly UTube videos strikes me as funny:

1. (diff) (hist) . . User:Conservative‎; 19:36 . . (+22) . . Conservative (Talk | contribs) (→Motivation: )
2. (diff) (hist) . . History of India‎; 19:35 . . (+338) . . RJJensen (Talk | contribs) (→War and Independence: )
3. (diff) (hist) . . User:Conservative‎; 19:30 . . (+94) . . Conservative (Talk | contribs) (→Goal Setting: )
4. (diff) (hist) . . History of India‎; 19:30 . . (+945) . . RJJensen (Talk | contribs) (→Environmentalism: )
5. (diff) (hist) . . User:Conservative‎; 19:30 . . (+190) . . Conservative (Talk | contribs) (→Motivation: )
6. (diff) (hist) . . History of India‎; 19:27 . . (+2,745) . . RJJensen (Talk | contribs) (add)
7. (diff) (hist) . . User:Conservative‎; 19:27 . . (+61) . . Conservative (Talk | contribs) (→Motivation: )

^{This message brought to you by: respond}_and honey 00:15, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Brilliant! --Sid 00:52, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

It is almost sad to see what CP should be so perfectly mixed with what CP is. - π 00:55, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

The royal "We"

TK:"We are an American encyclopedia." [2]. Thought they'd agreed long ago that English English was OK in context? ^{This message brought to you by: respond}_and honey 00:22, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

I think this is in the same vein as Ken announcing that "Conservapedia has learned" that such and such a creationist moron will be ejaculating on the internet soon, when in fact only kendoll knows what he's blathering about and he's equally as cagey with his fellow sysops in private. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 00:36, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

BIG articles

Alger Hiss tips the scales at 244kb. Is this a record? ^{This message brought to you by: respond}_and honey 16:47, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Well, let's see.

1. Alger Hiss- 250
2. Pan-Arabism- A surprising 228
3. Homosexuality- 177
4. Joseph McCarthy- 157
5. Koran Airlines Flight 007- A suprising 150
6. Homosexuality and Biblical Interpretation- 130
7. Atheism- 116
8. Evolution- 107
9. Barack Obama- 91

In comparison, our longest article is ‎Eternal Productions:101 Scientific Facts and Foreknowledge, coming in at 121, making it #10 on CP.

Come on, Ken, you're lagging behind. The Emperor _{Kneel before Zod!} 17:03, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Here, you can find a list of the longest articles at CP. larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 17:16, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Actually if you consolidated all Bert's KAL 007 stuff, it'd be phenomenal. ^{This message brought to you by: respond}_and honey 17:19, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

(that takes all the fun out of it though, LArron) ^{This message brought to you by: respond}_and honey 17:20, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Heh! Dubya comes in at 191, not a lot to say about him (Reagan's at 29) ^{This message brought to you by: respond}_and honey 17:22, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

It's interesting reading: cp:History of Poland at #13! (addendum: that's one of Rjj's copies from Citizendium) ^{This message brought to you by: respond}_and honey 17:26, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Hmm, about time he uploaded the pictures for that article. Генгис^pillaging 18:58, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

The thing about the Hiss article that I find weirdest is that half the article consists of citations. Wisest stupid Hoover! 21:18, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Do they simply like huge articles, or in a need of a policy of breaking articles into smaller pieces? [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 23:12, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Sid made this brilliant pic (discussed here). larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 17:48, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Inspired by Sid

The thirteen articles at CP with more than 100,000 bytes

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

# Article Bytes 1 Alger Hiss 251,135 2 Pan-Arabism 228,223 3 Homosexuality 177,243 4 Joseph McCarthy 157,848 5 Korean Airline Flight 007 150,360 6 Homosexuality and biblical interpretation 130,298 7 Operation Iraqi Freedom 123,862 8 Atheism 116,253 9 Battle of Gettsyburg 110,522 10 History of Poland 108,693 11 Evolution 107,055 12 Communist Party of the Soviet Union 104,277 13 Examples of Bias in Wikipedia 101,680

larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 23:01, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Andy and the Little Red Book

Chairman Andy is above, TK is in the middle, with banhammer, Ken is on the left, clutching to ideology, and Ed is on the right, looking stupid.

So I recently found a copy of the Little Red Book. I was browsing through it, when I came across two quotes that seemed to exemplify Andy, if you replaced "communist" with "conservative"

“”The socialist system will eventually replace the capitalist system; this is an objective law independent of man's will. However much the reactionaries try to hold back the wheel of history, sooner or later revolution will take place and will inevitably triumph.

which perfectly represents Andy's view on "the inevitable triumph of conservatism. And, of course, one cannot forget

“”We Communists never conceal our political views. Definitely and beyond all doubt, our future or maximum programme is to carry China forward to socialism and communism. Both the name of our Party and our Marxist world outlook unequivocally point to this supreme ideal of the future, a future of incomparable brightness and splendor.

...because communists Conservatives are never capable of DECEIT! The Emperor _{Kneel before Zod!} 01:15, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

...because they just convinced themselves to believe in the bullshit they are saying! [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 23:03, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

TK and his killer chip-gasm

As TK wipes himself clean after getting excited over the "killer chip", I would just like to point out his very obvious use of the prominent Conservative value of deceit by adding "Internet vandals" to the list of things the chip's creator said it could be used for. Now that I realize that internet vandalism deserves to be punished with death, I will never do anything even remotely close again (until, hmmmm... right now) Sandman 16:33, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

I fully support this cyanide chip technology. I look forward to holding the government of Saudi Arabia to ransom, threatening to remote kill people at random unless they pay me ONE BILLION DOLLARS. Of course, back here in reality land we realise that this is never going to fucking happen. (Though this does remind me of the guys who figured out how to put people's artificial hearts into test mode remotely from up to 50 metres away. Awesome hack.) --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 16:44, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Actually, the chip most certainly is possible. A tracking chip already exists for $500 dollars or so so one can track pets. Cyanide would be rather simple to add, and one could make it impossible to remove surgically by doing the same thing one can do with a bomb- removal would set off the cyanide. One could even use a gun to fire the chips. So, the chip technology is very real, and very, very, very, very, very dangerous. -- 18:14, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

You may like to spare a thought for the social consequences of implementing this technology. Then you'll appreciate why this is never going to happen. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 18:51, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

The people who would use the chip wouldn't care. -- 20:23, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Is that not a hoax?--Buscombe 17:08, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Nope, quite real, though it was pacemakers rather than artificial hearts, my bad. Defcon is by far the most interesting annual conference in the world :D --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 17:25, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

I think the bit about adding "internet vandals", which does not appear in the original article, is important, as it goes directly to the way TK operates in particular, and CP's conservative deceit in general. I was considering adding that to the existing WIGO, but noticed that someone had added a separate WIGO about it, and that it had been deleted. I think it should be added to the existing WIGO. Any objections? Gauss 17:19, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

I think that is a good addition. --Buscombe 17:22, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Done Gauss 17:35, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

So TK would be including DeborahB for her vandalism on the article about CP on Wikipedia, Jinx for wandalism here on RW, Kendoll for spamming sites (plus many other actions), Karajou for abusing his power, Ed Poor for abusing powers on both WP and CP... jeez, TK might as well start with the whole of CP's finest. Epic! Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 22:11, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Ah, he's just bored and trying to make us jump with indignation for him, just like when he deleted Human's user page. Corry 03:10, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

He is nothing if not inconsistent...and paranoid. It's a good thing no one is watching him for realz. Phallus of Satan 23:05, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

oh.. Ken...

Not wigo worthy, but it is interesting to see the way a great mind works. Ken is busy sanitising endogenous retrovirus article while resisting the urge to shout across the intellectual divide. --Buscombe 17:28, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

I see TK has wandered over and pissed on it. Interesting edit comment. Has he found a new target? Ooh, it's on, bitch. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 20:22, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

TK brings it. This should be interesting. Amin7b5 20:52, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Where to start? This is so full of win, I deeply regret that I have to go to bed in a few hours. SOMEONE MAKE SCREENSHOTS OF NEW DEVELOPMENTS! TK (Mr. "This is CONSERVApedia, we don't have NPOV and we won't give time to intellectually bankrupt POVs!") is for including both POVs? Ken basically disses TK (in broken English) for screwing up the thumbnail (even though that's a bug CP had ever since the upgrade - thumbnail generation fails surprisingly often)? TK trips and mentions the Special Discussion Group (which Ken never invited to) for a minute before catching himself? TK dissing Ken for being stubborn jerk? NOT EVEN EXPLODING ZOMBIE LESBIANS COULD MAKE THIS ANY BETTER! --Sid 21:12, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

EXPLODING ZOMBIE LESBIANS?! Wait, so Kenny was never invited to the SDG, so does that mean he would miss the posts by Andy? It's not like Andy ever cares, anyway... Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 22:06, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

The original discussion group, Conservapedia Special Discussion Group. According to PJR's tell all there has been three more since, two he didn't name so they may still be active. - π 22:09, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

What precisely did they say about Kenny on the SDG? It vaguely alludes to them "hating him" in the article. Or is that info not available for discussion, even here? Also, I love that Ken is utterly unable to use the English language in any meaningful way. What an odd dialect he must have... -- Yossarian^{The Man from the USSR} 00:43, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Just before the discussion group opened up someone anonymously registered the domain rationalwiki.info and was going to post private information from RW1 about several members here on it. It was kind of felt that my publishing the SDG info that would be a) playing into his stupid game and b) be a pretty immoral thing to do seeing as they did clearly want top keep these discussions private. - π 00:53, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

That's what I figured. --Yossie^{Spring in Fialta} 01:56, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Actually having reread PJR's document there have actual been 5 (6?) since the one opened up (which was about the second one they had) and Ken was invited late to only the most recent one. Seems they don't want him around even now. - π 02:09, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

If you've no facts: start a rumour

BHarlan asks about Joe Biden's alcohol problem, claiming to be unable to find anything. Hardly surprising when the first Google for "Joe Biden" alcohol is about his teetotalism. Shithead BH! ^{This message brought to you by: respond}_and honey 01:42, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

TK added it as a clause in the news item on him giving away the "big secret" about there being a bunker under his house (I always assumed there would be one). - π 01:48, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

So he did! Shithead TK! ^{This message brought to you by: respond}_and honey 01:52, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

A happy Shithead TK, from all of us. - π 01:53, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Anyone know where one might find the original of this to make an award for TK? ^{This message brought to you by: respond}_and honey 02:04, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Rjj deletes BH's comment, BH complains on Rjj's page, TK deletes BH's comment. Watch it BH - you're in the sights. ^{This message brought to you by: respond}_and honey 03:35, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Can I haz my fulfilled prophecy badge now pleez? ^{This message brought to you by: respond}_and honey 05:42, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Isn't BHarlan one of Andy's students? - π 03:38, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

No he is not, my mistake, continue slapping him TK. - π 03:41, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

So TK searches Google for Joe Biden Alcohol problem & comes up with 000s of targets - not noticing that most are related to his campaigning against alcohol. (except 1 header that has zero back up in theconservativepost.com/ of course) ^{This message brought to you by: respond}_and honey 03:49, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

On that criterion TK's got a (bigger) problem too ^{This message brought to you by: respond}_and honey 03:54, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

And he deep burns loads o'crap:

1. 23:55, 17 May 2009 TK (Talk | contribs) deleted "User:BHarlan" ‎ (Troublemaker/Troll: * Mystery:Why Are Black Americans Still Poor? ...')
2. 23:54, 17 May 2009 TK (Talk | contribs) deleted "User talk:BHarlan" ‎ (Troublemaker/Troll: content was: Your contributions have been less than encyclopedic. Please improve in substance and in tone, or please move elsewhere. Thanks.--Andy Schlafly 17:54, 20 April 2009 (EDT))
3. 23:51, 17 May 2009 TK (Talk | contribs) deleted "User talk:TK" ‎ (archiving)

(and so far he hasn't archived) ^{This message brought to you by: respond}_and honey 04:00, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

And, as an afterthought blocks the offender (and his email of course) ^{This message brought to you by: respond}_and honey 04:02, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

BH's mini-parthian:

== I will miss hellping out here ==I am sorry I could not help more. Good luck to everyone, and keep up the good fight!

^{This message brought to you by: respond}_and honey 04:05, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Well, that was fun! Quick on the trigger today, old TK. Who's next, I wonder. ^{This message brought to you by: respond}_and honey 04:11, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

That was incredible. It gets point out to him he has nothing to support his claim Biden had been drinking at the time, so he goes on a massive scorched earth campaign. It is only the kind of thing we joke about him doing, he actually did it. - π 04:15, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Well done on the WIGO Pi, I kept out of the way to avoid edit conflicts, I think between us we've got most of it. (NEVER TELL TK HE'S WRONG!) ^{This message brought to you by: respond}_and honey 04:20, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

It is strange I normally don't grab screencaps like that, but I happened to this time. I still have the mainpage and mainpage talk in case he throws the whole thing down the memory hole. - π 04:28, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

It has been said before but, TK - what a fucker! Andy, Andy, Andy - why are you so willing to let your site get ass fucked by TK? Ace McWicked^{Disco Jesus} 04:24, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

EC) He's taking after the master: Make a statement without checking the facts and then defend to the deathblock your untenable point using any irrelevant ad-homs on the way as you can. ^{This message brought to you by: respond}_and honey 04:26, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

I always thought BH was gunning for inner-circle / sysop status, the way he was so quick to suck upcome to Andy's defense on all the math/science stuff. You know, denigrating relativity in lecture 11 talk, and talking about his "secret plan" to "[develop] some of this material off-wiki, to send to Aschlafly for consideration." for the stupid math course. I was hoping he was the next Bugler. Gauss 05:33, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

He probably was, that is why TK was so quick to get rid of them. He used the Rod Weathers Parthian shot as an excuse to begin a policy of blocking emails, what he was actual angling was to prevent people going to Andy with complaints. Have a read of PJR's dossier, he mentions that what TK really wants is to be the only one Andy communicates with giving him effective control over the site. If BHarlan did a good job of defending Andy, he would be in his good books and inline for promotion and special protection. TK got rid of him before Andy had the chance to make him one of his special ones. - π 06:03, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

That wouldn't happen. He pissed Andy off when he insinuated that Saint Ronald was capable of producing a gay son. Andy reverted and slapped him on his user page about "gossip", which I ironically can't show because TK deep burned him for questioning his gossip. Corry 13:50, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

New Gentlemen video on Youtube

Gentlemen, there is a new video on Youtube. This is what I'll hear every time Ken does a "Gentlemen" moment. Plus the whole "red spy" thing fits in well with the theme at CP. "They're dime-a-dozen, backstabbing scumbags, like you! No offense." --Irrational Atheist 04:44, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

If he thinks I'm gonna download over 20 minutes of crap to vindicate his wazzokiness, he's got another think coming. ^{This message brought to you by: respond}_and honey 04:52, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Toast, it's not Ken's video. It's very funny. View it, please? --Irrational Atheist 04:59, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Tried: my sound's gone, sorry. I'll try to fix it and have another go. ^{This message brought to you by: respond}_and honey 05:03, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Ah, ma petit chou-fleur

Quite amusing. - π 05:14, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Think we can include the image of the spy as Ken for parodying the "Gentlemen" boasts? --Irrational Atheist 05:25, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

I don't know, I think the guy from "we have all your base" would be better. Beside, his article is getting kind of full of pictures. - π 05:56, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Wow Ken's videos are shit. I watch one and it was 10 minutes long, 2 minutes of introduction, 3 minutes talking this dentist guy up, a heap of time wasted on crap and the rest was the densit telling me how he couldn't understand something. Not real convincing stuff. - π 13:00, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Ken always reminded me of the picture on the right. Except since Publius' short story the cigarettes are replaced by hot dogs. --GTac 18:32, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

YouTub! YouTub! It's all about the YouTub! DogP^{Marmite Patrol} 18:50, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

In the Meet the Spy video, TK would be Soldier, jumping the gun and banhammering anybody who twitches funny. Andy is Heavy, having the finesse of a train. Ken is Blue Spy, ranting about his paranoia of the Evolutionist Red Spy. Scout is Bugler. -- ENorman.

How long has Conservapedia been a ghost town?

I've been tracking edits on Conservapedia over the past week. It's very quiet. Only members of a core team of a dozen or so editors have ever reached double figures in editing on any one day, and there have been a very large number of vandalism or troll edits, and lots of blocked users.

The only editor consistently producing new content of any quality is RJJensen, a retired history professor. If he stopped there wouldn't be much editing left except on ridiculous articles with names like "homosexual obsession."

Is this quietness a recent occurrence, or has it been like this for a long time? --Tony Sidaway 05:43, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

It has been creeping up slowly. There is a seasonal component too it, May probably is when most people have other things to do other than edit wikis. However if you look above at TK playing with other editors you will notice he doesn't play nice. One of two things happen to you at CP; either you get sysop right or you get banned, you just have to hope one happens before the other. TK is slowly clearing at any ungood think editors there who use to do the backbone work on the small unimportant articles. - π 05:52, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

As Pi said, it's been happening slowly but surely. Mostly because they are 1) slowly blocking the entire internet from edit access and 2) blocking anyone who disagrees in the slightest with Andy S. Wait, did I just say the same thing twice? ħuman 08:25, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Nope, at least at the times when Andy is not the one who is dropping the banhammer. [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 16:49, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

If only we had some kind of user whose major fetish was to create endless streams of delicious statistics in varying formats... --GTac 18:36, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Gary the EuroTrash is only the beginning. There is more to come for the Gentlemen (are you watching He Who Shall Not Be Named?)Phallus of Satan 22:30, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Is this Andy?

I was researching something for a client, when I came across the following paragraph and a little voice yelled in my ear, "This is Andy to a "T"!" (My emphasis added)

“”Commitment to a goal is usually measured by the action that someone takes to achieve the goal. Adults with ADD usually start out with a flurry of action when trying to achieve a goal and confuse this action with being totally committed to a goal. What often happens is that ADD adults tend to lose focus after the initial burst of activity towards their goal. A primary reason for this loss of focus is that a person never really thought about why they desired to achieve the goal. Commitment is measured by activity, but it is fuelled by desire.

--PsyGremlin_Whut? 08:41, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Heh! ^{I thought it was me being described!} Yup! Andy to a Tee. ^{This message brought to you by: respond}_and honey 10:18, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Shit that sounds like me! I had ADHD as a child, but I assumed that it kinda went away when you grow up. Psy, where is that article? I'm interested now! Crundy 12:01, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

That's the only part of it that referred to ADD, the rest was about goal setting. Can send it if you want? --PsyGremlin_Whut? 12:17, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

That's OK, found this anyway. Cheers. Crundy 13:43, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Oh and P.S. of course that isn't Andy. Only liberals have mental health problems, remember? Crundy 13:45, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

That looks like the kind of statement that anyone in the world would read and say 'Yes, that's me!' It's called the Forer effect and there are several articles that mention it on this very site.--ConservapediaRoolz 14:18, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

As someone with ADD, that does happen to me, but it also happens to my wife who does not have ADD. Forer FTW! Z3ro^talk 15:23, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Personally, I always thought that ADD and ADHA were always "forer" effects, as the primary descriptions of them are things that every single child I've ever met, has. From WebMd:

• difficulty paying attention to details and tendency to make careless mistakes in school or other activities; producing work that is often messy and careless (yeah, cause playing with friends, or watching TV is more fun then taking time to go over work)
• easily distracted by irrelevant stimuli and frequently interrupting ongoing tasks to attend to trivial noises or events that are usually ignored by others
• inability to sustain attention on tasks or activities
• difficulty finishing schoolwork or paperwork or performing tasks that require concentration
• frequent shifts from one uncompleted activity to another
• procrastination
• disorganized work habits
• forgetfulness in daily activities (for example, missing appointments, forgetting to bring lunch)
• failure to complete tasks such as homework or chores
• frequent shifts in conversation, not listening to others, not keeping one's mind on conversations, and not following details or rules of activities in social situations

---I really do not know why that isn't just being 1) a kid, or 2) a lazy, undisciplined kid.--En attendant Godot_{"«Oh, my Lolita, I have only words to play with! V.Nabokov»} 15:28, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

It's more complicated than that, and much more subtle. It's hard to describe to someone that doesn't have it, but it's more than the sum of it's parts. The difference you notice when you take any kind of stimulant, for example, is also indicative of different brain functioning. Z3ro^talk 15:31, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Agreed with Z3ro. I've been around some folks with pretty major ADD (one of my best friends, in fact), and part of the package of free gifts I get with my Tourette's is ADD and OCD tendencies. It's a different thing from "just being a kid" or "easily distracted", but it's a popular thing to misrepresent I guess. Especially when some subtlety is necessary in diagnosing and a lot of overworked medical professionals aren't really that interest in being that subtle. --Kels 18:13, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

OYG I have half of those symptoms! Shall I go seek medical attention and get myself drugged? [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 16:53, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Go for it; most ADD medications are just stimulants, you can get much the same effect from energy drinks at a fraction the cost. Z3ro^talk 17:53, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

It's kinda like everyone says... It's most than just typical kid stuff. For example, I have ADD and the other day I was walking around Sloan's Lake in Denver. We were having a pretty deep conversation, but every couple of minutes my attention would be pulled away and I'd be like "Hey look at that bird." It wasn't that I was trying to disrupt the conversation, I just could not keep my attention on it. SirChuckB^{DMorris for new Jinx!} 02:44, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Scientology as Christianity

RJJensen said:

“”Other Christian groups include Protestants (Dutch Reformed family of Churches, Anglican, Baptist, Congregational, Lutheran, Methodist, and Presbyterian) and the Roman Catholic Church. Greek Orthodox, the Church of Scientology, and Seventh-day Adventist churches are also active.

Note the period in that paragraph. He is separating the groups designated as Christian in the first sentence from the groups in the second sentence, one of which is non-Christian and another of which is designated by many evangelicals as "pseudo-Christian." ListenerX^TalkerX 16:18, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

you're right. my bad. middle-age eyes and all. and now I don't think you're an idiot for calling Greek Orthodox non-Christians in your edit summary--that's what it would appear RJJ was trying to say. Amin7b5 16:22, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Are there evangelicals who claim that Greek Orthodox (and likely other eastern orthodox) isn't Christian? My guess is that this is simply poor sentence construction on the part of RJJ. Scientology and Greek Orthodox are very, very different. Corry 16:31, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

That confused me too. I've always thought the GOC broke away from the RCC, but is essentially the same in terms of beliefs. I wonder where this has come from - then again, there has been debates on CP about whether the RCC is Christian, so who knows what these fundies think. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 16:36, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

(EC) There are Protestants who seem to think that any variant of Christianity with bishops to it is an agent of the Anti-Christ, a.k.a. the Bishop of Rome. ListenerX^TalkerX 16:39, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Wow, since when did Greek Orthodox Church (a.k.a Eastern Orthodox) no longer Christian, while the Protestant Churches (They both split from the Roman Catholic Church, just at different timeframe) still are? I thought those two has the difference mostly in the time split from the Catholic Church and possibility a minor subset of beliefs. Man, reading CP really start to give me brain damage. [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 17:00, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Actually, the Catholics split from Orthodoxy; the Pope (a.k.a. the Bishop of Rome) started lording it over the others, and when the Eastern leaders refused to acknowledge the Pope's authority, it started the schism. ListenerX^TalkerX 17:05, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Splitters! Генгис^{Our ignorance is God; what we know is science.} 18:34, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Actually, it is somewhat more complicated than that. Editor at CP^{Oh, Finland! Why?} 21:59, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

TK's next trophy?

TK looking for a head to go next to Jessica's? CP's been busy tonight! EddyP 20:53, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Oh god- TK vs Ken, the two biggest non-Andy personas on the site- This is gonna be huge. The Emperor _{Kneel before Zod!} 20:55, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Unfortunately, I think Ken'll bend over and take it. EddyP 20:58, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Has TK been on the Night Train Express communion wine? There's a lot of typos in his posts. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 21:03, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

No, he's only drunk on power. He's run out of users and new sysops to harass, so he's starting on the old guard. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 21:09, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

He's bored... larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 21:18, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Well, Ken had never really been "old guard". Ever since joining CP, Ken had basically been a loner who simply followed his own path, ignoring pretty much everything else on CP. He hadn't been a part of the SDG, for example. On the contrary, I think the SDG actually discussed whether "Conservative" was really Ken DeMeyer - he apparently never told anybody or gave any sort of verifiable ID.

Additionally, Ken is annoying. His practically DAILY "Gentlemen on a rather liberal website! Operation Wienerschnitzel has started! Some guy I won't name has told me that he will use certain measures to achieve a vague goal at a time of my choosing, maybe!"" shout-outs are clogging up CP's Recent Changes and all parts of the main page.

And his loner ways made him an attractive target: When it comes to Ken vs. ANYBODY, how many people will side with Ken? Zero. Ken has the charisma of burnt toast. In an actual stand-off between TK and Ken, the other sysops would be secretly cheering for TK, supplying him with as much ammo as possible.

The only obstacle is Andy. He defended Ken against random socks in the past, so TK will have to convince him that Ken has outlived his usefulness (which would actually be true, even by CP's standards). Ole! --Sid 21:22, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

They still don't know who he is, he goes by the name "David Jensen" now. I don't think anyone thinks that's his real name. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 21:27, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Interesting habit of picking nicknames that pretty much result in (what I spontaneously decided to call) Google White Noise: Either there are so many high-profile results flooding the search results that you won't be able to verify or disprove his existence ("David Jensen", "Peter Moore"), or the names are so utterly generic that you won't find any other trace of him anywhere ("Conservative", "Creationist", "Mr. Green"). Not to mention that he has a whole pile of disposable one-time names for when he's trolling forums and blogs. Gaming the search engine system from the very beginning, Ken? --Sid 21:41, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Ken seems to be ignoring TK- just tidying up his userpage- HEY KEN! MOZART'S REQUIEM IS SHIT, VERDI'S IS MUCH BETTER (sorry) The Emperor _{Kneel before Zod!} 21:49, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Man, how could he forget the classic Christian song, Drop Kick Me, Jesus, Through the Goal Posts of Life? --Kels 22:08, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Yo, did you notice that when TK is on the receiving end he's all for not washing their dirty laundry on the wiki, but when he's bitching at other sysops he's perfectly happy to bitch at them on their own user pages? --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 22:33, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

The phrase "when TK is on the receiving end" takes on new meaning where Ken is involved. --Kels

Looks like they've decided to kiss and make up:

Amin7b5 23:26, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

One of the general rules of dealing with TK: "TK doesn't make up. TK reloads." --Sid 00:52, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Funny. Just saw someone try debunk Evolution article, and TK permabans him. Guess TK made a 180º turn and (even though he accused Ken of doing it) does what he wants and enforces YEC POV anyway. Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 02:15, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Whatever "rule" TK needs to do whatever he wants is the one he uses. Don't try to make sense of it. ħuman 02:23, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Biden, Booze, and TK

I normally don't much care for TK WIGOs, but this might get big. HSMom has been on Andy's bad side for a while, but Andy might not like the idea of running of RJJ if he thinks that having the prof around gives the project a hint of legitimacy. If TK tries to run these two off it should prove interesting. Corry 22:31, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Maybe someone is feeding them farcical stories just to get HWSNBN going...Phallus of Satan 22:33, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Nah...no one would do such a thing, would they? I'm sure he doesn't read this anyway.Phallus of Satan 22:34, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Andy wants CP to be legit? (Probably a liberal word.) Vulpius 22:43, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

I dont like TK WIGO's much myself but it looks like he is entering end-game. Ace McWicked^{Disco Jesus} 22:49, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

"...it looks like he is entering end-game." We've heard that before. It must not be allowed to happen (as if it actually could!!). No, I'm sure all of the non-HWMNBN-related posts are completely legitimate. No sock-puppetry.Phallus of Satan

(ec) I wonder if Andy will step in. TK is just blatantly making stuff up here- particularly entertaining is the insinuation that he knows political insiders that tell him that Biden likes to occasionally limber up his mind. Andy won't defend Hsmom, but I'm not so sure about RJJ. And @Vulpius- Andy has never put forth effort to make CP legitimate, but you can only assume that he wants people to think it is legitimate. I suppose that today he has an opportunity. Corry 22:56, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

But HWMNBN has personally sucked Ed Meese's cock had many interactions with famous right wing peoplez!!!Phallus of Satan 22:58, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Of course, if you really think it through, maybe gary's little comments hit a little close to home. Booze. TK. Batshitparanoidinsanity... Phallus of Satan 23:28, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Well, the lulz seemed to fizzle out pretty quickly. Move along, citizens. @Chuck- I believe he means He Who Must Not Be Named. Corry 03:33, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

I love his insertion of what they frequently wail about over there- OMG WEASEL WORDS!!!! DogP^{Marmite Patrol} 02:22, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

I'm kinda sad... I was hoping that TK would start his name dropping again once he was firmly entrenched in the circle of power.... Weren't we keeping a list somewhere of all the people he is friendly with? I mean, seriously, his life is like Forest Gump with a lower IQ score. By the way, please forgive the black man's ignorance, but what does HWSNBN stand for? SirChuckB^{DMorris for new Jinx!} 02:55, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

He who shall not be named. Amin7b5 03:35, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Just to stir things up a bit... what if VP Biden's office were to be notified of these allegations? Libel case much? Secret service kicking Andy's head door in as they confiscate the server? TK getting shot at dawn ohpleaseohpleaseohpleaseohpleaseohplease? --PsyGremlin_Whut? 07:47, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

As incredibly pleasing as that would be, it sadly cannot happen. For Libel, Biden would have to prove that TK A, is lying (that's the easy part) B, that TK knows he is lying (much much harder) and C, that TK's lies damaged Biden's reputation in any way (Practically impossible). Besides, if any political statment gets CP raided, it would be the "The President is a Secret Muslim, buy guns and be ready to oppose him" line from Andy. SirChuckB^{DMorris for new Jinx!} 09:39, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

TK's last edit shows nicely why weasel words should be avoided. Lovely, TK. And the real beauty is that Andy doesn't even realize how much you're trolling his site. --Sid 10:14, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

I dunno--maybe TK is onto something here. This could really liven up otherwise mundane WIGOs: "TK, who (many feel) had to wear a diaper until age fourteen, rangeblocks the state of Idaho." or "TK, who (many feel) has admitted to repeatedly bilking elderly neighbors out of their Social Security checks, says something obnoxious." More zing that way.--WJThomas 21:49, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

The wigos will still be lame. Don't you people understand, that TK is a self-styled deep-troll intent on destroying CP? Not that that makes him our "friend" since in general, "TK is a self-styled deep-troll intent on destroying [wherever he goes]". ħuman 02:27, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Christian Persecution

Just took a look at this article for the first time. Man is it ridiculous. A couple of unhelpful stubs about real persecution in various countries, followed by a whine blog posting encyclopedic discussion of Hollywood's "persecution" of Christian Values™. RJJ was right to call them out for this idiocy, but we'll see how far this gets before his head's on the chopping block too. Junggai 08:50, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

It's pretty typical- you see people pretend that they're being persecuted because not everybody agrees with them. There is some very real, very bad anti-Christian persecution going on in the world, and it's pretty sad for people to claim that it's happening in the US because Hollywood makes some mean films or some people decide to treat gay folks like human beings. I think it's like the rich white kid wearing a Che shirt and complaining about how hard their life is because Dad will only by them a three series BMW, not a seven series. Corry 13:43, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Or, as I've said on-line to someone claiming American Christians are persecuted, "I invite you to find a synagogue, and see if they have any members past the age seventy or so and once lived in Europe. Ask them to explain 'religious persecution' to you." MDB 13:55, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Actually, I'm surprised they list Iraq. Isn't the conservative viewpoint that Iraq is a paradise now? MDB 14:02, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Maybe in the green zone. Corry 14:10, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Nono. Obama is president, so we can show how ugly Iraq has become under his leadership.--En attendant Godot_{"«Oh, my Lolita, I have only words to play with! V.Nabokov»} 14:13, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Jonathan Swift

As far as "lilliputian" and "yahoo" being Good Conservative Words goes... they're both from Gulliver's Travels. Could Jonathan Swift be reasonably considered a conservative by the standards of his time? I suppose if you take A Modest Proposal seriously, he might be.... MDB 13:24, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Fascinating observation, MDB!--En attendant Godot_{"«Oh, my Lolita, I have only words to play with! V.Nabokov»} 13:53, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, but it was an actual question, not an observation. My knowledge of classic literature is unimpressive. MDB 14:00, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

LOL (I was making fun of Andy's tenancy to exaggerate his "excitement" at things he sees that often are rather banal. If you notice it's always "fascinating" "wondeful" "excellent", never just "hum, sure..." ;-) Yes, Swift is very much a liberal in the traditional sense of "conservative wants to conserve the status quo". But, he's a wise man, so in Andyland, that means Conservative.--En attendant Godot_{"«Oh, my Lolita, I have only words to play with! V.Nabokov»} 14:11, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

True, but he doesn't enploy pure Christian humor. Travels is nothing but crude humor and mockery... I mean, he mocks Catholics and Protestants, and the main character puts out a fire by pissing on it. No, he's a liberal for sure. SirChuckB^{DMorris for new Jinx!} 19:40, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

He wrote tracts for both of the political parties of his day, he was the dean of a Protestant cathedral, and he wrote this. ListenerX^TalkerX 19:46, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Except that many (most?) experts accept that tract to be no small amount of satire, hiding a more important message about the nature of the Church. He wasn't *todays* Conservative christian, by even the slightest measure.--En attendant Godot_{"«Oh, my Lolita, I have only words to play with! V.Nabokov»} 20:00, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Gentleman RJJ

I think it was a parodist who nominated Humor in the Bible for speedy deletion, which RJJ more or less quickly obliges. Wasn't that one of Andy's pet projects? User:Nutty Roux/sigtalk 16:07, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

It depends on if they were before or after Jesus. ^{— Unsigned, by: Neveruse513 / talk / contribs} 16:14, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Hadn't thought about that. There was no humour in the Old Testament? --Kels 17:20, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Genuine Humor^TM? No. ^{— Unsigned, by: Neveruse513 / talk / contribs} 17:50, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

You know what Aristotle said ... tragedy makes men greater than they are ... humor makes them less than they are. Ungtss 17:58, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Spoken like a man who'd obviously never seen Trading Places. --Kels 18:30, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Girl Scouts

From the article linked by CP "When many parents think of Girl Scouts, they imagine young girls in uniform selling Thin Mints and Tagalong cookies – not learning about stone labyrinths, world peace, global warming, yoga, avatars, smudging incense, Zen gardens and feminist, communist and lesbian role models. " --- Cause gosh, it's so horrific that my daughter might learn YOGA or World PEACE or Zen Gardens. Bring back the real girlscuots so my daughter can learn to "lie back and think of england" and "make sure his dinner is hot", and "here's 100 recipes for after work coctail for your husband" and "how to breast feed a baby and not have saggy boobs". Oh yes, those were the days!--En attendant Godot_{"«Oh, my Lolita, I have only words to play with! V.Nabokov»} 16:31, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Sighs - same article gives us a new definition of tolerant: Garibay said, "Placing an asterisk by the word 'God' in the Girl Scout promise in an effort to be tolerant, yet promoting Eastern mysticism through Zen gardens and Buddha writings hardly seems tolerant to those who believe in Christianity." --No wonder CP likes WorldNutDaily.--En attendant Godot_{"«Oh, my Lolita, I have only words to play with! V.Nabokov»} 16:36, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

And Jane Addams - that uppity harpy! - is held up as a poor example of a role model that the Girl Scouts are propagandistically glorifying. And WND is indignant! After all, Addams was a filthy "ardent feminist and pacifist who received a Nobel Peace Prize." And we all know the sorts of slimeballs that win Nobel Peace Prizes. EDIT: And it brainwashes high school young women into caring about bullshit, waste-of-time causes like "Are plastic bags wasteful?" What next? Telling girls to clean their plate and not throw food away? Advice to not leave your car idling for twenty minutes? What kind of sick, twisted ideology is this that tells our girls not to waste stuff???? >:-( Bluefish 16:47, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Fundy tolerance: we'll tolerate anything that we believe in. Anything else - anathema! --PsyGremlin_Whut? 16:50, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

I love the "You're the bigot! (for not tolerating my bigotry)" logic when it comes to homosex. ^{— Unsigned, by: Neveruse513 / talk / contribs} 16:52, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

I wonder if the religious right has a basic misunderstanding of what the word "tolerant" means, or if they just misunderstand it on purpose to grandstand. It's like a poe, how is one to figure it out? Z3ro^talk 16:52, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

I love this article. Especially the list of women. It's basically "Jane Doe was a prominent female activist who was the first to do this and that, championed this issue, wrote five books, received numerous awards, and might have been a lesbian". --Commodore Guff (blocked for five years) 17:46, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Rjj on liberal bias

Rjj apparently thinks CP's going over the top on Liberal Bias deleting tons of good facts. ^{This message brought to you by: respond}_and honey 06:05, 18 May 2009 (UTC)image, just in case

TK! TK! - Go get him, boy!!. ^{This message brought to you by: respond}_and honey 06:05, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

"...shoots itself in the footnote..." He is being slightly light-hearted there... ListenerX^TalkerX 06:16, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Doch gewiss, but he still deleted 6000+ chars from the article. ^{This message brought to you by: respond}_and honey 06:23, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Did he wait until he thought TK had gone to his well earned slumber? ^{This message brought to you by: respond}_and honey 06:48, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

30 uninterrupted non trivial edits in 3h:03m (01:26 - 04:29) averaging (at a guess!) approaching 1000 chars ± each. Is this a record? ^{This message brought to you by: respond}_and honey 10:03, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Given how Jess was demoted for fiddling with Andy's beloved "Liberal vandalism" I'm thinking that the funeral march will be playing soon for RJJ (especially as he hints at conservative deceit in the talk page). Of course, it could just be another case of conservative double-standards. We wait in anticipation of TK's awakening from his camper cot in Mom's basement. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 10:15, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

when he started last year I predicted he'd be gone by Christmas, so he's done well, however I think he's blown it here. Soon TK's destroy CP mission will be complete, and then it'll be some other poor bastard's turn. Totnesmartin 12:20, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Nice blunder, professor: Stephansdom, Stephansdom... that's Vienna, isn't it? I move the pic from Germany to Austria... What does the caption say? Stephansdom, Passau... Hmmm, Passau, probably one of these quarters of Vienna, let's rephrase it into Passau, Vienna

ROFL! Passau is a town in Germany - though bordering to Austria. Yes, Passau has a Stephansdom on its own, a marvelous baroque cathedral. To mistake it for the Gothic cathedral of Vienna, well, that shouldn't happen to a historian... But perhaps, you were just skimming... larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 12:45, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

(Aside: one of my few clear memories of Wien from 1960 is of Stephansdom's roof ^{[and my exchange student's hunky older brother Harald who would have been a shoo-in (shoe-in?) for teh Hitler Youth if he'd been born 10 years or so earlier. A big, blond, well muscled guy]}.) ^{This message brought to you by: respond}_and honey 15:50, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

I think RJJ is going to stick his guns on this. There are academic standards to be upheld after all! Генгис^{Our ignorance is God; what we know is science.} 18:10, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

(unindent) Small wheel war, Ed reverts Rjj and Rjj reverts Ed and keeps on taking out stuff, and now Ed starts adding stuff. Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 02:26, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

UPDATE: Really, I know this is TK we're talking about, but WHAT THE HELL?? Following the first Conservapedia Commandment now equals playing "by the liberal's (sic) moronic and self-serving 'rules'"? This is the most obvious parody he's come up with so far. Junggai 10:12, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

To be honest I don't think TK believe all that stuff, I think he is trying to push RJJensen into quitting. What he is trying to do is push the one thing RJ has, academic credibility. He has to decide between that and being a member of a site that will publish unverified/unverifiable information. - π 10:17, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Normally I don't have much time for TK, but that is good stuff - almost Bugleresque.--

Kriss Akabusi^{AAAWOOOGAAAR!!1} 10:46, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

It's another classic example of TK making up (and breaking) rules as he goes along, in his attempts to destroy CP. And as long as nobody calls him on it (after Jess' fall from grace, what are the chances of that ever happening again?) he'll get more and more bold. It can't be long before we see another TK vs. Andy showdown, surely. However, I think RJJ's days are numbered. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 10:50, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Random Thought

Just a random, non WIGO thought. Was perusing the recent updates, and noticed one on the bible article under "humor in the bible." I found it interesting that the "more detailed treatment" of the humor in the bible was merely a three bullet-point list, two of which were "funny" quotes. Do they not understand the meaning of the word "more?" --Cwaddell 02:19, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Most of the content of that article was by Ed Poor. He ascribes different meanings to words like humor, detailed, more, treatment, encyclopedia... than you or I (or most other English speakers) do. --Simple 02:34, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

I work with a guy who's a hard up christian (he is also to keep me posted on the Rapture) and he sent me these...
Q. What kind of man was Boaz before he married Ruth?
A. Ruthless.
Q. What do they call pastors in Germany ?
A. German Shepherds.
Q. Who was the greatest financier in the Bible?
A. Noah He was floating his stock while everyone else was in liquidation.
Q. Who was the greatest female financier in the Bible?
A. Pharaoh's daughter. She went down to the bank of the Nile and drew out a little prophet.
Q. What kind of motor vehicles are in the Bible?
A. Jehovah drove Adam and Eve out of the Garden in a Fury. David's Triumph was heard throughout the land. Also, probably a Honda, because the apostles were all in one Accord.
Q.. Who was the greatest comedian in the Bible?
A. Samson. He brought the house down.
Q. What excuse did Adam give to his children as to why he no longer lived in Eden ?
A. Your mother ate us out of house and home.
Q. Which servant of God was the most flagrant lawbreaker in the Bible?
A. Moses. He broke all 10 commandments at once.
Q. Which area of Palestine was especially wealthy?
A. The area around Jordan . The banks were always overflowing.
Q. Who is the greatest babysitter mentioned in the Bible?
A. David. He rocked Goliath to a very deep sleep.
Q. Which Bible character had no parents?
A. Joshua, son of Nun.
Q. Why didn't they play cards on the Ark ?
A. Because Noah was standing on the deck. ( Groan...)
PS... Did you know it's a sin for a woman to make coffee?
Yup, it's in the Bible. It says . . . "He-brews"
Ace McWicked^{Disco Jesus} 02:51, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

All gone now. --Horace 04:08, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Your friend sounds like a funny guy, Ace. If he showed up on CP, he'd be banned in a heartbeat. Czolgolz 12:47, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

He is a funny guy actually and he is a YECer also. I tried to explain to him the fallacies in his belief and printed him the "Arguments against a young earth" page from here for him to read. He dismissed it as having "too many big words">. Ace McWicked^{Disco Jesus} 20:32, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

He would feel right at home at CP, although he might get banned as a parodist. - π 02:48, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

All those, without "Q. Who was the most flexible man in the Bible?" ?! --Marty 00:50, 21 May 2009 (UTC) Balaam. He tied his ass to a tree and walked 40 miles.

Low facts to words ratio from Aschlafly

Has Aschlafly given up writing his own stuff? It looks like this latest text-chunder has been copy-pasted right from an Aschlafly quote generator. Bondurant 13:38, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Given the nature of the quote he is responding to, I"m guessing his response, when put through the newly patented "Ashflytranslator" is "I don't understand a thing you said".

At the risk of a Godwin, I think Andy subscribes to the school of "if I repeat something often enough, it'll become true." --PsyGremlin_Whut? 13:55, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Maybe he is using a quote generator (ours or his own) to respond to these people. [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 14:41, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Andy is simply taking the rational decision to ask the poster to address his point before wasting his time worrying about irrelevant liberal nonsense. OncomingStorm 15:08, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Well, if that's the case, I suppose Andy will be addressing points put to him at least once out of a hundred or so? Jimaginator 15:11, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

No, I think it is pretty obvious that Andy is in fact getting his ass handed to him by someone who actually understands physics. You're gonna have to deep burn that sucker pretty soon. Bjones 15:53, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Things like that make me wish I had five votes to spend on a WIGO. Classic. ħuman 18:18, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

I think I like the related WIGO even more. Ed bringing light bending through a prism into relativity? Nails on a chalkboard. If he had read anything about general relativity, anything at all... -- JArneal 05:40, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Conservatives and political parties

Ok, this is what started this whole thing. I have heard... well, just about every conservative I've debated brings up that the Democratic party was the party of slavery and claims that only liberals deny this. That's absoultely true, the Democratic party is the party of slavery and Jim Crow and all that fun jazz. However, why is it that no conservatives ever recognize teh party flip of the late 60s/early 70s? It's basic American History that after LBJ signed the Civil Right's Act, there was a mass exodus of Southern Democrats (and a few crazy racists). They were accepted by the Republican party, which disgusted a lot of Republicans, who then switched to the Democratic party..... This is not a hard subject to grasp, but conservatives always seem to leave that out. Looking at the laws and such, do we really think that the Andys of 1860 supported that Northern Socialist Abe Lincoln? SirChuckB^{DMorris for new Jinx!} 19:54, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Assfly said it, I believe it. ^{— Unsigned, by: Neveruse513 / talk / contribs} 20:00, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

No, but andy makes an ENDLESS point of Lincoln being a Republican! Cause it makes him feel good to say that they, and not the dems are the party that supports the blacks.--En attendant Godot_{"«Oh, my Lolita, I have only words to play with! V.Nabokov»} 20:02, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Maybe your not familiar with the logic of tradition. Democrats were once the party of slavery, therefore they are always the party of slavery. To further my point, they deny it. In even moar furtherance, they deny that they deny it. QED, lib-burr-ul. ^{— Unsigned, by: Neveruse513 / talk / contribs} 20:04, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Just like any party, anywhere in the world, under any circumstances, that calls itself "conservative" must be exactly like the current American conservative party, otherwise they're liberal traitors (I'm looking at you, Australia). Z3ro^talk 20:29, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

It just amazes me. Lincoln was a Federalist, supported black rights, supported women's right (it seems) and believed that the Federal Government was the ultimate authority in the land. On top of that, after he won the war, he supported a welcome return with few penalties to the south. Is that really the type of politician that Andy and most modern conservatives would support? and Oh yeah, to Neveruse. If the parties are how they are and have always been that way, the modern Republican Party would be supporting hate crime legislation, after all, the Republican party of the early 20th century invented hate crime laws to stop groups like the KKK SirChuckB^{DMorris for new Jinx!} 20:35, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

It's just like a liberal to twist my logic into straw men and then ad hominem me without addressing my one simple point. Do you deny the possibility of action at a distance? ^{— Unsigned, by: Neveruse513 / talk / contribs} 20:57, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Also, Lincoln had a boyfriend. wp:romantic friendship--En attendant Godot_{"«Oh, my Lolita, I have only words to play with! V.Nabokov»} 21:01, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Isn't that the same argument technique of saying King James I of the KJV is Bisexual/homosexual? [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 02:27, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

I suspect there's a whole genre out there of history slash. I'd say it was an untapped market, but there's probably plenty of "tapping" going on. --Kels 14:25, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Other statements of interest

Let's take a look at selected lines:

• "Atheist materialism lay behind the genocidal crimes of the Nazis" -- Pretty much debunked by Christopher Hitchens in his book god is not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything.
• "Standard textbooks overemphasize the significance of popularity." -- Sure. George W. Bush isn't relying on popularity to get elected.
• "That military battles are an essential part of history, and of preserving freedom." -- Enough said.
• "Martin Luther King was a Republican who preached Conservative values. " -- He preaches non-violence, while someone preaches the line above.

Bottom line: any particular statement in that is as likely to be true as any other. [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 00:04, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

As far as MLK being a Republican goes... how many of today's Republicans would go to Memphis to support striking sanitation workers, I wonder... the American right today would treat Doctor King like they treat Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson (although neither of them anywhere near what King was, Sharpton especially.) MDB 09:57, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Even better, MLK was more or less a socialist. A quick google search found this essay by Lew Rockwell going on about how MLK was a dirty pinko scum who shouldn't have a holiday named after him. Anyway, if I remember right, there was some attempt to put that sort of thing into the CP article on MLK. The banhammer flew quickly. Hactar 05:07, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

The Doctrine is in!

Did you know that Barack Mussolini wants to enstate a minimum wage? He must be stopped! Czolgolz 03:21, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Oh noes!!!! Obama = Fascista! ħuman 03:55, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Oh, I see, it'a JPatt jerkoff. ħuman 03:56, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

It rather goes against the "Obama is a Red" party line that Conservapedia has been spouting for a while now... ListenerX^TalkerX 03:57, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

It does go with the "Obama belongs to the other party, we should smear him with anything we can find" line though. - π 05:12, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

I'm rather fond of how Obama's policies are a "carbon copy", but when compared they aren't really all that close at all. --Kels 05:27, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Not true at all, Kels. I wager that Obama is a strong supporter of suffrage for women and proportional representation. Oh, wait, we were just copying the things we hated from a WND version of the Manifesto. My bad.--Tom Moore^{fiat justitia ruat coelum} 07:58, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Remember that, according to CP, fascism is a radical left-wing doctrine. Vulpius 11:40, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Argumentum ad Mussolini, to go with the Argumentum ad Hitler? --Gulik 08:10, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

I would prefer a direct generalization to Argumentum ad dictator [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 13:50, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Geometric vs. exponential

Mr. Schlafly is correct in this case, a geometric progression being a sequence of numbers $ar^{0},ar^{1},ar^{2},\dots ,ar^{i},\dots$; in his example $r=2$. Exponential would work as well, but means the same thing when the exponent is constant. I was attempting to remove a WIGO that made us look like a bunch of fools who have muddled our algebra. ListenerX^TalkerX 07:52, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Actually exponential growth is the continuous time equivalent of the discrete time geometric growth. - π 07:58, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

er, so is it right or wrong - if it's wrong, then doofus here will <!--- editit out. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 08:01, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

(EC) Exponential is used in some discrete applications, but the geometric progression is discrete only, true. (All the more reason to remove the WIGO, though.) ListenerX^TalkerX 08:04, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

I think exponential is $a^{0}r,a^{1}r,a^{2}r,\dots ,a^{i}r,\dots$, isn't it (math tags f'd up, I mean a^(ir) etc.!)? So geo is 2,4,8,16... and exp is 2,4,8,16 - for a=2 and r=2. And of course arithmetical growth is $a+r*0,a+r*1,a+r*2,\dots ,a+r*i,\dots$, right? ħuman 19:49, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

geometric :: arithmetical = exponential :: linear --larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 20:12, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

AtheistsLiberals and Charity

Nice one Ken, he has replaced Atheist with Liberal. Not to mention pissed all over the article. Ken, add a picture of Hitler at the top while you're at it buddy. Ace McWicked^{Disco Jesus} 09:43, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

That survey result, the quote "In any case, no real evolutionist, whether gradualist or punctuationist, uses the fossil record as evidence in favour of the theory of evolution as opposed to special creation.", the quote "When discussing organic evolution the only point of agreement seems to be: "It happened." Thereafter, there is little consensus, which at first sight must seem rather odd" and the one from Darwin which he slants to sound racist, are Ken's entire debate rhetoric. He has nothing else. - π 10:12, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

I wonder how much money Ken has given to little brown kids not just this year but like ever?  Lily ^{Inspirate me.} 15:06, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

He buys them computers as long as they promise to link to his articles. Vulpius 16:20, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Who t F?

is the "Wayne Gretsky" of Canadian Creationism? And is that different to US creationism? Jesas, Ken. How about mentioning a name now and again - we might even be impressed? Unless... he only exists in your head? --PsyGremlin_Whut? 11:13, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

The only Canadian Wayne Gretsky I know is the hockey player. - π 11:20, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Okay I have reread Ken's tripe, apparently he is comparing this guy to Gretsky in terms of skill at their chosen profession. - π 11:21, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Well, if he's that good, he's going to do himself a world of harm if he starts using Ken's drivel. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 11:33, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Why does it take a Canadian to spread the message throughout the world? Are the Americans not up to it? Haven't you got any contacts in other countries Ken? His shout-outs get more pathetic by the day.  Lily ^{Inspirate me.} 11:37, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Back at Psy, this is the simple problem with Conservapedia, if you are a professional you would not associate yourself in anyway with Conservapedia as you would get laughed at. - π 11:40, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

At least he could have spelled it right. Its "Gretzky".dammit Aboriginal Noise ^{Theist, barely hanging by a nail} 12:03, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Sounds dangerously furren to me. Probably a liberal in disguise. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 12:07, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Ouch. They may have shoot themselves in the foot because hockey players usually gets nailed to the wall every so often, which may result in brain damages (Eric Lindros?). And Wayne Gretzky as coach (What year are they living in? There are better examples if they don't want the coaching part) doesn't work very well either (For the record, the team is Phoenix Cyotes). [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 14:00, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

I wonder if the "Wayne Gretzky of Canadian Creationism" is Denise O'Leary. It would make sense, Wayne used to try to be the whole team sometimes, and Denyse operates about a zillion blogs that link to each other to make herself look like a groundswell. --Kels 14:17, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

The "Wayne Gretzky of Canadian Creationism" will be as big a yawn as Windmill Ministries, which so far as I can tell is the single only delivery Ken's made on any other his red telephones other than that fucking moron "Nephilim Free" on YouTube. Ken, do you take a "wide stance" when you're shitting on CP's front page? You should widen up and see if you can splatter a little more shit on the left side too, and for goat's sake you need to get yourself, Jpratt, and Ed Poor into therapy to deal with all your pent up homosexual rage. Or you should rent a hotel room in midtown Manhattan and just fuck each other to death. Whatever. 70.228.38.134 15:18, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

A dozen edits later, "Conservapedians believe that Canadian evolutionists goal tenders will be no match for the "Great One" of Canadian creationism!", he's made the image work, he's fixed the spelling, he's added a few more links... and of course, he is comparing his anonymous IDiot to Wayne "the great one" Gretzky, the George Best of hockey... sort of. ħuman 19:58, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Ten more edits and he has resized the image twice, and added some classic Ken-style redundancy to the blurb. PS, Ken, wtf is this "goal tender" crap? Gretzky played centre... Doh, I fail at reading comprehension of course. ħuman 20:01, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

2 pics that sum Ken up

• 

  Ken's first Science project

• 

  Ken at bedtime

What happened here?

OK I know Alexa isn't 100% accurate but I've been following it for the past week or two and have been enjoying a steady decline in CPs figures seeing it falling from somewhere in the 40,000s a fwe months ago to the 80,000s recently and looking good for plopping out the ratings altogether later this year. But suddenly and for no obvious reason it gets a spike up about 18,000. A pretty impresive figure. Well of course it fell again just as quickly but I wondered what had caused it. Any ideas? Just Alexa randomness? StarFish 11:43, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

My guess would be the Vanity Fair / Cracked articles? btw who is Anita bryant, and why is she the third highest search term leading to CP? --PsyGremlin_Whut? 11:54, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Radical anti-homosexual crusader from the seventies/eighties. Czolgolz 12:03, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Judging by the timing and cracked.com's consistent, above 3,000 ranking, I would say it is that. - π 12:07, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

If it wasn't for that article I reckon they would have dropped below 100,000 again. - π 12:09, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Not even the eighties. The last significant activities is in 1977. Also, Ever wonder why they have vast amounts of text written on Homosexuality but it isn't on the top ten search term leading to CP? [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 14:08, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Holy crap, I remember her! I was still a kid when she fell out of the spotlight, but Mad and Cracked (the paper version, back when John Severin was playing their version of Mort Drucker) were still making fun of her well into the 80's. --Kels 14:14, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Does Anyone know?

What study, report, or statistic is Andy talking about here? How the hell does he honestly compare the effects of smoking to being gay? Last I checked, taking it up the butt or eating someone else out didn't do a damn thing to your "life expectancy". If anything good sexual and prostate health actually increase it.HollowPsycho 13:53, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Possibly Assfly excluded the homosexuals who happens to be old (still in the closet maybe due to rules in the past), so the life expectancy likewise shifts downward. [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 14:11, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Well, I dare say the average life expectancy of gay men dropped sharply in the '80s due to the AIDS epidemic. Possibly that's what he's referring to. However, with better awareness and anti-retrovirals I suspect it's more or less on par with the average heterosexual lifespan again now. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 14:30, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Or, you know, he made it up. --En attendant Godot_{"«Oh, my Lolita, I have only words to play with! V.Nabokov»} 14:32, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

It's all clearly laid out here. You just need to open your mind and let the rubbish flow in. Of course we all know that Assfly has done some serious statistical analysis here. The analysis is further complicated by the fact that gays smoke more than good honest christ-people. As an aside I just spotted the homosexual fantasies article. Before I even looked at the history I knew just who wrote this article. Uncle Ed! JoeDuffy 14:36, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Right... Gay men fantasize about forcible sex and rape scenarios more than straight women. I guess that explain Harlequin romances.70.228.38.134 15:01, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

That might be my new favorite homo article. It starts mid-paragraph and just quotes an unsourced study. How could you write that article and not acknowledging your own closet homosexuality? I think Ed's got a secret. ^{— Unsigned, by: Neveruse513 / talk / contribs} 14:56, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Homosexual fantasies? Ah, good wholesome family friendly encyclopedic content. Vulpius 16:22, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Another Uncle 188 classic! --Yossie^{Spring in Fialta} 14:53, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

That's an "Uncle Ed has read a book" rather than an "Uncle Ed has found a quote" article. Since Ed doesn't seem to read many books, that article is rather special. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 15:49, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

"Same-sex marriage is just a way to confuse and mislead public school students as young as kindergarteners and first graders about marriage." - apparently Andy has seen the ad someone linked to here the other day, and is trying out the new "talking point" - don't confuse the kiddies! ħuman 20:12, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Cue Helen Lovejoy in 3, 2,... --Just passing by 21:28, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Don't forget, in Ken's life Andy's mind, having teh Ghey means you will get bad things in the ass and die. Phallus of Satan 22:34, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

My favorite part of the whole sexual fantasy polls is that "forced sexual encounter" and "sexual event with the same sex" are in the top five for both sexes. Guess that means the whole country is gay. SirChuckB^{DMorris for new Jinx!} 23:15, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Hey Ken

Looks like a certain search engine beginning with G has put a key fossil in its logo. Evolution on the internet remains unfazed! And you on the internet remain an idiot! 194.6.79.200 14:56, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

God I bet that burns his chaps... ^{— Unsigned, by: Neveruse513 / talk / contribs} 14:58, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

I see google is also celebrating by dropping CP's evolution article to 15 in the rankings. Ken's balls are shrinking rapidly! --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 15:51, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Guess he'll be moving on to a different search engine now that the G word has wronged him. Aboriginal Noise ^{Theist, barely hanging by a nail} 15:53, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

I regret making gay jokes at the expense of all the quality gayz I know, but I have to say that I'm starting to wonder if we're looking at the right search engine that begins with G. Sure he's not looking at Gay Friend Finder or something similar? 70.228.38.134 16:06, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Oh, rats. Now they have to write their own search engine. What should they call it? Conoogle? Vervoogle? Wackadoogle? Nutzoogle? Truthdeniersoogle? Damn them liberals anyway!

I would say Conservagle is probably a good name when they claim "Google" to have too much "Goo" (remember in Jesus Camp one of the video shown to kids has the line "did we evolve from a bunch of goo? I don't think so" or a variant of it). [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 17:17, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

I love that once you remove science from the discussion it devolves to a bunch of poorly-informed doctrinaire nincompoops taking personal umbrage at the suggestion that they personally evolved from apes or goo. It's precious, really. Oh, and the image on Google looks like a poop with a skeleton in it, sort of like when my childhood dog ate my gerbil. User:Nutty Roux/sigtalk 18:31, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Googspeed? Taytopacket 14:23, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Goddle User:Nutty Roux/sigtalk 15:17, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Yes, indeed, a conservative search engine is what we need. This could further isolate them. Pre-screen all the "offensive" stuff like science and math. Kinda like Google in China, where you search for "Tank Man" or "Tianamen Square Man" and come up with nothing.

I tried that Tianamen Square search once on google.cn. Scary results... --GTac 19:44, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

What do you expect, Man evolves from Tanks or Man evolved inside Tiananmen square (Reference to Peking man)? [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 00:58, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

speaking of which, they should have "Tank man" referring to the stuff found in Left 4 Dead. [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 00:59, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Hard efforts by RJJensen

Well not really anything new or surprising (or that interesting), but I noticed RJJensen was suddenly making a whole bunch of significant contributions which didn't concern CP's core issues. Since that's not very normal for a CP member, I just googled a big sentence from one of these contributions and of course like usual, it's all directly copied from another website.

But it's okay, right? It's a government website, and the government is in service of the people, so this means it's actually the US citizen's website and it's not illegal to copy something from your own website, right? Perhaps, but it's still a half-assed effort. Not to mention how sad it is that these are the biggest contributions to the wiki in a long while.. --GTac 11:48, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

This here explains it. - π 11:56, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

but it's still a half-assed effort --GTac 11:59, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

This might cast some light on RJJ and copying. EddyP 12:02, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Ah yes, he got a bit touchy about being called on copying, didn't he? Btw, does anybody know why he was "hounded out" of Citenzidum? There could be a story there. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 12:20, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Looking at his talkpage (and the sections below that one) imply that it's a mystery even on Citizendium and that Larry Sanger himself was apparently involved on some level. And his contribs list has a one-month gap before his retirement. Without knowing anything beyond that, it looks to me as if the good doctor received an epic bitchslap behind closed doors for something. --Sid 13:31, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Bit more lookin around (also with the forum search) for his name implies that RJJensen had, er, "strong views" on some content/style questions. Take for example this epic discussion from June 2008. And Larry made this forum post, which offers at least a bit more speculation hints:

“”In the cases where that would seem to be so, I don't move them toward the door; they move themselves. Frankly, perhaps that is (taking the very long view of things) for the best. If you think of the especially prolific people who have left--Nancy Sculerati, Russell Potter, Richard Jensen, and now Martin Baldwin-Edwards--they are all bright and excellent writers, but they are also extremely opinioned and appear to have fundamental disagreements with the constitution of this project. Nancy and Martin both felt themselves to be inadequately supported by me in their struggles with amateurs (they both wanted editors to have more authority over authors than they really do have in the project), while Russell and Richard I think at bottom disagreed with our neutrality policy and (to simplify) wanted our articles to reflect the expert view, period. Since I am the defender of our basic principles, this ultimately comes down to a dispute with me personally. If we magically had all these people on board, there's no question that it would be a much more productive project for a while. But the problems would inevitably surface again and we would be torn in multiple directions.

I dunno anything beyond this speculation... and I don't really care that much, so I'll leave the rest to the more interested people. --Sid 14:02, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Hypocrisy meter overload

Wow, this breaks all kind of irony meters. So the burden of proof is on the person making the claim (unless it's Andy making the claim)? Crundy 12:43, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Side note: this is quite an interesting bit of what-the-fuckery that CP linked to in the same article. Crundy 12:45, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

I didn't even follow the news stories, but by now, I know CP/Creationists enough to not be surprised: "Hey, we found the missing link!" - "NO YOU DIDN'T! LIES! DECEIT! LAUGHABLE! HOAX! AND EVEN IF IT WAS TRUE, IT WOULDN'T PROVE ANYTHING! IN FACT, IT PROVES CREATIONISM!" --Sid 13:23, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Answers in Genesis are claiming that it is proof of the flood. - π 13:38, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Andy sez: make the sample available for fully independent analysis by critics...I smell Lenski!!!1!! ^{— Unsigned, by: Neveruse513 / talk / contribs} 13:56, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

This is even more ludicrous than Lenski. At least with Lenski, the samples were biological, and, if Lenski did send them out, he'd do so just by growing some more. The fossil, though, is an artifact. There's only one. Kind of like the reason the Catholic Church didn't allow radiocarbon dating on the Shroud of Turin for many years -- older techniques would have required the destruction of about 0.5 square feet of it, and they said, "sorry, assuming it is the burial cloth of Christ, we can' let you ruin that much of it." MDB 15:54, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Why is it that these conservative commentators can't learn how to use an apostrophe or a hyphen correctly? Only in the first paragraph: "That is like saying because poodle's have 'hair' instead of 'fur'... Why do so many people get scammed by these non-sense claims & accept them as fact?" Combine that with the LOL's, frequent use of all caps, junior-high attempts at sarcasm, and idiosyncratic use of quotation marks, and it all adds up to the impression of them as mouth-breathing idiots. Junggai 14:04, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Steady on there, Junggai! Don't you know that the word/phrase "mouth-breathing" is copyright © Jinx _{hi Jinx!}? ^{This message brought to you by: respond}_and honey 15:55, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Wow, I am surprised that we still have a functioning irony meter somewhere. They don't seem to ever learn how to talk properly even after the Lenski affair. [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 17:11, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

My irony meter registers "plaid" when I open a browser tab to Conservapedia. Is that bad? --Irrational Atheist 17:22, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

I supposed it's better than registering: "42".--En attendant Godot_{"«Oh, my Lolita, I have only words to play with! V.Nabokov»} 18:00, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

send me the fossilz!

God I would love to see Andy get all Lenski over this fossil. "Sendz me the datas! Sendz me the fossilz!" Man, it would be hilarious, just what CP needs to put off its decline. Ace McWicked^{Disco Jesus} 22:11, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

I love how Andy always talks about how those dirty evolutionists are just scamming the world. Cause lord knows that No good Christians would ever fall for some stupid scam just because it validated their personal Religious Convictions would they? SirChuckB^{DMorris for new Jinx!} 23:33, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

I love it when Andy used the phrase "In the United States, the number fooled is less than 50%." So idiotic, yet so meaningless. [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 00:48, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

I love that he states you only need a grade school understanding of evolution in order to reject it. So ironic. Ace McWicked^{Disco Jesus} 00:55, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Teh assfly is supercool: "There's nothing special about evolutionary theories that requires anything more than a good grade school education to understand (and reject). In fact, the theory appeals more to people who are intellectual underachievers than those who did well." Yes, the dumber you are, the easier it is to understand evolution, but the dumber you are, the more appealing evolution is, but the dumber you are, the easier it is to reject evolution. I'm confused.Phallus of Satan 00:59, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Get rid of the last part, then substitute "evolution" with "faith healing". Does it make more sense? More evidence that Schlafly templates exists. [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 01:09, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

"There's nothing special about the Bible that requires anything more than a good grade school education to understand (and reject). In fact, fundamentalism appeals more to people who are intellectual underachievers than those who did well." Huh. Works like a charm. --Kels 02:21, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Nicely done. ħuman 03:38, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

(EC) Seriously, though, "Scientists Unearth Long-Sought 'Missing Link' Fossil" is about as interesting a headline as "U.S. Air Strike Kills 'Number Two' Al Qaeda Leader". Fossils are unearthed every day, and "missing links" will always remain in the fossil record. Save the banner headlines for when we dig up something we didn't always expect to find. --Marty 01:02, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

It's a crappy headline, but it's what those librul reporters are prone to say. ħuman 03:38, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Too bad they don't put a logo change when the "Number two" Al-qaeda leader got killed. [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 01:09, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

The expert on all things engages in some projection: "You may not even be able to determine what the basis of the age estimate is; it may simply be made up." (emphasis mine). ħuman 01:23, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Ah, you beat me to it[3]. We could only be so lucky as to have another Lenski letter. I would like to point out the most self-deluding statement I have read all day. Addison: "Let me say that I am not skeptical of evolution for religious reasons. It is for scientific reasons." Right. Corry 01:31, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Damn you TK, I wish I had an account like I did back during Lenski. Encouraging him and egging him on was half the fun. The best part was both agreeing or disagreeing with him further entrench him in his position, so you didn't even have to parody him. - π 02:01, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

I kinda like Addison - he's either very clever, or very clueless, but when he says "perhaps you could have a discussion without mocking the other members" immediately below Andy ranting on about not being impressed by degrees and stupid people like evolution, it's kinda special. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 07:57, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

God I love this, and I hope it will go on a long time. It's just so typical CP. Something to do with evolution? Reject out of hand, rant about liberals/atheists/statistics, make personal insults. If the conversation drags on, perhaps skim over the article and see if you can highlight anything which could be twisted into something negative. Rinse and repeat. What does Andy even think being 'open-minded' means and how the hell does rejecting out of hand figure into it? --GTac 11:15, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

"open minded" as in "he opened his mind and everything fell out." Totnesmartin 11:55, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Much like fundy tolerance, fundy (or Andy's) open mindedness translates as "blindly believe everything I tell you." --PsyGremlin_Whut? 12:13, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Andy says- "No, Sam, the burden of proof is on the person who makes a claim of validity." Staggering hypocrisy! Someone needs to call him on that about YEC. The burden of proof is always on the one making the claim. Carl Sagan said "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof." Jimaginator 15:21, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary stupidity" is often more relevant at CP. Etc 16:45, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Thats a little unfair, Andy has proven creationism on several occasions. His 'Fall colors are beautiful' argument alone should be enough. Do you deny that 2+2=4?

@Psy I think Addison is an idiot, all journal papers are written in passive voice. - π 01:51, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Missing link or weakest link?

This discussion was moved to [[the Saloon bar|the Saloon bar]].

I have moved this. - π 01:48, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

I have moved it better. The Emperor _{Kneel before Zod!} 01:59, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

TK fails basic children's tales

Oh This is priceless. While it's been obvious that Woloct was cruising for a banhammer, TK's reason shows an unbelievable failure to grasp the moral of that story. Go ahead TK, keep thinking the emperor came out ahead! HollowPsycho 18:54, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

CP's version of The Emperor's New Clothes would end with a mass execution. --Sid 18:58, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Hmmm... That is a quote from Sandman ("...the halfwit remains a halfwit"). Possibly Gaiman quoted it from somewhere. So it's not an interpretation of The Emperor's New Clothes that TK made up himself. Then there's Pratchett's interpretation of the story (if it had gone on a little longer it would have been the story of the boy who got a spanking for being rude to royalty). Dendlai 19:12, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, did I miss something? What exactly did Woloct do that was begging for a block? His contributions seem mostly like pretty minor stuff to me. I certainly didn't find the "multiculturalism/liberal worldview" that TK accuses him of. Junggai 19:19, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Sadly, I have to admit he does have a point that I've always hated about that story. kids, the feebel minded, and us poor slobs in the "masses" can scream and yell about the naked emperor, or the illegal wars -- but in teh end, those in power remain in power, and all we've gotten for our troubles is an unobstructed look at the Nasty Parts of ugly fat powerful men.--En attendant Godot_{"«Oh, my Lolita, I have only words to play with! V.Nabokov»} 19:21, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

I thought what we actually got for our troubles was millimetre wave scanners so that the emperor can see us naked. (Incidentally, does anyone know anything about the properties of those scanners? I've been thinking about silver loaded paint and interesting things to give the guys in security to look at next time I fly from Heathrow.) --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 20:01, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

That's the whole point of the story Godot, it's not gonna change the balance of power, but the masses can learn not to buy into the hype of politicians and people with some kind of agenda. We can't remove them from power, but we can empower ourselves to look at them critically. SirChuckB^{DMorris for new Jinx!} 20:22, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Awww, lookit, TK likes to read us. It seeems that he doesn't quite get what he's saying about CP by using that quote. HollowPsycho 21:12, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

A "gentlemen" from TK! Totnesmartin 21:49, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

How dare we question TK and his masterful use of quotes. I mean, after all, he is good friends with Arianna Huffington, Ollie North and countless other famous people. Why, he was probably there when the quote was first uttered. By the way, Terry, You're STILL A DICK!!!!!! SirChuckB^{DMorris for new Jinx!} 21:54, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Is it an ad hominem fallacy to point out that TK is a paranoid mindless fuck? Or is it ok because it's true? Wait, I'll go sock back up and see if I can support my baseless claims.Phallus of Satan 21:58, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

believing yourself to be much more important than you are can also be a symtom of paranoia, so those name drops he does would fit there. As if any one of those people would be on friendly terms with some car dealer out in the sticks... Totnesmartin 17:41, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

DON'T CLICK THAT LINK!

Rule #1 For Atheists and Perverts: Convince the children that it's "normal". Watch.
Terry Koeckritz_{Hi Testicle Klown!} leads with that and has a simple Youtube link with just "Watch" as its link text? --Irrational Atheist 03:21, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Obviously someone is having too many kids~ [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 03:50, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

And since when did Perverts need to convince children that anything is normal? They can simply amuse themselves with children. [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 03:50, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Hell, the stories we've heard so far are nothing. Check this out. Corry 04:51, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Ouch. Looks like the Ireland has too many priests~

And did someone mentioned that the Irish commission official report has 5 volumes, just coincide with the Islamic count of the number of holy books? [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 08:23, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

And you know it's f**ked up when the Executive Summary is longer than any one of the following articles:

• Atheism
• Evolution
• Examples of Bias in Wikipedia
• Operation Iraqi Freedom (included because this is longer than any one of the articles above)
• Homosexuality and biblical interpretation (included because this is longer than any one of the articles above)

And the report doesn't even need reference section(s). [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 08:38, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Personally, I think that this is a pretty good response to that video. 92.9.227.235 19:01, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Although it has little or nothing to do with the brutal problem of child sexual abuse (recommended - the movies Song For A Raggy Boy and The Magdalene Sisters), the sexual life of priests in Ireland is a storied one. I remember one incident which attained the state of a farcically ridiculous tragedy, some time early in the nineties. A rather well-known gay hotel/nightclub establishment one night reported the illness of a man at about 5am. When the ambulance got there, they discovered it was a priest, and that he was already dead. This would have been surprising enough to the God-bothering population, but even more surprising was that he had passed away in peace, as another priest, who was handily enough there at the time (if you'll forgive the turn of phrase....), had already administered his Last Rites to him. It seems the place was crawling with teh gay priests. Ah yes, hypocrisy has been alive and well in Ireland for hundreds of years. DogP^{Marmite Patrol} 19:43, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

The KKK was a nonviolent discussion group

When someone ask why the KKK is not labeled as a terrorist group RJJensen steps in to fix the problem and somehow makes it so the KKK of the 20s and 30s was a nonviolent discussion group!!--BoredCPer 14:44, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Warning-Reading the KKK nonsense will cause your spelling, grammar, and sanity to plummet. One wonders if they ever even re-read what they type. Nah. Jimaginator 15:37, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

There is prabably a point that the KKK is actually a non-violent discuss group (Until they turn violent? Or after they are disbanded they need a more moderate viewpoint to attract newcomers(bait-and-switch)?). Whether that'll get TK'ed is still up in the air. [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 18:10, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Good on ya Rjj; way to blow your credibility. ^{This message brought to you by: respond}_and honey 18:15, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

"I is racist" — typo or Freudian slip? ListenerX^TalkerX 19:03, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Being a Brit, I don't have the knowledge of the KKK that Murkans do, so I've been looking round the net. Found this:

The KKK experienced a tremendous revival in 1920s America. While the old KKK of the 19th century had been primarily an anti-black, Southern phenomenon, the new version became popular and powerful by extending its hatred to Jews and other “undesirables” while stressing the superiority of white Protestantism. “This new Klan, organized in 1915, had a membership of more than 6,000,000 by 1925 and was exerting a strong political influence in some states and localities” (Jack Allen & John L. Betts, USA: History with Documents, Vol. 2, p. 215).- here

(also contains the statement: "As uncomfortable as it may make some people feel, the fact is that the attitudes and actions of Christian America helped create and sustain a world in which the Holocaust was possible, if not inevitable.")

Interesting? Or not? I dunno. ^{This message brought to you by: respond}_and honey 19:59, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

A message for TKunt

Hi TK, I know you read here so I would like to point out that although you state there is "no parody" on CP there is still a parody article created by me up on CP that has been endorsed by, well, You! How about that!? Ace McWicked^{Disco Jesus} 23:10, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi Tkunt! You haven't endorsed my article that I completely screwed up, but it's still a point of pride that it still remains up there after a year. When will it be discovered? As a test, I made a similar, but very slight "modification" to Wikipedia's article on the same subject, and it was fixed within hours, and I was told I didn't know much on the subject (I don't, but hey, does that stop a CPer?). Anyway, here's your hint: It's in a *gasp* science article, not that any CP article would truly qualify as a science article, unless you count YEC. Ciao Bella...Jimaginator 15:48, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Well, if this is a brag-off, I'd like to reify that one in particular of my first parody articles is still there (although parts of it have been watered down by 25 intermediate revisions), and that's in spite of Google's listing at least three forum threads circa 2007 where the joke is explicitly pointed out. --Marty 07:00, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

And we won't mention the one that made it to Featured Article either. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 08:16, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

CP World History Final

I don't know why it just now occured to me, but seeing the final made me want to post the answers to the exam and, perhaps, future homework assignments somewhere on RW so that Andy's 'students' could, theoretically, just crib them without having to do any work. This would include in places the "Andy Answer" and then the "Real Answer", if such exists. Are we already doing this somewhere, and/or does it sound like a good idea - input would be appreciated. Since I'm lazy, I can only be arsed to do this when the mood strikes me - would that be a problem?--Martin Arrowsmith 23:31, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Seems like a fun idea, why not? ħuman 23:41, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Teh homeskullarz are doin' fyne and the oether "stewdenz" are to? Rumpurt Wizzleteats Noddington III

“”36. Countries that have had much higher percentages of belief in evolution compared to the United States are: (a) France only (b) England and Germany, the main combatants in World Wars I and II (c) Turkey (d) Poland and South Korea (e) England and Germany, who were on the same side in World Wars I and II

France, England, Germany and Poland all have more people accepting evolution than the United States. And according to Wikipedia, South Korea is high in the world with technology and science, and almost half the population is non-religious, another quarter Buddhist. So which of these would be the correct answer? B or D? --Irrational Atheist 00:04, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Where is this? The WHFE article is the last one. ħuman 00:10, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Oh, never mind, I'm wrong, the link I just gave is the current 'Zam. ħuman 00:12, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

1c,2d,3a,4c,5d,6a,7b,8a,9c,10b*,11b,12b,13a,14c,15e,16e,17d,18c*,19b,20d,
21b,22d,23b*,24b*,25b,26d,27b,28c,29c,30d,31d,32d,33b,34c,35d,36d*,37a,38c,39**,40b,
41d,42c,43b*,44c,45e*,46e*,47d,48c,49b*,50d,51c,52b,53c*,54d,55d*,56e,57d,58d,59c*,60a

I've marked the problematic ones with an asterisk; the worst is question 39 which does not appear to have a correct answer. I am of course open to correction; this was off the top of my head.--Martin Arrowsmith 00:49, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

39 is b. It's the only option that is unique to Jesus. At least, the one where we have fables telling this tale. --Irrational Atheist 00:54, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps I'm being overly critical, but there are at least three Christian saints who were supposedly crucified; Peter and Andrew of course, but also Little Saint Hugh of Lincoln (bit of an ugly story, there) and Simeon of Jerusalem. I suppose that you could argue that they weren't religious leaders, or didn't go willingly, or some such. If you were feeling really pissy you could bring up Socrates, or David Koresh, or Heaven's Gate cultists, or Joseph Smith or Jim Jones.--Martin Arrowsmith 01:21, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

This is Andy, so it's pretty obvious that the answer to 39 is all of the above. I'm pretty sure when he means religious leaders, he means the one true leader of each religion (Jesus, Mohammad, Buddha, Ras Tafari, Xenu, etc), not comparing him to other Christian leaders. No one else performed miracles (any claims to the contrary are hoaxes); no one else was willingly crucified; faith, as we all know, is a uniquely Christian concept; no one else ever used parables, or if they did, it was to teach deceit, not truths. Pretty clear what the answer is now. DickTurpis 02:24, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Andy couldn't have given us a better birthday present! Who wants to thank him? ħuman 00:56, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

1. C
2. D
3. A
4. C
5. D
6. A
7. B
8. A
9. C
10. B
11. B
12. B
13. A
14. C
15. E
16. E
17. D
18. C*
19. A
20. D!
21. B
22. D
23. D
24. B
25. D
26. D
27. B
28. D
29. C
30. D
31. D
32. D
33. B
34. C
35. D
36. B*
37. A*
38. C
39. E
40. B
41. D
42. C
43. B*
44. D
45. E*
46. E!
47. D
48. C
49. B
50. D
51. C
52. B
53. A!
54. D!
55. E!
56. A
57. D
58. D
59. C!
60. E!

EC Boys- F
EC Girls- E
That's what I got. * means conservative propaganda, ! means difficult question. Welcome. The Emperor _{Kneel before Zod!} 01:18, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

I'm shocked at how easy this test is. Unlike his other tests, which have some very specific questions you'd basically only know if you took his class, this almost all obvious to anyone, although you have to have a general historical literacy to get a bunch of them. I think there are at the most 2 or 3 I'm not 100% sure on, including 53, which I do not believe has a correct answer, as both equal protection and taxation without representation will not appear as such in the Magna Carta. 60, by the way, is A. DickTurpis 02:11, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

57 is my favorite--Nate River 02:26, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Proofreading

"HONORS (all should attempt to answers all these questions):" Plz to fix ur welkom. ħuman 00:15, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

"60. Who were the “Anglo-Saxons”?

(a) Germanic tribes that conquered England ruled it in a chaotic manner until A.D. 1066 (b) Germanic tribes that conquered England ruled it after A.D. 1066 (c) Norman tribes that conquered England ruled it in a chaotic manner until A.D. 1066 (d) Norman tribes that conquered England ruled it after A.D. 1066 (e) English nobility "

(a) through (d) need some punctuation at the very least between "England" and "it". ħuman 00:18, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Chaotic Anglo-Saxons? They gave us trial by jury (obviously liberals then) and invented the current system of counting years from the birth of Jesus. But they also let women own property, so yeah, total chaos must have reigned. Totnesmartin 17:48, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Art?

I like this gem.

“”12. An example of a work of art produced during the Renaissance is (a) a random splattering of paint on a canvas, to illustrate the artist’s emotions (b) a life-size sculpture of the Mother of Jesus holding Him after the Crucifixion (c) colorful paintings intended to create an “impression” rather than convey detail (d) a music video that ends with the performers smashing their guitars on stage (e) a random sampling of garbage nailed to a poster board to promote environmentalism

Please tell me you have Mr. Schliafy's opinion of art catalogued somewhere, because already his generalizations of art he doesn't like are fascinating.--Woloct 01:30, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Why do I get the feeling Andy doesn't like modern art? - π 01:35, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Choice C is my favorite. "What did you call them? Emotions? Bah! Art isn't to express feelings, you dolt, it's to make realistic pictures."--Woloct 01:38, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Preferably of Jesus, so they can be used for idol worship. The Emperor _{Kneel before Zod!} 01:45, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Although I agree that Christian art during the Renaissance was some of the most powerful and beautiful ever produced, I can appreciate other types of art. Andy, stop brainwashing children.--Nate River 01:58, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

How very odd. He doesn't appreciate modern art, I get that. A lot of people here, from the debate we had a while back, would probably pat him on the back and buy him a beer for that. But he doesn't like Impressionism? Political art? The Who? Didn't he say he liked The Clash at some point, but he doesn't think guitar-smashers are art? Again, how very odd. -Kels 03:51, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Andy can't possibly believe this is a real question without having severe mental retardation. Music videos weren't around then (I wasn't around in the Renaissance to check, but I'm fairly sure video technology wasn't yet invented) whereas literally anything can be perceived as art. Opinion. Not. Fact. SJ ^Debaser 14:12, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Well, this question is a "double gimme" - one, the Jebus skulptur is the only one that could possibly be a renaissance work, and two, it's the Jebus answer! Sometimes these questions make one wonder what that class session was like... "what else do we hate?" Hopper never painted Jebus! Monet never painted Jebus! The Who/Nirvana/etc. never sang hymns to Jebus! Environmentalists hate teh baby Jebus! ħuman 20:19, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

My answers

Stuff with * should be propaganda. Number in () is the corresponding lectures.

Q	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10
00	c	d	a	c	b*	a	b	a	c	b
10	b	b	a	c	e	e	d	c	b*	d
20	b (7)	d	b	b	d*	a	b	a (6)	c (10)	d
30	c	d (10)	b	c	d*	b	a	c	e*	b
40	d	c (9)	b*	c	e*	e	d	c*	b	d
50	c (2)	b*	c (6)	d	a	b	d	d	c	a

Extra (Boys): F Extra (Girls): E This is for the record. [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 03:43, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Your presentation, if nothing else, gets a wiki "A"! Nice work. May use as a model answer, if I ever understand it. ħuman 04:24, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Q	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10
00	c (9)	d (1)	a (1)	c (2)	d (3)	a (?)	b (1)	a (2)	c (1)	b (1)
10	b (4)	b (7)	a (4)	c (6)	e (5)	e (5)	d (6)	c (7)	b (7)	d (5)
20	b (7)	d (10)	b (10)	b (12)	b (8)	d (7,13)	b (8)	c (6)	c (10)	d (11)
30	d (?)	d (10)	b (11)	c (?)	d (11,12)	b (?)	a (14)	c (2)	e (3)	b (8)
40	d (8)	c (9)	b (12)	c (9)	e (13)	e (6)	d (13)	c (8,10)	b (14)	d (3)
50	c (2)	b (12)	c (6)	d (8)	c (8)	e (11,12)	d (13)	d (8)	c (12)	a (5)

I liked it so much I stole it, put in my own answers (differences noted in red), and added more lecture references. These are the answers that I think Andy wants, not the 'right' answers: e.g. "The ancient world had several founders of great religions, but only one performed miracles: Jesus of Nazareth"--Martin Arrowsmith 06:04, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Oooh big fail there Martin Arrowsmith. The early Israelites also used to preform miracles. - π 14:27, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Pedagogy

I see that Andy is no longer writing separate tests (he abandoned that a while back, actually). For this I applaud him (albeit weakly). He still has a question only for boys and one only for girls at the end, but the two questions are so ridiculously easy that answering incorrectly should be grounds for failing the entire course. By that I mean only getting a ninety. What I wonder is why did he stop writing separate tests? I don't want to blame him for stopping this silly "chivalric" endeavor. A pet peeve of mine is when a person changes their mind and those that oppose the original stance then ridicule the person for the change of mind, so I'll try not to engage in that too much. But I can only think of three reasons as to why Andy stopped trying to write separate tests for boys and girls.

• First, he might have taken the criticism from his students (or at least one student) to heart and decided that in this (sorta) egalitarian world there is no advantage to any of his students to give them separate tests. He might have placed his duty to prepare his students for the real world over his own views of gender relations.
• Second, he might have gotten severe negative feedback from the parents. The church communities form which he gathers students are probably close knit and well-connected with one another. Bad word of mouth spreads quickly. Perhaps he got some bad feedback and decided to let his views on "chivalry" take a back seat.
• Thirdly, he might have realized that writing a fair and challenging test is not easy. It takes a lot of work. Writing two tests takes... er... twice as much work. Perhaps he just felt like it was too much work for too little gain?

I am being nicer than I normally would be, but I'm in a good mood and thought that I'd be somewhat nice for this particular late night ramble. To be honest, though, my guess is that he caved in to pissed off parents (how embarrassing!) or that he's just too damned lazy to write two tests, seeing as how he's never held a real job in his life. Corry 04:49, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Now, waitaminnit. I hate to come to the Assfly's defense, but as I remember, before he went to law school, he worked at the Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics lab as an electrical engineer. APL is about fifteen minutes from my home, I know people who work there, I took a few classes there, and I can assure you, it is a "real job". MDB 11:25, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Didn't last long though, did he. ;-) ^{This message brought to you by: respond}_and honey 11:35, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

That's fair. APL does some pretty cool things. Corry 14:03, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Nice post. I vote for "too lazy". Oh, and "forgot to do it", that was so twelve weeks ago. ħuman 04:52, 22 May 2009 (UTC)