Conservapedia talk:What is going on at CP?/Archive145

From RationalWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

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>, <137>, <138>, <139>, <140>, <141>, <142>, <143>, <144>, <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)

Ed Poor...[edit]

...hasn't edited for a while, and I don't see a note about a holiday on his userpage. Any ideas? EddyP (talk) 17:39, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

5 days absent from WP - that's not unusual though. This message brought to you by: Toastrespondand honey 18:55, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
If you summon him, he will come. Ace McWickedi9 22:01, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
He's back on WP too. Not obsessive at all Broccoli (talk) 22:05, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
He does ask the question we're all asking. --Kels (talk) 22:07, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
He's such an awful wiki editor. Adds a couple lines to homosexuality and puts the ref inline, when all the others are footnotes... How come no one has reverted him yet? ħumanUser talk:Human 22:48, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
At WP it has been cleaned up so that it is now in prose form (instead of a list) and the reality has been added. At CP it has been enshrined as fact. Am I the only one who notice that pretty much every topic on CP is a quote mine these days? - π 01:17, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
Ed creates another article at Wikipedia. Sometimes I wonder if he actually has senility problems. Megaten (talk) 01:35, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
Anyone want to slap a notability tag on that? - π 01:41, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
Having googled around, the guy might be worthy of an article but Ed's ref doesn't cut it. Standard practice: start something & leave it to the grunts to do the work. This message brought to you by: Toastrespondand honey 01:50, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
You go through Ed's work, right from the beginning, and it quickly becomes clear that the only reason he has any credibility at all is longevity. That's it. He can't start an article properly, he pushes POV constantly, he sucks at making references, he asks stupid rhetorical questions when he could just go and write in the article, and on and on. He's incompetent and has a habit of backing exactly the wrong horses (global warming denial, creationism, Moonies, hard-right Conservatism, CP, etc., etc.). WP must have been handing out sysopships the way we do back in the day. --Kels (talk) 02:30, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
My impression was that WP grew very quickly after a slowish start and everyone who joined before a certain time period were grandfathered into sysopship to keep up with the sudden growth in users. - π 02:41, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
Kels, I have been making exactly those same points since I first commented on Ed. And you can also include not adding categories and ignorance about how to find things out on a wiki. I remember him asking for help on how the gallery feature works. It's not difficult, you can look it up in the help pages or copy another gallery to use as a template. For someone who continually boasts about his wiki-heritage, he is an absolutely appalling editor who claims the work of others for himself. His early standing at WP ws purely a matter of being in the right place at the right time. When it came to actually applying the principles of good governance he failed miserably and was rightly shown the door. His efforts at CP have continued in the same vein, where he has almost single-handedly destroyed their maths articles and singularly failed at establishing or encouraging a framework for future development. And now he only pops his head round the door at CP to let them know he's still alive while pushing his pet projects elsewhere. I'm sure Andy had high hopes by getting an ex-Wikipedian of some standing (especially one who had been "forced out by libruls") to help with his project. Alas, Ed had has been like one of those temporary managers who comes in, slashes all the essential regular spending, upsets all the staff, and then moves on claiming that he has increased profit margins. There is absolutely no question that he was the worthy winner of the CP's biggest idiot ward. Redchuck.gif ГенгисRationalWiki GOLD member 08:39, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
I think you pretty much covered the Ed story between you, Pi, and more so Genghis. The guy, as our British friends would say, couldn't organize a piss up in a brewery. ħumanUser talk:Human 09:14, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
How dare you! We certainly wouldn't say that!

It's "organise". Ajkgordon (talk) 18:00, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
So much for having British friends. --Kels (talk) 18:43, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
That's how they write it. They say it "organize" ;) ħumanUser talk:Human 20:48, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
That's because it's more phonetic. --Kels (talk) 05:21, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Is TK losing his touch?[edit]

Probably not WIGO worthy but I just found it quite amusing that someone's just been on a 30 minute vandalism streak with TK online, but he does nothing. It seems he then got a bit em brassed about it so blocked the guy who pointed out the vandalism. Jammy (talk) 18:43, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Paint. Drying. You should liveblog watering your plants next time. TK blocks people. That's his function at CP. He doesn't edit, he doesn't do policy, he blocks and deletes. Nutty Roux100x100 anarchy symbol.svgUser:Nutty Roux/sigtalk 18:59, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
You should stop being such a big meany pants. Web (talk) 20:55, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
I was more making a point about how boring TK stories usually are than harshing your buzz, but you're right. Sorry about that. Nutty Roux100x100 anarchy symbol.svgUser:Nutty Roux/sigtalk 20:59, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
The liveblogging plants thing sounds more like Ed Poor than TK. --Kels (talk) 21:01, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
Dun worry, its k. All is forgiven. <3 Web (talk) 21:10, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
Hey, Slutty, you should add "(such a) big meany pants" to your random talk page link list... By the way, if you add a single pipe at the end of the transclusion, your different sigs on one page will return different random things. Otherwise the parser runs it once and re-uses the results in each subsequent instance. ħumanUser talk:Human 21:47, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
You speaking funny language to me. You do these things to sig and sigtalk. You real nice.Nutty Roux100x100 anarchy symbol.svgUser:Nutty Roux/sigtalk 21:49, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
Unfortunately you appear to transclude your sig from your preferences. Redchuck.gif ГенгисRationalWiki GOLD member 22:03, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
It works, see what I did above - added "|" before the closing brackets. ħumanUser talk:Human 22:21, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
You're such a geek. Redchuck.gif ГенгисRationalWiki GOLD member 22:40, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
I thought it was pretty funny. A vandal is busy pasting ascii pron into the articles...and what's TK doing while it's happening? Deleting all of tmt's archives. Pretty pathetic...then again I guess we (especially Trent) have always been more important to TK than CP. Hey TK. — Signed, by: Neveruse513 / Talk / Block 23:43, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

He has now oversighted the guy telling him. Really what does he hope to achieve? We all know he fucked up and let a vandal lose, hiding it won't make it unhappen. What a pathetic little man he has become, he runs a small wiki like he was an authoritarian dictator because he has nothing else to control. - π 01:28, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

"This guy's alerting me about vandalism he is reverting...I'd better run checkuser on him..." It just goes to show you what the atmosphere on CP is like any more. I think TK's latest exchange with Jamie almost said it explicitly...good faith is not all. — Signed, by: Neveruse513 / Talk / Block 01:41, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
We at least got "assuming good faith is liberal" out of him, so much for the compassionate conservative. - π 01:45, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
Yeah, mistrust is such a conservative value. Redchuck.gif ГенгисRationalWiki GOLD member 08:42, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
Also isn't it ironic that TK oversights the guy telling him about the vandalism but leaves the porn on display via the page history. "Use the force for good, Terry." - Welcome to the dark side, Darth Koeckritz. Redchuck.gif ГенгисRationalWiki GOLD member 09:20, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
In the lights of TK Oversighting the thing, would it be necessary for us to use capturebot on this page's CP links as well? [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 02:01, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
Look at the message at the top of the page. 02:06, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Sunday Insights?[edit]

Haven't seen any lately. Disappointed. Must investigate further, then figure out where the hell the tillde button is on this new keyboard. There. ENorman (talk) 20:32, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Don't give up hope. There's still plenty of time this evening for Andy to get liquored up and hit the keyboard after the wife goes to bed. And the day is not completely sans insights. Here we learn that the most effective tool (insert joke here) against liberal deceit is cross-examination, "better than even the requirement of an oath". So perhaps we can look forward to a fleshing out of this cross-examination notion, what it is and how to use it. In the meantime, ponder this question: How can requiring an oath--which is only as good as the intentions of those taking it--be of any use against liberals, who are inherently deceitful?--WJThomas (talk) 23:26, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
I always thought the best tool against deceit was torture. How else can you get those deceitful liberals to say what you want them to say?--Tabris (talk) 04:09, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
Quote-mining? --Gulik (talk) 18:45, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Wow, TK can still get more lame than he already is.[edit]

Look at his block reasons

  • He, being one of the most liberal(no pun intended) user of range blocks, accuses people of having the same IP as other previously blocked users (shouldn't he have blocked the range already?).
  • He blocked a range for one year with the following explanation: "Same IP(s) as previously blocked user(s): Rogers Cable, Toronto, ONT, Canada. Canada, soon to be renamed Trollville Republic." Why let it expire if you believe it is going to be all trolls?
  • He believes that Proxy blocker isn't working (I can only assure you that they have Proxyblocker; see for yourselves if it still works by using an anon. proxy with static IP) and somehow France has something to do with Miami. Again, why let it expire?

It's not like as if we haven't seen non-expiring range blocks. [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 02:46, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

You assume TK has any idea what he is doing. As far as I can tell he bases his range-blocking on the old class network IP allocation system and he use those free online IP information site; some of which are out of date or giving you deliberately obscured information to try and get you to buy a product. He is basically blocking at will in some desperate hope that it hurts us in someway, failing to realise we would like it if he blocks all points of access to CP. I think people, particularly in the US, should try to use as many different ISP as possible because a) TK's blocking strategy would actually work that way and b) it would prevent the people they actually want to edit from editing, good old middle class Americans with little technical knowledge. - π 02:53, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
That assumes TK wants to block just for the sake of having it expire and block again? (I don't see otherwise why he wants to have a time limit for his range blocks, as he did have infinite range blocks a while back) [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 04:04, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
IP addresses do change hands on occasion. What is now a range belonging to a proxy site now might be sold to an ISP at some point in the future, especially as the IP4 space is getting used up so quickly. It actually shows TK is not completely insane with his blocking. - π 04:08, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
It's not worth creating a new section, but I like this little gem. He REALLY needed to get that straightened out, I guess. JArneal 06:42, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
He might not be insane with the blocking but it's hardly textbook sanity either. Scarlet A.pngtheist 14:43, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Mildly amusing[edit]

Andy replacesimg "centre" with "center" in an article about a British local authority because it's "more phonetic". Right Mister Shlafly, now we know. This message brought to you by: Toastrespondand honey 13:18, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

See it's been WIGOd, didn't think it was worth it meself. This message brought to you by: Toastrespondand honey 13:51, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
<pedantry corner>Revisited</pedantry corner> Redchuck.gif Генгисmutating 14:48, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
My word Genghis! That must have stung for you to remember it for 3 months! Slap.gif This message brought to you by: Toastrespondand honey 00:56, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
Indeed, it has left an ugly scar. Redchuck.gif ГенгисRationalWiki GOLD member 19:28, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
Isn't there a commandment or guideline about not making arbitrary changes between English and American spelling? Oh wait... that only applies to non sysops. On a related note... just checked the commanments and no 5 made me choke on my coffee: "Do not post personal opinion on an encyclopedia entry." Again, I suppose that doesn't apply to Andy and his Toy Boys wind-up thugs. --PsyGremlinWhut? 13:55, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
(EC) So the whole we only allow American spelling we accept non-American spelling on British or Australian topics was just conservative deceit after all? Well, you could knock me down with a feather. Redchuck.gif ГенгисOur ignorance is God; what we know is science. 14:00, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
If Andy says it, it's not "personal opinion", it is the revealed Word of Ronald Reagan (and His sidekick, God). --Gulik (talk) 00:19, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

RW users as bad as Robert Mugabe reports a disgruntled conservapedia editor[edit]

[1] Ace McWickedi9 22:07, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Oh, I wanted us to be higher on the list. Does this mean he hates TK too? Broccoli (talk) 22:09, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
Isn't he the resident Rhodesian racist? Redchuck.gif ГенгисRationalWiki GOLD member 22:10, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
"Liberals also try to make the Rhodesian government look racist; it was not" Yep. Broccoli (talk) 22:14, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
Oh, sweet Jesus. An Ian Smith apologist. Now I've seen it all. I hope he's a parodist. TheoryOfPractice (talk) 22:24, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
Will he be blocked for knowing about the wiki of evil? Broccoli (talk) 22:39, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
Probably a sock of Marcus Cicero. Redchuck.gif ГенгисRationalWiki GOLD member 22:41, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
South Africa's 19th greatest man: Verwoerdimg! I remember the cover of Private Eye after his assassination: several native Africans dancing joyously with the caption "A nation mourns" This message brought to you by: Toastrespondand honey 00:35, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
Ich bin ein Rationalwikian. I feel so special next to Kennedy and Obama--Tabris (talk) 02:29, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
This guy looks like an Apartheid apologist. He'll probably be made an admin very soon and will force a pro-apartheid bias on Conservapedia (at first it'll be subtle, as in now, the articles on Ian Smith and members of the Afrikaner party don't talk about their racism), but soon it'll get worse, especially if Andy rubber stamps the articles. He has yet to edit Nelson Mandela's article, but I'd like to see his opinion on Mandela. --Crazyswordsman (talk) 03:50, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Not so sure; CP has attracted apartheid apologists in the past, notably summer of 2008, and both Crocoite and Karajou were quick to bring down the bannhammer and the memory-holer as I recall. TheoryOfPractice (talk) 04:21, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Well I was going to try and compare Conservapedia to the Fox Nation website (which seems to be full of people who don't care what positions Barack Obama takes; they openly oppose him because he's black). --Crazyswordsman (talk) 22:02, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
Reminds of this lovely site, that seems to yearn for pre-1994 South Africa. Extra lulz for all the references to "white liberals" by the conservative commentators. The again, given Ed's use of "black' and 'negro' he'll feel right at home there, amongst those who still use the k-word. Busy mailing Wordpress to see if I can get it shut down. --PsyGremlinWhut? 10:43, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

End of an era[edit]

So farewell then, pointless law glossary template. You will be missed. For now at least, it does live on as a red link in all the still-extant empty Law Terms pages.-- Kriss AkabusiAAAWOOOGAAAR!!1 14:14, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

In related news, somebody is facing ten years' hard time...TheoryOfPractice (talk) 14:17, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
Worst. Lawyer. Evar. — Signed, by: Neveruse513 / Talk / Block 14:32, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
P.S. Hey Andy-pants, you missed Law Term E and Z, which have hundreds of thousands of views each and are ranked in the top 15 on your popular pages. Dance for us, little man. TheoryOfPractice (talk) 14:37, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
Andy is incapable of any sequence of actions that might lead us to believe he is watching us. You have to talk to TK...he's the one without any shame. — Signed, by: Neveruse513 / Talk / Block 14:40, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
So, is Andy now saying that viewing his website is punishable by hard time? I always thought it was criminally bad. --JeevesMkII The gentleman's gentleman at the other site 14:58, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
Still no update on the Main Page of the total page view count. Go on Andy, do it. Trumpet the 100 million, I'm sure you want to. You can just ignore the fact that about 40 million of those page views are bogus. Redchuck.gif ГенгисRationalWiki GOLD member 15:35, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
I read the whole 18 USC § 1030 thing, and I'm guessing Andy thinks pageviews are equal to monetary value. They would be if he had ads on his site, but considering he doesn't... no one is doing anything wrong by bumping page views. Kettle o' fish 17:59, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

I love it, deleted and restored, only 2 hours later, law terms D already has over 19,000 page views! Clearly, one of CPs most popular pages. Z3rotalk 16:10, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

My guess is that he's extremely confused about bandwidth costs. 18§1030 has nothing to do with bandwidth or pageviews on CP. I don't actually think Andy is this big of a hack (and I'm probably wrong), but I think this is a very (very) lazy scare tactic. — Signed, by: Neveruse513 / Talk / Block 18:09, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
On a somewhat similar note--I had no idea that that guy was Jewish, never mind a practicing rebbe! CP is truly a phenomenal source of information. TheoryOfPractice (talk) 16:19, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
I've no idea who's doing the page bumping but it only started again on Saturday after being back to normal following the July 4th festivities. I wish they'd stop so that we can now see what the real rate of page views is. Redchuck.gif ГенгисRationalWiki GOLD member 16:41, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
Impossible: there is no stopping the hypnotic appeal of Law Terms D. (It's not me by the way - I only need to look at it a couple of times a day to get my fix.)--

Kriss AkabusiAAAWOOOGAAAR!!1 16:43, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

I was checking it on Alexa, there doesn't seem to be another spike happening, I assume whatever caused the last one is switched off now. Though, interestingly it also says this, that I haven't noticed before: "Average Load Time for Very Slow (6.49 Seconds), 88% of sites are faster." But we already knew that. Scarlet A.pngtheist 16:51, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
And it seems that RW is starting a spike on views/user, are more people staying around and doing more editing? Scarlet A.pngtheist 16:52, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
Summer break, maybe? Broccoli (talk) 17:20, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
I don't think Alexa is affected by page bumping as it measures the number of unique visitors. The only time that had a knock on effect was when the homosex top ten attracted attention. Redchuck.gif ГенгисRationalWiki GOLD member 18:28, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
Just been catching up with some of my reading and apparently Andy is gonna take action against page bumping! Redchuck.gif ГенгисRationalWiki GOLD member 19:58, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

(unindent)What I don't understand is that TK deletes the template, but leaves the 29 pages it is included on. 00:31, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

TK says hi by banning someone for removing the broken template.
Also, anyone notice that someone memory-holed Andy's empty threats about 18:1030 — Signed, by: Neveruse513 / Talk / Block 21:27, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

CP at UD[edit]

Uncommon Descent - home of Dembski, the Newton of Information Theory - is a place which likes to diss wikipedia, too. But though there are those who think highly of CP, others are not that convinced... larronsicut fur in nocte 17:35, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Newton as in Isaac, or as in User:Newton? --Gulik (talk) 18:35, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
From wikipedia: In 2002, Dembski published his book No Free Lunch: Why Specified Complexity Cannot Be Purchased without Intelligence. It was No Free Lunch that prompted Dembski's Discovery Institute colleague Robert C. Koons to deem Dembski the "Isaac Newton of information theory."
This Koons knows a Newton when he sees one... larronsicut fur in nocte

Bridge To Nowhere, the latest chapter of RobS vs. RJJensen[edit]

This article is little more than pure nonsense in its existing form. It probably needs to be deleted. Rob Smith 15:36, 13 July 2009 (EDT)

Wow, I'm honestly curious what RJJensen is thinking about this. He's had pretty much free reign until recently, and now he's colliding more and more with Rob - and gets the full "You suck and what you wrote is nonsense." treatment. --Sid (talk) 20:42, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

He's had a good run so far. Redchuck.gif ГенгисRationalWiki GOLD member 20:54, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
Jensen and FOIA are the two best parodists on CP at the mo.--

Kriss AkabusiAAAWOOOGAAAR!!1 12:12, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Rob apparently realized that RJJ either doesn't care or chose not to speak up (wise choice, since that would lead to instant banning): Rob (about the initial version by RJJ): "Pretty naked partisanship based upon ZERO facts or substance." Quoting the most recent Freefall strip: "I do not see this ending well." --Sid (talk) 21:16, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Migration/homing ability[edit]

I have never understood the bee Andy gets in his bonnet concerning migration and homing abilities. The migrations in Africa are because animal species need to follow the rains so there is nothing "un-seen" or "non-materialist" about that. Also homing ability, does Andy think animals are homing via divine intervention? Ace McWickedi9 21:49, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Exactly. He claims that homing/migration is "guided by non-material phenomena, such as intelligent design that might allow for abstract programming features or divine guidance or another mechanism that transcends materialism." Whatever the hell that means.--WJThomas (talk) 22:04, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
Better translation: "Humans use maps to assist themselves in finding their way. Since the animals does not have technology of the map, they must have divine guidance to where they are going." Stay tuned for the episode featuring Andy walk to the convenience store down the street using a map. [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 22:27, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
If gOD had made a perfect world then no-one would need to migrate anywhere. Migration is nature's way of circumventing another divine cock-up. Redchuck.gif ГенгисRationalWiki GOLD member 22:33, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
Pshaw. How do you know Adam and Eve didn't saddle the triceratops and migrate to Eden South for the winter? --JeevesMkII The gentleman's gentleman at the other site 09:58, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Far Out!! Can You Dig It?[edit]

I gotta wonder where Andy hangs out if he's hearing "liberals" say things like this. --WJThomas (talk) 22:36, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

He has a condo in 1965. --Kels (talk) 22:38, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
Andy's mining the summer of love for new liberal words? Groovy! Right-on. Pyschedelic. Bitchin. I'm contacting Andy right away and see if he wants to trade any of his old Grateful Dead concert tapes.--Simple (talk) 23:14, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
Grateful Dead concerts? Here, have almost 7,000 of them. --Kels (talk) 23:54, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
I would like a nice crispy soundboard of Cornell '77 if he has one. Willing to trade an awesome '89 Deer Creek. TheoryOfPractice (talk) 23:18, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
Seeing Andy's constant attempt at pseudo-linguistics reminds me more and more of the infamous skull experiment by Sam Morton. Morton wanted his hypothesis to be true, so he biased it to twist the results. Even if it was possible to label a word like "radar" or "steak" as conservative or liberal, he only updates the conservative page. But really, what's his hard-on with words and dictionaries lately? ENorman (talk) 23:23, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
If I didn't know better, I'd say he's been reading Derrida and the other deconstructionists/post-structuralists--he seems to be onto the idea that language creates/shapes reality, and in his mind the predominance of "conservative" language bolsters his idea that America is growing more conservative...TheoryOfPractice (talk) 23:38, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
You mean, because of his delusion that America/the world is becoming more conservative, he labels any word he possibly can "conservative", as long as his "layers" build in a nice neat 1-2-4-8 set of rows at a time? ħumanUser talk:Human 23:54, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
Man, those Founding Fathers must have been insane flaming Liberals, without any of those great Conservative words or concepts. --Kels (talk) 23:55, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
Or he's trying to compile a newspeak dictionary and eventually whittle out liberal, moderate, and center-right words as well as anything more than 3 syllables or non-phonetic, until the entire English language can be focused into one word. "Derp" ENorman (talk) 00:02, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
Andy has always had a thing about the dictionary and language. Recently I have been going over some archives from 2007 and Andy complains that the dictionary is biased because he doesn't agree with the definitions of words. Obviously it is the dictionary that is incorrect. Ace McWickedi9 00:10, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
Doubleplus good! --Gulik (talk) 18:50, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

(undent)You forget the Andy train of argument though. I am always right> I'm a conservative > Anybody who disagrees with me is a liberal and wrong > ban the liberal scum and hunt them down ENorman (talk) 00:15, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Slightly off topic, but a story where Andy somehow becomes king of the world would make for a good, modern 1984. It would be pretty scary. X Stickman (talk) 02:15, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
That would be lucid. Woah. Broccoli (talk) 08:42, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Hang on, a though occurs. How does this geometrically increasing conservatism fit in with Andy's nutbar Christian view that the world is getting ever worse in preparation for the End Times, through which we may or may not be living now? Is it that in Eden, everyone was a liberal and since the fall the world has been getting progressively more conervative? Does not compute. --JeevesMkII The gentleman's gentleman at the other site 11:56, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

That would be cognitive dissonance due to Andy's complete lack of analyzing his own views. It's like Kent Hovind demanding fossils of every dinosaur that ever lived and wanting Proof that they are generationally sequential (i.e. every generation, every individual parent-offspring match), thus closing all the gaps. Since neither is physically possible, the result it that by his definition every new fossil generates a new gap. Thus, his demands are ultimately mutually exclusive. In Andy's case, though, there are three factors: world getting worse for End Times, Conservatism on the rise, Conservative good/Liberal bad, that form one of those impossible triangles (DECEIT!). If he applies his "logic" any further the whole house of cards will collapse. Kalliumtalk 14:30, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

More math[edit]

I can't believe how much subtle parody MarkGall has managed to get into the math articles at CP. Where is Ed Poor? I particularly like cp:Fundamental_group. A work of parody genius. JoeDuffy (talk) 13:04, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Bad form, old chap. We don't "out" other people. We are not the CP police. Redchuck.gif ГенгисRationalWiki GOLD member 13:33, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
Perhaps, but they would probably find it anyway. JoeDuffy (talk) 14:02, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
Maybe they would but it seems people on here are all too keen to out vandalism on CP which seems to be helping CP achieve whatever absurd goals it has. I've found quite a blatant piece of vandalism on a CP article that's been in place for a few months now and has even been linked to unwittingly by admins. Why spoil it by telling them exactly where to look? Jammy (talk) 14:07, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
They're not too skilled at finding it. I know of several articles (having written them myself) which are either poorly written and get the concepts wrong or are pure bullshit about a subject I've invented (but which sound correct to a reader with no knowledge of the subject area). EddyP (talk) 15:14, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
Are they parody? They are way beyond my knowledge of maths, but even reading them with the expectation of parody they don't seem very funny.--

Kriss AkabusiAAAWOOOGAAAR!!1 15:16, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

If I recall correctly there used to be a notce @ the top of the WIGO page to the effect of "don't out parodists". What makes anyone think that there's anyone with the knowledge on there sufficient to recognise mathematical parody? Of course, there's always the ploy of outing someone as a parodist when they're not just to see all their bona fide edits erased. This message brought to you by: Toastrespondand honey 15:35, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
With Ed Poor set to lay waste to them all any day now, it's probably a moot point anyway.--

Kriss AkabusiAAAWOOOGAAAR!!1 15:48, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Am I missing something? Where's the parody? The fundamental group certainly is an important topic in algebraic topology, and I don't see any glaring errors within the conservapedia article.--Mathoreilly (talk) 01:28, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Anecdotal evidence WIGO[edit]

Now, this annoys me on multiple levels.

Sunday "record cool temperatures prevailed."[2] And what is the temperature on an historically hot July 13th in New Jersey tonight? Down to the low-50s. But don't expect Al Gore to return his $100 million and Nobel Prize that he obtained from the man-made global warming scam.

So what about the near record temperatures in the UK over the last few weeks? I mean, despite these people considering the atlantic and pacific oceans as the edge of the world and "here be dragons" beyond that, they don't call it global warming for nothing. (I realise that individual spikes in temperature aren't proof of climate change, but it's a good demonstration of the cherry picking). Secondly, regarding the Nobel Prize, it was split between Gore and the IPCC. And the prize amount is 10,000,000 SEK, which is only 1.2 million dollars. Andy is out by two whole orders of magnitude. Sorry for bringing him up on such a "minor" quibble, but I refuse to let these things go unchallenged. Scarlet A.pngtheist 13:16, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, my bad, that last thing is only partially relevant as he states $100 million and Nobel Prize. I don't know what Gore has made from it, but surely with that logic then anyone who earns money through a scam should return their money, but I doubt CP will be demanding that of anyone on the Right any time soon. Scarlet A.pngtheist 13:18, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
It would be a start if Halliburton returned some of the billions they have made out of the Iraqi WMD scam. Redchuck.gif ГенгисRationalWiki GOLD member 13:37, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

I actually live in Central New Jersey, it was actually quite warm last night. By chance where does Andy live? I might want to pay him a visit. ---------- Matt

All this ignores that we've seen a deep solar minimum. Just wate until them sunspots and CME's start popping back up, July @ Xmas! 16:13, 14 July 2009 (UTC) CЯacke®
Essentially, if they are this irrational, NOTHING can ever change their minds, and they will consistently ignore evidence that they don't want to see, and inflate evidence that they do want to see. I also live in central NJ, and commented to a friend just the other day that someone is going to make the claim that "see, it's been cool, that means global warming is a fraud." I recently watched something about glacial recession, and it was downright scary. The guy had time lapse photography over years, and all you saw was the front of the glacier moving back back back, to spots that glacialogists and geologists have NEVER seen before in the record. Oh wait, I forgot Earth = 6000 years old. My bad. Jimaginator (talk) 16:50, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
Oh, and Andy, you are such a douche....Jimaginator (talk) 16:52, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
"Hey, you didn't die yesterday. You must be immortal." --Gulik (talk)

Andy calls Jpatt a liberal[edit]

Right here [3] JoeDuffy (talk) 14:15, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

I don't think so--Andrew Layton was removing the "mulatto" bit that a troll had put in--I think that's the "liberal" he was referring to. TheoryOfPractice (talk) 14:19, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
Sorry. I was a bit sloppy and missed a link. Have a gander at [4]. A troll had added the mulatto claim. Jpatt got on his high horse and deleted it. Then for some reason added it back in again. I guess after careful consideration he thought it appropriate. I can't wait to read about Bush being the 42nd "honky" president. JoeDuffy (talk) 14:27, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

It warms my heart...[edit]

...everytime I see Jinx on CP trying to get his rights back. Andy is being very thorough with his inquiry. EddyP (talk) 21:29, 14 July 2009 (UTC)


Here's a reason, Andy the "Engineer": molecular oxygen is corrosive! Good for short term, but destroys your lungs over a few days (i.e. bad). Does he think he's an expert biochemist now? And note how he doesn't "articulate a reason why" it should be supported. Geez. And by the way Andy, please check links when you post them- it's not hard. Both of the ones you put up yesterday don't work... Kalliumtalk 14:40, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Back in the day...when they first started putting premature babies onto respirators, they'd load 'em up with 100% pure O2. This did wonders for the survivability of the babies but a bunch ended up blind, due to something called "the boxcar" effect, (retinal vessels would constrict starving the retina of oxygen, irony much?).
I also recall treatments (this is in the 1980's so it's not exactly "new!") of treating diabetic sores with a "boot" of HBO2. In this procedure they actively wanted the "corrosive effects" of oxygen to debride the flesh surrounding the sore with a much higher precision than a surgeon could deliver. (Maggots also do this job nicely but we won't go into that.) 16:30, 14 July 2009 (UTC) CЯacke®
Andy thinks he's an expert on everything. Haven't you noticed that? Mathematics, statistics, law, medicine, astrophysics, philosophy, linguistics, history... --Gulik (talk) 18:48, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
What a closed, narrow mind you have, Gulik. Redchuck.gif ГенгисRationalWiki GOLD member 18:52, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
Is this a new fascination? I've never heard Andy bleating about hyperbaric oxygen before. Should I even bother asking how the acceptance or non-acceptance of HBOT for cerebral palsy and MS is a liberal/conservative issue? Corry (talk) 21:46, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
Everything is a liberal/conservative issue. Do you prefer ibuprofen or aspirin? Whiskey or vodka? Macaroni or spaghetti? Based on your answers, I can be confident you are a liberal. That's basic logic, though I'm not optimistic that you or other liberals will admit it. --PitchBlackMind (talk) 22:52, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
Probably something that quack organization he works for came up with, so he promotes it on his blog. Same as the abortion/breast cancer stuff. --Kels (talk) 23:07, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Kels--you're right. The HBOT--Terri Schiavo connection, courtesy of a member of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, Andy's quack group. Plus two more. TheoryOfPractice (talk) 23:15, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, ToP. I assumed the standard Manichean dichotomy, but was wondering if there was a more (dare I say) sophisticated argument at hand. Corry (talk) 23:45, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
Yup. As the Terri Schiavo case shows, if you're opposed to HBOT, you're "antilife."TheoryOfPractice (talk) 00:31, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
When I read that, I just assumed somebody had decided to insert some parody. Poe's Law, indeed. Umlaut (talk) 01:39, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
"Should improved flow and metabolism be noted, a multi-disciplinary program would be mandatory consisting of hyperbaric oxygen in conjunction with PT, OT, speech appropriate nutrition, neuro feedback, herbal medication, acupuncture, etc." Quack, indeed. Redchuck.gif ГенгисRationalWiki GOLD member 10:05, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
For some odd reason that article titled "Hyperbaric Oxygen Therapy for Multiple Sclerosis: My Experience]" has an abstract that only talks about solving nonlinear partial differential equations. That's "disseminating quality controlled scientific knowledge" for you. [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 14:45, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

@Gulik: ...evolution evolutionary theory, microbiology, particle physics, carcinogenesis, epidemiology, psychology, psychiatry, political "science", arc welding (probably)... Kalliumtalk 03:36, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

But don't True Catholics™[edit]

Also oppose the death penalty, war profiteering, and laying off doctors/nurses and closing hospitals just to make an extra buck? (if this comes off as anti-Catholic, I apologize in advance. I have a Catholic Godson and enjoy Catholic services a lot) --Crazyswordsman (talk) 22:50, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Why apologise for being anti-Catholic? Buncha child-molesting, women's-rights-limiting, keeping-the-poor-in-their-place, imperialism-promoting, out-of-touch power mongers. TheoryOfPractice (talk) 23:00, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
But Andy's a Catholic on, I was going somewhere with that. --Kels (talk) 23:05, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
No, that's just Bill Donahue and Brent Bozell (and the Cardinal Newman Society). --Crazyswordsman (talk) 02:39, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
Original (true) Catholics also aren't allowed to read the Bible unless they are a man specifically chosen by God to become a priest/clergyman. Kettle o' fish 07:23, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
You enjoy Catholic services? — Signed, by: Neveruse513 / Talk / Block 13:25, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
Only when I was younger, because the priests told me what the Bible really meant. ^.^ Kettle o' fish 20:18, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
I think he was talking to me. I went to a Christmas mass once and thought the priest said some beautiful things. You just need to go to the older parishes rather than the megachurch-like ones. --Crazyswordsman (talk) 23:38, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

And you need to remember that when the priest says "this is just between you and me, right?" that it's time to run home to your parents in a hurry. TheoryOfPractice (talk)

As a SCUBA diver...[edit]

You really do not want to breath oxygen under pressure. Despite what Andy wants to believe, oxygen under pressure is notorious for causing seizures, which under water is a REALLY BAD THING, and was one of the first things I learned not to do while SCUBA diving (not through first hand experience). While it is handy to have oxygen in the atmosphere, you do not want to breath it under pressure due to that blindness, seizures, and other issues it causes. The highest oxygen content we divers use is Nitrox, which is only 30 - 32% oxygen, and even that requires a modification of dive tables to avoid any risk of oxygen poisioning, and to accomadate... (insert obscure SCUBA description here) ĴάΛäšςǍ₰ A sig not even he can predict! 23:30, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

But according to Andy experts are always liberals and hate Jesus and eat aborted fetuses that they forbid to pray in schools. ENorman (talk) 23:56, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
But... but.. my fetus omelet has a picture of the baby Jesus on it! ħumanUser talk:Human 04:34, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
Another liberal decrying the falsehoods of pressurized O2 merely enforces Andy's well-reasoned argument, Javascap... — Signed, by: Neveruse513 / Talk / Block 13:27, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
It's only a matter of time before Andy claims expertise in this area as well. Etc 13:39, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
No, he already claimed expertise by commenting on the example. [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 14:39, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
Anti-life? HA! Well fuck you Andy, because y'all are anti-reality! Anti-life. Really now...ENorman (talk) 15:37, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
Norm, it's "antilife," not "anti-life." Andy made a point of saying so in an edit summary. Please do try to pay attention. TheoryOfPractice (talk) 16:48, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
So Obama is Darkseid now? --Kels (talk) 16:44, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
Did you say Darkseid? TheoryOfPractice (talk) 16:47, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
Hah! I actually saw the context for the wedding line recently, AND IT'S STILL FUNNY! --Kels (talk) 16:49, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
You all just don't understand. Anti-life justifies Andy's hate! --Arcan ¡ollǝɥ 22:33, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Significant "Don't trouble yourself on our account" WIGO is significant[edit]

Thisimg is the first time in a long time, if not ever, that RW was mentioned without bloxoring. Corry (talk) 03:51, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

  • Poor little idiot. TK readies his banhammer in 10...9...8...--Tabris (talk) 03:58, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
I was wondering if someone else noticed that. Not only did TK not block the guy, he actually helped him. Strange that the guy hasn't made any other edits yet. -- JArneal 06:55, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
One might guess that it is a real life homoschooler (or worser a parent of such) poking the troll Senior Admin to see if the rumors are True.
"Fair thee well good citizen Wittle, I'll see thee in private emails." Methinks. 17:34, 15 July 2009 (UTC) CЯacke®

What the hell...[edit] Ed Poor referring to here? TheoryOfPractice (talk) 04:20, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Ed is part Jewish. 04:25, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
Okay. What happened to warrant that out-of-nowhere comment on his part? TheoryOfPractice (talk) 04:28, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
Given that it's Ed, and Ed is incompetent, he probably thinks that "Moonie" is a race now. --Kels (talk) 04:30, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
Even if the above is true (arguably more so if the above is true), it's a weird sentiment.WilhelmJunker (talk) 04:33, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
In passing, just above that section is this:"As Ed has given me his permanent proxy, ..." from TK. WTF? This message brought to you by: Toastrespondand honey 04:51, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Ah, you guys noticed what the edit before that was, right? TK reverted someone filling the page with a couple hundred "NIGGER"s (by the way, what has it been with the recent surge in vulgar vandalism? it's been especially prominent in usernames, some of which have been pretty creative). Ed Poor's reaction is just....him being Ed Poor, a noble soul trapped in a world he never made (with apologies to the dear departed Steve Gerber).Megaten (talk) 05:28, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Probably coming from Uncyclopedia, 4Chans and the like. CP occaisionally attacts attention and gets surges from there, but since that's usually transient, they just go for the usual kind of acutal moronic vandalism that hits Wikipedia every now and then. Scarlet A.pngtheist 14:05, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Just something I stumbled upon...[edit]

I mentioned Dembski above. Andy himself just introduced Dembski as the first exampleimg of Bias in Wikipedia:

  1. Wikipedia savages anyone who criticizes the theory of evolution, such as Dr. William Dembski, whom Wikipedia introduces with outlandish, unsupported quotations by liberal critics.[1] For example, Wikipedia describes David H. Wolpert as a "prominent mathematician" in order to insert a scathing, unjustified quotation by him about Dembski.[1] In fact, Wolpert does not even hold a math degree and his (non-math) doctorate was from the University of California at the weak Santa Barbara location.[2] Dembski's PhD is in math from the preeminent University of Chicago.

And where are they standing today? Poor Wolperts without his math degree? Well, Wolperts is a consulting professor at Stanford (no doubt at its weak Stanford location) while Dembski is a research professor in philosophy at the (I suppose, preeminent) Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary in Fort Worth, Texas.

larronsicut fur in nocte 07:18, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

You know, anyone ever think that Andy actually is playing the same sort of game as us, only being even funnier? IE, he not only hates liberals, etc., but he also enjoys tweaking "us"? I dunno, I'm probably wrong... ħumanUser talk:Human 08:28, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
I suppose that Andy measures success using the only metric in which he excels, i.e., the grad school you were allowed to visit. But even this metric isn't flawless for Andy, as according to it, Andy isn't better than Obama ... larronsicut fur in nocte 09:30, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
No, that still works, because, while Andy('s mommy) worked hard to earn his place at Harvard, Obama was only there because of affirmative action, or cheating, or some sort of liberal conspiracy. And Obama wasn't even born in America. So there!--WJThomas (talk) 10:48, 15 July 2009 (UTC)


Superb addition! May use as a model. How did this insight take so long?-- Kriss AkabusiAAAWOOOGAAAR!!1 15:10, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Speaking of which, is "nonsense" (1614, 1605-1615) a conservative word? [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 15:14, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
I love the entry right above it, citizen's arrest; taking the law into your own hands so we don't need tax-payer funded police. So Andy's advocating vigilateism now? Z3rotalk 15:30, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
Andy advocates a lot of crazy shit. IMO he'd rather have a Church Militant over a police force, because the police are funded by the liberal government and they don't arrest teachers for not undergoing mandatory school prayer. I'll have to compile a list of the batshit stuff he's supported (Hyperbaric oxygen chamber therapy for curing autism, that bullshit concierge health care, re-translating the Bible, homeschooling with large classes, making English the official language of America, etc.) ENorman (talk) 15:44, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
So he's advocating against the right to a fair trial? And BTW, Hyperbaring oxygen therapy does in some perspective cures autism -- at least you no longer have autistic children if you kill them with oxygen poisoning. [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 18:25, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

I always chuckle at "The King James Version of the Bible contains only about 8,000 different words" - yeah, by intent, not because there were only that many words back then! Then wanted to make it relatively easy to read! And the figure I read was 6,000, but still. Hey, that's one word/day since creation give or take a few hundred! ħumanUser talk:Human 20:37, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Isn't that one word per year? Redchuck.gif ГенгисRationalWiki GOLD member 22:22, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
Atheist liberal maths deceit! ħumanUser talk:Human 22:55, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
I love how he thinks how prostitution and gambling happened only after the KJV was published. --The Emperor Kneel before Zod! 02:09, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
So, what _is_ the World's Oldest Profession in Andyland, then? --Gulik (talk) 04:23, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
Fruit peddling. --Kels (talk) 05:02, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Double WIGO[edit]

Wasn't this WIGO'd last week, and down voted 10 times? Web (talk) 23:47, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

I think so. I'm positive it was discussed here. --PitchBlackMind (talk) 23:57, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

WAAH wigo[edit]

Funny enough on its own, but the next example below it that Andy "improved" at the same time is truly hilarious:

  1. Wikipedia completely omits Conservapedia from Wikipedia's ranking of the largest wikis,[5] even though Conservapedia easily qualifies. Wikipedia's censorship of Conservapedia from that entry remains even after the exposure of this bias.

First, it's NOT Wikipedia, you moron, it's wikimedia. Second, CP was mentioned there one hour ago (if I read my timestamps correctly). Third, they try to only count "good" content, not all the places Poor Ed stubbed his toe... or your essays in the mainspace. Or "Law Terms D", sadly. ħumanUser talk:Human 01:07, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Weirder than I thought - CP is raised on the talk page at WM 7/15, today. Andy's whinge above is from 7/5... does he expect the people who run wikimedia to read his "bias" page in order to "improve" their articles? ħumanUser talk:Human 01:08, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
That's probably a sock of Andy, too. --The Emperor Kneel before Zod! 02:11, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

what in fuck is this?[edit]

That Main Page in full

god almighty Ken, GET HELP. Ace McWickedi9 07:03, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

I cried a little when I saw that. Web (talk) 07:30, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
Sweet jesus, Ken! Post it everywhere, we love it! AndyToad.gifNorsemanCyser Melomel 07:46, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
It's too beautiful. Just too beautiful. StarFish (talk) 08:04, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
Darlin? Or is it Stawin? ħumanUser talk:Human 08:20, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
Oh Darlin, you shouldn't have! I prefer "Starwin", which sounds like a talent contest. Totnesmartin (talk) 08:29, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
Oh, Darlin', I'll never dooo youuuu no harrrrmmmmmm! I prefer Starwin too. Or Stalwin. I wet myself. ħumanUser talk:Human 08:42, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
What I like is that Ken sources the image from his "Atheism" user page on Flickr which he then links back to his CP article. If you would like further advice on SEO please contact.... Redchuck.gif ГенгисOur ignorance is God; what we know is science. 08:51, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
The irony of that whole thing is that Stalin was not even a "Darwinist;" the Soviet establishment at that time preferred a variation on the older idea of Lamarckism. Mjollnir.svgListenerXTalkerX 13:43, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
Also Stalin NOT communist. Stalin = Stalinist fafuxake nothing like communist! This message brought to you by: Toastrespondand honey 13:59, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
What? A Stalinist holocaust denier? Probably a commie symp, too. RobS (talk) 17:13, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
? This message brought to you by: Toastrespondand honey 17:16, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
Rob, sweetheart, you are living proof that sometimes it is better to remain silent and let people think you are a fool, than to open your mouth and show them you are a complete fuckwit. Please reconcile knowing the difference between "communist" and "stalinist" and being a "holocaust denier". Even somebody as red-under-the-bed-paranoid as you shouldn't make that mistake. (Oh and really. Commie symp? Like that is a threat or insult anymore? Get out of the 50s Rob.) --PsyGremlinWhut? 17:21, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
(EC) Stalin was a Red, all right; most of the mess he made was due to attempts to make the USSR more communist. Mjollnir.svgListenerXTalkerX 17:24, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
Never heard of the "Stalinist holocaust?" somehow cp:Holodomor only covers a portion of it. I dont know what is worse, a "Stalinist holocaust" denier (there are those, you know, even in academia, who deny the Stalinist holocasut) or your everyday garden variety [[commie symp]]. RobS (talk) 19:42, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
Let me get this straight - did you just say you don't know whether a Stalinist holocaust denier is worse than a communist sympathizer? Nutty Roux100x100 anarchy symbol.svgUser:Nutty Roux/sigtalk 19:49, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks Robbie darling - I needed that laugh. Either the above is just another example of your "idiot grin" strategy, or you really are an idiot. Where did it say we didn't know what the 'Stalinist holocaust' was? And the "commie symp" allegation - please back it up, with a little bit more than 1950's rhetoric. --PsyGremlinWhut? 11:19, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
To be sure, a lot of academics are unable to tell the difference; I have seen Holodomor denial done without any cry whatsoever being made. Mjollnir.svgListenerXTalkerX 20:12, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
I'm not sure what you mean. Russian Holocaust denial is awful, but what does it have to do with being a communist sympathizer or how they're equivalent (depending on what RobS meant by "don't know what's worse")? Nutty Roux100x100 anarchy symbol.svgUser:Nutty Roux/sigtalk 20:16, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
I think the remark is along the lines of, "I don't know who's worse, the monster or the dupe who believes his lies." Mjollnir.svgListenerXTalkerX 21:20, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
Let's meld this thread with discussion below [6] Here the discussion is over Eric Foner [7], past president of both the American Historical Association and the Organization of American Historians. Foner is a Stalinst Holocaust denier. [8] Foner "denounces 'the obsessive need to fill in the blank pages in the history of the Soviet era.' He wasn't talking about pesky American historians using the Freedom of Information ...but about a Moscow exhibition on the Soviet gulag." RobS (talk) 20:01, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
I prefer Hitwin to Darlin myself. Ken, this is good, but Hitwin was better, more evocative, more clearly communicated your point. Stalin isn't as closely connected with killing lots of people for evolutionary reasons, so Hitwin gets your point across much more clearly. Darlin is confusing - it makes the reader think "Was Darwin behind Communism?". Stick to your desired message, and put plenty of pictures with Hitler in them on the Main Page, it's an important point you're trying to make. Keep up the good work. --DogPMarmite Patrol 16:44, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
Sorry, the days of Main Page Hitwin are over. Ken is too afraid to go against TK's edicts. Redchuck.gif Генгисpillaging 17:19, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
Apparently TK is more powerful than God in Ken's mind. Are you not doing God's work here, Ken? How can you let anyone stand in the way of God's work? --Kels (talk) 19:35, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
They're like the halycon days of summer. I have such fond, misty eyed memories of how the Main Page used to look in days of yore. Everything was beautiful back in, oh, May. Then fucking Crundy came along and complained about it and it led to the Grand De-Hitwinisation Pogrom of 2009. Black mark for Crundy, I'll not let him forget it easily. --DogPMarmite Patrol 17:42, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
Hey DogP, I resuscitated it for you. Redchuck.gif ГенгисRationalWiki GOLD member 23:34, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Hurray! Hitwin AND Darlin on the Main Page, together in a sublime dance, smashing the evolutionist monkey-mud-people! Joy unbounded! --DogPMarmite Patrol 15:39, 16 July 2009 (UTC)


I've finally gotten TK to IP range block part of NJ. [9]. Kettle o' fish 19:29, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Oh, and TK.. the user page said: "About me.. I love you, Terry. You are the best on all this site has to offer". Kettle o' fish 19:35, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
Excited.gifKeep up the good work! I await the day the entire state of New Jersey to be blocked. [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 14:59, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
And nothing of value was lost. Loveydoveycakes (talk) 18:11, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Andy is teasing us![edit]

Oh Andy, you're such a tease! EddyP (talk) 14:15, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

There's no doubt in my mind that he's convinced himself of the "true" number of hits. — Signed, by: Neveruse513 / Talk / Block 14:26, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
Of course, page views aren't really a useful measure of the success of a project like Conservapedia, for reasons I don't need to elaborate. I would think citations are a more relevant indicator. And despite all the exposure, when was the last time you saw anyone citing CP, in any context?WilhelmJunker (talk) 14:39, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
Apart from the youtube vid of the guy saying "look at this awesome site" which I wasn't sure was serious? No. No-one apart from his own homeskollars cite it. Scarlet A.pngtheist 14:57, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
We cite CP. That's what our entire CP category (and the WIGO) is for. Nobody (save a couple of YEC's who is stupid enough to do it) apart from his own homeskollars and his family member (the interview done by his mom, remember?) cites CP for anything positive, that's for sure. [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 15:06, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
Speaking of which, this is perhaps his deceit (if he does not believe the hits are legit) tactics to "phase in" the hits so they look legit. [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 15:09, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
His "CP has had 99M page views" edit means he still gets to trumpet a fanfare when his number gets to 100M. My own estimate is that the real number of page views is somewhere between 50 and 60 million. Redchuck.gif ГенгисRationalWiki GOLD member 15:14, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
Andy tries to be legit. I would bet good money that he has "calculated" that ~2.6 million hits are "fraudulent". If and when he updates the mainpage with 100,000,000 views when the stats page shows ~102,600,000, my theory will be confirmed. — Signed, by: Neveruse513 / Talk / Block 15:16, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
Ur... does this means he is suffering some other forms of deceit? [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 18:37, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Hehe, see section above, it's official as this section title says: Andy is actually playing along, perhaps even having a quiet chuckle at our expense. I wonder if whenever he refers to "liberals" he actually means just "RationalWiki"? ħumanUser talk:Human 20:29, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

I think you're attributing to Andy a sense of playfulness that doesn't exist. Much more likely that he just hates to admit that he's wrong (and/or we're right).--WJThomas (talk) 11:09, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Newbie Spotter...[edit]

First post at RW after having enough with CP. Didn't know where to put this so I'll leave it to someone else, just found it quite funny that Conservapedia decided to stick this news article up today (15 July 09):

We Told You So Department: Alert Al Gore! A new peer-reviewed study may shake the foundation upon which man-made global warming fears are based. The new study discovered "something fundamentally wrong with the way temperature and carbon are linked in climate models."

Which links to here as its sole source: [10]

Seems like they'll go to any extent to disprove global warming, using findings from an Oceanographer studying a warming period some 55 million years ago - somewhat at odds with the Creationist point of view, you'd have to say. — Unsigned, by: JamesFarrier / talk / contribs

Wink.gif you have to admit they don't keep a record of what they have said elsewhere. [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 14:35, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
Well, they'll use the science when it's suits them. Glad you managed to notice this too! Scarlet A.pngtheist 15:00, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
Wasn't Andy the one who basically said peer review amounts to nothing but paying off the board of editors a few years ago? But he will still trumpet it when needed. What? You have an article that was peer review.... Whatever... Peer review means nothing... But look at this article that agrees with me.. It's PEER REVIEWED, you have to accept it. What a freaking tool. SirChuckBA product of Affirmative Action 17:03, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
I'm a little surprised. I went and did a search on Science Blogs, and didn't come up with a thing. You'd think someone would be talking about it there, if only debunking the denialists. --Kels (talk) 17:24, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
Well, it doesn't make a very strong case against climate change, and I haven't seen it mentioned anywhere in the clogosphere, with one notable and obvious exception. Could be that it just isn't causing much of a buzz?WilhelmJunker (talk) 17:35, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
Andy seems to think that peer review is like the church rewriting scripture, with a few people talking amongst themselves to decide what becomes Truth, which must be accepted by all others. If only he would realize that peer review does not end with publication. Or for that matter, neither does it begin with manuscript review. Kalliumtalk 23:54, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
I'm no scientist, so I could be reading this wrong, but if you trawl through the links to get the original paper, does it not actually suggest that the CO2 sensitivity model may be wrong - as it estimates the temperature rise too low, as this new data suggests an undiscovered (until now) feedback system exacerbating the temperature rise (at my amateurish guess, perhaps the temperature increase caused by CO2 rising causing increased evaporation rates of the oceans, which increases water vapour in the atmosphere, and water vapour is another greenhouse gas, so this causes further temperature rises)? If I am reading this right, does this not mean that, far from global warming therefore not being an issue, it potentially could be even worse than has been thought? If so, does this not make actually make the global warming deniers even wronger? 21:08, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Andy Schlafly--Praying to a False God?[edit]

This may have been discussed while I wasn't around, so my apologies--but this new-ish essay by Andrew Layton Schlafly seems to imply that he thinks that conservatism is better than religion. How can he reconcile that with his faith? Is he hinting at the need for/proposing a new religion/cult/belief system that's better/more pure/less corruptible than standard religions? TheoryOfPractice (talk) 15:39, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Don't be fooled by the word 'Essay' in the title - it's just a collection of bullet points slung together and makes no coherent argument. Compare it to an actual essay like say this one and note the difference. Is there a word for people who descend into bullet points instead of stringing thoughts together properly?--

Kriss AkabusiAAAWOOOGAAAR!!1 15:59, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Conservapedian? --JeevesMkII The gentleman's gentleman at the other site 16:07, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
One might say that Yahweh is a false god in the first place... --Kels (talk) 16:31, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
Mark my words. A day will come when Andy will try to start his own religion: the Conservative Christianity. Vulpius (talk) 16:58, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
I can't wait to see their bible: "And on the fifth day, he created the Glock 9mm." SirChuckBA product of Affirmative Action 17:05, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
We should go ahead and write it for him: The Conservabible. Would be a fun project. --127․0․0․1 (talk) 17:21, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
The Conservabible is already under construction at the CP Bible Retranslation Project. Aboriginal Noise with 4 M's and a silent Q 10:53, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
What? Miley "posed almost indecently on Vanity Fair" Cyrus? Geez, they will pull anyone onto the boat if that person said anything remotely related to their goal. [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 18:16, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Intolerance of atheists WIGO[edit]

Thread moved to Debate:In God We Trust by Totnesmartin (talk) 17:59, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

I think this debate has legs - should it be moved to the Debate space? Silver Sloth (talk) 14:57, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Done. Totnesmartin (talk) 17:59, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Distortion 101 WIGO[edit]

Actually, as much as I feel ill for agreeing with Turquoise Knickers, the WIGO is wrong. In the CNS article, it says "Hoyer also said he could not think of any small business owners..." (para 2) and later "“I don’t know many small business men or women who are making,..." (para 5), so the borked news is actually right. TK, you owe me a beer. --PsyGremlinWhut? 18:10, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Except that TK quotes a source for income to small business, the reference is in regards to income to owners of small businesses, there is a significant difference there. tmtoulouse 18:21, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
Also his number isn't in the source - the source has a rather odd statistic about SB income (again, not the owners' incomes...). I think any SB owner who literally earns $280k is not likely to pull back their hiring practices because their taxes went up. They're doing just fine already. In my wild-ass-guess world, successful SB owners tend to make in the 100k range - which is a very nice income. ħumanUser talk:Human 01:58, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Well in the original source, both versions are used. Nevertheless, the only direct quote explicitely states "many" instead of "any", which is way more easily defensible for a politician. My guess would be that the source itself is wrong and that Hoyer only said "many". So I guess it makes TK...kinda right...but not convincing. He's correctly quoting the news source, which is itself (presumably) distorting the original statements. Anyway, what about the figure for the average income? Is there some "connect-the-dots" thinking in there? -- 08:01, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Global warming[edit]

Gotta love their bastardization of this article. The article says CO2 explains only some of the warming, and that something else is working in tandem with CO2 levels. Conservapedia interprets it as "Al Gore was wrong and Global Warming is a lie!"

I have heard it somewhere (someone who do mathematical modelling) that a large part of the effect comes from water (which is still combustion products along with CO2). Conservapedia will interpret it as "See, the water canopy helps warming up the earth right before the flood". [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 02:41, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
The H2O thing is iffy. Coal, for instance, contains no H, so does not contribute to atmospheric H2O. Oil and methane, however, do, and as such burning them might increase the atmospheric load of H2O. ħumanUser talk:Human 06:06, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
Coal has some hydrogen - around 5% depending on the type. But yeah, fairly small compared to its carbon content. Ajkgordon (talk) 08:49, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
Water in the atmosphere has a highly warming effect (more then CO2), but the amount of water present varies very little. If there is "too much", it just rains down. 09:23, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Your opinions?[edit]

Slight parody by a homeschooler who has increasingly been questioning Andy lately? EddyP (talk) 19:40, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

No. Broccoli (talk) 19:53, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
Not even close. I believe Addison fancies himself as quite teh homskollar, regardless of any insolence to his master. — Signed, by: Neveruse513 / Talk / Block 19:58, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Does anyone know..[edit] one would go about reporting plaigarism of this article which appears on another site word-for-word without citation? Kettle o' fish 01:39, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

.... 10:1 says you yourself are Earthtasks, so you could just admit the fraud and delete it — Unsigned, by: / talk / contribs

Oh great, you now just make TK banhammer anyone who put up the suggestion. [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 02:25, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
Nice way to make the little man jump for you... ħumanUser talk:Human 04:25, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
No, I was actually IdetA. *points to IP address* — Unsigned, by: / talk / contribs

oh and TK, you missed how this article was copied from both the previous one and this site. — Unsigned, by: / talk / contribs


I love how he redirected "Hard-core pornography" to "Pornography". Now we know.

But what if someone types in "Hardcore pornography" without the hyphen? THEN WHAT!? SJ Debaser 10:04, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

The mind boggles as to what circumstances would lead a person to search Conservapedia for hardcore pornography. --JeevesMkII The gentleman's gentleman at the other site 11:11, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
No mental problems my ass. EddyP (talk) 11:17, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
Searching for any sort of wankfodder on CP should redirect to the Reagan article. 11:42, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
You got it all wrong. I once saw a woman's ankle on CP. Oooo baby... 12:50, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
I love the talk page, which is over two years old:
Do we want an article on this? I have a lot of information, but it might disturb members of our target audience. Maybe if I tapdance around the details and just discuss statistics and such.... --Ed Poor 08:47, 17 April 2007 (EDT) Better question is what do we want for an accompanying photo? --RexMundane 11:26, 17 April 2007 (EDT)
Information. Tapdance. Statistics. Photo. Lol. Etc 22:13, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
The page itself is somewhere between hilarious and sad. --Kels (talk) 22:40, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
I like it.... It reminded of Sex ed classes. The class I was had an obviously gay teacher and it was fun watching her try to toe the school board line on what was acceptable. Which was hilarious because the students kept pushing things further and further. SirChuckBA product of Affirmative Action 23:00, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Andy's Coin-Flipping WIGO[edit]

Don't want to come off as if it's a bad thing to tweak a WIGO written by someone else, but I wanted to make a point. This talk page is full of criticisms of WIGOs that are overly long, rambling, or beating dead horses. If there's a WIGO out there you don't like, then vote it down, but If you want to use it as an anchor to add an unrelated point or state something for the 666th time, like "Ho Ho, now they are saying that (blank) is a 'Conservative Word'!", please refrain, or at least write your own from scratch. --SpinyNorman (talk) 15:27, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

I think the point of that WIGO is that Aschlafly kicks out words that would actually fit quite nicely in order to maintain his notion that "new conservative words" are being "created" in an arithmetical progression. If a "new" (better) conservative word is found for the 17th century then one has to be dropped from the current list i.e. it is "no longer" a new conservative word. 17:13, 17 July 2009 (UTC) CЯacke®
Agreed - Andy would declare that "Mytzlplyk" is a conservative word if it maintained his pattern. What made me decide to WIGO this particular bit was that these were literally back-to-back comments by Andy negating and then approving different words having the same conservative basis, Christianity. Maybe it's not WIGO-worthy at all, but I was commenting here on the Talk page because it was expanded twice in ways that didn't seem to add anything to it. --SpinyNorman (talk) 19:00, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
Hm. Do you think that Andy will return to the Conservative Dimension if we can get him to say his name backwards? --Gulik (talk) 00:45, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
You know what would be a good idea/funny thing? To take our article on BestConWords (we have one, right?) and paste in all his edit comments since he started fitting the data to the hypothesis, leaving none out. Hilarious reading. That would make a place for people to add stuff without the problem of them becoming pre-lamed wigos, I think. ħumanUser talk:Human 02:51, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

SES application[edit]

Did that ever get resolved? tmtoulouse 21:10, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

I'll have to call on Monday, but it looks like he was rejected since he's not on the list of approved 2009-10 providers. --SpinyNorman (talk) 22:13, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
Easier way to test if it works: ask on CP and if you get banhammered, it is rejected. [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 22:28, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
Or they deny the existence of the application. Andy is not crying about it--Tabris (talk) 02:20, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Sometimes it's the simple things in life...[edit]

Simple but funny. Z3rotalk 21:19, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Hahaha. The entire block log over the past couple days has several clever additions, and accompanying responses by sysops. Damn, I'm in my's probably time to stop laughing at things like AndysSaggyNutsac, but I can't help it. --PitchBlackMind (talk) 22:59, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
Barely funny. Most of the "user" names are just rude statements. What is funny is when people register a name that completes the sentence "SYSOP blocked..." - as in, say "Jesus from this site", or "his bumhole with a giant dildo". Still, very low-level humor. ħumanUser talk:Human 03:01, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
You mean like this fine fellow? (Self promotion warning) Stile4aly (talk) 06:56, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
Yes, like that fine fellow. Surely that was their real first name and fecal initial?! ħumanUser talk:Human 07:04, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Boston and PatrickD[edit]

"Actually, Bostonians are somewhat proud of their juxtaposition of the very old and the very new. Trinity happens to be very close to the all-glass Hancock tower (too close, in fact, construction of Hancock threatened to damage Trinity.) If I get into Boston, which isn't very common, since I live some distance away, I'll see if I can take a picture that juxtaposes the two in a striking way"

Walking down Boylston Street towards Copley "Square", one walks past the ancient (relatively) Trinity Church. Behind it is the Hancock Tower, a steel and glass edifice which is essentially a four-sided mirror. The view is extraordinary. One can see three sides of the church at once, since its rear is reflected by the tower. And the "frontal" view is not dominated by the 'scraper behind it, since the tower mostly reflects the sky. Boston is an amazing city to walk (it is best experienced that way, unlike most cities), and presents many hugely successful juxtapositions of "old" and new. (OK, the "old" ain't exactly Roman roads, but still, it's Merka).

Eh, I couldn't post this on CP at This page, so screw it, I wrote it here. ħumanUser talk:Human 05:11, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

So how does Andy keep the pit bulls off the homskollars?[edit]

Well, how does he? Pmail the goons when a new student joins CP? Sekrit forums to alert them not to block his paying kiddies? Anyone ever see Andy insta-unblock a "first name last initial account" because he "knows" them IRL? ħumanUser talk:Human 07:08, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Yes, there was this guy. I believe he may have even have been the trigger for TK's swearing at Andy and his consequent demotion. Redchuck.gif ГенгисRationalWiki GOLD member 12:01, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
Do we have a copy of TK's little hissy fit lying around anywhere? I could do with a good laugh. In the meantime, I'm off to HJ's page, to read TK's accusing Andy of being an alcoholic again. --PsyGremlinWhut? 12:17, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

WTF is Rob's new Userbox about?[edit]

The userbox links to a 2 line reply from 4 years ago. I'm not seeing anything showing that Chip Berlet or Fred Bauder were members of the Weather Underground. As far as I can tell from CP's article, in the 1980s Chip Berlet signed a petition also signed by some former Weather Underground members. I suppose in Rob's mind this means he was Bill Ayers mentor during the Pentagon bombing. God knows Rob's kooky when it comes to conspiracies, but can anyone explain what's going on? Stile4aly (talk) 05:31, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

There are still commies under RobS' bed, ya know? And he is determined to out them everywhere and anywhen (why isn't that a word?) he can. ħumanUser talk:Human 05:46, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
I read a bit of WP's pages and yes, I think that's what he's getting at. He cites instances of Weather Underground and others doing nasty stuff, so there! FlareTalk 18:40, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
As I recall, RobS had quite the hard-on for attacking Berlet at one point, didn't he? He doesn't seem the type to let grudges (or imagined grudges) go easily, or at all. --Kels (talk) 18:44, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
Scoll down to the business about the NLG. Chip Berlet was VP of the NLG. Fred Bauder, Wikipedia Arbitration Committee Chairman was a member of the NLG and refused to recuse himself. Bernardine Dorhn was a member of the NLG.
The point is, I been on Dohrn's trail along time -- since she left my hometown to spread commie terror across the America & I heard everyday news reports about the hometown girl gone bad. If Obama & Ayers become collateral damage, well just too bad. RobS (talk) 17:07, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
The inside of your head is a really strange and frightening place, Rob. --Kels (talk) 17:43, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
You can't blame him for being suspectful of the lawyer vice-king, can you? FlareTalk 17:49, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
Berlet isn't even a lwayer, and both Bauder & Dohrn are disbarred. I guess corrupting childrens minds with commie rot & agitprop has to take the place of the legitimate practice of law for all these National Lawyers Guild alumni. RobS (talk) 20:55, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Obama, Catholic enemy[edit]

I've just been reading JPatt's user page, which is good for a laff, but this caught my attention: "...marks him [Obama] as a singular enemy of essential elements of the Catholic Church’s moral teaching."
--Fr. Corapi

Official Catholic Church Doctrine
Can anyone source that, specifically the "official" bit? (in passing; I always thought that "Fr." was short for" Frater" i.e. "Brother" not "Father".) This message brought to you by: Toastrespondand honey 03:20, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

I thought it was from teh Franglais, "frere", as in "Frere Jacques"? Still means Bro', tho'. So he's a monk(ey)? ħumanUser talk:Human 03:33, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
This is the guy who said it. A priest come TV talking head. - π 09:22, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
Related: Jpatt (of course) didn't just leave it on his user page: cp:Fr. Corapi on Notre Dame scandal. And some context, apparently: "Fr. Corapi, Cardinal Newman Society Launch Prayer Campaign for Notre Dame 'Travesty' on National Day of Prayer" No word on this being "Official Catholic Church Doctrine". It would surprise me, actually, since on CP, nothing is official church anything unless the Pope says it in a speech that explicitly states that he is speaking for the church. Anything below that is dismissed as personal opinion - see for example the whole "Catholic Church and evolution" mess. --Sid (talk) 11:43, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
And by "The Pope" I'm sure you mean "Andy Schlafly". DickTurpis (talk) 13:26, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
Shouldn't we have the Andychurch/Conservapedian Church article by now? He's obviously starting his own church. [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 23:40, 18 July 2009 (UTC)


It has now officially been 100 days since he has lost his rights. --The Emperor Kneel before Zod! 16:03, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

The investigation is proceeding nicely, I see. --Kels (talk) 21:03, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Is it just me...[edit]

Or has Andy got this wrong? (admittedly that wouldn't be anything new)...he says that a "no" vote for Sotomayor would cost a senator support from the NRA, which seems to contradict the first part of his ramblings [11] Jammy (talk) 16:29, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

It's not just you. I thought the same thing. But I know nothing about the process. I wondered whether somehow a no vote was a vote supporting her nomination. --Horace (talk) 16:42, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
Or somehow endorsements from the NRA being such a bad thing it is costing the senator his/her seat. [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 18:21, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
You're welcome Andy! Jammy (talk) 19:03, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

So when a democrat does it, it's bad, right TK?[edit]

I love Terry's little attack against Obama here. Goalpost moving is condemnable, huh TK? It's a blatant attempt to fool the public? It's another tactic from the bag-o-tricks from those dirty, godless, anti-American communist liberals? You sure you wanna go there? Ok, I'll see your "goal for economic recovery" and raise you one "original purpose of the 'War on Terror'". Your move.HollowPsycho (talk) 20:16, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Please, don't feed the animals. What's-his-name doesn't care about the goalposts- he just wanted another angry comment like that one. Seriously, ignore him. Kalliumtalk 20:34, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
Troll --Kels (talk) 21:02, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
Every time you give TK a response, God kills a kitten. Please, ignore him for the kittens. Web (talk) 02:04, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
My bad. I just got off a long spiel of listening to right wing idiodicy before that, and that edit just threw me over the line. I gotta remember to not end my browsing with anything from him. HollowPsycho (talk) 05:48, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Andy and Dinosaurs Lizards[edit]


Never mind that Andy thinks dinosaur should still be called "lizards", what is even stoopider is the fact that he thinks 1841 is a "suprisingly late date". The first actual scientifically recognised fossil considered to be an extinct species was in 1824. So really not that late at all. Ace McWickedNecron99 20:25, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

But dinosaurs were contemporary with antedeluvian man and may even still exist. Redchuck.gif ГенгисRationalWiki GOLD member 20:35, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
And before 1841 they were known as "dragons". Ace McWickedNecron99 20:41, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
Their loss in teh Flood of 1823 forced teh Christian Scientist Engineers to invent bulldozers, cranes, and tanks to replace them. ħumanUser talk:Human 21:49, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
Well, Andy is more correct in calling them lizards because "dinosaur" literally translated from Greek (I think) is "fearfully great/terrible lizard".
As to why they're aren't called lizards, well.. they're effing scary compared to most of today's lizards (with the exception of the Komodo Dragon). (talk) 23:46, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
Isn't modern consensus moving towards dinosaurs being more avian than lizards? Or is that only some kinds. X Stickman (talk) 00:08, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
As far as I know dinosaurs are not considered lizards. Ace McWickedNecron99 00:21, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
Yes, quite. Dinosaurs aren't called lizards for the same reason dogs aren't called lizards and Andy isn't called clever Beastiepaws (talk) 01:04, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
If we generalize like that, would not wolves be simply dogs and tigers be simply cats?--Tabris (talk) 01:43, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
It's well beyond that level of generalisation-- lizard is not a synonym for reptile and dinosaurs were *not* lizards. It's more like calling birds lizards or hamsters marsupials in its inanity. Please look at the link I posted for fuller explanation.Beastiepaws (talk) 01:57, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
(EC)Dogs are wolves. The common house dog is a subspecies of the grey wolf. - π 01:50, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
To further clarify and throw around some vocabulary, lizards are in Lepidosauromorpha, while dinosaurs were in Archosauromorpha. Crocodiles are in Archosauromorpha, as are birds. Lizards, tuatara and snakes are all in Lepidosauromorpha. Of course, on CP, I'd be accused of using "jargon" (ie, big words that confuse Andy) for using actual scientific terms. (Taken from the video here, which I would have imbedded, but I can't find the original source) Hactar (talk) 01:49, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
Links are good, I am sick of people embedding videos unnecessarily. The load time on the Saloon bar can be terrible some days. - π 01:53, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
Or to make the above paragraph understandable by somebody of AndyPandy's intellectual stature: Reptiles and lizards are closely related, but not the same, and dinosaurs, with the exception of Barney, are reptiles (Barney was a person in a suit, sorry to spoil the illusion for you, but there you go).--Precumming Storm (talk) 02:11, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
No. Lizards *are* reptiles. Dinosaurs are also reptiles. But dinosaurs aren't lizards. Got it? Lizards and dinosaurs are both particular but mutually exclusive types of reptiles. Geez, did anyone bother to look at the nice taxonomy diagram? Beastiepaws (talk) 02:21, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
Hence, "Reptiles and lizards are closely related, but not the same", the statement being applied at the infraclass level of Archosauromorpha/Lepidosauromorpha. Its one of those annoying things that palaeontologists do that wind taxonomists up (its accurate enough to be true, while being inaccurate enough to be false.)--Precumming Storm (talk) 03:36, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
Clearly no. Or did you mean that rhetorically? - π 02:26, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
We don't need complicated graphs or fancy spanish words to know what's right. The fact that lizards aren't dinosaurs is a truism which only liberals would deny. 03:00, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

(Unindent)You guys are overthinking this. We don't call dinosaurs "lizards" for the same reason we don't call telephones "voices" or "far aways". FlareTalk 03:13, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

I keep hearing voices! Souls are trapped in a box! I shall set you free, o' souls.. *breaks your TV and radio with a sledgehammer* There, be free to go to heaven/hell o' souls. (talk) 03:39, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
Why do we call him Andy? Why not call him a monkey like he is?--Tabris (talk) 04:11, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
This conversation went from funny to funnier, via smarter. I chuckled till I peed. ħumanUser talk:Human 04:20, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
Most mornings I give the dinosaurs here a dish of fresh water to splash around in. Sometimes they get a new spray of millet seed to pick at. They really like the seeds from the stem end of a bell pepper. They hate it when I trim their toenails, but it's for their own good. One little guy has a bruised foot because he got tangled up in a wicker nesting structure, so I need to keep an eye on him. He's still pretty perky and I hope he'll be OK after it passes, but you never can tell. These dinosaurs tend to hide any injury or infirmity, because their own buddies will turn on them at in an eyeblink. Sprocket J Cogswell (talk) 04:21, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
P.S. The ones in the cage never keep track of where they poop, and just as often it goes in the water supply. No way I'm going to tell them to just sit in it and sip. Sprocket J Cogswell (talk)
We have a horrible Dino infestation here in Denver. The little bastards are in everything. One got past the nets last night and I had to chase him out of the flour container with a broom. Freaky little lizards, annoy the hell out of me. What are the EPA rules on Dinosaur abuse? SirChuckBA product of Affirmative Action 04:26, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
Isn't there speculation that some dinosaurs were warm blooded, i.e. not reptiles/lizards? This message brought to you by: Toastrespondand honey 04:35, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
Would that make them taste like chicken? Not sure, but I think the EPA says #8.5 shot out of a full choke is appropriate for close quarters in the pantry. Mind you point clear of the liquor cabinet and spice rack, and aim good, cause sometimes they charge when they're wounded. Sprocket J Cogswell (talk) 04:40, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
Mmmmm, tastes like chicken. Whatever weight, whatever choke, just cill the bastids before they cill us!!! I seen the movie! (It sucked) ħumanUser talk:Human 04:44, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

(Unindent) Just to clear this up, then I'm gone. There are two major clades of dinosaurs, Saurischia (lizard-hipped) and Ornithiscia (bird-hipped). Ironically, the bird-hipped dinosaurs did not evolve into birds, its just a case where ornithischians independently evolved the posteriorly oriented pelvis. The saurischians were the ones that evolved into birds. More specifically, a clade known as Maniraptora. In reality know, if we could get rid of Feduccia and Ruben and all the other BANDits, birds are technically reptiles. Dinosaurs evolved from a common archosaurian reptile during the early Late Triassic. From there, the Ornithischians (like Triceratops, etc.) died out at the end K-T extinction event. The Saurischians, on the other hand, and more specifically, Maniraptora, evolved filament-like integumentary structures that then developed into true pennaceous feathers. And of course, we now know, as a FACT, that Velociraptor was feathered. So, dinosaurs are reptiles. Some evolved into birds, (ie. Maniraptor split into two clades, Eumaniraptora and basal Avialae), and some died out as reptiles.

Now, from Maniraptora, basal birds such as Arcaheopteryx and Yanornis appeared. Archaeopteryx shows deinonychosaurian features such as a long tail bone and a hyper-extended second toe. This, along with the fact of feathered dinosaurs, we know that modern day birds arose from dinosaurs. To sum it all up, birds came from dinosaurs, but not all dinosaurs evolved into birds. So, you can also assume (and this is going farrrrrrrrrrr back, that birds are reptiles.) Oh, and you're right. Dinosaurs are not lizards, but a subgroup of archosaurian reptiles, the Dinosauriformes.

For more information on feathered dinosaurs and why creationists get it wrong, see this article. And no, I'm not coming back, this is just my statement.--Beishanlong grandis 16:24, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Spectacular jobs people![edit]

Maybe I have been watching the WIGO page with less diligence, but apparently people will vote for "Nothing.". No links, nothing. [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 05:43, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Work Flow to all Service No.:

1. You tell us the service you need in detail.

2. We give you our plan according to your requirements.

3. Sign contract and prepay us to proceed with our cooperation.

4. We follow the service till you are satisfied.

By the way, for your convenient business, we are open for our cooperation way. Your suggestion is also warmly welcome!

PS, this is the sort of email I get from China. PPS, your link is teh borken. ħumanUser talk:Human 05:47, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
Link fixed? Cool. +31? Not that big of deal these days, especially considering the "silly" vote. Especially when nothing much is really going on there these days. I think that was your point? ħumanUser talk:Human 05:50, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

It is because nothing is going on. The place is dead. And that is why RW is grinding to a slow halt as well. You guys aren't even sitting around talking about how dead CP is anymore. You wondered how it would end? Not with a bang but whisper. Fifth Horseman (talk) 15:46, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Hint: A link can be included like this. [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 16:12, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
Excuse me, but I think you are mistaking me for someone who cares. Fifth Horseman (talk) 16:20, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Physics WIGO[edit]

If it wasn't Ed Poor, I'd say it was a joke. Broccoli (talk) 23:49, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Also, Ed Poornography. --Gulik (talk) 00:19, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
It really sheds light on his bragging over at WP about the number of articles he has created. Nowadays such a pointless creation would be speedied I would imagine, but back in the day they probably just got "really" written by other editors. ħumanUser talk:Human 02:01, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
I remember going through some of the new pages he'd created way back when he first got there, and most of them weren't any better. They either did get deleted for being POV crap, like anti-evo articles and such, or worthless stubs that were actually on useful topics, but Ed was too incompetent to write anything about. Sort of like firing off a shotgun, something is bound to hit, but the percentage is pretty slim. --Kels (talk) 02:26, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
It would be "fun" to use dpl to eke out all his "created article" and analyze their contents, at the point he typed "save". ħumanUser talk:Human 05:31, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
Ed is just sooooo bad at wikis that it defies belief. One of his recent entries was John Holden which comprises "John Holden is President Obama's 'science czar'. Michelle Malkin says that Holden is a radical secular evangelist." Not only is this a typical Ed uncategorised quotestub (albeit referenced) but he got the guy's (John Holdren) name wrong. Redchuck.gif ГенгисRationalWiki GOLD member 19:15, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
Are you sure he wasn't just re-reading Catcher in the Rye for the steamy parts and got Holden Caulfield's name all mixed up in his naughty, naughty thought-box? The Foxhole Atheist (talk) 19:27, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
Ed is so preoccupied with sex that I doubt he even needed to reread Catcher, it's probably ingrained into his sub-conscious. Unlike myself - it must be over 40 years since I read it, perhaps it's time to dust off that old school copy which I have somewhere. Only trouble is that I have quite a backlog of newer books which I want to read and don't really have the time. Redchuck.gif ГенгисRationalWiki GOLD member 20:13, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
PS Why don't you change your ID as your sig is the name we all know you by now. Redchuck.gif ГенгисRationalWiki GOLD member 20:15, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
Um, I didn't know I could? How can I haz ID change? The Foxhole Atheist (talk) 20:22, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
As a 'crat I could do it for you if you like. Redchuck.gif ГенгисRationalWiki GOLD member 20:32, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
By all means then, please do so. I'd really appreciate it! The Foxhole Atheist (talk) 20:33, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Liberal myths[edit]

The JPat gun control v pro-life wigo leads me to ask: have we got a critique of cp:Liberal_myths anywhere? It seems to me it could be ripped to shreds point by point especially by an American. This message brought to you by: Toastrespondand honey 05:42, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Hmm, replace "Bush" with "Obama" and "Liberal" with "Conservative" at the end, and it's up to date! It's uncanny. I love how it ends with a completely random, uncited, and rather meaningless quote that does exactly what they said not to. Kalliumtalk 14:39, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
HA- their citation for the myth "that there is a vast right-wing conspiracy" is an article by O'Reilly about- I kid you not- the vast left-wing conspiracy. Of course, in the article, Bill's only definition of "left-wing" conspiracy is his perceived general movement of the media to the "far left". In other words, the right is by definition Right, and people know it, so if more than one person disagrees, it's a socalist conspiracy! Aaaaahhh! Kalliumtalk 14:46, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
I like the first one, how it is a lib-burr-rul myth that "the population has increased by a large amount." Mjollnir.svgListenerXTalkerX 14:54, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
AND: "They claim that there is a gene which causes people to be gay, despite the fact that the scientific community rejects this view". But of course scientific consensus doesnt' matter for "The claim that abortion and breast cancer are unrelated", "They claim that humans and apes have a common ancestor", "They claim that intelligent design is not a science and has no evidence". Selective much? As for Andy's thing about proper qualifications (irony, I know): "They claim that no climatologist or physicist rejects global warming, despite the fact that the founder of The Weather Channel rejects global warming, as do thousands of other scientists." Has he STILL not read that the WC founder was a meterologist, not a climatologist? Selective much? Kalliumtalk 14:58, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
Isn't it obvious that the agenda of the left-wing conspiracy is to spread the myth that there exists a right-wing conspiracy? Etc 15:28, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
This WIGO is, somehow, the first time I've ever seen that liberal myths page. I am terrified. Even if most of the items on there were put in by parodists (I cba going through the history), the fact that they're still on the lists mean the viewpoints are endorsed by the CP heads. Scary stuff. X Stickman (talk) 16:36, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
It is interesting what you can get quote mining from that page. "The main reason for this has to due [sic] with [their] passionate, partisan hatred for our current commander n chief [sic], the President of the United States of America." Nice to see that conservatives like good patriots support Obama, whilst the liberals are hating on him in a partisan way. - π 01:37, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
I have made a side-by-side out of the long bulleted list in the "Liberal myths" article. Mjollnir.svgListenerXTalkerX 05:14, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
You didn't, really. You made a mess. Please use the template when doing this. Your last work and this one are a fricking pain to edit, since there are no section headers. Please take my constructive criticism in the manner in which it is intended... ħumanUser talk:Human 05:28, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks, it's much better and easier to edit now! ħumanUser talk:Human 23:59, 20 July 2009 (UTC)


Just when I'm thinking of giving up, leaving the Internet and getting an actual life, Conservapedia pulls me back in with their hilarious inshites, making me think this is better than the real world. Dinosaurs are terrifying lizards, America legally owns the moon, and TK needs photographic evidence of Reagan and Gorbachev going at it.

You couldn't make this up. SJ Debaser 18:33, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

I can't seem to find the rule 34 of Reagan x Gorbachev, but I did find some Lincoln x Washington. (talk) 05:14, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Some dumb S***[edit]

From the Surchur Conservapedia search on Youtube: The dumbest S*** I have seen in a while. --Passerby25 (talk) 15:53, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Andy vs. Jon Stewart[edit]

What is with Andy's sudden hatred for The Daily Show and Comedy Central? I mean, Lewis Black's segment on CP gave him a national audience and is probably the only reason his blog survived as long as it has. On that same note, Andy does understand the Daily Show is way over the head of your typical teenager.... You really need to know your politics before you can seriously get the Daily Show. SirChuckBA product of Affirmative Action 15:59, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Hey Now! I am a Teen and I love TDS, actually, that is where I discovered CP from (and then I later discovered another kind from a /b/tard friend of mine, but that is another, more disturbing story, altogether) --Passerby25 (talk) 23:16, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
Andy has sudden bursts of hatred for Comedy Central in general. My guess is that a showing of Trading Places was on, so Andy started watching. He sees a tie-in for the daily show during the commercial break and it sends him into a rage. — Signed, by: Neveruse513 / Talk / Block 16:06, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
I never thought of that.... I figured that he was pissed that Stewart, a self admitted Jew would dare try and usurp the true humor that Jesus brought to the land in his famous ministry consisting of nothing but parables and knock knock jokes. SirChuckBA product of Affirmative Action 16:13, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

(Duh, can't read...) Andy holds grudges well. Sterile handstand 16:22, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

I agree, the Daily Show often goes over heads, teen or otherwise. Sometimes I smirk when something Stewart says goes right by the studio audience but I get it. Other times, things go over my head, and I'm not so smug. I assumed that Lewis Black's reference to CP was made up, and was astounded that it wasn't. Which led me to CP and RW respectively. Andy is a Douche. Tell your friends, especially your Christian ones. Jimaginator (talk) 17:02, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
Can you imagine Schlafly being interviewed on either the Daily Show or Colbert Report? Scarlet A.pngtheist 17:08, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
Andy on the Colbert Report would be amazing. Someone more talented than me should do a youtube video of interspersed Andy and Colbert clips. Z3rotalk 17:31, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
Actually, I think Colbert's tactic of embarrasing people on his show would backfire in an Andy interview:
Colbert:"So everything bad that ever happened ever was the fault of liberals?" (audience laughs)
Having been out-parodied by Andy, Colbert tries a different tactic:
Colbert:"But conservatives in the South were the primary supporters of segregation in the sixties, right?"
Andy:"No, the liberal academia teach you that conservatives were responsible. Liberals were the ones who were racists." (Both Colbert and audience are in awestruck silence)-- JArneal 00:16, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
I feel sorry for Colbert. How do you out-crazy people like that? --Gulik (talk) 00:21, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
This is a great idea. Someone needs to tip off Colbert's staff to bump it up their "to do list"! ħumanUser talk:Human 01:05, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
Public schoolers watch that much TV? Really? My high school must be the odd one out. As far as I know the following doesn't count as "watching TV": reading, partying, doing drugs, playing video games (I'm actively moving my thumbs), having sex, vandalising Conservapedia, going to the movie theatre (it's a communial thing), going to certain academic/athletic extracurricular activities.
8 hours of sleep + 8 hours of school + 1 hour of food + 15 minutes of toilet + 30 minutes of shower + 1 hour of faking like we're doing homework = 18.75 hours. Extracurriculars are at least 2 hours at my school and parties are about 4?.. So 3 * 5 = 15 hours in the school week. 15 * 4 = 60 hours per month not devoted to daily activities. Sure there's the weekend, but that just means more parties, sex, dating, liberal activities.. like socializing and making jokes (as opposed to being tactful for the conservatives).
I no longer get any of those television stations due to the government's mandated DTV transition. 3 hours per month of Television watching for me.
Wow, the people at your school got 8 hours of sleep? most of the people at mine usually get somewhere in the 3-5 hour range.
How many hours do you spend on Conservapedia, Andy? Kettle o' fish 01:22, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
Wow. For me it was just video games, video games, video games. Hope I'm less of a loser in college.-- JArneal 04:23, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
Totally agree with you there, I'm going to be a senior next year, and all Ive been doing is Video Games, Video Games, Porn, Video Games, Watching TV, Porn, "Hand Exercises", Read the news, Video Games. I hate myself :P --Passerby25 (talk) 23:38, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Do we now have evidence suggesting that Andy does not possess the knowledge of existence of certain technologies, namely TiVo/commerical flagging/commercial skipping/personal TV? [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 02:45, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Andy rarely watches TV.. as far as I remember.
I wonder what kind of statistics are out there for how many hours housewives watch per month. My guess is: 3 * 7 * 4 = 84 (+/- 3). 18:32, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Oh, jeez, how did I miss this thread? Andy on the Colbert Report? Where do I send a check to make this happen? Can we start up a collection? Fedhaji (talk) 03:59, 22 July 2009 (UTC)


A perfect WIGO, I especially like where TK says

I have tried, on many occasions, to approach you privately

I love how she sees straight through his bullshit. --The Emperor Kneel before Zod! 20:37, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

TK really loves his secrecy. Gauss (talk) 20:49, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
Or perhaps we should interpret the words in light of his need to linkage of pornography? [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 20:51, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
I wonder if Andy will react? If Hsmom really is a Home Schooling mom then she could cause problems for Andy. Ace McWickedNecron99 20:55, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
Afaik, she's a homeschooling parent, but has no connection with his program (none of his little scholars are hers), so she can be unpersoned with glee. PubliusTalk 21:06, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
Andy will ignore the whole thing, of course. It's a conflict that he doesn't see himself as winning (even though he never actually wins conflicts, he thinks he does at least) so he'll stay out of it and let TK do what he wants. As usual. Although I do find it funny that Terry complains about out of hand rhetoric in such a bombastic fashion. --Kels (talk) 21:08, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
Ah, the chewy, chewy irony of TK asking someone else to make "substantive" contributions. He hasn't made any contributions, substantive or otherwise, for weeks. He's all bluster and banhammer. But I guess it was always one rule for me, another for thee with TK. --JeevesMkII The gentleman's gentleman at the other site 21:33, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
TK enjoys plagiarism, Hsmom doesn't. That's one of the main points of this conflict. larronsicut fur in nocte 21:46, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
I think one thing you can definitely say about Hsmom is that she has integrity and standards - something sadly lacking from most of Andy's goon squad. But I love TK's "all in the name of the children" criticism - most old hands here who had offsite communication with Terry Koeckritz know that "because of the childen" was TK's alleged reason for wanting to bring down Conservapedia. Redchuck.gif ГенгисRationalWiki GOLD member 22:05, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
'TK is pissed' - does this mean pissed off, cause drunk doesn't make sense. Matt oblong (talk) 22:37, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

She won't do it, but there's a parthian I'd like to see. (Take it you're not a Merkan, Matt? To them it just means angry) Look at the following ddifs - remove subversive commentsimg. This message brought to you by: Toastrespondand honey 23:15, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

TK hit the "burn" button faster than CaptureBot could act in this recent WIGO; is there something that could be done to fix this? Our friend Terry seems to be even more on the ball than CaptureBot in some of these WIGOs, and that's a problem. Fedhaji (talk) 02:57, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
Solution is for the WIGOers to grab screen shots and replace CB's version if it got there too late. No need to upload if CB caught it. ħumanUser talk:Human 03:02, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
I've given up on her: she's fucking apologizedimg!!! This message brought to you by: Toastrespondand honey 01:30, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
"Pollyanna ignorance"? Not bloody likely. --Too tired to log in (talk) 02:19, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
It's not much of an article, but I dunno if I'd call it an apology...oh, you didn't mean what you linked to, then? --Kels (talk) 02:27, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
Alright, I'm an idiot, sorry! This message brought to you by: Toastrespondand honey 02:41, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
I wonder if she's actually apologizing for real, or if she's playing TK. After all, the whole "I'm just a simple woman, I don't know any better" plays awfully well with Andy, and totally short-circuits TK's attacks against her. We'll see. --Kels (talk) 03:22, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
She's been editing "Pollyanaimg since, so who knows? This message brought to you by: Toastrespondand honey 03:25, 22 July 2009 (UTC)


Doesn't this study that Ken is promoting confirm that intelligent design is a childish idea based on your own preconceptions and incredulity and that creationist are just having trouble letting go of ideas that formed when young? Children also have trouble dealing with the idea that the world is a sphere because they are use to the idea of things falling "down". - π 07:50, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Ken: So children are stupid? "children infer from their own observations that there must be a Creator" Fucking retards, maybe. I was raised in a fossil-collecting (South Wales), Book-reading family. I never "observed" that there must be a ceiling kitteh! Only babies get their Daddies confused with Goddies. Now go answer the SBI question, you sad excuse for a human being. ħumanUser talk:Human 07:58, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
The CMI article itself reads like it was written by Kendoll's more literate cousin. The quotes, the random youtube video thrown in... Do you suppose he's unable to read anything that doesn't break off half way through for a diverting video? It would explain a lot. --JeevesMkII The gentleman's gentleman at the other site 10:22, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
I tweaked the WIGO after reading the article, because it made me laugh on two levels. First, the kids were shown pictures of things and given only three responses to choose from for each: "God made it", "People made it", and "Nobody knows". When you restrict kids to those three options, is their response surprising? Second, I love how a bunch of ID proponents are using a test that forced "God" to be the only answer for "design" to keep acting as if ID is science that has nothing to do with promoting Judeo-Christian beliefs. All the survey proves is that young kids have great imaginations - if you added "Magic people" or "Fairies" as options along with "God", I wonder how many kids would have chosen the former over the latter. Ask the survey of older, educated kids, and you'll mostly get two answers: "God" from the kids raised to believe in God over fairies and other magic people, or "This survey is B.S.", because "Nobody knows" is not the same as "Natural forces as explained by science". --SpinyNorman (talk) 16:39, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
I wonder what the results would be if "Nature Made It" were added to the list. Also, what would happen if "God Made It" was removed, and "Nature Made It" was added instead? Figures don't lie, but liars do figure... Jimaginator (talk) 19:56, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
Is "non-theistic" right in any case? I know there's not that much Christianity there, but I'm not sure if there's no theism at all. --Kels (talk) 17:18, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
I think Shinto is pantheistic, but I also think it's more of tradition than actual religion. Christianity does have some presence though, so non-theistic is not the word to use for Japan. ENorman (talk) 19:59, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
Even if it's tradition rather than religion per se, wouldn't it be theistic since it does involve spirits and gods to some degree. I gathered being theistic didn't just mean Christian, it meant worldviews involving any deities. --Kels (talk) 20:04, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
Therefore, in Ken's own words, he's admitting that religion is exploiting children's incredulity, which is further confirmed in the bible. [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 00:39, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
I'm sure most of you have heard this argument, but it's till one favorites: essentially the arguments goes if you take someone with no exposure to modern technology (they usually give the example of an African Tribesman or someone from the Rainforests of South America) and show them a car, they may explain it many ways: Maybe magic is running the car, maybe the driver is a god, maybe the car is a god and favors the driver. However, once you explain the principles behind it and show how each piece comes together, they will realize that there is no supernatural force behind it. The difference between this tribesman and the religious? The tribesman accepted an explanation whereas the religious hold fast to their beliefs. Still one of my favorites cause it makes religious people squirm. SirChuckBA product of Affirmative Action 06:59, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
Did I just heard cargo cult? [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 16:21, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

John Holdren WIGO[edit]

Maybe I really suck at linguistics, but... why is there a need for a comma between the words "radical" and "techie" on the picture? [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 05:14, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

If the question is being posed "is he a radical?" to a techie, then yes. If they are calling him a "radical techie (technocrat?)", then no. ħumanUser talk:Human 05:19, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
Oh, I missed that. Now the better question: which techie (They're using singular form, so is it directed to one single techie?) are they asking his/her opinions for? [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 06:51, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
Haha, no, they are just illiterate and the comma does not belong. And TK, king of the misplaced comma, wouldn't notice. ħumanUser talk:Human 06:57, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

God's beautiful autumn foliage[edit]

Apparently some pesky liberal scientists have come up with a deceitful atheistic explanation of those autumn colours... Cantabrigian (talk) 10:58, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Move it to RationalWiki:Saloon bar, maybe? [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 16:17, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
Good thinking, Batman. Cantabrigian (talk) 16:47, 22 July 2009 (UTC)


Look's like Andy has had an interesting evening. Redchuck.gif ГенгисRationalWiki GOLD member 22:10, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Alright, somebody explain me who (?i:moist), (?i:trent) (our Trent?), (?i:dix) and (?i:bubble) are supposed to block.
Also, poor S(i)m(o)ns. FlareTalk 22:40, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
Andy's shrivelled cannon must be reviving its self so agressively with dirty backstreet liberal ammo that it's going to wash us all away in a florid baige tidle-wave of self loving. Cover your eyes!!! Matt oblong (talk) 22:44, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
And if poor Simon's last name is Dixon, he's trebly screwed! Andy deserves to get hit with a tidal wave of "imaginative" user names for this stupidity. ħumanUser talk:Human 23:52, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
I have a friend whose name is Sam Dixon. He's a mentally retarded homeschooler too. (talk) 05:06, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
I'm still laughing, sad to say... ħumanUser talk:Human 07:13, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
Well, Michael Weiner is screwed. --Barikada, too lazy to sign in.
Yup! ħumanUser talk:Human 03:07, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
What I love about that log/page, whatever it is, is it is Andy's "dirty words stash" - and anyone can find it on his blog. Like looking up "penis" or "fuck" in the dictionary. PS, did anyone ever write "it is, is it is" before? ħumanUser talk:Human 03:09, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
Time to create a username that's slightly close to TK... won't post it here because TK watches this site like Andy's wife watches Tru(TV). (talk) 05:06, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
It seems that has been taken care of already. Aboriginal Noise with 4 M's and a silent Q 10:39, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Taking a look over there, I see Ken just burned his own user page again. Does anyone even pay attention to that thing any more? --Kels (talk) 03:45, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Ken thinks doing that "cleans his screen", sadly. Eh, did he ever prove the SBI ever existed yet? No, but evolution might be on the run in Kenya! ħumanUser talk:Human 03:53, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
Ken seems to think Lyin' for Jesus is an effective long-range strategy. I doubt there's much that could convince him otherwise, even though he's been doing it online for a lot of years and yet...people haven't turned away from reality quite yet. Keep at it, Ken, you'll win someday. Somehow. --Kels (talk) 04:13, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
Ken couldn't answer the question on the SBI yet, as he is going to be quite busy for a while. As usual, I repeated my question. larronsicut fur in nocte 05:08, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
I've asked 'em on Swedish Wikipedia - only 10 minutes ago so we'll see. This message brought to you by: Toastrespondand honey 07:08, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
Nice work, Toast. Although, the book, at least, is real (I think). ħumanUser talk:Human 07:13, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
A kind person has copied my request to the Reference desk This message brought to you by: Toastrespondand honey 08:00, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
:As far as I can see from a quick Google search Nils Heribert-Nilsson was a professor at Lund University. The Swedish Botanical Institute should probably translate to Botaniska institutionen (I'm not sure of the proper English translation, but it's probably something like the Academic Department of Botany). The book does exist according to Google Scholar, but it's old and can hardly be used to disprove any current evolutionary thought What specific information do you need? Sjö 21 juli 2009 kl. 10.10 (CEST) This message brought to you by: Toastrespondand honey 08:22, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
I love a language that looks like this: "Har nasa givit ut någon officiell siffra vad alla månlandningar har kostat?" Just gotta say, and not meaning to mock, at all. Ourls looks stupid, too. PS right now I am involved in making some product for a Swedish producer. His English is 99% better than my Swedish! ħumanUser talk:Human 08:07, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
100% surely. This message brought to you by: Toastrespondand honey 08:22, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks! Yes, the book is genuine - it was written in 1953, has ~1300 pages, was published in German, but includes an English summary. There are at least to contemporary critiques of the book (one in Science, the other in The Quarterly Review of Biology), and these two are absolutely unfavorable. Our article on Nils Heribert Nilsson refers to them. larronsicut fur in nocte 08:35, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
See the new Wikipedia article, our interest has made him more notable than he was before! This message brought to you by: Toastrespondand honey 16:11, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
Very illuminating. So very likely, someone probably mentioned that he worked at "a Swedish biological institute", and the endless Creatard game of telephone turned that into "director of the Swedish Biological Institute". And of course the intellectionally (and just generally) writers and editors at CMI never bothered to find out one way or another, and lying stenographer and junior propagandist Ken dutifully added that to his Big Pile O' Lies over at CP. Quite the trip for some relatively obscure researcher who went sniffing down the wrong path regarding origins. --Kels (talk) 17:26, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

I enjoyed his main page spam about positive youtube videosimg. The "inroads" are all the same person. 06:16, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

And it only took him 5 edits. Congrats, Ken, you're getting better all the time (can't get no worse). L/McC 1967. ħumanUser talk:Human 06:27, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
"Conservapedia is considering expanding its YouTube subscriber base at Conservapediavideos" - I wonder when they will make a decision on that?  Lily Inspirate me. 07:53, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
"Ken is considering masturbating over several central European countries" but it does not bother them much as his aim is poor. ħumanUser talk:Human 08:07, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

I think I learned a few new terms[edit]

Wowimg. I love the edit comments they do here too. tmtoulouse 18:33, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

I see JPratt took the opportunity to include his own name in there as well. Redchuck.gif ГенгисRationalWiki GOLD member 19:32, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
I had been spared knowing what "lemon party" and "tub girl" referred to until Schalfly was experimenting with the edit black list tool ("lemon party... tub girl... RationalWiki!"). Of course that's also where we got "Hot... Science... RationalWiki!". ħumanUser talk:Human 23:43, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
In Ken's own words, he's admitting that religion is exploiting children's incredulity, which is further confirmed in the bible. [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 00:38, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
Don't worry, just as I have demonstrated, you can create accounts that already technically exist. I will make another account on CP with a recurring name, just to confuse the poopers out of them (talk) 05:05, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
That is clever, although the very first regex will (probably) stop you. - π 05:09, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
Yea, it blocks it. That sucks. And in other news, I was blocked again. -.- (talk) 21:17, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

So farewell then...[edit]

Law Terms E (393810 views) and Law Terms Z(390,231 views). After arch-sociopath (allegedly) Terry Koeckritz deleted the Law Glossary template they only had borken links. Will Andy now delete the rest of his homeskollar's term templates? I see Andy also updated his site page count to 99,300,000. The excitement is unbearable.  Lily Inspirate me. 22:33, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

If you look closer you can see Andy admitting the counter reads 102 million page views. Ace McWickedNecron99 22:44, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
Time to leave the page bumpers on then, provided they are legal in your country of course. At least that way AndyPandy can never claim with any certainty that he broke the 1million mark, as the results will always then be tainted by us rationals.--So close to a million, but how many of those are previous page bumps? More than you care to believe. (talk) 23:49, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
My bumper's on for a handful of hours once every two or three days; I decided to keep it in service following this discussion. I'm adding between half a million and a million page views per week. I'm still pulling articles at random instead of concentrating on any specific page so Andy has no way of disowning my donations. You may thank me now. Mountain Blue (talk) 05:46, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
Me too. I wanted to leave my clickbots off, but couldn't resist, so I set off a small farm of machines I have access to, all running through Tor and hitting random pages throughout the system. It's running at a very healthy tick and is most satisfying. I reckon without all the clickbots for the last few years, CP would have only about 5-10m legitimate hits. --DogPMarmite Patrol 15:39, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

The amusing bit is "how is Andy coming up with his totals"? Clearly, he's trying to account for the fake-pageview-storm, but he only compensates for a tiny fraction of them, growing smaller all the time. PubliusTalk 00:47, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Publius is right. How is Andy deciding when to break the awesome 100,000,000 mark? Or when to give up the silly mainpage views/edits bragging and get over himself? ħumanUser talk:Human 03:29, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
When it hits 103 million, I would expect. [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 04:54, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Keeping Up[edit]

From Dec 2008 - Jun 2009, TK and friends have done a marvelous job by blocking 3,500,000 IPs each month. But in Jul 2009, they can't keep up the speed - though numerous vandals use the ongoing absence of Guard Dog to provide him with block reasons.

Number of Active Range Blocks at Conservapedia on Jun 22, 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 382 33 53 93 126 19 197 25 236 4 7 5 3 10 1 0 903
# ∞ Blocks 94 0 2 0 1 0 22 2 88 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 523

What is the problem? Leniency! While Karajou always goes for infinite - and DeanS at least gives five years - TK handed out some shorter punishments: range blocks for six or even three months. Though this should give the impression that he actually knows what he is doing, now, it kicks him in the butt: The blocks are expiring as fast as he is creating new ones: July 2009 will see the end of the blocks


and twenty more will end in August - or will they not? larronsicut fur in nocte 10:27, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Hurry TK! They're disappearing as fast as you're making them! Just go for broke and make them all infinite! I see quite a number of my own blocks are expiring soon. Rest assured they will move swiftly back into action on the frontlines of resisting teh stupidz. --DogPMarmite Patrol 15:42, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
Someone should email him the script to do automatic range blocks. [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 16:12, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
I could write him one if you like. - π 02:20, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
Hey that is nice I'll be able to edit from home again. - π 02:18, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

CP account creation borken[edit]

Accounts created at CP Jul 8, 2009 - Jul 21, 2009

I predict that account prediction will be completely disabled on CP and all prospective users will need to contact TK privately for permission to start an account, granted only after an intrusive IM session. For the time being, account creation appears to merely be broked. Nutty Roux100x100 anarchy symbol.svg 17:53, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

One can always go right after Andy for an account, in order for him to avoid any embrassments he may ask less questions. [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 20:09, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
I'm surprised that there are still new editors which aren't banned instantly - though their number is small larronsicut fur in nocte 21:21, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
Anyone else amused by the fact that Ken Bottoms created an account on Friday and still hasn't been blocked? Of course, now he'll be dead within minutes, but still... Stile4aly (talk) 23:59, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
Judging from the chart, nobody is interesting in blocking Ken's hole with their peen either.--PitchBlackMind (talk) 04:39, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
Well at least Ken has cleared his shit off the left page againimg. (Not worth its own heading, but there is so little happening). - π 04:47, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
Aww, I'll miss you Darlin. --PitchBlackMind (talk) 04:51, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
Good lord no. Ken has turned his unique idiot attention to politics. - π 05:18, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
At least he didn't try to photoshop it himself... Obamoleon? Napama? ħumanUser talk:Human 05:33, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
I like Naporack since it's both first names. Also, this is an odd image considering how favorable (the early part is all I read) the Napoleon article is.--PitchBlackMind (talk) 05:47, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
Didn't the Metric System come about because of Napoleon? Metric=Foreign=Communist! Jimaginator (talk) 14:52, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
Naporack HUSSEIN Obamaparte. The Foxhole Atheist (talk) 16:38, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
By looking at a longer span of time, and dividing the number of accounts that stick by the number of total accounts created, it would be possible to see a percentage of accounts that stick. From there, we could get a trend line for when the chance of an account surviving starts to approach 10%, 5%, zeroooooo.....Jimaginator (talk) 15:49, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Ahhh memories[edit]

Due to CP being dead in the water and my fanatical need to keep myself occupied, I have being going over old CP archives and found some hilarious things I had forgotten. For example I refound the page where Andy states he'll debate any atheist or liberal anytime before getting throughly nailed by AmesG who calls him out on it. Great laughs. Ace McWickedNecron99 22:11, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Was that when Andy demanded that Ames place a deposit? That was wonderful. Corry (talk) 22:24, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
Ray Comfort obviously remembered that when he asked Thunderf00t for a deposit as well. Redchuck.gif ГенгисRationalWiki GOLD member 22:25, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
It was originally posted somewhere on RW but this talk page commentimg from Andy always makes me laugh.  Lily Inspirate me. 22:34, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the capture Toast but I already have a screencap.  Lily Inspirate me. 22:40, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
it's just a habit. And it might stop TK vanishing things if he knows they've been captured anyway. This message brought to you by: Toastrespondand honey 22:50, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
He has vanished it already, Hi TK!!! You dishonest prick! I have also discovered a wealth of missing talk page archives, masses of them suddenly...vanished! Ace McWickedNecron99 23:37, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
What a slanderous toe-rag I hope he gets sued for that. He forged (not very well as it had already been established that it was a comment from Andy) the page contents which were "Sir, please stop uploading junk. An encyclopedia does not need multiple pictures of processed pork. I'm deleting those images.--Aschlafly 14:47, 2 May 2007 (EDT)  Lily Inspirate me. 23:58, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
TK's on a mission to get every mention of his real name removed from RW, and he doesn't care whose innocent lives he fucks up along the way. And Andy, of course, is oblivious - dang, Andy's building an encyclopedia! He's too busy to worry about trivia. Although, TK, you should leave some blocking for Andy, since he finds it very satisfying. ħumanUser talk:Human 03:20, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
He ought to go for someone else then: we don't come in till number 9 on google. This message brought to you by: Toastrespondand honey 06:01, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
Only because Proxima keeps copying our articles. Could we not have a repeat of these privacy policy violations again? - π 06:09, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
Is she still doing that? I saw no evidence of such on the g search oogle for Terry Koeckritz. Granted, it is a habit she has, of putting things on every wiki she has access to, but in this case? ħumanUser talk:Human 06:58, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
Really? I got the Liberapedia mirror of the article before ours. Granted their's is in mainspace whilst ours is buried in some subpage off the main wiki contents, but still. We need to use the Terry Koeckritz template more, despite the disadvantage that it takes longer to type. - π 07:50, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
I don't subscribe to the view that TK (Terry Koeckritz) wants to get his name removed from here. I think he doesn't give rat's arse about it. What he does want is to make people think he wants it removed, that way he can pull the strings for his childish amusement. He knew that GAmes Caius didn't have any power to get it removed here and that the mob would never allow it - he just wanted to torment our former young friend. Of course, because Terry Koeckritz is a lying (proven), plagiarising (proven), treacherous (proven), deceitful (proven) sociopath (apparently), our erstwhile colleague was forced to leave and concentrate on his blog. TK doesn't care about his name as it doesn't make any difference to his real world life. All these wikis and forums are just a massive RPG for a sad old Walter Mitty character stuck at home looking after his aged mother. No one with a proper job would be able to follow TK's editing pattern. The fact that the Erasmus page was taken down just shows that he's so bored that he needs to monitor us all the time. Being demonised is much more rewarding to a sociopath than being ignored. Redchuck.gif ГенгисRationalWiki GOLD member 07:11, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
Eh, you're probably correct on that. Ugly www links mean nothing to tired old men like us; to up and coming young lawyers, they're a pisser. Oh, and you forgot to link to MMORPG. ħumanUser talk:Human 07:15, 23 July 2009 (UTC)