Conservapedia talk:What is going on at CP?/Archive151

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>, <145>, <146>, <147>, <148>, <149>, <150>, <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)

Closed up shop again?

Maybe Andy has finally decided that only the chosen few can edit his precious blog.
"You do not have permission to edit this page.
The action you have requested is limited to users in one of the groups: Administrators, edit" --Psy - C₂₀H₂₅N₃O^{You know you want to} 18:58, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Night mode. It's been on more and more lately. Mindless word Hoover! 20:29, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

The saddest thing is that whether night mode is on or off these days, there's not much difference in the "Recent Activity." Junggai 20:56, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

The saddest thing is that it seems like every couple of days someone posts on this page with their knickers in a twist because night mode is turned on or membership creation is turned off, as though that's something that hasn't happened four or fives days a week for years now...TheoryOfPractice 21:15, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Seems to be working now. Plenty of probable trolls creating accounts. Aboriginal Noise ^{What the ...} 21:32, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

I think the saddest thing is the way Andy butchered that tea party news post and none of his sysops have fixed it up to at least make it a consistent mess. - π 23:09, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

I think the saddest thing is the state of the Republican Party as judged from Andy's photo. 100% white, 95% old. You suck. I hate you. 07:12, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

He even defended the layout. Having done that I doubt anyone will fix it. –SuspectedReplicant^{retire me} 09:20, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Don't tell me Schlafly still has his monitor set at 800x600, that is what I had to reduce mine too to get the text to sit under the picture. - π 11:08, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Active Editors at CP and RW

Active Editors

RationalWiki

Conservapedia

• Some edits were transferred from teflpedia, so our traffic isn't zero over the time of the exile
• Conservapedia didn't profit from our time-out
• the number of active editors at Conservapedia is on an all-time low. With the start of Andy's new course, this will change
• IMO, Conservapedia never recovered from the effects of the week that never was. I hope that our handling of a similar - even worse - situation, will show better results....

larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 08:43, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

I think the week that never was is a correlation, but not a causation. At about the same time, TK got his sysop rights back. -- Nx / talk 08:57, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Seems clear to me that the sharp dip over the summer is from TK turning the screw. Will be interesting to see if it goes up again now that he seems to have lost interest slightly.-- Kriss Akabusi^{AAAWOOOGAAAR!!1} 09:06, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

I agree that much of this is TK's work. But the handling of their data loss was a how not to do it manual - perhaps influenced by TK... BTW, I up-dated Conservapedia:Active users and RationalWiki:Active users: only 25% of the 150 editors who contributed the most comments to CP are still editing, on RW, the number is 56% ... larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 09:50, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

I still enjoy the fact we have more users very-active (3 edits per day) and above than CP has semi-active (1 edit every 3 days) and above. - π 10:45, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

I wonder if my 2486 edits in January is a record for edits in a month. What a waste of time. Aboriginal Noise ^{What the ...} 19:13, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

As you asked, I wasted some of my time :-)

top 10 edits in a month at CP # month editor #edits 1 Apr 2007 cp:User:Jaques 3655 2 Apr 2007 cp:User:Ed Poor 3353 3 Apr 2008 cp:User:EdBot 3229 4 Jan 2009 cp:User:WesleyS 2486 5 Jul 2007 cp:User:Aziraphale 2289 6 May 2007 cp:User:Jallen 2241 7 Jul 2007 cp:User:Learn together 2172 8 Apr 2008 cp:User:Deborah 2138 9 Jul 2007 cp:User:Aschlafly 2131 10 May 2009 cp:User:RobsSmith 2009

top 10 edits in a month at RW # month editor #edits 1 Aug 2009 User:NxBot 6883 2 Jul 2008 User:Human 2499 3 Aug 2008 User:Human 2264 4 Jan 2008 User:Human 2254 5 Jun 2008 User:Human 2128 6 Feb 2008 User:Human 2016 7 Sep 2007 User:Human 1993 8 Jun 2007 User:Human 1880 9 May 2009 User:Human 1839 10 Sep 2008 User:Human 1802

larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 06:37, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

We need to get Huw laid. SJ ^Debaser 10:36, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

I second this motion. ^gnostic 11:34, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Dear Gentlemen/TK at a rather liberal website...

That is all. Cheers! SJ ^Debaser 11:43, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

This message is just a link to a youtube video of a mumbly reading of cp:Time. Coarb 17:07, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Do better then. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 17:16, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

I do not believe that a mumbly recitation video is better than no video at all. I think any reader can do better by simply visiting cp:Time and reading it. Coarb 18:35, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

A sentiment with which I can only heartily agree. People can read the article on their own, and chortle at its hilarity. Now a dramatic reading of Conservapedia might be amusing. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 19:42, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Rob's articles would need to be read in hushed, conspiratorial whispers. --Kels 22:16, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Calling William Shatner... ħuman 22:23, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

My challenge is to create a better video mocking CP not do the same thing with better diction. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 22:49, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I know, but seriously - can you imagine Shatner reading that article (or for that matter, Schlafly) word for word, deadpan or dramatic? ħuman 23:16, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Sorry I have a stupid voice, I can't help it. Someone posted a video of Shatner here reading Palin's Twitter account. That was funny. SJ ^Debaser 10:39, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Conservapedia on 9/11

Apparently liberals don't care about commemorating 9/11.

Fuck off, Conservapedia. SJ ^Debaser 17:45, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

The possibility for tasteless google logos boggles the mind. Planes crashing in to the twin Os perhaps? Anyway, if we liberals are neglecting 9/11, it's only because we're so excited about Glenn Beck's 9/12 that we just can't wait. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 17:50, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

That's just what I was thinking - were they expecting crashing planes into the Google sign? It's just the liberal thing that bothers me - they're so bloody arrogant they think that liberals don't give a shit about 9/11. Berkshire hunts, the lot of them. SJ ^Debaser 18:00, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Why does Conservapedia slack on celebrations on such a remarkable day? Where are the their displays of solidarity? Why does Conservapedia celebrate 9/11 by proudly presenting an article on Louis XIV, and whining about Google?

John 8:7
So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.

Very curious, if you ask from me... --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 19:07, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

The single best part about CP's Google=9/11 rant is the celebratory shout-out to Bing, the search engine owned by notorious arch-liberal Bill Gates. JPatt, you're an idiot. A mouth-breathing, ignorant, idiot. TheoryOfPractice 19:38, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, CP has this completely right. Google is doing absolutely nothing to commemorate 9/11. 92.20.106.67 20:06, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

According to conservatives, the best way to celebrate 9/11 is to profit off it or exploit it for political gain, no matter how tasteless it may be. --Crazyswordsman 00:56, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

I think someone did ask if a message of support for the victims and their families could be posted. Did I imagine that? --Phentari 03:58, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Well, I haven't seen much about it anywhere on the Internet. But again, what do you expect? I have one friend on Arsebook who set their status as "never forget" for about 12 minutes. Call me cynical but that's the sort of shallow self-indulgent grief tourism that such an occasion doesn't really need. Doesn't take much Googling to find out that Google's standard way of marking dates would be highly inappropriate. ^gnostic 12:28, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Can we have a day to "never forget" the 100K people who are killed every year on India's roads? That seems like something fixable, so we can do something besides make mawkish graphics. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 12:38, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

I love it when CP gets on their moral high horse about something. It always reminds me of that discussion between Andy and PJR 1 or 2 Xmases ago, when Philip asked people to give something to those less fortunate and Andy insisted all he needed to give was is prayers. Hypocrite. --Psy - C₂₀H₂₅N₃O^{You know you want to} 13:13, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

That's the brilliance of Conservapedia. They can say one thing and do another...

User: Are you going to give any money or clothes or anything to those less fortunate, Andy? No? How about giving blood or something like that to people who are dying in hospital?

Andy: Nah, I'll ask God to help the sick and needy... that's enough... if it works, it works, if it doesn't, it doesn't.

Having said that, you never know, maybe Andy does donate to charity (as long as it's the right one i.e. not for people with AIDS) and give blood. SJ ^Debaser 15:15, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Pong wigo

http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Pong&diff=prev&oldid=699657^img looks like pretty obvious parody. -- Nx / talk 18:02, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Pong Doubles I think it's called, and it's not recent, so probably parody of the subtle kind. Of course, the best way to determine this, look it up on Wikipedia. Eye-ron-eeee.... :p ^gnostic 12:21, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

So long, suckers

Conservapedia is growing after all, along one dimension at least: the average number of edits per editor has nearly doubled from July to August: Are people taking pages out of Stuttering Ken’s book? Have they wrestled themselves free of the Gestapo stranglehold of TerryKare? Is it because of the New and Improved Bible project, a quest with the crap absorption capacity of a truckload of Huggies? Does anyone still care?

Anyway, I’ve kind of lost interest in Conservapedia, so this is probably one my last edits here. They’re embarrassing themselves so badly lately they’ve gone from cringe comedy to simply sad. The Lenski Dialog was pretty inane but not necessarily proof of insanity; you could explain Andy’s bizarre behaviour as a collision of scientific illiteracy, confirmation bias, and a healthy dose of social resentment. Andy’s Bestest New Conservative Words and his crazy Bible projects and the Obamunism paranoia are different; this shit is clearly not the work of a reasonable grown man aware of his surroundings in any conventional sense. This is way beyond their usual Flat Earth bullcrap. This is Time Cube territory. This is all the way through crank.net, out the other side, and back home through the center of the hollow planet in a Nazi-built flying saucer with Elvis at the helm.

Laughing at Conservapedia stumbling around and bumping into things used to be like laughing at the town drunk in the soiled polyester pants stumbling around and bumping into things. Now it’s like laughing at the Spastics Society.

Mountain Blue 03:58, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

"Here" as in WIGO:CP or "here" as in RationalWiki? Because, despite appearances, there's a difference (although I'll never get around to writing my mini-essay/survey on why this difference is important). Megaten 04:47, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

The explanation for this piece of trivia is that the majority of edits is now dominated by a handful of monomaniacs. It's exactly what one would expect of a diminishing editor base. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 06:02, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

MB is right about the Spastics Society. I wouldn't be surprised if people have heard of ED's 2-year long bullying of autistic "Chris-Chan". Sure, Chris-Chan does walk right into it, in ways you really wouldn't want to imagine, but it's somewhat morally dubious to pick on him for it given his condition. As time has passed, Andy's dragged us closer and closer to being just like ED. The man is ill, he needs real psychiatric help, and that makes laughing at him a lot more difficult. Bil08 12:17, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

The difference between Chris-chan and the Sonichu mess (which is both hilarious and terribly unfortunate at the same time) is that Schlafy may be riding on his mother's dubious success, but he's not living in her house, being taken care of by her, making webcam movies of himself having sex with inanimate objects and stuff like that. He has married, had children, gotten work with people as crazy as he is and now he is being paid to teach other people's children. It's that last one which, in my mind, brings him very directly across the line between "basically harmless kook" to "dangerous influence". The problem is that we can't really do anything about that for several reasons - it's not like we can barge into a parent/Schlafly conference and challenge him to a debate to show his intellectual failings and arrogant treatment of anyone who disagrees with him.Megaten 12:44, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Wow, so I'm not the only one who noticed the parallels between Chris-chan and the Conservapedia leadership. Yeah, Chris is kind of like Andy's evil good twin. Chris is fundamentally trying to make people happy and is not really a major threat to anyone except the sanity of his YouTube subscribers... while Andy keeps coming back, like a politician, bringing forth another reign of terror, and is powered by the flames of the underworld - or something along those lines. --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 12:57, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Chris Chan and sonichu? Can someone explain? I'll go on ED if I have to (this sounds interesting) but I'd much rather not. EddyP 15:14, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Chris-Chan is an odd guy who has become an internet celebrity (in certain areas of the internet) for being the most messed up loser you can imagine. His only fully diagnosed (as far as we know) mental illness is Autism, but he clearly has more stuff wrong with him than that. He became famous when people found his *terrible* home made comics (seriously he's 27, he's been drawing most of his life, and my 6 year old cousin is a better artist. That is no exagerration) based on a character called "Sonichu", which is literally just a yellow Sonic the Hedgehog with the ears and tail of Pikachu (he insists that this constitutes a new franchise that is not ripping anything else off). He's an interesting case just to read about. It really is hard to imagine that a single person can be *so* messed up, and yet he utterly refuses to admit it. It's astonishing. He has a surprisingly extensive wiki dedicated just to him, to save you going to ED. Just google "CWC wiki", it's the first match.

The one parallel between Schlafly and Chris-chan is that they both do immensely stupid things that a large amount of people know about (e.g. the Lenski-dialogue and basically anything Chris has ever done), and yet they refuse to admit it was a mistake, and they both come back for more. Plus they're both demonstrably insane. X Stickman 16:02, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

I read most of the ED article. That is one strange guy. --Psy - C₂₀H₂₅N₃O^{You know you want to} 16:30, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

"As time has passed, Andy's dragged us closer and closer to being just like ED." Yeah, that's kinda sorta what I'd wanted to say. Thanks, Bil08. Mountain Blue 03:05, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

I'll be honest, what with the growing resistance over the past several months about adding CP stuff to any article not explicitly about CP, I'd say we're getting less like ED as time goes by. There's still ED-esque mocking stuff, yeah, but it's getting more and more segregated from the "mission" stuff. --Kels 03:51, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Would this be a bad time to admit I discovered RationalWiki by way of ED's links to various articles here? Conservapedia itself I discovered by way of some chan raids. As for Chris-chan: I know about some of the areas trolling him, and the ED page is no longer one of the badder areas trolling and harassing him. Check out places like the CWCki, PVCC, and /cwc/ to see what I mean. Still, I agree overall on the Schalflys being worse than Chris-chan ever can be: they've risen farther than they ever should have in modern American society. Chris-chan is just a particularly poor fool. Photovoltaic Array 16:14, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

I'd agree with that. Some people only view RW through the lens of WIGO CP, though, so of course they get a distorted image. ħuman 04:09, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Having looked around CWC wiki (thanks for the link) I am astounded by three things: 1) The similairty between Chris and Andy in regards (hi Ken!) to their inability to see their own problems; 2) Chris's naivety and foolishness and 3) the lengths trolls have gone to and the things they've done (obtaining sex tapes? RL microphoned dates (though the man in the pickle suit made me laugh)?) If trolls are actually going to go on a date with Chris in RL 'for lulz', methinks it would be wise for Andy to take a closer look at his RL homskollars. I'm looking at you, Sharon and Addison. EddyP 17:59, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

March on DC...

"People were chanting enough, enough" and "we the people!"

Sounds suspiciously like socialist chants to me... SJ ^Debaser 19:51, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Rob should be taking down their names, just in case. --Kels 20:01, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Did they start singing We shall not be moved? Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 20:39, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

What I find funny is they're saying "we don't want this", trouble is, more of us do, and we just showed that in an election... ħuman 21:31, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

What election? The conservatives didn't win, ergo what happened wasn't democracy but mobocracy, therefore no election happened and Obama isn't President which is why he is to be ignored, insulted and questioned about his parentage in equal measure, unlike Bush or Reagan who are to be immediately lionised and those who speak against them are to be burnt at the stake, especially as burning at the stake won't harm the environment because climate change isn't manmade. --Hey Rob, the Reds are out to get you, they've even insinuated themselves into Old Glory. Dem Founding Fathers, Communist bastards the lot. 21:52, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

The Invisible Hand of Grade Inflation

Well, Andy's graded his first homework paper from his first lecture, and the bar for quality has been set. Take this example from question 4, which asks for an explanation of what "The Invisible Hand" is, along with an example:

The “invisible hand” is the influence that motives people to work harder and create their own opinions and ideas. An example where the “invisible hand” made its mark was when the USA began their mission to space so that they may prove to the Soviet Union, who at that time was the most advanced in space technology, that we can do an even better job. The “invisible hand” helped the USA to progress the knowledge of space and open more doors for the next generation.

Hey, nobody's perfect, and this is a good opportunity to explain the problems with the answer and actually correct the student's misunderstanding. Instead:

Fascinating explanation of the "invisible hand"! May use as a model.

Parents, please get a refund while you can. If you paid nothing, at least you're getting your money's worth. --SpinyNorman 00:36, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Wow, talk about an answer that has nothing to do with the topic. Surely Andy knows the Apollo project was a, um, gubmint waste of money? ħuman 05:12, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

We've all seen Andy be willfully ignorant, or very selectively ignorant. This isn't ignorance, it's absurd stupidity. Andy needs a dope-slap. -Lardashe

I'm so glad Andy is grading again. ^{— Sincerely, Neveruse513 (Dictated But Not Read) / Talk / Block} 00:51, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

It's a fond wish that someday, one or more of Andy's students not only realize what a poor (mis)education they received under him, but has the integrity to write about it online as a warning to others. I truly feel bad for these kids, who are going to have a rude awakening when they get to college and experience a real-world economics course grade for repeating Andy's idea of a "model answer" like the one above. --SpinyNorman 01:05, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Forget the invisible hand, my invisible backhand is the ultimate motivational tool.--Tabris 01:33, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

15

Theory: the "courses" are a phantasmagoric entertainment made from whole cloth to amuse us.

04:43, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Notice how he silently corrects some speling missteaks in the answers (though he missed "loose"/"loosing" for "lose"/"losing" in the last "essay" (maybe because they aren't caught by his spellchecker, being correct spellings of other words)). Nothing like improving the answers when the gist is just what you want to hear, eh Andy? Cantabrigian 08:54, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Grade inflation indeed. The very first paper gets 102%. That's going to be a hard act to follow. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 09:06, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

To be fair to VeronikaF, her description of the Invisible Hand pretty much agrees with what Teh Assfly says in the "lecture", so it's no surprise that he likes the answer. Cantabrigian 11:11, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

It would be interesting to have a 'student' nearly copy a past student's words/mistakes from a previous year (leaving the answer sheet up and essentially handing out everyone's past homework? Yea, that's a good model) to see if Andy will grade it consistently. --Shagie 15:00, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Looking at these 2 sets of answers, it's good to see Andy is consistent in his marking. a) Write lots of drivel = 60/60. b) Write very little drivel = 59/60. --Psy - C₂₀H₂₅N₃O^{You know you want to} 16:42, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

(a)'s answer to number 2 seems mostly on target, right up until the hilarious conclusion. Fedhaji 08:27, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Economics and the curiously absent

I am wondering if Andy stuck TK on his leash during the economics season. He has been absent. Ace McWicked^{Model 500} 00:44, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

TK's smart enough to stay way clear of anyone and anything directly bearing on Andy's classes. -SpinyNorman 00:58, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

He did block a student last week, he probably is being cautious these days. - π 01:17, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Then why no "news" items from him? This has been a great week for "conservative" news, but no TK. I think he's resting somewhere quiet and dark. Yes, that's it. 04:45, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

I think he slunk into a dark cave to ponder his next move. ħuman 05:10, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Abuse of power becomes an addiction. TK isn't getting enough kicks any more from CP. He was away from there for almost a year without a peep so he must have another playground, which he has returned to now that the fuss over his last shit-stirring scheme has died down. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 06:23, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Er, perhaps he's on holiday?-- Kriss Akabusi^{AAAWOOOGAAAR!!1} 09:13, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Even when TK went on holiday to Hawaii (allegedly) he remoted accessed his home PC and carried on editing here. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 10:56, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Maybe this time his holiday is more fun. Weymouth, for example - if I was down on the Esplanade in Waheymouth I wouldn't think about Conservapedia.-- Kriss Akabusi^{AAAWOOOGAAAR!!1} 13:45, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Ed Poor kisses Andy's ring

• Ed Poor kisses Andy's ring

This is anti-Catholic bigotry and hate speech. Not surprising its allowed to remain and no one cares, given this site. RobS 23:21, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

I think it refers to kissing his ass Rob. P.S. Commies are everywhere. Ace McWicked^{Model 500} 23:26, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Isn't it a Godfather reference? --Kels 23:31, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Nope. From the rank of Monsiegnor on up, the laity often ask to kiss the ring of members of the Curia.

Um, why would the Catholics be a protected group on this site anyway? Most of us are atheist, and several of us are pretty anti-religion in general. Catholicism is no less silly than any of the other strange belief systems out there, and a lot more silly than some. tmtoulouse 23:37, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Would you refer to another one-fifth of your fellow human beings, Muslims, as having a silly belief system? RobS 22:16, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Yes. TheoryOfPractice 22:46, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Also, considering behaviour at CP, to accuse us of hate speech is laughable. Ace McWicked^{Model 500} 23:38, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Hatred is as hatred does. RobS 22:16, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Also, believing in imaginary beings is laughable and ridiculing belief in the supernatural can hardly be labelled hate-speech. Would it be hate-speech to mock an adult who put out milk and cookies for Santa Claus? The "kissing the ring" ritual of Catholicism is no different. TheoryOfPractice 23:42, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Believing in imaginary beings....hmmm. Don't see you as a contributor to D&D article [1], but maybe you can explain why RW Constitution article has a link to D&D, huh? RobS 22:16, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

I'll use small words for you, rob, because I know you're not very smart. That is an (admittedly weak) joke based on the fact that the word "constitution" has more than one meaning. I played D and D as a kid. Never believed in elves as a result. TheoryOfPractice 22:49, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

There you have it, ladies and gentlemen: YHWH is exactly as real and respect-worthy as Pelor, only Pelor isn't quite so much of an asshole. Wazza^{Hello? Is there anybody in there? Just nod if you can hear me...} 08:46, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

You are part of a website that actively demonises anyone who doesn't support Andy's version of conservativism. So RobS, look in the mirror. P.S. Commies are putting chemicals in your water. Trust no one. Ace McWicked^{Model 500} 23:50, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Huh? How do you know what my views on immigration or interventionism are, which may differ from other conservatives. Or protectionism? (oh, I forgot, you're a closed-minded liberal who uses stereotypes to classify and demonize people different from yourself. My apologies.). RobS 22:16, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

At first I assumed it meant literally planting a kiss on his sphincter, but that is because I have a dirty mind. Even dirtier now that I allowed that image into my brain. X Stickman 23:55, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

There's actually another double entratendre that refers to circumcision scars. RobS 22:16, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

It's hardly anti-Catholic anyway. I think Rob is one of the few people in the universe who would make that connection. I assumed it to be a Godfather reference like Kels, though Rob probably never saw the movie due to some tenuous connection to commies.--EcheNegraMente ^{Hold up our fists to the flame in the sky} 00:21, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Not only would the Godfather references also be anti-Catholic, it's bigotry against persons of Italian descent likewise. Here, from the JFK Library, "In his Pontiffs library, Mr. Kennedy, as head of state, did not kneel or kiss the Pops ring but bowed and shook hands." Look at Google results, [2], we also have, "Deputy National Security adviser Denis McDonough and WH Press Secretary Robert Gibbs both kissed Pope Benedict XVI's ring as Obama stood at Pope's right side" or here from the State Department website, "Although Irish Catholics began to play a major role in local and state politics in the latter nineteenth century, the first Catholic to seek a national office was the popular governor of New York, Alfred Emanuel Smith, who was the Democratic nominee for president in 1928. Anti-Catholic prejudice, the fear that a Catholic president would "take orders" from the Pope, insured Smith's defeat. Methodist Bishop Adna Leonard declared: "No Governor can kiss the papal ring and get within gunshot of the White House." [3]

"it's bigotry against persons of Italian descent likewise" You're better than half the people I see on Comedy Central. Will you be here all week? I'm enjoying the veal, by the way... ħuman 01:03, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Let me ask again, you going to leave this anti-Catholic bigtory and hate speech in this mainspace? RobS 22:16, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Wait, wait, wait...."kissing the ring" references to The Godfather are anti-Catholic and anti-Italian? Did you mix up your meds, or did you just ditch the Risperdol in favor of crack? To answer the question, it's absolutely standing. Especially since you're shitting a brick over it.--الملعب الاسود العقل ^{Please don't spoil my day, I'm miles away} 00:10, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Mafia-Related Prejudice and the Rise of Italian Americans in the United States, S. Luconi, University of Florence, Italy. Published in: Patterns of Prejudice, Volume 33, Issue 1 January 1999 , pages 43 - 57 Subjects: Nationalism; Racism;

Abstract

Italian immigrants to the United States and their offspring have long been the target of prejudicial accusations concerning their allegedly prominent role in criminal activities. This article investigates the influence of such an ethnic bias on their political ascent. ... underworld-related charges have for the most part limited their political success because they have undermined voters' trust in candidates of Italian ancestry. The Mafia-connection stereotype gained momentum in the aftermath of the revelations of the Kefauver Committee in the early 1950s. However, it continued to have significant influence on the election campaigns of Italian Americans at least until Geraldine Ferraro's 1992 bid for the US Senate. Despite the progressive assimilation of Italian Americans, the perception of members of this ethnic group as potential criminals has persisted, and still haunts politicians of Italian extraction. Significantly, even Italian-American candidates have recently resorted to the Mafia prejudice to discredit fellow ethnic opponents.

Keywords: Mafia; organized crime; ethnic prejudice; Italian Americans; politics and elections 1890-1990 [4] RobS 00:33, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Ever notice how the biggest purveyors of hate speech are the first to feign offense and get their panties in a twist as soon as anyone says anything they don't like? Yeah, Rob, the day we take orders from a headcase like you we'll hand Andy the keys to the place. I can use google to post completely irrelevant bullshit too. Take your fucking meds, nothing you says makes any sense to anyone who isn't you. DickTurpis 22:32, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Fine. You offended a billion Catholics, and when it was brought to your attention, you tried to justify the hateful reference. Good luck to you and your enterprize. RobS 22:38, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

(UI)I think we already, with any luck, offended any strict observers of any religion with this site, Rob. Also, what do Italians have to do with this? Neither Ed nor Andy strike me as being paisanos. PS, my best friend is Italian ;) ħuman 01:07, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

I don't know who thinks HRs are useful when they should be edit buttons

Continued....

Great, Rob. Now I assume you are going to register complaints at the Kennedy Library and usinfo.org as well, because, as you point out, they use this highly offensive term too. Those damn anti-papists, they gotta be stopped; they offend billions of people. DickTurpis 22:58, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

<-Ok, let's see what religioustolerance.org, a site I personally admonished User:Conersative from using some years ago in the CP's Richard Dawkins an Creationism article,[5] says about anti-Catholic bigotry:

CATHOLIC GUIDELINES FOR POLITICIANS & OTHER BELIEVERS

History of Catholic presidential nominees

Alfred E Smith's run for the presidency (1928):

The Rev. Thomas Reese, SJ, wrote:

When Catholic immigrants arrived in this country at the end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th centuries, they were the underclass confronted by a white, Anglo Saxon, Protestant (WASP) establishment that was predominately Republican. As a result, from the very beginning Catholics were drawn to the Democratic Party. Even before Franklin D. Roosevelt, Catholics became an essential component of the Democratic Party coalition in 1928 when Al Smith ran for the presidency and was met by the most anti-Catholic campaign ever waged in the United States. Luckily for Catholics and the Democratic Party, Smith lost, otherwise they would have been blamed for the Great Depression.

According to an essay by the U.S. State Department:

"Anti-Catholic prejudice, the fear that a Catholic president would 'take orders' from the Pope, insured Smith's defeat. Methodist Bishop Adna Leonard declared: 'No Governor can kiss the papal ring and get within gunshot of the White House.'...

Anti-Catholic hate and bigotry was sufficient to prevent any other Catholic presidential candidate from being nominated for over three decades. (bolden added) [6]

So a source I refered to as "decidely leftist and anti-Christion site.... not an appropriate cite we [CP] should be linking to," calls this language, "Anti-Catholic hate and bigotry."

The JFK Library carries an oral interview with J. Raymond De Paulo, "a campaign organizer, Citizens for Kennedy in West Virginia." focusing on "issues of religion and anti-Catholic sentiment in West Virginia during the 1960 presidential election," excerpted,

The more sophisticated clergy and their wives, whom I knew very, very well, and who were close personal friends of ours, and are again, and whom I admired very much and still do, and who have been guests in my home and in theirs And yet, he and his wife—I’m speaking of one particular man now, because I admired him so much. When he made his first sermon against Kennedy I, of course, heard about it within minutes after it was finished. When we discussed it, he told me he just could not believe this country would be the same with a Catholic president.

He indicated that one of the reasons that made him believe so was that he was in the lobby of the hotel one day when the bishop of our diocese walked in and I met him. I was at another table and as I walked across the room to greet him, he extended his hand. His hand was half-turned so that, should I desire to show my respect by kissing his ring, it was available. But if I didn’t, he didn’t want to make it too obvious. I took his hand and not too ostentatiously kissed his ring. There were people in the dining room in the hotel, and I felt it was just a mark of respect to my bishop. He had seen it or he had heard about it and he thought that was about as degrading as a man could get. I tried to explain to him the reason that a Catholic kisses his bishop’s ring: it was a mark of respect to the Church and in no way degrading or humbling to oneself. He just couldn’t see it, he just couldn’t see it at all. He made that a major objection. He said that if a Catholic is president, we will all be kissing rings and we’ll all be getting our orders as you do, from Rome. I assured him that it had been a hell of a long time since I had gotten an order from Rome. Logic and reasoning were not used at all. [7]

Logic and reasoning, Mr. Turpis, logic and reasoning. But if "rationalwiki" wishes to ignore logic and reasoning, in favor of hate and bigotry, good luck, my friend, good luck. RobS 00:02, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

TAKE YOUR FUCKING MEDS! Jesus MotherHfucking Christ. You are impossible to have a conversation with because you are completely fucking batshit insane. You. Make. No. Sense. When. You. Say. Things. You need help. Badly. If you are really not seeing some sort of therapist or psychiatrist you need to start. Like, 10 years ago. And you try to embrace the notions of "logic and reasoning"? If you could ever even begin to fathom what those words mean it would be a great leap forward for you (yes, commie reference was most certainly intended). Get help. Immediately. DickTurpis 01:06, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Speed kills, man. --Kels 00:20, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

It's totally anti-Catholic, as the "mob" element is derived from Catholic ritual. And, as such, like anything playfully mocking superstitious belief, is okay by me. TheoryOfPractice 00:23, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Actually the kissing of the Mafia Don's ring was a creation entirely of the makers of The Godfather. - π 12:23, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Which they took from Catholic practice, I assume. TheoryOfPractice 16:41, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Mind you, RobS has got a point, really the WIGO should have read: "Ed Poor gives Andy a damned good rimming, complete with reach-around", thereby removing any confusion.--Hey Rob, the Reds are out to get you, they've even insinuated themselves into Old Glory. Dem Founding Fathers, Communist bastards the lot. 00:52, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Actually, Rob hit the nail on the head. It's making fun of Catholics because we're all commies who are angry about JPII's influence on Solidarity. I'm off to fluoridate the water now... say goodbye to your precious fluids... Corry 04:21, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Am I the only one not getting what "ring kissing" means? mind someone show me the details? [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 05:46, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

I don't think I know you anywhere near well enough for that. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 06:38, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

I phrased it deliberately to be ambiguous and so allow people's imaginations run riot. Although Rob may only see one interepretation, which is the way of the closed-minded conservatives, it may also refer to the kissing the signet ring of any powerful man. Having watched this video on symbolism then the ring has other connotations. Rob, being such a conspiracy theorist yourself I recommend that you open your mind and learn the truth about power in the world by watching that. You might learn something. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 07:16, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

When I read Rob's comment, I really, really wanted to think that he was taking the piss. Sadly, he's just illustrated once again what a complete and utter moron he is. Rob, you know, sometimes it really is better to shut up and let people think you're an idiot. You don't have to keep on proving them right. Oh yes - half the members of our cabinet are members of the Communist Party. Who am I gonna call, Rob? --Psy - C₂₀H₂₅N₃O^{You know you want to} 16:49, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Yup - on my first read I expected it to be one of us being parodic, then I got to the sig... oh well. ħuman 21:29, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Don't forget to kiss TK's anus ring when you get back to CP, Rob! --Kels 01:03, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Extra irony

Of course all this is extra funny when you consider that RobS knowingly associates with a man that believes the Irish were not discriminated against for being Catholic. - π 05:28, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Ken is back in form!

GENTLEMEN!^img A new message! He seems to be suggesting that he is going to shoot someone. Ace McWicked^{Model 500} 00:22, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Not the first time I might add........tmtoulouse 00:27, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, he needs to top it off with the deer heads like he did last time. Ace McWicked^{Model 500} 00:30, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Ace, while you are debating at Ask, tell Ken that it was CUR who started the thread, and so we didn't really care. --The Emperor _{Kneel before Zod!} 00:32, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

"Conservative snipers often clandestinely stalk their ideological targets (like abortion providers)..." Fixed that for you, Ken. --Kels 00:31, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

The only thing I can discern from his post beyond typical Kennish hyperbole is that he's referring to a thread started by CUR in April in which a Bunch of Numbers says Google rankings are unimportant. Am I missing something here? 00:34, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

I gotta say this, he seems more coherent than Rob in the above ring-kissing sections. ħuman 01:13, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Ah thanks Ken. It's been a while. StarFish 11:57, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I was starting to miss that closet-case, middle-aged, right-wing, insomniac's incoherent ramblings. SJ ^Debaser 12:03, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

And it only took four edits. A new record. ^gnostic 12:11, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

He's going to burn it any minute soon, so here it is for the people coming late:

Gentleman, liberals are so inconsistent. Are Google ranking's important or unimportant? You seem to have been divided on this issue! Secondly, do not think I have foresaken my trademark tenacity. Conservative snipers often clandestinely stalk their ideological targets (like Darwinism) before they move in for the kill again. :) Gentlemen, I sense by your past dividedness and inconsistency that you feel I have hit some ideological targets with some rounds. :) conservative 19:34, 13 September 2009 (EDT)

And yes, he is bat-shit insane. Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 15:13, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Alan Turing WIGO

I contend that this WIGO is not funny the way it is written, but instead is funny because it links to Ed Poor being a moron. It could easily be reduced to its component links and nothing else. Please try to step up the funniness of the summaries in the future. Fedhaji 08:50, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Aye, it was one of my lamer/wordier/more derailed items, and I did consider just posting it to the talk page. --Sid 19:44, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Ed. Just... Ed.

• 14:23 - Ed creates cp:Contempt, which in its first and currently only version starts out with the line

  Typically, words used to expressed contempt towards people, compare them to animals or evoke bathroom images.

• 14:24 - Ed hammers MICasey for infinity because of last wordism.
• 14:25 - Ed bravely reverts said last words:
  • "I don't believe in evolution - all I'm saying is that I'll try to add more bulletproof and reliable points so that we can make our point better."
  • "Ed, I was agreeing with you."
  • "Ed is absolutely right and doesn't even need to hide behind words like arguably. Oh, and here's my suggestion to merge two similar items."

I included the first one (1) because it's a classic Ed article and (2) because the timing is interesting, as if it's some sort of message. Alternatively, Ed wrote the article and then reviewed Casey's last-wordism and decided to ban him forever in under a minute - which is also absolutely possible, knowing the (absolute lack of) sysop quality standards at CP. --Sid 20:14, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

He is a smug, self important git. The reason I quit socking at CP was because my last sock I had got a warning from Ed and I had to bow down to him like a sycophant. Once done, I felt dirty and could never do it again. Ace McWicked^{Model 500} 20:32, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

To go back to the things that make you feel dirty, but want to do again? Z3ro^talk 20:34, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Casey seems to have been a pretty obvious parodist. MadLibs...HAHA 20:55, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Fairly obvious, but I thought he was good. ^{— Sincerely, Neveruse513 (Dictated But Not Read) / Talk / Block} 22:02, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

How do ya figure? Fairly typical attempts to be logical. I was seeing similar stuff when I cruised RW a year ago. MadLibs...HAHA 22:07, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

This is for the person who said in theire edit comment, "Ed, fucking Ed..."

Poorly manufacted shoop

NotHuman 00:32, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Andy's Lazy Lectures - A curious old find

Out of interest in CP at its start, I went and looked at some of Andy's first pages, only to come across something quite surprising. He wrote little, awful stubs about Locke, Rousseau, Voltaire, etc. But not only were they awful, they were familiar. Those who have read bits of his "World History Lectures" may have stumbled upon the mess that is his "lecture" on the Enlightenment. It consists almost entirely of those very same stubs.

Lecture 8:

"Swiss-born political philosopher Jean Jacques Rousseau (1712-1778) wrote several controversial works. He felt that politics and morality could not be separated, and that the will of the majority was not always correct. Many Americans today would agree with that view. However, Rousseau also attacked private property, and laid the groundwork for future communist writers such as Karl Marx. Rousseau declared that government’s goal should be to provide freedom, equality and justice. But note that freedom often results in inequality."

Andystub from 2006:

"Swiss-born political philosopher Jean Jacques Rousseau (1712-1778) wrote several controversial works. He felt that politics and morality could not be separated, and that the will of the majority was not always correct. Many Americans today would agree with that view. However, Rousseau also attacked private property, and laid the groundwork for future communist writers such as Karl Marx. Rousseau declared that government's goal should be to provide freedom, equality and justice. But note that freedom often results in inequality."[8]

The rest are identical. When Andy first made up the "lecture" in 2007, he just copied his half-baked stubs. When he "taught" the "course" again in 2009, he added a couple sentences and changed some wording, leaving it as was. He didn't even think to take advantage of the marginally better (though dismal) articles which had succeeded his stubs. This man is in the education business how? (Apologies for the use of scare-quotes, but I revolt against connecting him with any sort of actual learning) 21:50, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

LydiaM

"several students missed the first lecture do to other commitments"

Fuck you Andy, I don't care if she's a troll, you lose at spelling one-upmanshit. ħuman 04:15, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Has anything heppened to Andy's application for his homeschool to have some sort of official recognition? Toffeeman 14:08, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

What the hell happened with her homework that got Andy in such a twist? I mean, a couple misspellings, hell, he's corrected misspellings in the past on "model" answers. What is so special about this homework that he gets all upset? Z3ro^talk 14:13, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

It's like the one that got deleted: two students thought for themselves rather than blindly following his lecture and paid the penalty. –SuspectedReplicant^{retire me} 14:15, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

I don't think this one was overtly anti-conservative, was it? More likely the rambling about Bernese mountain dogs and 15-seater vans struck Andy as implausible, and therefore probably the work of a parodist. Trouble is, if it is parody, the way to avoid looking silly would be to mark the homework cautiously and non-commitally, not to rant rudely and criticise the culprit's spelling.-- Kriss Akabusi^{AAAWOOOGAAAR!!1} 14:46, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

It's absolutely disgraceful the way he's been talking to the students lately. I can only imagine he's paranoid and is convinced they are parodists. That said, if you had half a brain wouldn't you response in a polite fashon just in case? Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 15:21, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Of course he didn't object to being called "Professor". What an incredibly arrogant double (triple?) standard. Kallium^talk 15:55, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

There's another reason that LydiaM caught hHell. Not only did she again contradict Andy's belief in the prosperity gospel, but she also took a shot at Catholicism. In her discussion of the invisible hand, she talked about how great it was the Martin Luther was able to come up with the concept of Protestantism because Catholicism was corrupt. Andy is nominally a Catholic, so I'm sure he didn't care for that. Stile4aly 19:52, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Alternative parsing, perhaps?

"several students missed [what] the first lecture do to other commitments"

[[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 18:54, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Andy's (as of now) latest reply is breaking Creepy and Irony Meters: "LOLOLOL, I don't believe you are actually called Lydia, I mock your spelling, please give out your personal info so I can call your profs and mock you some more!" *shudder* --Sid 19:50, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

When you suspect every new user on your website of being a vandal site sockpuppet - which, to be fair, a lot of them probably are - you should really take the hint that the site has become a laughingstock to most people who have heard of it. High google results Kendoll? They're people laughing at you, mate. SJ ^Debaser 23:45, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Lydia seems to have had enough, she's removed^img the entire conversation. No doubt Andy will add it back when it's probably best left burried. By the way, shouldn't we add this to our Andy page so prospective student's parent's can see how he treats them? Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 07:10, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Yes, these interludes deserve to be documented on the serious Andy page. Especially his insulting attitude. ħuman 02:35, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

And blanked her essay^img. Obviously can't take any more abuse from tehassfly. Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 09:37, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

And people say nothing's happening. Please. With TK around things would have NEVER gotten this far. Anyone watching CP for lulz and to see Andy further sabotage his credibility as a "teacher" has a lot to be thankful for with TK's absence. Andy will only truly be himself, having to interact with people in ways that highlight this kind of stupefying arrogance, with TK out of the picture. Let us hope that the best is yet to come. Perhaps another Lenski affair this Fall.

How are these "classes" taught, anyway? I thought he actually ran a proper class, like a group of kids sitting in a room listening to him drone on, but this seems to be internet taught. Does he do both? Are there e-students for some courses and real students for others? How do you sign up for the e-courses? Do you have to pay? This is confusing me. X Stickman 01:29, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

What's Left

CP seems to have all but died. Alexa figures heading down sharply. Very few edits/editors and nothing really funny. Looking at our page's on people like Ed Poor they look very tame now, citing 'schocking' abuses which now would be notable for how mild they are. They've stopped trying. If you so much as look at one of the sysop's they will ban you now! It reminds me of the old Rodney Dangerfield quote "If it wasn't for pick-pockets I'd have no sex life at all." If it wasn't for vandals CP would have no editors at all. It's sad, sad, sad. My favorite comedy channel is showing the test card and I'm scared it's going to go off air... StarFish 10:40, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

CP isn't going off air until the black helicopters come for Andy, or until he finally gives up homeschooling. As comedy goes though, they're repeating the same tired old material. Broccoli 11:03, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

I wish. Instead for me they have knowingly or not jumped the shark. Editor at CP^{Oh, Finland! Why?} 11:16, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Police state

CP's been like this for ages now, but it's just got so much worse in recent months - it quite literally seems that every single new user is banhammered within a week at most for being a liberal/parodist/vandal. It's not even just dissent that isn't tolerated now - it seems that the most innocent comments get you banned now. I'm taking this from Ed's hammering of MICasey the other day. This shite is flowing rapidly? I don't think it is anymore, considering the appalling way they treat new users. SJ ^Debaser 20:21, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

I thought the dictatorial nature of Conservapedia was in remission with Terry Koeckritz absent... ListenerX^TalkerX 20:23, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

The rest of the Conservapedia Gang are still there - they're working extra hard to make up for TK's absence. SJ ^Debaser 20:26, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

TK has set the example for them to follow. It's like CP is now controlled by a load of Gumbys. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 20:36, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Although TK is a known liar he did tell me in an IM chat ahwile back that Andy had advised the sysops to not hesitate in giving out infinite/5 year blocks. Ace McWicked^{Model 500} 20:39, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

It's that kind of open-minded, tolerant attitude that puts the American right-wing back on top! SJ ^Debaser 20:43, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

TK still talks to people on IM? People are still willing to talk to TK? Broccoli 20:48, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Talked to him twice just to get a feel for him. Decided it was pointless as the man is a habitual liar and an asshole so I sent him an abusive, drunken email and now thats that. Ace McWicked^{Model 500} 20:52, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

I mean c'mon JoshSuperNerd aka micasey, its an encyclopedia not a forum to comment on what you don't agree with(everything). Micasey not even banhammered yet.---Dorks

Actually, I was MICasey. Everything was going so swimmingly, too. I even tried to not to be overly line-towing, and yet even a moment of assent to Ed Poor got struck down as being a dick. Can't say I'm surprised. 72.145.230.132 21:55, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Its quiet - too damn quiet

Where's TK been recently? Bob Soles 15:13, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Probably not enough new users for him to torment and block. Must be getting boring for him now. Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 15:23, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Want me to shoot him an email to fire him up again? Inhuman 15:42, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Nah, leave him. Maybe my block will expire before he gets back and I can get my account back. SJ ^Debaser 15:49, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

I demand whoever made this graph format the dates in a more American centric/fucktherestoftheworld format, rather than having to read the graph closer. Thank you. Z3ro^talk 15:51, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

The sooner you colonials realise that you're not the centre (note spelling) of the universe... Oh, and the Twin Towers atrocity was on 11/9, not in November. (cue Rule Britania etc.) Bob Soles 15:57, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Incidentally, when I'm not joshing around I prefer ISO 8601 because it sorts properly. However my spreadsheet is set to English (GB) and dd/mm/yyyy is what I get. Bob Soles 16:07, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, it's funny, isn't it? We both get it half wrong. The rest of the world get the order in the right sequence but backwards. All the Americans would need to do to get it right would be to put the year first. yy/mm/dd rather than mm/dd/yy. And then the time would fit as well - largest to smallest. yy/mm/dd hh:mm:ss. Then we'd all be happy bunnies. Ajkgordon 17:23, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

dd/mm/yyyy works best because it goes in the order of things you're most likely to forget, because they change so often. You're not likely to forget what year it is, so that goes last. Month only changes 12 times a year so you're not particularly likely to forget what month it is. But the day? That changes every day, man. Every day. So it comes first, so you can read it quickly. Like the way you put the currency symbol before the amount, like £10, so you know you're talking about money before you read the whole figure. It's just simple efficiency. X Stickman 18:35, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Except if you're reading a calendar, then you find the month first, followed by the date. And what with our country so much better than every other, I see no reason to change; that would make us accomdationists, or something. Z3ro^talk 18:38, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

That's for humans, who can work these things out easily in any case. I agree that the Big Endian yyyy/mm/dd makes most sense, followed by Little Endian dd/mm/yyyy, and our Vespuccian friends' Middle Endian mm/dd/yyyy is a bit annoying. –SuspectedReplicant^{retire me} 18:41, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Your pussy year/month/day shit is for humans. Real men mark time in seconds since the unix epoch. ^{— Sincerely, Neveruse513 (Dictated But Not Read) / Talk / Block} 19:08, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

I can't argue with that :) I just hope you've gone 64-bit or you'll be reincarnating soon. –SuspectedReplicant^{retire me} 19:16, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

As far as I'm concerned, people running 32-bit software might as well be fucking amish. ^{— Sincerely, Neveruse513 (Dictated But Not Read) / Talk / Block} 19:19, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Sir, I warn you. dd/mm/yyyy is clearly the superior system, any other system is simply blasphemy and will be treated as such. I will not warn you again. X Stickman 20:12, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Sir, I warn you, I will not take your warnings. clearly you've been deluded and lied to, and the mm/dd/yyyy system makes so much sense it's blown your mind. Z3ro^talk 20:32, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

That, sir, is blasphemy. Sir. So why don't you come to Ireland and say it. Huh. Huh. Huh. Eh. Sir. I'm not there either, though... and I'm somewhat sure it only applies to citizens. So why don't we both go and register as irish citizens (if you're not already) and THEN say it. Huh. X Stickman 22:45, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

I doubt very much whether any of you has the courage to come to Chicago and tell me to my face that yyyy/mm/dd is not the superior method of marking dates. As the opening of a file name it makes files sortable by the date of the content (or whatever date you wish to record), not the date it was created or accessed. Perfect for my law practice or your homemade porn collection. 18:54, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

I will totally meet you in Chicago and tell you that to your face, good sir *throws down guantlet*. Z3ro^talk 19:14, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

And for the record, I will be willing to meet you in Gary, IN. ^{— Sincerely, Neveruse513 (Dictated But Not Read) / Talk / Block} 19:18, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

We should meet at Three Floyds Brewery in Munster, IN instead. 19:53, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Mapquest says meet me there in 4 hours. ^{— Sincerely, Neveruse513 (Dictated But Not Read) / Talk / Block} 19:57, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

What's wrong with the various breweries around Chicago, except for nerveruse's irrational fear of the city (and really, someone willing to meet in Gary, swearing off Chicago, come on). Z3ro^talk 20:15, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

I live downtown. Just let me know when you all want to meet up and wherever. NW IN is fine, but not preferred, although Three Floyds is pretty darn good. 04:01, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

October 9th would be a good weekend for me. My boycott of Chicago is more of a literary device than a reality. ^{— Sincerely, Neveruse513 (Dictated But Not Read) / Talk / Block} 16:50, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Had I not vowed never to return to Chicago, I would be all up in your foyer. ^{— Sincerely, Neveruse513 (Dictated But Not Read) / Talk / Block} 19:08, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Any format that is sortable (e.g yyyy/mm/dd hh:mm:ss) is superior to one that isn't (hh/yyyy/µs dd@mm or whatever it is you merkins use). Etc 20:17, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Don't worry

I sent him a message 130.156.3.254 16:23, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Fool! Mindless word Hoover! 16:55, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Minor sideline lulz: American spelling for non-American names, part 592

RJJ: "Labour Party (Norway) is non-American spelling and will thus be renamed to Labor Party (Norway)

Party site: "We're actually calling ourselves Norwegian Labour Party in English, guys..."

Countdown until the British Labour Party will also be renamed Labor Party: 3, 2, 1... --Sid 13:21, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

No lulz at all. That's just a straightforward translation into American English while the Norwegians just happened to have translated it into British English. As it doesn't actually have an English name, what's the problem? Ajkgordon 18:19, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

I'm aware of the point you're making, but I chose to post this regardless since I would've gone by what the party uses on their official (English version of their) website - that's as close as it gets to an "official" English name. --Sid 19:23, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

I refuse to argue with you because to do so would mean continuing to defend Conservapedia. I concede. Ajkgordon 08:17, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Smart PDF Converter shareware? Really, Professor Andy?

Check out this image (and its older versions). For some reason, Andy The Educator decided against using a simple screencap tool and instead... did what? Convert to/from PDF, changing stuff here and there? I dunno. Best part might be the 5,099×6,599 image, though. --Sid 19:38, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

I've been laughing at that for a while. How tragically inept. I'd love for him to add some nonsense about the cost vs need of pdf conversion software. ^{— Sincerely, Neveruse513 (Dictated But Not Read) / Talk / Block} 19:44, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

I guess using the open source software like say oh the ImageMagick install you've already got on your server you fuckwit to convert that PDF to an image would be supporting communism. That's probably the same reason they don't fix thumbnail generation. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 19:51, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Plus, JPEG is a great choice for line art. --79.24.1.188 19:57, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

I don't know why he's too lazy or inept to make his own damn graphs for his "lectures". Then he could even inject some liberal consistency into their appearance. ħuman 20:06, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

No, I think he's making these. The file he uploaded earlier was a ridiculous version of the one he has up now. He keeps adding shit to it. 20:08, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Buh. This does not compute. Why would he make a graph, then render it as PDF only to convert it to a raster image with a honking great watermark? He must be very confused about these newfangled computing machines. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 20:14, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

I think he gave up, the image is gone for now. ħuman 20:26, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

He just doesn't know how to use the move button: http://www.conservapedia.com/File:Price_control_curves_0001.jpg -- Nx / talk 20:30, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

There's also another case of him not knowing the Move button (Homework 2, Student 5), but in this case, I think it's to purge the old versions. --Sid 20:31, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

He really needs help with this one. It's called "cropping the white space", Andy! ħuman 20:35, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

He seems to have figured it out. Oh well. -- Nx / talk 20:46, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

[ec] At least he finally figured out how to take simple screencaps of his document. Though the thing still goes from "kinda small" preview to "2,549 × 3,299 pixels", which makes me think he either downloaded a crack or actually paid for software he doesn't need. --Sid 20:47, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Oh noes, the madness continues. 5,099×6,599 (955 kilobytes) - "better resolution". And he's still got acres of white space. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 21:54, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Christ, I almost pissed myself. ^{— Sincerely, Neveruse513 (Dictated But Not Read) / Talk / Block} 19:46, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

I don't know what kind of a monitor his mommy bought him, but on mine those letters are more than a centimeter tall. -- Nx / talk 22:08, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

So let's get this straight, he's drawn his diagram with a handful of shapes, probably in Word 2007 (Student & Teacher edition) and saved it as a PDF, then used Smart PDF converter to convert the PDF to a jpeg? Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 22:10, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Does Word 2007 have export as image? Does Windows have a screenshot utility? Can't really blame him for that. -- Nx / talk 22:19, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Oh boy. He has no idea to things such as:

• doubling the length and width of the pic does nothing of quality if you resize it to fit the screen anyways"
• Oh shit someone lived in remote areas and takes ages to download huge images (that he may increase size yet again)
• Saving the pic as Vector graphics can view at any size and still have better resolution

Oh, by the way, how do we know "ImageMagick install you've already got on your server you fuckwit"? [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 22:13, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Fortunately, mediawiki is smart enough to resize it to 800 px, so you get this. -- Nx / talk 22:15, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Word doesn't have export as image but you can copy your drawing to Paint and save it as a JPG/GIF/TIFF/PNG/BMP. And in Windows Alt+PrtScrn saves the current window to the clipboard which can be pasted into Paint. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 22:25, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

I know that, but how is Joe Average supposed to know it when pressing prtscrn does absolutely nothing visible. -- Nx / talk 22:31, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

I only added the PrtScrn thing because you asked. Copy & Paste into Paint is all he needs. Also you forget that Andy Schlafly is NOT Joe Average - he is an authority on anything and everything. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 22:34, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Touché. -- Nx / talk 22:55, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

The funny thing is, under all the layers of incompetence, it is actually a very informative graphic. I wonder where he cribbed it from? ħuman 23:55, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Pretty much any basic economics textbook although the curves are rarely quadrants like he has drawn. Word 2007 permits a single click to place a quadrant although why he keeps everything in outlined text-boxes makes it look really clunky. I don't know if anyone has commented on this but the display resolution for the graphic is 600 dpi. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 10:09, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, those boxes around the text - with an extra blank line to boot - are awful. Oh well, he's got to start somewhere... ħuman 22:37, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

"Quadrants"? ListenerX^TalkerX 19:35, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

I think he means quadrangles? Or in this case "rectangles". ^{— Sincerely, Neveruse513 (Dictated But Not Read) / Talk / Block} 19:49, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

"Quadrant" - a quarter of a circle. I thought you guys knew maths. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 20:13, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

I am more accustomed to using "quadrant" to refer to a quarter of a Cartesian graph. ListenerX^TalkerX 20:26, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Pffft "valleys"

Andy's correction of the evolutionist "lies" regarding valley formation is comedy gold, classic Schlafly. Has the man ever seen a glacier? Has he ever stood at the base of one? Has actually seen the grooves left behind high up on galcial valley walls? I have and its pretty indisputable. Ace McWicked^{Model 500} 19:58, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Of course he hasn't. That would require him to leave the good ol' US of A. There are liberals out there. Liberals just slavering at the thought of taking the Arsefly roughly from behind. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 20:09, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Dont they have glaciers in the States? Glaciers are awesome beasts to behold. In NZ there are tons of them. You get out of the car and see the glacier and think "That aint so big". But suddenly you find you have been walking for 2 hours and you're still not there. They are massive things and when actually hiking up a glacier you can hear the "creak" of it moving underneath you. Its great and kinda ominous. Anyway, I digress, Andy could learn a few things if he left NJ. Ace McWicked^{Model 500} 20:21, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

What makes you think Andy is interested in learning anything?--WJThomas 20:27, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

If you asked Mr. Schlafly about the glaciers, he would probably tell you that they were made when God threw his fountain drink away and scattered the ice cubes. ListenerX^TalkerX 20:24, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

I don't think the lower 48 have any (though I might be wrong, could be some small ones in the Rockies?), but when we bought Palinland from the Russkies we got ourselves a whole bunch of good ole USAian GodCubes. ħuman 20:29, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

But to get there you have to run the gauntlet of Canuckistan. They have people who speak French there. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 20:36, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

He could fly on an American-built plane, run by an American--owned airline, staffed by a nice American-speaking crew and he'd be safe. ħuman 21:15, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Safe? Those airline crew types have all been dangerously exposed to foreign liberal types. Broccoli 21:23, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

They do have them in the States. There are glaciers all over Alaska, of course, and there is Glacier National Park in Montana, though the glaciers there are nearly gone now because of the whole global warming thing that doesn't exist. If Andy wanted to know, he could know, but he doesn't, and there it ends. Kaalis 20:34, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Yosemite is also a great example of glacial erosion... glacier valleys carved out of a giant block of granite. I think they might also have glaciers there, can't remember. Wazza^{Hello? Is there anybody in there? Just nod if you can hear me...} 06:44, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Well, yeah, if you want to believe "geological evidence" there are scrapes all over New England/New York, and couple piles of sand dumped by glaciers (Cape Cod, Long Island). But that's only if you believe liberal evilutionist lies. ħuman 09:06, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

The man is a complete moron. Period. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 20:47, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Absolutely brilliant! I see that once again Assfly has forgot to add the 'citation needed' flag to his statements such as "But the shape of the Grand Canyon proves otherwise". (It's not good for a 'teacher' to start a new sentence with the word 'but' either) Hibbo 22:06, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Unsurprisingly, this is not how I was indoctrinated when I was being brainwashed by liberal rapist Geography professors during my studies for my B.A. in Geography. Meh, what do they know, silly bookworms. I smite thee, Andrew Schlafly, you fucking numpty. What a complete twat you are. DogP^{Marmite Patrol} 23:44, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Andy's conclusion appears to be that all valleys were caused by teh Grate Floode. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 05:45, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Oh yeah? Well fact is, nobody has ever observed a glacier moving, so all you libruls have is a silly theory which won't fool people who've opened their eyes to the Truth™--GTac 07:15, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Actually people have observed a glacier moving, but as I guess your comment is supposed to be just rhetoric I'll not supply details. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 09:47, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Anyone notice that...............

........Schlafly "trimmed" his talkpage without archiving and deleted the law terms citing "favorite of the easily amused liberal morons". Ace McWicked^{Model 500} 05:18, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Actually he didn't delete all the Law Terms articles. I wonder why not? Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 05:42, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Hasn't noticed the rest yet? - π 05:43, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

I guess the dream of being the greatest constitutional law source in the world has died then. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 07:33, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

cp:Ancient Terms A etc are still there, though I'm disappointed to see that some of them aren't completely empty.-- Kriss Akabusi^{AAAWOOOGAAAR!!1} 08:13, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

I got into a minor tiff a couple years ago with some homeskollar over "X terms X" versus categories... her answer: "this is how we are doing it". Guess that's over. Although "V" still exists. ħuman 08:18, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Here's what I liked: "15 September 2009 Aschlafly (Talk | contribs) deleted "File:Price control curves 0001.jpg" ‎ (not overwriting properly)" You idiot, that's your cache. Reload a few times and it will be fine. How long have you been doing this? ħuman 08:19, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Reload a few times? Is that a synonym for a hard refresh? ^{— Sincerely, Neveruse513 (Dictated But Not Read) / Talk / Block} 13:16, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

CTRL+R / CTRL+F5? NotHuman 13:49, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

...the fuck??

Gentlemen-why-are-you-so-incompetent-Compete-is-superior-to-Alexa Mountain Blue 08:22, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Ken's an idiot, of course. Alexa sucks, we all know that. ħuman 08:30, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Ah so. One service with statistics pulled from the depths of their arse is better than another such service. Why? Because one produces the stats kendoll likes. I wonder if this isn't a cunning plan to get more ad views by flattering obsessives like our man here. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 08:46, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Ken, why did you leave that up for less than half an hour? That's not even enough time for us to get a screenshot of your ramblings. You have to admit You won't admit but you know it's true that any new editors at Conservapedia are gone within about a week. SJ ^Debaser 12:56, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Damnit people, <capture> for fucks sake. Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 21:37, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

TK and teh bloxors

This is old, June of 2007, but it still made me smile. Andy makes a test account, siteadmin's it, and TK blocks for infinity. ĴαʊΆʃÇä₰ I like mysterious gasolines 13:49, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Featured articles

A good yardstick of CP's health is cp:Conservapedia:Featured articles#Proposed for featuring. This list has almost run dry a few times, only to be filled back up at the last minute. At the moment five articles are proposed, including one that's already been featured, a standard J Martinez compendium of ripped off images, and - oh joy! - cp:Essay: Best New Conservative Words. That gem is set to grace the main page in two weeks' time.

But since the only person adding substantive content at the moment is RJJensen, and they can hardly feature him every week, at some point they are surely going to either run out, or end up resorting to something like cp:Clothing. Any bets on when that will happen?-- Kriss Akabusi^{AAAWOOOGAAAR!!1} 14:45, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

They could always feature Law Terms D. I often notice it in the top ten most viewed pages. For me it epitomises conservative Creationist thinking. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 15:09, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

What they need is me back there, copy/pasting some "quality" articles for them. --Psy - C₂₀H₂₅N₃O^{You know you want to} 17:47, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Encyclowhatnow?

Watch Ed quasi-blogging about Windows bugs. --Sid 15:47, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

What an exciting life he leads. 194.6.79.200 16:08, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

You've gotta love all those red links. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 16:26, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

I love the bugs he's chosen. "I can't type in MS Paint in magnifications other than 100%? Windows is not ready for wide-scale deployment." ^{— Sincerely, Neveruse513 (Dictated But Not Read) / Talk / Block} 16:56, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

What ever happened to the 1000% zoom in windows 95? NotHuman 20:02, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Everyone knows Windows won't be ready for wide-scale deployment until they rewrite it from scratch. Mindless word Hoover! 16:58, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

I like the first 'bug' he put down. Only three problems with that bug, Ed. Firstly, it's a bug in Internet Explorer, not Windows. Internet Explorer is a web browser. Windows is an operating system. You see the difference? Secondly, it's a bug in a beta. This is what betas are for - testing in order to find bugs and fix them. Thirdly, this bug is fixed in the final version of Internet Explorer, and you can even get a hotfix to fix the beta if, for some bizarre reason, you are disinclined to simply use the final version of IE8. 92.17.146.207 18:08, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

I seem to remember the paintbrush thing being that way since windows 95, so at this point I'm fairly sure it's a feature, not a bug. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 18:12, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

In fairness to Ed, that 'feature' has pissed me in the past. ^{— Sincerely, Neveruse513 (Dictated But Not Read) / Talk / Block} 19:31, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Do you think he was trying to create a better version of Andy's supply/demand curve picture? Perhaps after having read it here. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 18:17, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

He's looking for 'Windows' bugs and he only came up with two? Jeez. Talk about lack of effort. :) Worm ^{(t | c)} 19:20, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Time for some Mac user to get over there and pour some smug all over his head. DogP^{Marmite Patrol} 19:42, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Can reformed Mac users join in? Mindless word Hoover! 19:51, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Deliberate ignorance

I just noticed Assolini's edit of cp:Deliberate ignorance and noticed it was filled with cherry-picked crud. Surely we can come up with our own version; Common expressions - "Goddidit", plus all the examples of how YECretinists ignore overwhelming scientific evidence. I'd do it myself but the footy starts in 20 minutes. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 18:26, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

It was certainly filled with cream of an unknown source. ħuman 06:14, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Liberal bias in the thesaurus

Someone send this to Andy. I'm sure people may have seen it before (yes, the comments are correct regarding "non-political" definitions and synonyms), but just imagine his face! ^gnostic 18:05, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Or send it to Ed, bugs in Microsoft Word. Then let Ed Kiss Andy's Ass some more. [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 18:16, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

I'm a creationist and what is this?

Hi, I'd like cites for everything in this section. Books, links, the complete text of the article, and an explanation of what he's saying in the longest paragraph. Does anyone have any of that? Thanks

I'd also like to see any screenshots of Bugler's goodbye. That's awesome. ^{— Unsigned, by: Banned for no reason / talk / contribs}

Sorry, what can you be more specific? And sign your posts with 4 x ~, thanks. Ace McWicked^{Model 500} 22:43, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

I think he's from the media! Oh noes! --e|m|c ^[TALK] 23:02, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Well, what's he saying? Why does he think evolution is not testable and why does he change his mind? He never says. Are there any resources on the web about Popper specifically? Banned for no reason 23:29, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

I can't tell what he's saying either... but that's because he's not using his entire brain, only the stem. Like a reptile. JS Leitch 11:16, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

I am wondering what the hell this has to do with the main page? - π 11:45, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Starting points for new users. We can cut to the Saloon Bar if you prefer. ^gnostic 11:47, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

It just annoys me that all they think we are about is CP . - π 12:00, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Yes. That's only about 98% of it. StarFish 12:37, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Wow, people here are really rude for no reason. Fuck you, too, you're a cunt. I asked about Conservapedia because it covers the front page and is almost all you talk about. What I asked for first is references for quotations by Karl Popper, you fucking retards. Banned for no reason 02:27, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Are you asking us for stuff about Popper and Darwinism or questioning Conservapedia on Popper and Darwinism? Conservapedia on Popper and Darwinism is the usual mix of half truths, distortion, bullshit and outright lies. Take the "Darwinism is not a testable scientific theory, but a metaphysical research programme... " quote. What does Popper mean by "metaphysical research programme"? The next words explained it (my emphasis) "a possible framework for testable scientific theories". We may call it, Popper may have called it (if he hadn't been so pissed off with Kuhn) a "paradigm". If you want to know why Popper thought that you could read the book which, to be fair to Conservapedia, is cited. The disadvantage of this is that the book was written for professional philosophers (it was originally written for a conference on his work). You could read an introductory book on Popper: Bryan Magee's is excellent. Or you could look at Wikipedia or the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. These won’t concentrate on Popper's thoughts on Darwinism. But then concentrating on creationist bollocks about Popper and Darwinism is pointless. Popper thought Darwin, and Darwinism was brilliant. Papers such as "Towards an Evolutionary Theory of Knowledge", the subtitle of "Objective Knowledge" ("an evolutionary approach") and statements such as "I have always been extremely interested in the theory of evolution, and very ready to accept evolution as a fact" (P194 of "Unended Quest") ought really to put the matter to bed. Looking for "quotations by Karl Popper" is also pretty pointless: the odd quote won't help you understand or criticise his philosophy. Dismembered quotes are only of use for the rather pathetic rhetorical games that creationists are so fond of. Toffeeman 20:42, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

You fucking moronic cunt, RW is about a whole hell of a lot more than fucking lame conservapedia - that's just how we met, you dumb fucking sphincter. If you want to learn about Karl fucking Popper, I would point your stupid dumbassed pointy head to a search site called "google.com", and even better, to your local fucking university cunt whore shit library. He wrote books on the philosophy of science. And why, you stupid rat-infested crotch whore, are you asking us for citations on a CP article, you smelly armpit infested with lice? ħuman 02:42, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Human, be nice to n00bs. Please. --The Emperor _{Kneel before Zod!} 02:47, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Emperor gets the "oblivious understatement joke of the year" award! ħuman 03:38, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi, I'd like cites for everything in this section. Books, links, the complete text of the article, and an explanation of what he's saying in the longest paragraph. Does anyone have any of that? Thanks Hmm. Why don't you ask for that on CONSERVAPEDIA, seeing as it's their fucking article? TheoryOfPractice 03:32, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Ironically, we're probably more likely to provide him with CP's sources than CP itself. 04:39, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

That, and Banned for no reason likely refers to being Banned for no reason via rangeblock et. al. at CP, so we are the poor feller's only hope. Aboriginal Noise ^{What the ...} 11:09, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

You fucking gobshites only needed to point our new fuckwitted reader to our Side-by-Side refutation article on CP's:Evolution article, you fucking bunch of arses. Oh, and hey - fuck you all, shitforbrains. DogP^{Marmite Patrol} 16:04, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Is it just me

or has CP been down for a while? ħuman 23:33, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

500 and a 404. --The Emperor _{Kneel before Zod!} 23:40, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

I could use a 4:20, my self...TheoryOfPractice 23:41, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

503 here sometimes, but it seems to be up again. NotHuman 02:43, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

It is an act of god. tmtoulouse 23:55, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Hmmmm, I wonder....Gooniepunk2010 ^{Oi! Oi! Oi!} 23:56, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

It's as much an act of God as someone claimed that RW's downtime is an act of God. [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 18:24, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

That would be Jinx _{hi Jinx!}. --The Emperor _{Kneel before Zod!} 22:18, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Where I think you go wrong

Conservapedia are ripe for satire and parody. Unfortunately, in your quest to do just this, you have made yourselves a target for satire and parody. And herein lieth the ultimate contradiction in this website. MarcusCicero 19:54, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Do point us to some satire or parody. Mindless word Hoover! 19:56, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Of us, to clarify. Mindless word Hoover! 19:57, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Don't be a twat, you know fine well the kind of adolescent and pathetic humour I'm talking about. MarcusCicero 20:10, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Like I said, where can you find significant satire and/or parody of us? Other than on your utopian forum that only the worthy may enter, I mean. Mindless word Hoover! 20:12, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Ach ja? Kartoffel! Polizei! --79.20.12.147 20:11, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

JESUS FUCKING CHRIST! Why are you such an imbecile? The opportunities for satire are all around you. The WIGO is a prime example. Wankers posting up insignficant nonsense with shite like LOLLLL!LO!LSLO and GOATS!!!! LOL LOOK AT ME LOLOLOLLCAT!!! etc. MarcusCicero 20:20, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

OK Marcus, here's a lesson in logic for you. Opportunities for parody ≠ parody. Mindless word Hoover! 20:23, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Wittgenstein! Na klar! --79.40.238.113 20:25, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Funniest thing about this is that Marcus things we give a shit. Heh, I hope he is enjoying himself at his super-secret site. Ace McWicked^{Model 500} 20:33, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Ikea essen Pinguin! Oh weh. --79.45.237.79 20:34, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Steve's just bored again. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 20:40, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

............................................................penis. NotHuman 22:15, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

You're all morons. Every last one of you. MarcusCicero 23:04, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

I'm not. I'm actually quite intelligent. And my Mom thinks I'm cool. TheoryOfPractice 23:06, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

I am when I choose to be. I need to make a pin-cushion to stab with straight pins now. Do I use a pattern? Heck no! Because I can move objects with my mind! NotHuman 23:24, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, like ToP I am pretty intelligent. Intelligent enough to know MC is an idiot because all he does is log on, hurl abuse, and leave. If he were intelligent he wouldn't bother. Oh well each to their own. My mom doesn't think I am cool though - she approves of my fiancee but that's about the only thing I have done in my life she approves of. Oh, my fiancee and university degree. And worldwide travel. Ace McWicked^{Model 500} 23:37, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Curious test edit. Oh, and so, MC, you paste the entire wiki as... something... because the occasional WIGO CP is as puerile as its subject? ħuman 23:42, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

We're not morons at all. We can make all the stupid jokes we want because RW isn't an attempt to create an encyclopedia. We can be serious when we need to be, and any upright-walking human should be able to tell the difference. It's not our fault you got confused. JS Leitch 11:27, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

If you were really serious, you'd give 5-year bans to anyone who made a mediocre WIGO post. Typical liberal hypocrisy. ~ Kupochama^[1][2] 18:22, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

CP Outage

Personally, I love these cp outages during the week and 'school' year. Just think of all of those poor students that can't read Andy's lectures or do their homework. Thats the best excuse ever - "I couldn't hand in my homework - because the dog ate your webserver!" --01:10, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

I'm fairly certain it is a bit of a blessing to some of them, i.e. those forced by their parents to take these classes. Aboriginal Noise ^{What the ...} 01:38, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Some of those parents must be asking if those classes are refundable.--Tabris 02:28, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Some people got in free, so they get every penny's worth of it. [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 14:34, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Why did Schlafly end up as a nobody?

I was in the kitchen drinking beer and making quesadillas and started wondering - why is it Andy is such a nobody. Taking as written that he has those degrees and a JD he should have had it all. So why is he a second rate half breed teaching a homeschool class with no clear achievements save a pathetic wiki that no one reads? Was it because he ranted and raved at every job he ever took about the liberals etc? Or was he scared to step out beyond his self-built intellectual bubble? Perhaps he was just too lazy and stuck up thinking that working was beneath him, for the liberals, a lived off his family money instead. A serious question. Ace McWicked^{Model 500} 06:50, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

We have only the smallest of windows into his life. Maybe he has always put his family first, making spending time with and working with them his first priority and setting his other goals aside. Maybe he's tragically inept and has just slid by with his advantages, and once he had to prove his real mettle he was more comfortable returning to a coasting lifestyle in a created bubble. Maybe we're overestimating the position of his birth, since while comfort and not-inconsiderable family resources are a lot, they might not have counterbalanced well with the expectations, comparisons, and doubtless painful upbringing that accompanied them. To try to puzzle this out would be like trying to puzzle out why Marcus Cicero feels the need to be a self-indulgent prick - you just have to eventually accept that you'll probably never know.--Tom Moore^{fiat justitia ruat coelum} 07:11, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Personally I think he is afraid. He is to cowardice to really investigate and find out that some of his long cherished beliefs are in fact - wrong. This would explain his consistent dodging of questions, his agression towards those he disagree's with and his need to set up conservapedia to start with. A place where he cannot be questioned and is always right. As to MC - he is just a prick with no deeper insight to be gained from examing his behaviour. Ace McWicked^{Model 500} 07:17, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

He has always come across to me as fundamentally lazy. Look at the Obama comparison. He tried to run for a safe Republican seat, based on nothing but the fact he is a Schlafly, no experience or anything to sell himself. He tried his hand at academia, but gave up after a few years. He once complained that Assistant Professors are overworked; which I took to mean he didn't want to do all the work involved when he had that job. So his mum/wife's contacts gets him on a legal retainer for a quack organisation, but he doesn't try to build a law business on the side. Look at how he runs Conservapedia, is that a dedicated man? - π 07:29, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Good point. Ace McWicked^{Model 500} 07:31, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

I've no idea about his financial circumstances but did he get a good inheritance from his father? Unearned wealth can be a tremendous demotivator. As to his family it would appear to me that he probably spends more time on CP than any self-respecting spouse would consider healthy. I suspect that Andy's ultimate failure is not recognising when he is wrong. In business and academia that probably is a fault too far. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 08:28, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

As with what Pi was saying, you can see his laziness in CP. His not reading Lenski's paper, not following citations, not bothering to read articles critical of CP but trumpting them on the main page. He just doesn't do the research and it must grind him when people like Obama and Dawkins do so well through hard work after he just gave up, and considering Genghis - money can have that effect. And I think that CP reinforces his views making it harder to break from his delusions. Ace McWicked^{Model 500} 08:44, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

This thread is mean. OK you don't like Andy, but he has a family, a daughter in college, friends and all the rest of it and is probably perfectly happy. I expect he's a pleasant enough person if you meet him in real life as well. Too much internet!--C0n53rv4p3d14 r00l2 09:08, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

I almost posted the same thing earlier. One of my friends was a lawyer at a firm in London and found herself working longer and longer hours. Eventually she had a choice: become a partner or see her family. She chose the latter and moved back to Scotland with her husband and daughter. She's much happier than she was despite taking the "nobody" option. Andy is a wilfully-ignorant, arrogant jackass but that doesn't make him a nobody. –SuspectedReplicant^{retire me} 09:24, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Personally I can't imagine someone with assfly's attitude doing well in a workplace with other colleagues. I mean, he even manages to alienate people who think the same way as him. Would you want to work in an office with him? I also can't imagine him doing well as a lawyer, because his warped preconceptions about liberal thought processes would lead him to come up with insane defence / prosecution cases for criminal law, and god only knows what he'd be like as a family lawyer! Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 09:45, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

What fucking crap! bullshit! This man is more than happy to denigrate the achievements of Obama as "racial quotas". More than happy to call Richard Lenski a liar and to spout nonsense that Dawkins has fraudulently gained a professorship. He openly abuses people, anyone, that does not fit his narrow definition of "right" so dont harp on about it "being mean". It has nothing to do with not liking Andy but wondering why is it, with all that he gained and had, has done very little himself. You jackass. Ace McWicked^{Model 500} 10:05, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Oh the meanness thing is rubbish. I simply meant I don't agree that he's a nobody. You could make the same argument about any of his siblings: they all had the same opportunities and none of them got elected president either. It still doesn't mean they're nobodies. Yes, Assfly is obnoxious and an asshole, but that's something altogether different. –SuspectedReplicant^{retire me} 10:12, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

You're calling him a complete failure, and then analysing everything you know about him in meticulous detail to look for reasons why! I don't care how 'obnoxious' he appears to be in internet discussions - that is unarguably mean and churlish behaviour.--C0n53rv4p3d14 r00l2 11:32, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

(unindent) I think openly gloating about mass murders and indicating that it's the natural result of liberal public schools, despite the fact that the shooter was home schooled is mean and churlish, I think dismissing the president of the United States as an "Affirmative Action President" is mean and churlish, I think running a website that concludes that black people vote Democrat because they're stupid and easliy led is mean and churlish. Don't cry for me, Andrew Schlafly. I have no sympathy for the man whatsoever, no matter how cordial he may be in person, he's still a dick and a giant tool in most of his interactions, so by all means, speculate away. SirChuckB^{Penguin Knight, First Class} 11:57, 17 September 2009 (UTC) (ps, I forgot about the whole Ted Kennedy thing)

he may be a kind of a nobody at the moment, but his sheer brilliance, his deep knowledge of so diverse fields like history, economics, physics and mathematics will earn him is place in history, when all of us will be forgotten. Face it, he's the new magister magistrorum. Deny this insight, and you are just another liberal...

larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 12:07, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Too true. Andy has been spending the last few years writing his magnum opus, which will contain all True and Trusworthy Conservative Information in a single source. On another note, notice how successful he has been at getting people to back conservapedia. There are no far-right church groups editing it. No hyperconservative campus organization members. No faculty or students from BJU, Liberty U., or nutjob seminaries. No group of winners from EagleForum. Excepting very occasional edits by Rob or Phyllis Jr., his own family doesn't edit it. Is this owing to a complete lack of charisma on his part, or something else? And to those who consider all this specululation "mean" or "churlish," get a grip. We all know the internet magnifies the less social characteristics of people. But while we all end up seeming dickish, Andy eviscerates even those who agree with him, thinks he is the possessor of all knowledge and wisdom, and teaches kids. 14:23, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Eloquently put, Rod Weathers, but you're still basing everything you say on his behaviour on the net. This "everything we say and do is fine because OMG Andy is teaching kids" argument is so tired. Really, you have no idea what his classes are like. --C0n53rv4p3d14 r00l2 14:45, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

I agree with our concerned resident; tired arguments are invalid. ^{— Sincerely, Neveruse513 (Dictated But Not Read) / Talk / Block} 14:47, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

CR, I, like Andy, am an educator in world history. I don't need to see what his classes are like, because I've read his lecture materials. I've seen his homework, the answers he receives, how he marks, and what grades he gives. I've seen how horrifyingly lacking his knowledge of history and economics are. I've seen how dismissive of thought and inquiry he is in student answers. In the case of education, his action online is judgment-worthy, as it is a part of his process of education and a direct extension of his classroom. 14:57, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

It's the playing on murders and death to further his own agenda that tell me he is not a "pleasant enough person". This includes those items that he did not post but openly endorses but supporting their inclusion on his website. Right on the front page is the great Hitwin- Ken's "if you think evolution is true then you don't mind the Holocaust" and "if you are an atheist then you are uncharitable and are therefore responsible for all the starving children of the world." Then there's the repeated "liberals don't care about 9/11", and I just counted at least seven posts denigrating Kennedy immediately after he died (when it's a conservative, they scold to show respect and leave well enough alone). There's also the accusation that Liberals didn't care about the soldiers murdered in the recruitment center, that Dawkins and atheism are responsible for a recent school shooting because the killers wore black and had a copy of his book, etc. etc. etc. The best example was the one in which a church was shot up and he cried "Christian persecution!" while denying and deliberately concealing the fact that the gunman was a conservative Christian who opened fire because he felt that the Unitarian Universalists were too liberal. So, let's get this straight: UUs are dirty Liberals who aren't really Christian unless they are murdered, in which case we'll marginalize it, skew reality, and act is if they were best buds so that Andy can cry foul without questioning the motives of the actual gunman because they shared somewhat similar beliefs (for instance, the Crusades weren't that bad and are exaggerated by revisionist Liberals). People with any shred of basic decency wouldn't spew such self-serving hatred. Oh yeah, and we apparently enjoy murdering babies. Kallium^talk 15:01, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

You are all jumping to conclusions! The people who have actually been in these classes don't seem to agree with you. And Neveruse, I'm so glad you've decided not to leave us, but the argument "we've decided he's a bad teacher so we're awarding ourselves carte blanche to say and do whatever we like" is both tired and invalid. Valid arguments, like mine, never become tired at all.--C0n53rv4p3d14 r00l2 15:10, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Please show how the argument is invalid. ^{— Sincerely, Neveruse513 (Dictated But Not Read) / Talk / Block} 15:13, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Don't Feed the Troll. 15:17, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

But, dammit, trolls need food. ^{— Sincerely, Neveruse513 (Dictated But Not Read) / Talk / Block} 15:20, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

It's not trolling to say that the very personal attacks above are a bit much, and that none of you know as much about Andrew Schlafly as you think you do. Although behaving like this on a site called RationalWiki does have a nice, almost dadaist absurdity.--C0n53rv4p3d14 r00l2 15:45, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

So what, then are your thoughts about Schlafly's very personal attacks on Richard Lenski and others? Do you think it speaks well of Andy that he made pointed accusations of fraud against a respected scientist without bothering to read the paper that generated his ire, and then attacked the paper and its authors based on a profound lack of knowledge of even the very basics of evolutionary theory and microbiological techniques? Schlafly is not a kid. He is a middle-aged adult who should know better than to act as he does, and yet he does what he does. In the Lenski affair, after all, he wrote letters to PNAS, The New Scientist, and so on. Those letters are not just on the internet. They are out in the world. He does things like that. He gives plenty of reason to judge him as we do. Kaalis 17:25, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Andy's been pwning himself on the interweb for over ten years now. He's had his arse handed to him on a plate in practically every online debate he's ever taken part in, and yet he keeps coming back for more. It's epic verbal slapstick: pointing and laughing is an entirely appropriate response. --Robledo 19:21, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

"none of you know as much about Andrew Schlafly as you think you do" It's an interesting claim that what someone writes is not a big, clean window into their mind. I suppose you mean to infer that you know more about Schlafly than us. Specifically, you must have information that puts him in a much better light. Please share so that we may consider it and be persuaded. ^{— Sincerely, Neveruse513 (Dictated But Not Read) / Talk / Block} 19:28, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

On a bit of a side track, but I've got a stick up my arse about these sorts of things. When calling someone else a total failure, it's best if you either aren't drunk or can spell. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 19:45, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

I agree. Mindless word Hoover! 19:48, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

I don't agree. I think that came off a little bit like the Schlaf, there. If speeling errors did somehow mean something (as you and teh Schlaf seem to suggest), what would be wrong with a failure identifying a failure? ^{— Sincerely, Neveruse513 (Dictated But Not Read) / Talk / Block} 19:52, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Now that I am hungover and awake I'd like to state for the record, I started this thread because I was curious as to why, with all Andy's degrees and education why he has no clear personal achievement that is not likely the result of his Schlafly namesake. He could have done so much and didn't. I am wasn't calling him a "dick" or anything else. What gives him the right to look down on others and treat them like crap when he himself appears to have done so little. Is he pissed at Obama because they were effectively at the same level at Havard and through perseverance Obama became prez while Andy did little? I was asking a valid and serious question and was not trying to denigrate him. Ace McWicked^{Model 500} 19:51, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Quite simply, you asked the wrong question. Most people are nobodies when you judge them against the celebrity curve. Obama beat Schlafly to become chair of the Harvard Law Review and so the latter has a lifelong grudge against the former. Given that, and his upbringing, it was inevitable that he would become a vile, slime-spitting ball of hate and so he has. But the fact that this entire website was set up in response to something he did pretty much proves he's not a nobody. The fact that this thread is all about him just re-proves that fact. If you had asked "Why is he such a vitriolic, hate-filled bag of pus?" then there may be some point to talking about it. You didn't ask that, though. The answer to the question you asked is "He isn't. Next." –SuspectedReplicant^{retire me} 20:14, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

I thought people would be smart enough to infer from the title followed by my first comment that I was asking why, whith all his head starts, has done so little and turned so wretched. It wasn't that hard to figure out. Shall I use smaller words next time? Perhaps I'll spell everything phonetically. Ace McWicked^{Model 500} 20:18, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

And you have had your question answered: maybe this is what he wanted. And by using "wretched", you're going back to what you claimed not to be asking - why is he a dick. You've had your question answered. If it wasn't what you wanted to ask, try again, and yes - perhaps you should use smaller words so you know what you're asking. –SuspectedReplicant^{retire me} 20:25, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

I am not calling him a dick but he is obviously hate-filled and wretched. Are we going to fuck around with semantics now? Ace McWicked^{Model 500} 20:30, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Apparently we have to. I think my posts have made clear exactly what I think of the monotone-voiced, truth-denying, wilfully-ignorant self-abuser but you seem to have violated the 90/10 rule against drink, drink, drink. –SuspectedReplicant^{retire me} 20:34, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

"It's not trolling to say that the very personal attacks above are a bit much, and that none of you know as much about Andrew Schlafly as you think you do." So.... marginalizing and/or capitalizing on other peoples' deaths and murders while essentially calling everyone who doesn't agree with him deceitful, selfish and evil with no regard for their humanity isn't sufficient to at least suggest that he is deficient in basic human compassion? If not, what kind of evidence would you interpret that way? Because normal people are not remotely as self-indulgent and self-serving as his posts suggest him to be. We simply work with the piles of evidence we have. Kallium^talk 23:32, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

I would want to speak to him in person before drawing these kinds of conculsions, because I don't think postings on the internet give you a reliable picture of someone's character.

A separate point is that some people here are taking the position that two wrongs make a right - he said x about Obama or Lenski, so I'm going to say y about him. I don't agree with that justification.

Someone up there asked if I claim to know him better than you. To clarify: I don't know him, and haven't met him.--C0n53rv4p3d14 r00l2 08:36, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Normally I would agree with you on the first part, but what else constitutes character? The only way his CP persona would not be reflect his true self is if in "real life" Andy is a completely different person who actually shows critical thought, a willingness to compromise, and the capacity for rational discourse and understanding. However, that still wouldn't change that through his primary mode of communication with the world he consistently displays paranoia, extreme prejudice, binary thought, utter self-righteousness, and unwillingness to learn from others, all in abundance- not to mention that he's quick to make negative character assessments of others based upon absolutely no evidence thereof: if you don't agree that this one clearly worded sentence in the Lenski paper is deliberately misleading, then you are a godless Liberal who supports killing babies, wants to destroy all religion (especially Christianity), hates America (especially if you're already an American), knows no compassion, has no qualms about murdering your neighbor, doesn't care about terrorism, "feigns offense" rather than having real emotions, etc. These are all things he has said about others on a daily basis for years. In real life his character may not be as bad- but that doesn't just dismiss the underlying arrogance and hostility towards others that his actions on CP regularly reveal. Meeting him in person would not change that- it still falls under the category of how he treats others. Madoff was reportedly quite amicable and appeared quite honest in person. I'm sure Andy would seem very nice and friendly if you met him on the street, but everyone can put on that facade- does it really matter? What is character if not his behavior towards others, especially those he disagrees with? Does CP not reveal that? (Regarding your second point, I try to avoid retaliatory name-calling for just that reason- not that I always do, of course.) Kallium^talk 13:25, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

I guess he could think better when he was younger but somehow lost it. I'm not Jesus 09:00, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

"Liberal" British press?

Apparently the liberal British press denounce Obama critics as racist. Another example of Andy knowing sod all about Britain, as most of the British newspapers are almost as right-wing as Conservapedia SJ ^Debaser 12:31, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Yes but according to the Daily Mail, Conservapedia gives you cancer. As well as everything else on the planet. Oh, and you can get AIDS from cycling. Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 12:36, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Jesus Christ. Do you ever read the British papers? With the exception of the Daily Express and the Daily Mail, and (Just to push it) the Daily Torygraph, the rest of them are sandel wearing, card carrying liberal hippy commies. The Guardian is possibly the best paper in the world, especially its online service, though the UK Independent is mighty close (Both extremely liberal newspapers) MarcusCicero 12:38, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Actually, the article doesn't say anything of the kind. "Has America really turned around and stumbled back into the sulphurous swamps of racial hatred? The short answer is no." and "By attempting to marginalise Mr Wilson as a racist, Democrats are playing a dangerous game". –SuspectedReplicant^{retire me} 12:40, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Marcus, I think you're forgetting one... Let me give you a clue: it belongs to someone from down under. BadaBing 13:40, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Yes, the Currant Bun is right-ish, and nobody's mentioned the Financial Times yet either. The Mirror is left-ish, I suppose, but from an American perspective I imagine most of our papers would indeed be seen as card carrying liberal hippy commies. I also agree with MC that the Guardian is possibly the best paper in the world. For non Brits, here is a good summary of most of our newspapers. –SuspectedReplicant^{retire me} 13:49, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

I was referring to the most popular Red Tops and the Daily Mail, Express and Telegraph - all very right wing. The Telegraph is the one that Andy links to. I see on the main page talk there's gonna be another discussion emerging about the political alliances of the British Press. SJ ^Debaser 13:53, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Right-ish? Come on, even O'Really would love the Sun. "Gotcha"? Their rabid hatred of anything that comes from the other side of the channel? BadaBing 13:56, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

The Sun supported Labour in 1997, and I think in 2001, which would probably disqualify it from being Conservative in the US. Also page 3 isn't very socially conservative.-- Kriss Akabusi^{AAAWOOOGAAAR!!1} 13:59, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

But they report from a never ending right-wing, "be English of fuck off" position. SJ ^Debaser 14:00, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

They are nationalistic, yes, but I have no doubt that Schlafly, O'Reilly and the rest of the gang would see them as liberal because of their sometime support for Labour and their lax morals.-- Kriss Akabusi^{AAAWOOOGAAAR!!1} 14:29, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

From a British perspective, you're absolutely right. But all British papers support the NHS (for example), which means they're filthy commies in the eyes of the Schlafly crowd. –SuspectedReplicant^{retire me} 14:34, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

An interesting observation. It leads us to the conclusion that British rednecks are fundamentally different from their American counterparts. They don't have this absurd fear/hatred of a mythical "elite" that leads them to shoot themselves in the foot every 5 minutes. BadaBing 14:37, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Although this "Europe is out to get us" thing seems to be the next best thing. BadaBing 14:39, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Well, the entire exchange on Talk:Main_Page is pretty textbook Andy; he has one definition of left and right and that's his own. As one of our articles mentions, in the US, centre is placed just to the right of Palapatine's Galactic Empire. And this massive distortion from what the rest of the world views as either liberal or conservative, or left or right is one of the main issues facing the US. It thinks it's just a bit right, when really, it's hyper-right, its scary. And, as I've always asserted, motivated by the fear of being liberal rather than the pros of being conservative. ^gnostic 15:42, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, our rednecks don't have the anti-elitism thing. They do however have equally annoying traits to make up for it. The awful mawkish fawning over dead celebs, and the crusades for the cause of the occasional murdered kiddywinks are the worst. I swear, if I ever hear about Princess Di or little baby Maddy again, it'll be too soon. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 20:25, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

"The Express leads with a headline relating to Diana, in other news, reports say that the heatwave in Hell shows no sign of stopping." I think Andy doesn't get that these people are as far-right as you can get (they only won't actively support the BNP because the racism aspect would be professional suicide). The only reason that even the right-wing papers in the UK still support the NHS and defend it from the US whackjobs who misrepresent it is because they're very nationalistic; and thus will defend the national institutions. It's no different than O'Reilly or Coulter standing up for more left-wing aspects of US culture just because they're part of US culture. Not that I can think of a great example off the top of my head, but I'm pretty sure they're not overly critical of nationalised/socialised utilities or road networks (oh, and nationalised military, of course, they're definitely okay with BIG government when that big government has a big gun-shaped cock to wave around). ^gnostic 12:51, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Russell Howard greatly summarised the British Press on Mock the Week last year [9]. The Express has a picture of a British Crusader in the title followed by the slogan "The World's Greatest Newspaper." Talk about nationalistic. Not long ago when one of these rapist fathers were discovered they asked in those phone-in boxes they put in articles "should the death sentence be introduced for muderers/rapists?" Yeah, the British press are very leftwing arent they? SJ ^Debaser 13:06, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

wtf...cp blocking ips?

Did CP start blocking IPs from viewing the site? I keep getting a 403 Verboten, but I can surf it on a proxy. ^{— Sincerely, Neveruse513 (Dictated But Not Read) / Talk / Block} 18:20, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

The aftershock from clickbotting actively viewing the site? I got that since the late part of the July 4th push. If not, then someone who has server admin access must have been blocking views along with socks? [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 18:26, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

I'm not logged in and I can see it (on a blocked IP). I've seen several 403s on CP in recent weeks only for them to clear within a few seconds. I think they're having a few server problems. –SuspectedReplicant^{retire me} 18:32, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

I suppose that's why god gave curl the -x option. ^{— Sincerely, Neveruse513 (Dictated But Not Read) / Talk / Block} 19:04, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

I have it on good authority that several IPs have been denied access because of the clickbot campaign. I also know that TK asked for certain IPs to be blocked based on who they are even though they were not major clickbotters. It's a pity that blocking IPs from even viewing the site isn't available to sysops otherwise CP would disappear under it's own cloak of invisibility. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 20:57, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

It was just strange because the clickbotting thing was over months ago. It must have been my edit to Conservapedia Talk: Law Terms D. But who would be watching that who could also make an IP block like that? ^{— Sincerely, Neveruse513 (Dictated But Not Read) / Talk / Block} 21:02, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Any doesn't rangeblock, he logs into the server and 404 blocks. More effective and less transparent. Just right. 22:00, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Andy or CPWebmaster. It has to be done at the server level and those who have access to the server can check the logs to see where hits are coming from. The MediaWiki software doesn't have the ability to block viewing of the home page. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 22:06, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

I have never used a clickbot but I also can't view. Ace McWicked^{Model 500} 22:11, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Pretty much the entire Realm of New Zealand seems to be blackballed. Could be something to do with my spiders. I was scraping every single page of theirs several times a month, assembling history data for my charts and shit. Some months I must have contributed about a fourth or so of their traffic. I can still see them through my proxies tho. Mountain Blue 22:44, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

My current rotating proxy is also blocked but a free web proxy still works. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 22:29, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Guys are we sure this is blocking and not borking? From where I am it would appear to be a DNS error although I'm no expert. We have seen 403s before when they've screwed the server up. Also it has been a bit patchy for the last few days. Does Poe's law not apply here or am I missing something? StarFish 06:53, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

I couldn't access from my work PC but could from home and while I couldn't view it ListnerX was still posting WIGO's. Ace McWicked^{Model 500} 07:07, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

A DNS error could do this though as different IPSs update DNS records at different speeds. I find it fairly common to get different DNS info from home and work. I guess we'll know better in a day or two. If you ping www.conservapedia.com see what IP it tries to ping and compare the two. If they're different that could explain it. If they're the same then I'll shut up and go and count fish. StarFish 07:19, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Ah - I tried pinging it just now and it wouldn't return an IP address at all! As DNS resolution is held at ISP level and not on CPs own server this fairly clearly points to DNS errors - I think... StarFish 07:21, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

I'd just like to point out that this blocking is not related to CP being down. One is a deliberate prevention of access and gives a completely different error message. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 12:46, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Student abuse

My Google-fu is weak today. Can someone point me in the direction of the incident where assfly blocked a student after they submitted their essay and then got a bollocking from the student's mother? Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 20:29, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Our coverage is here. –SuspectedReplicant^{retire me} 20:38, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Cool, but where's assfly's response? I'm trying to build up a "how Andy treats students" page. Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 20:41, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

I trust it will be balanced with Andy's usual glowing, unwarranted praise of his students. ^{— Sincerely, Neveruse513 (Dictated But Not Read) / Talk / Block} 21:24, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

You mean praise as long as they are male? Otherwise they are inferior in all fields and only a liberal would claim otherwise. --ENorman, too damn lazy to log in.

Crundy, I think wigo2425 on this has the links to AmandaP; the one for LydiaM should be here. [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 03:06, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

There was one incident in which a student wrote a baffling descriptionof Smith's invisible hand, and andy described it as a model answer. I can't find it right now, but it's a good example of Andy's economics education being cribbed from the back of matchbooks. If you want the example but can't find it, poke me on my talk page and I'll help you look for it. Good luck with the list, Crundy. It will be long. --Concernedresident 09:11, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Quick note: The invisible hand stuff is in this article under the section "The Invisible Hand of Grade Inflation". --Concernedresident 09:35, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Conservapedia is down

They're offline, I can't get them.

Me neither. Looks like it's not just us too. –SuspectedReplicant^{retire me} 07:13, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

As per the thread above pinging CP doesn't even return an IP address (as distinct from returning pings) so it looks like it's proper borked. StarFish 07:24, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Like RW was in a few weeks ago.

Not quite. For example, if you ping www.fishnips.com, it returns an IP address although the four pings time out. So the DNS records held at the ISP (and mirrored around the world) are correct even though the site itself may or may not be able to return a web page. But if you ping www.conservapedia.com it doesn't even resolve it to an IP address and is therefore unable to attempt to ping, or get a web page or anything. To my understanding this suggests that the records held at the ISP are missing altogether. This is slowly mirrored around the world which is why some of us were still able to connect yesterday and some weren't. This would suggest to me that CP is either changing ISP, server or has not missed a payment. I've been wrong before though. StarFish 07:45, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

They lost a week a few months ago and they might have to return to an old version again. Or has Momma finally got sick of Little Andy's silly games?

Just FYI London calling, cannot resolve www.conservapedia.com - fails to contact DNS servers at ns1.m264.sgded.com @9.39am GMT+1 62.189.127.13 08:39, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps their server got raptured? I'm unable to load the page from Ireland, although the site linked by Replicant says that it's up.--Concernedresident 09:02, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Tracert can't resolve the target from Montana. Yorick 09:53, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Yah, tis so. NS1 is alive but has no DNS server running on it. NS2 just plain doesn't exist. Silly Arsefly. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 10:04, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Nicely spottaged Jeeves - does AS/CP manage the DNS boxen at sgded.com? Looks like they're the property of Site Ground Inc. (sgded = Site Ground Dedicated?)and not under his control. My 37 dinar says his Internets provider are broked, no doubt because they're liberal Steve Kay 11:26, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Just had a quick look at the Site Ground forums. It certainly isn't full of people complaining. I think they've just bent it again. I guess it'll be up sooner or later. It's happened before. StarFish 12:18, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Back up now. There's a 7 hour gap in the log so I guess it's just good old server problems. Happens to us all! StarFish 14:28, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Hey, I just noticed. NS1 is the same machine that the Conservapedia site is running on. Just what kind of fly by night operation are siteground running anyway? It's all kinds of weird that the DNS server on that machine should die (almost never happens) and that the NS2 machine should fall over at the same time (4 years of uptime out of Linux isn't that unusual, although people more diligent with the kernel upgrades than me get less.) It's even weirder that servers falling over doesn't trigger audible warnings and flashing lights to wake up whatever tech is babysitting their data centre that night. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 19:27, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

pins and needles

is what I'm sitting on waiting for Andy to respond to parodist MarkGall's claim that "invisible hand" is indeed in his newer copy of the Merriam-Webster dictionary. Will he refuse to believe him? Will he ignore it? Will he declare it a victory for conservative words? ahhhhh!!! ^{— Sincerely, Neveruse513 / Talk / Block} 19:44, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Why should a dictionary have phrases in it? --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 20:17, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Most dictionaries do when a combination of words means more than either of the single words on their own. To someone ignorant of the phrase "red herring" just looking up "red" and "herring" would offer no enlightenment whatsoever. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 20:46, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

"Think fast!"

After these edits to the Obama talkpage:

Ed: "You. Writing plan. Now." (3 minutes later) "You. Banhammered. Now."

I didn't consider it WIGO-worthy because... eh, it's Ed's usual being-a-total-asshole routine, this time just without the default layer of "Call me Uncle Ed, I wanna be your buddy, we could talk on the phone if you like." --Sid 22:54, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Ed gem

Now, is this a bug or a feature?

This is just superb. Ed, who are you talking to?-- Kriss Akabusi^{AAAWOOOGAAAR!!1} 15:15, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Wow. I think technically, even an "empty" folder contains a symbolic link to itself and the parent directory, not to mention a stat entry, which I suppose could be viewed as part of the folder itself... ^{— Sincerely, Neveruse513 (Dictated But Not Read) / Talk / Block} 15:21, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

He's allegedly talking to God, or Microsoft. I can't tell. [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 15:32, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

It sounds like it's really got to him. Perhaps he's talking to the voices in his head. StarFish 15:40, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

"It's really upsetting that they would let this go on and on, instead of fixing this problem." - Get a life Ed. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 16:23, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

No, get linux. [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 17:58, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Or a GNU port of any linux utility... I can hear him bitching about having to use a CLI now... ^{— Sincerely, Neveruse513 / Talk / Block} 18:02, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Nice one Neveruse513. Bitching about it. Meat is the natural food of dogs. Bitching. Dogs. Food. Never mind. StarFish 18:11, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

heh, if only I was actually that clever... ^{— Sincerely, Neveruse513 / Talk / Block} 18:13, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Cygwin is a must have on any windows machine to make it usable, and also to stop me driving myself insane by typing "ls" at the windows command prompt every five minutes, and having it tell me ls doesn't exist. Plus, cygwin ssh is so much more convenient than having to start putty or something. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 19:35, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

I used to just dump all the GNU utility executables into...whatever directory that is where programs are run on windows. Does Windows have a bin folder? I'm kind of glad I forgot. System32? ^{— Sincerely, Neveruse513 / Talk / Block} 19:39, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Good grief! In Windows, deleting an empty folder is Shift+Delete, Return. Deleting a folder with stuff in it is Shift+Delete, Return. We in the industry call this "a consistent user interface". (go figure.) And speaking ontologically, an empty folder does have something that warrants the user's attention and care upon deletion request: the fact that the folder exists at all. People, as surprising it is, like the notion that empty folders aren't deleted on willy-nilly. For example, currently, people bitch about Git's notion that empty directories/folders are not revisioned in repositories (and hence can't be committed and will be missing when you check a branch out); clearly people are concerned that some folders exist at all, even when they have nothing in them. --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 19:56, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Stop the presses!!!!! Redo Template:Mainpageright! I just (a day or two ago) discovered the most damning Windows bug. I often read stuff on my WinXP laptop when I'm going to sleep. Basically, since I'm unable to properly read stuff at 3 AM, I use text-to-speech to overcome my muddled brain's deficienciens. So, I installed CLiCk, Speak, which uses the Windows Speech API. Latest reading project? Slacktivist's magnum opus on Left Behind. And Windows reads "St. Luke" as "Street Luke". Worse, it misreads this newfound Holy Scripture's name: "LB" is read as "pounds". This is a blatant conflict between established religion and secular world. What else can you expect from an operating system designed by that notorious atheist humanitarian Bill Gates? --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 07:10, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Global warming WIGO

Is my memory faulty? I thought I remembered Chippeterson arguing intelligently at length with Aschlafly over something a long time ago. Why is he still around and unbanned? Fedhaji 20:38, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Check his userboxes. Double standard.--Thanatos 00:31, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Jesus wrote the Constitution, hence it predates Thanksgiving

Even if Jesus didn't write the Constitution, he could have travelled back in time and given it to the Pilgrims. Debate.

He could have travelled back in time and given it to the Pilgrims

travelled back in time.

Back in time. NotHuman 23:13, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

"Thanksgiving was in 1619 or 1620" well, certainly not 1619, puritan pilgrims arrived in 1620. Was probably 1621... ħuman 23:19, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Ah, I see, the 1619 one was in VA. ħuman 23:21, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Unless you going with the theory that Andy thinks that he/Reagan is Jesus then Jesus would have had to travel forward in time --BoredCPer 00:43, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Copyedit

[10] Ken

, "escherichia coli" should be written as "Escherichia coli" - always cap the genus, and itals for scientific species names. You're welcome, Ken

. ħuman 23:27, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Wow, that article is just about as vague, generic, and scientifically ignorant as they come (not to mention being a rather odd mix of creationism and traditional ID). But I just LOVED how they not only completely contradicted themselves, but helped everyone see it by putting those sentences in the only two sidebars:

• "Crowing over changes that have nothing whatever to do with the grand scheme of evolution [i.e. "microbes-to-man"], as if it proves the latter, happens almost daily. It gets rather tiresome. We will continue to remind everyone of what is really being claimed, without apology, while ever this deceitful style of argumentation continues to be used."

came immediately following

• "Lenski’s research underlines how impossible the grand scheme of microbes-to-man evolution is."

Sweeping, irrelevant claim that doesn't support them = bad. The exact same sweeping, irrelevant claim turned to support them = good. Cognitive dissonance, anyone? Kallium^talk 01:04, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

It's like some crap I read on AWK today, where PJR uses the latest research into the nature of the universe to refute the big bang and thus YEC IS TRUE! ħuman 01:44, 21 September 2009 (UTC)