Conservapedia talk:What is going on at CP?/Archive296

This is an archive page, last updated 20 August 2012. Please do not make edits to this page.

Archives for this talk page:

<1>, <2>, <3>, <4>, <5>, <6>, <7>, <8>, <9>, <10>, <11>, <12>, <13>, <14>, <15>, <16>, <17>, <18>, <19>, <20>, <21>, <22>, <23>, <24>, <25>, <26>, <27>, <28>, <29>, <30>, <31>, <32>, <33>, <34>, <35>, <36>, <37>, <38>, <39>, <40>, <41>, <42>, <43>, <44>, <45>, <46>, <47>, <48>, <49>, <50>, <51>, <52>, <53>, <54>, <55>, <56>, <57>, <58>, <59>, <60>, <61>, <62>, <63>, <64>, <65>, <66>, <67>, <68>, <69>, <70>, <71>, <72>, <73>, <74>, <75>, <76>, <77>, <78>, <79>, <80>, <81>, <82>, <83>, <84>, <85>, <86>, <87>, <88>, <89>, <90>, <91>, <92>, <93>, <94>, <95>, <96>, <97>, <98>, <99>, <100>, <101>, <102>, <103>, <104>, <105>, <106>, <107>, <108>, <109>, <110>, <111>, <112>, <113>, <114>, <115>, <116>, <117>, <118>, <119>, <120>, <121>, <122>, <123>, <124>, <125>, <126>, <127>, <128>, <129>, <130>, <131>, <132>, <133>, <134>, <135>, <136>, <137>, <138>, <139>, <140>, <141>, <142>, <143>, <144>, <145>, <146>, <147>, <148>, <149>, <150>, <151>, <152>, <153>, <154>, <155>, <156>, <157>, <158>, <159>, <160>, <161>, <162>, <163>, <164>, <165>, <166>, <167>, <168>, <169>, <170>, <171>, <172>, <173>, <174>, <175>, <176>, <177>, <178>, <179>, <180>, <181>, <182>, <183>, <184>, <185>, <186>, <187>, <188>, <189>, <190>, <191>, <192>, <193>, <194>, <195>, <196>, <197>, <198>, <199>, <200>, <201>, <202>, <203>, <204>, <205>, <206>, <207>, <208>, <209>, <210>, <211>, <212>, <213>, <214>, <215>, <216>, <217>, <218>, <219>, <220>, <221>, <222>, <223>, <224>, <225>, <226>, <227>, <228>, <229>, <230>, <231>, <232>, <233>, <234>, <235>, <236>, <237>, <238>, <239>, <240>, <241>, <242>, <243>, <244>, <245>, <246>, <247>, <248>, <249>, <250>, <251>, <252>, <253>, <254>, <255>, <256>, <257>, <258>, <259>, <260>, <261>, <262>, <263>, <264>, <265>, <266>, <267>, <268>, <269>, <270>, <271>, <272>, <273>, <274>, <275>, <276>, <277>, <278>, <279>, <280>, <281>, <282>, <283>, <284>, <285>, <286>, <287>, <288>, <289>, <290>, <291>, <292>, <293>, <294>, <295>, <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)

A blast from our past.

Abd on CP. Gives us a shout-out, too. Theory of Practice "the standards of the site are ultimately an expression of the community makeup, and not a set of rules or policies." 23:58, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

He mentioned RationalWiki? How long do you think he'll last? Peter ^{This is not my first temporal anomaly} 00:12, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Gone. Did anyone cap it? --Sasayaki (talk) 02:11, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

What did it say? Spud (talk) 07:01, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Just that their cold fusion article was mostly copied from ours. — Unsigned, by: ORavenhurst / talk^{Do You Believe That?} 12:42, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Someone at CP plagiarized the rat vandals? Spud (talk) 14:22, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Parodists. The answer is always parodists... Occasionaluse (talk) 14:27, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Someone is beating a dead Sarah Jessica Parker. -- Seth Peck (talk) 16:32, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Oooh, you bitch! Генгис^{Gum disease} 19:31, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

You could at least have said Nicholas Cage. Sophie^Wilder 19:54, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

• Fascinating. Looks like

• The mention of RW was revision-deleted. I'm not quite sure where I mentioned it. Basically, the article had major text that had been lifted, not long ago, from RW, the article had been edited to make it more of a RW-style attack on Cold fusion, by DorMouse, using text from RW. I may have mentioned this on the Talk page. If so, that page has been deleted. (DorMouse was later blocked as a sock.) The mention may have been in an edit summary for the page, but if so, my edit summaries have been edited? That's a trick I'm not sure the software supports. But how the software displays truly hidden revision deletions I don't recall exactly. I'd guess the content changes, if they are left, will appear in the next edit, which is legally okay if it's the same editor.
• A note was placed on a new Talk page:

• Please use original content instead of copying and inadequately citing Creative Commons licensed content from a dubious source. Conservative 20:57, 31 July 2012 (EDT)

• RW would be the "dubious source."
• However, Conservative reverted my changes -- which were original content -- back to the plagiarized content. I'll respond to his request, see what he does. I can source anything to reliable sources that I put in the article.... at least in general.
• He didn't shoot the messenger, I wasn't warned or blocked, but he did rather miss the message!
• The Talk page History shows only one revision, [2]. However, the log for the page shows five revisions.[3] I conclude that the Talk page has been revision-deleted, or totally deleted and recreated.

• Meanwhile, a user appeared here who had previously edited only this page, so it could be watchlisted, and this user promptly edited Cold fusion, with similar trolling to what I'd seen from the same-name user on Wikipedia. I reverted, but it wasn't my content I was reverting to, it was from Tweenk, I think, and others. Oh, he placed an inaccurate description of a living person as a convicted felon. The guy's conviction was apparently reversed. Wikipedia has the story, if anyone really cares. I don't. --Abd (talk) 00:42, 2 August 2012 (UTC)
• Never mind. David Gerard, another Wikipedia troll (a famous one), reverted it all back in. I don't revert war. Just saying'. --Abd (talk) 00:49, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Abd doesn't revert war, he engages in REVERT RAGNAROK! [4], [5], [6], [7], [8]! Hipocrite (talk) 20:32, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Hipocrite, however, does revert war, he did it all the time on Wikipedia, and he's not shy about it here.[9] He's undoing the balance that Tweenk had provided to Cold fusion, editing in fantasies about the field, divorced from reality.

Ironic if the Conservapedia article on Cold fusion ends up better, more accurate scientifically, than the one here.

Snark, the RW trademark, doesn't require error, snark is an attitude. Unless RW wants something else, asserted facts should be fact. --Abd (talk) 21:58, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

2012 Olympics, featured on fark.com

Looks like CP's going to get a jump in traffic this month... I wonder if they'll notice where it's coming from, and how they'll spin the ridicule on the comments page. Consequently, did anyone from here submit the link? Shakedangle (talk) 20:47, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

I love it when people see CP for the first time. Sophie^Wilder 08:55, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, it's like watching children on Christmas morning. Генгис^{Our ignorance is God; what we know is science.} 09:21, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

I get a similar kick out of watching people who suddenly realize that deities are lies slowly deconstruct all of the social institutions and cultural walls they've been forced to live in, inside their minds. The expressions on their faces are almost orgasmic. It's a great thing. Reading Fark comments is close, being that it's all text. -- Seth Peck (talk) 16:56, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Whatever anyone we did, we got props. -- Seth Peck (talk) 17:29, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Joaquin no more?

It's been something like a month since Joaquin deleted his little pet main page things and went "on vacation." Do you think it's safe to conclude now that he's not coming back? My guess is that he finally got fed up of Kendoll's constant dribblings obscuring the only thing he ever did at CP. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 21:47, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

I didn't even notice he was gone. But have hope, like Iduan, he may return from his break oneday!--Mikal ^{Harass Follow} 21:50, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

CP: The only dictatorship Joaquin couldn't get behind. ^{ONE / TALK} 12:12, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Easter Island (Rapa Nui) WIGO

I see someone has [1]^img callled Andy on the BS about the Rapa Nui statues. What is the deal with this anyway, is Andy genuinely ignorant about the statues, and doesn't actually know their origins have long been explained? Is there subtle racism at work here ("Liberal atheistic pre-missionary era Polynesians couldn't have done that - godidit!"), or is he just pulling "mysteries" out of his arse again? It'll be interesting to see how Andy responds to the challenge. -- 23:17, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

...I never knew that Andy knew so much about archaeology. --Andy Franklinson (talk) 23:27, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

You clearly have never read his world History lectures have you. They help explain so much about what he says. --Mikal ^{Harass Follow} 23:43, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

I once again put forward the theory that Andy lacks that part of the thinking process that makes you actually think your stuff over. He goes straight from impulse, fleeting thoughts to vocalising them without that intervening "hold up, brain, let's make sure this shit actually makes sense" stage that most people go through. Most people would go "Those easter island statues are huge and odd looking, it'd take some kind of miracle for such a society to make and transport them" > "Hold up, it's not that strange, let's research this shit" > "internet research" > "huh I guess it's not that odd after all". Andy goes "Those easter island statues are huge and odd looking, it'd take some kind of miracle for such a society to make and transport them" > "Publish my amazing insight for the world to see, double down in defensive mode if anyone challenges it". X Stickman (talk) 00:38, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

I'm not sure what's so mysterious about it. Po-Matoran are known for their increased strength, and often work as carvers.

Oh wait, wrong Nui.

Also, someone should go move that page to "Resurrection Sunday Island". Such filthy secularized language has no place on Conservapedia. «-Bfa-» 01:19, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

X Stickman, actually I'm not sure that's an issue. Aschlafly doesn't go through any thought processes like that at all. What he decides to write is only what he thinks can be believed to support what he thinks should be the natural order of things. I'm not even sure that many people like him actually believe in YEC only that YEC is a useful tool to build support for their view of what society should be like. I'm not saying he isn't a believing Christian, only that this is little more than (feeble) propaganda, not to be believed by those like him that push it, but designed to brainwash the masses, to keep order. It's nothing new, of course. The only thing that stands out with Aschlalfy's techniques is his total ineptitude and negligence. Ajkgordon (talk) 08:39, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

You have to wonder at the perverse sense of humour of a God who erects graven images. Генгис^{Our ignorance is God; what we know is science.} 08:47, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

The lulz, he did it for them. -- 15:56, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

This really is final proof that Andy himself has given up on his blog being an encyclopaedia. His insight says God must have done it, the linked article says people did it. He doesn't even care enough to standardise his own bullshit. -- Iscariot ^{Andy Schlafly for Congress 2012!} 15:56, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Ed Poor: Now with more irony!

Remember, it is chiefly liberals who oppose science, because a scientific idea can be proven wrong.^img That's adorable. Liberals oppose science. Ha! What a fantastic insight! This makes me want to kiss him on the mouth, just because. Hiphopopotamus (talk) 02:57, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Woooooow. Though the irony begins even earlier: "Not particularly conservative to promote anti-scientific hogwash like mind control." Yeah, Ed, tell that to the guy who claimed that Obama used mind control to win the election. --Sid (talk) 05:02, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, but liberals use mind-control on other liberals. Conservatives don't believe in things like...wait, what?Hiphopopotamus (talk) 05:28, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

I find it impossible to believe that anybody with a functioning brain can be as self-unaware as Smeg Ed. This is as bad as his "Unlike liberals, Conservatives are willing to admit their mistakes" comment. So clearly he's either brain-dead, trolling CP or lying through his yellow teeth. --Psygremlin (talk) 08:29, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Am I the only who noticed this part of Ed's quote? "Moreover 'brainwashing' was used to persecute new religions in the 1970s until the APA told mind control advocates to put or shut up, and they had to fold." Isn't Ed a Moonie? MDB ^{(the MD is for Maryland, the B is for Bear)} 12:13, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

"New religions"? Cults is the word you're looking for Ed. Stupid, fucking cults. Генгис^mutating 12:33, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

How long till Terry recites this as gospel?

Obama to stage fake assassination attempt, declare martial law and suspend the election.

After all, it's perfect for him -- a wild rumor about Obama, spread by right wing nuts, that involves the elimination of American freedom, and it's source is basically "I've heard that..." MDB ^{(the MD is for Maryland, the B is for Bear)} 11:53, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

It's certainly no less batshit insane than anything else he's written. I've given up on Tossbotty since his 'No, everybody firing wildly in a dark cinema would totally work' bullshit. The man is more insane than Schlafly. --Psygremlin (talk) 12:22, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

It's not much more stupid than Terry's rant today, with the immortal line "True, the Constitution lets Congress do this. But conservative and “patriotic” Congress watchers reacted in anger and outrage." In other words, this is perfectly okay but we're upset anyway. Bonus points to Nick Skindisease for "Congress just became the Reichstag!" rpeh •T•C•E• 13:13, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

I don't see anything wrong with the comment that some people are outraged when congress does certain things the constitution allows. There are many things that congress does that piss me off and few of them are unconstitutional (retroactive copyright term limit extensions piss me off, but the Supreme Court ruled they are constitutional; even if so, they are bad legislation).

The man says so many bizarre and utterly stupid things. I'm shocked you found something that I think is perfectly sensible. Phiwum (talk) 13:19, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Okay, that quote doesn't really give enough context. He's claiming Congress has "fatally" weakened itself, allowed tyranny etc etc, all from doing something it's specifically allowed to do. I just liked the juxtaposition of the "True... " part with the finalé. rpeh •T•C•E• 13:21, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Rpeh, I didn't get your reference to skin disease at first but I realise you're talking about Nick Purpura. Yukky but suitable. Linked so others can benefit from your atheist liberal insight. The Real James Brown (talk) 13:23, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

I thought it was my turn after Psy came up with Unsanitary for RoseAnn. I first heard about other uses for the word purpura from House, when someone had this. rpeh •T•C•E• 13:31, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

I still want to call him Nick PurplePeopleEater. Anyway, I loved the bit of article that said the more people who know about this, the less likely it is to happen. Now, when Obama's Kenyan stormtroopers fail to appear over the horizon to take their guns and make anchor babies with their women, they can congratulate themselves on being vigilant citizens who prevented the overthrow of America. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 15:13, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

At least he appropriately enough put quotation marks around 'patriotic'. Vulpius (talk) 15:40, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Andy, you lying sack of dung

Andy: Articles would mention the public school if any Olympic gold medal winners were attending one. Michael Pehlps does not attend a public school, and has not for many years. He swam for a private club.^img

Reality: He hasn't attended public school for "many years" because he's twenty seven years old. Phelps is a graduate of Baltimore's Towson High. MDB ^{(the MD is for Maryland, the B is for Bear)} 17:21, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Oh yes. A private club is just like a private school. You know, because they both demand money as a gate to keep the peasants and plebs out and are only for the successful rich people. This totally makes sense. Because the word 'private' totally means the opposite of public, which is liberal and evil and communist and bad. So they must have to do with each other. Yep. ±KnightOfTL;DR^{free guybrush threepwood! no new taxes! down with porcelain!} 17:26, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Good athletes often gravitate to private schools in order to play on a good sports team, which makes it easier to get noticed. Since private schools don't have the geographical district limitations of public school districts, they can take their pick of the crop. Exceptional athletes can even be granted scholarships to private schools, as good sports programs are very prestigious and can attract donors and fame--"Shut up, Brx." 17:30, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Wait, does he like Phelps because he's a rich kid? Or does he hate him because he's a potsmoker? Is the fact that Phelps is suddenly an "overachiever" (lolwut?) mean he's conservative, despite the bong hits and the fact that he's not an underdog??? I'm confused. -- Seth Peck (talk) 17:32, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Don't forget that the most successful swimmer in history is overexposed by the media...--"Shut up, Brx." 17:34, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Phelps shows he's very self centered by winning all the time. Andy's never won anything, because he's so humble. Hiphopopotamus (talk) 01:38, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Atheist, gun-controlling Britain...

...just won gold in the clay-pigeon shooting. Suck it, Schlafly. 81.137.227.129 (talk) 14:42, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Ah, that wonderful feeling of knowing Andypandy is probably hatefucking his pillow in rage after hearing this, while also desperately trying to spin this into a new rant about liberal Britain. God it must be a nightmarishly shite existance being Andy Layton Schlafly. Judge Holden^{The Judge Smiles} 17:45, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

I don't think so. I don't think Andy ever entertains the possibility that he might be mistaken, so he has no rage over this or any other result at all. Deep down, he's right, and it's an interesting challenge to discover how. Phiwum (talk) 17:52, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Bah, liberals! Real conservatives shoot people. Генгис^{Our ignorance is God; what we know is science.} 19:38, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Does anyone know his explanation for A) Liberal, godless and socialist Britain now ranking 5 in the world and B) Why the top 20 is almost exclusively made up of such godforsaken socialist hellholes? Judge Holden^{The Judge Smiles} 20:03, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Slave training camps. Генгис^{You have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you.} 20:15, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Former Communists???

Andy, you fucking moron^img, Viktoria Komova is 17 years old. She was born 4 years after the official dissolution of the Soviet Union, she hasn't lived a day in her life under communism. How long are you and your idiot countrymen going to go on pretending that communists lurk around every corner? Really, these Olympic games have brought out the most insufferable side of Andy. His preening arrogance and his ridiculous stupidity united in one colossal display of arsehattery. He should go die in a fire somewhere. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 21:20, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Not only that, but given his comments about the commies and their slave-labour training systems, the probable reason why Gabby Douglas is homeschooled is because her training regimen doesn't give her enough time to attend normal school. --Psygremlin (talk) 12:57, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Did the goalposts just shift?

Andy decides the list of public school attendees/grads was getting too long, so he just uncategorizes them. Aboriginal Noise ^{What the hell is that thing?} 01:23, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

I just noticed that too. What an asshat. Not to mention two of the athletes he has listed under private schools are also "adults". They're both 23. Idiot. Hiphopopotamus (talk) 01:27, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Shame he's going to miss out on the 8 women who won gold in the coxswain today, chances are they went to private schools. Aboriginal Noise ^{What the hell is that thing?} 02:00, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Wait... so Andy's now breaking it down into adult/college; private school; home school and public school. Just how many school kids does he think qualifies for the games? Outside of gymnastics, probably not many. I wonder if that 16-year-old Chinese girl who broke all the records went to a private school? --Psygremlin (talk) 13:01, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

User:Conservative Moonlighting?

After CP, my favorite humor site is North Korean News. It's struck me that their press releases speak with the same voice as Ken's screeds. Here's one about how they need nukes because some guy tried to damage a Kim Jong-Il statue. Can't you see it illustrated with a sinking USS Pueblo? Whoover (talk) 02:42, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

I think its the absolute certainty and conviction that their 180 degree slant on reality is not only correct, but obviously the only reasonable position that any decent person could adopt. It really is eerily similar. -- 09:40, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

it is obvious that the north Korean news service people do not think in Emglish, whereas User:C is only fluent in Gibberish. C®ackeЯ

Ooh. So this is the writing job Ken once claimed to have. Vulpius (talk) 21:55, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Surprise Censorship

So I questioned why CP is celebrating a man, an American man, getting fired for disagreeing with Chick-fil-a and yet poo-pooing an Olympiad, a non-American, getting terminated over voicing her opinion for something. Question gets deleted and I get banned for a year. It must have been a sneaky liberal censoring me. --Sometimesrock (talk) 19:07, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Congratulations. You just discovered that only liberals censor free speech. Err... rpeh •T•C•E• 19:17, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

You must be new here. Ace^{The Rep Grows Bigger} 23:46, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Suddenly they fall silent

Remember when Andy bragged on the main page about how "atheistic Great Britain" would underachieve "as predicted by Conservapedia"^img back when they had zero gold metals? Now that they have five gold metals and fifteen overall (placing them in 7th place overall and 5th place in gold metals as of this writing), CP has suddenly gone quite over Britain's Olympic standings. The question now is how far will Andy move the goal posts in his desperate attempt to cling tot he notion that Conservapedia's "prediction" was correct?--BMcP - Just an astronomy guy 01:37, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

He'll claim they're "joke sports" and therefore don't count. Hiphopopotamus (talk) 01:40, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Well, when Canada came in third in total medals a couple years ago Andy called their performance embarrassing, so clearly the UK will have to do much better than 7th if they intend to prove Andy wrong. Anything less than #1 in both gold and total medals is just plain pathetic. Give it up, atheists! DickTurpis (talk) 01:50, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Pretty much. GB is hosting the olympics, therefore anything less than topping the table means GB did shit and CP is proven right once again. X Stickman (talk) 01:51, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

It never ceases to amaze me that this man went to Princeton and Harvard. --TheLateGatsby (talk) 03:01, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Not only did Canada finish 3rd in total medals at the 2010 Olympics, but they finished first in number of gold medals and set the record for most gold medals in a single Winter Olympics, 14. How embarrassing! --Night Jaguar (talk) 07:13, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

I'm not sure where this classification by total medals is coming from. The only correct way of doing the ranking is by golds, then by silvers then bronzes. If you just compare totals, it's better to win two bronze medals than one gold, and that's clearly wrong. rpeh •T•C•E• 08:56, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

It's a weird American thing, they've always done it that way. Effectively they rank all medals as equal, despite that making no sense whatsoever. But then this is the country that gave the world fat poor people. VOX^HUMANA 10:13, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

I don't know about that. In some sports the separation between first and third can be milliseconds. A small country, without the financial and technical backup, winning two bronze medals can be a fantastic achievement. The USA has 5 times the population of the UK; you might expect a proportionately smaller number of individual athletes to excel at particular events but statistically a more populous country would be expected to field a stronger group in all team events. Генгис^{Is the Pope a Catholic?} 14:17, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Joke sports? We still celebrate John Hughes' gold medal in Los Angeles (1928) for town planning.  Lily ^{Inspirate me.} 07:57, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Sadly, he was passed over for a gold medal for making The Breakfast Club. (I know it's not the same one...) MDB ^{(the MD is for Maryland, the B is for Bear)} 12:35, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

My current piece of trivia is that the oldest contestant to win a medal was 73-year old John Copley who got a silver in 1948 in Mixed Painting, Engravings And Etchings. Генгис^{Is the Pope a Catholic?} 08:49, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

The real question is - "Is dressage a joke sport?" Hipocrite (talk) 11:54, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

A joke sport is whatever Andy says is a joke sport.--Spud (talk) 13:10, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

A joke sport is one where "conservative Christian Americans" are not competing, or what Spud said. Генгис^{Our ignorance is God; what we know is science.} 13:33, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Update: England is up to eight gold metals now, tying them with equally atheistic France for fourth in the gold count and they are also fourth overall; Andy is going to have to move those goal posts pretty far.--BMcP - Just an astronomy guy 09:02, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Actually it's now ten, and please don't keep calling us England otherwise those sour-faced Scots and Welsh will never sing the national anthem. Генгис^{Our ignorance is God; what we know is science.} 11:56, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Two Medal Count Gripes

I've got two gripes with medal counts.

The first is that it makes the Olympics into a competition between nations, which it's not supposed to be. It's supposed to be about competition between athletes regardless of national boundaries. It was the Cold War that created the obsession with medal counts, to score US vs. Soviet points.

The second is that I don't think all medals are necessarily equal. Take Michael Phelps seventeen(?) gold medals. Okay, he is, by any standard (except Andy's), an amazing athlete -- maybe the greatest swimmer ever. But is it fair to compare swimmers and sprinters, who can compete in multiple events during the Olympics and thus have a chance at multiple medals, to, say, a decathlete, who really only has a shot at one medal despite the fact he has to excel at ten different events? MDB ^{(the MD is for Maryland, the B is for Bear)} 12:14, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

I agree with yourself on all points, except that I must point out that currently Team GB is ahead of France and Germany, to say nothing of the Aussies. Nyahh nyahh nyahh. Oh, and there's proof that we're all satanic atheists: in gold, silver and bronze we have 6, 6, 6. rpeh •T•C•E• 12:23, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

And you're losing to Christian capitalist America _{and godless Red China} U-S-A! G-O-D! U-S-A! G-O-D! MDB ^{(the MD is for Maryland, the B is for Bear)} 12:39, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Yes indeed, GB currently holds the Ashes, and we are having our worst Olympics since Montreal. It's a dark time here in Australia. On that note, does Andy hate us (Atheist Prime Minister) or love us (home of Hillsong and floodgeology.net)? VOX^HUMANA 15:08, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

I had too google "holds the ashes". "Two countries, separated by a common language." MDB ^{(the MD is for Maryland, the B is for Bear)} 15:19, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

MDB's point is discussed by The Economist. Cantabrigian (talk) 12:44, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

There are some systemic biases which favour certain sports and therefore some athletes. Some cycling events for example were restricted to a single competitor from one country; and there's usually only one event which sailors, judokas or boxers can compete in, as is pretty much the case for most endurance or time-consuming sports such as long distance running, cycling or team-only events. Swimming is a favoured sport as there are multiple events in different styles over a narrow range of distances both for individuals and teams; and like cycling it is also one which is less wearing on the body as there is not the pounding that runners, jumpers or gymnasts suffer. I don't want to belittle the achievements of Phelps and Thorpe in swimming, or Wiggins and Hoy in cycling, but Steve Redgrave's five gold medals over five successive Olympic Games is a phenomenal achievement. Генгис^{Is the Pope a Catholic?} 13:59, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

An annoying thing in medal counts, for me, is that they're effectively useless as a method of bragging until the games are done. Some countries produce athletes who are better at certain sports, and the speed at which they acquire medals is entirely down to the scheduling. Andy bragging about/mocking team GB for not getting medals in the first few days was just plain silly since everyone knows GB is strong in rowing and cycling, but those events didn't start on the first day. X Stickman (talk) 15:03, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Only reason metal count matters to me is because they are useful in discrediting Andy's so-called "theories" on what makes a nation competitive in the Olympics. Of course once his theories are discredited, he just moves the goal posts and censors dissent.--BMcP - Just an astronomy guy 02:06, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

It seems to me the fairest way to measure is with a weighted overall count: gold worth 3, silver 2, bronze 1. With that I currently have China in first with 97, USA right behind with 96, UK next with 52, then Russia with 42, and France with 40. Of course, this isn't terribly relevant until the games or over, but it does seem to show that it will be difficult for anyone else to overtake USA or China. DickTurpis (talk) 12:09, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

MDB called it.

Yep, he's crazy enough to go there^img. There's no conspiracy theory too lunatic for our Chuckarse. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 13:30, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

--Psygremlin (talk) 13:47, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Normally, being proven right is a nice feeling. Now, I feel like the guy who sees someone speeding down the highway, weaving across lanes, and says, "wow, that idiot is going to get into an accident"... and then sees the mangled wreckage three miles down the road. MDB ^{(the MD is for Maryland, the B is for Bear)} 13:51, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

I don't think anyone who correctly calls what will happen at CP gets unashamed satisfaction. You always come away with a feeling of dirtiness. Генгис^{Is the Pope a Catholic?} 14:04, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

I was going to use the analogy "kind of like watching a stripper", but that gave me a mental concept of Andy, Terry and Ken doing a "full Monty" fund raiser for CP. Now, I want to get roaring drunk in hopes of forgetting that. MDB ^{(the MD is for Maryland, the B is for Bear)} 14:11, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

There must be some way we can get Terry to report on the "Teen Obama went to Mars!" story. --Psygremlin (talk) 14:12, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Wait wait wait... Project Pegasus sent Obama to Mars? Was Ben Grimm involved? MDB ^{(the MD is for Maryland, the B is for Bear)} 14:48, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

I wish I could say I'm surprised. The man is a hopeless case. rpeh •T•C•E• 14:15, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

I note Terry poses the question, "What if the Bush SecHomeSec had ordered 4.5 million rounds of ammunition and 150 suits of riot armor, experimented with drones over US soil, and had federal officers patrolling city bus and rail stations (when most city transit authorities have their own police!)?"

Well, Terry, you probably would have cheered loudly, and questioned the loyalty of anyone who dared oppose it. MDB ^{(the MD is for Maryland, the B is for Bear)} 18:58, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Gotta admit, I am curious as to how the 150 suits of riot armor (which by my estimation would be enough to cover less than 5% of any given county police force) factor into Obama's evil plan to become ruler of the USA. How exactly will a few dozen plastic shields and fireproof stab vests factor into his strategy? and fore all the misgivings about drones, given that the drones seem slated to do little than replace manned police helecopters in certain capacities, how will these help enforce atheist sharia law upon such macho gun obsessed conservatives like Pitchsphincter? Judge Holden^{The Judge Smiles} 19:29, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Presumably the United Nations, despite being a toothless waste of money, has been researching godless cybernetics and gene-splicing and has 150 supersoldiers for whom the armor will... no. I can't do it. There's nothing I can write that is any more loopy than Chuckarse's drivel. rpeh •T•C•E• 19:53, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

I like how Karajou's contribution to the discussion on Talk:Main Page^img offers a glimpse into the mind of a wingnut conspiracy theorist. Still probably not as scary as a glimpse into Terry's mind. --Tabrcg23 (talk) 01:45, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

I almost feel bad for Karajou. What a frightened little bunny he must be, knowing that every. single. person. is out too take away your freedoms. Although, I suppose it gets evened out since he doesn't have to worry about if what he thinks is true. Carlaugust (talk) 02:49, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

And a lovely bit of Godwin to boot. Генгис^{Our ignorance is God; what we know is science.} 07:21, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

I see our resident cold fusion crank...

... has found a new home at CP. It seems to be the pattern with these one issue nutters. They go to Wikipedia and get beaten in to submission, then they come here to see if they can peddle their crap to us, and finally they end up at Conservapedia, the place where editorial standards go to die. Makes me wonder how Maratrean is doing evangelising his fanwank religion. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 16:31, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

er, he's still here. Hipocrite (talk) 18:49, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

It will make CP more like a buffet of bullshit. Instead of just the conservagelical pseudosciences pushed by Andy co., you also get the bonus of cold fusion, Maratreanism, and JimJast-ian relativity crankery. Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 06:47, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Interesting. He seems like the sort of fellow who craves attention, whether it's positive or negative. And it's usually easier to get negative attention, as many a toddler knows. Doctor Dark (talk) 17:13, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Missy Franklin

She's also half-Canadian. Osaka Sun (talk) 06:35, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

And a Protestant. Aboriginal Noise ^{What the hell is that thing?} 15:24, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

According to Andy, her folks moves to the USA because Canada is hostile to capitalism and has socialised medicine.^img When I read things this stupid, Jesus kills a kitten. --Psygremlin (talk) 19:12, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Her folks moved from Canada because of a job transfer. They gave her a choice to swim for Canada. Aboriginal Noise ^{What the hell is that thing?} 19:25, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

My brain just exploded

So when US basketball thump Nigeria, it's bad sportsmanship, but when they struggle against Lithuania it's all Kobe Bryant's fault? Never mind that Andy's source says that other overrated star LeBron James pulled them through.^img Andy gets more unhinged with each passing day. --Psygremlin (talk) 20:14, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Lithuania has 1% of the population of the USA and 79% of it's population is Catholic. Andy could have twisted this much smoother if he had done some research. --K. (talk) 20:52, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

There > Their

Spelling and grammar^img is important, Ken. Ace^{The Rep Grows Bigger} 23:49, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

If an atheist did that, Ken would be telling us that atheists are stupid. --Andy Franklinson (talk) 00:29, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Also, is > are Ayzmo (talk) 01:11, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Spelling and grammar are important? No no no. Ace^{The Rep Grows Bigger} 04:55, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Our pleasure, Ken^img. rpeh •T•C•E• 06:37, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

FWIW, I'd always say "spelling and grammar are", because they're separate entities, which means you need the plural form. Google finds more cases of "are" than "is", but it's not a clear-cut thing. rpeh •T•C•E• 06:38, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Rock and roll is dead. Depends on whether we see the phrase as a singular entity or not. Spelling and grammar? Hmmmm, don't know. Let's have a fight! Ajkgordon (talk) 12:52, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Rock and roll is certainly singular: "rock" is a shorthand for rock and roll, and nobody ever talks about "roll" music. I've always considered spelling and grammar as two distinct items and I'm simply intrigued to see them treated as a gestalt entity. rpeh •T•C•E• 13:13, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Tsk. This is not true. Cheap Trick want to rock all night, while KISS want to rock AND roll all night, indicating that the rolling is an additional activity modifying the rocking. If any further evidence were required, Limp Bizkit apparently conduct the rolling absent the rocking. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 13:43, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Quite true Jeeves. Michael Jackson wanted to rock with you. Steve Winwood wanted to roll with it. Obviously 2 separable things. Theory of Practice "the standards of the site are ultimately an expression of the community makeup, and not a set of rules or policies." 13:46, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Let me guess, you like both types of music: country and western? rpeh •T•C•E• 14:41, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

I dislike all three. Генгис^{You have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you.} 15:10, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Wasn't referring to in this section title. In Ken's post it says, "then why is their current evangelism efforts so thoughtless and lackluster?" Is should be are since "efforts" is plural. Ayzmo (talk) 16:50, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

"Is they is or is they ain't so thoughtless? The way they seem lackluster makes me doubt." 184.61.193.172 (talk) 19:29, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

NPR to the rescue!!! Theory of Practice "Trampoline" is an Olympic sport now? 13:59, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Kendoll fails at life, #565343

In a move designed to destroy every irony meter on the continent, Kendoll asks "does evolution and atheism make you weird?^img" His case study? Mass hysteria in North Korea over the death of Kim Jong Il. I guess Kendoll doesn't go to church then, because it's exactly the same kind of mass hysteria practised at charismatic churches across the USA several times a week. Kendoll, don't you recognise a religious observance when you see one? --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 13:32, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

So Ken's QEer blog quotes VoxDay saying "As for the PZ Myers Memorial Debate, we are still in search of an atheist to champion the argument that the logic and evidence for the nonexistence of gods is stronger than the logic and evidence for the existence of gods." GODS? Генгис^{Is the Pope a Catholic?} 15:08, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

As opposed to the mass hysteria over the death of the pope? No wierdness there.--Thunderstruck^{A Bastard Poster, For Bastard People} 16:40, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Weirdness in the Christian religion? How can you say this is anything but rational and normal?--BMcP - Just an astronomy guy 18:36, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

I'll be sending you the bill for cleansing my laptop of vomit first thing Monday morning. Генгис^{Gum disease} 19:12, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Great. First thing I see on my PC in the morning is creepy Benny Hinn. I hate you forever. --Psygremlin (talk) 09:07, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Andy's Happy Talk

Cheese and rice, he must be a treat at a dinner party.^img I love how this insight came about in regards to the Olympic coverage. I don't particularly enjoy the inane shit some of these guys talk about, but I don't particularly want to hear them talking about hell either. What a sad little man. Hiphopopotamus (talk) 20:46, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

I guess in Andy's mind it should sound like this *ahem*: "And Phelps starts for his last swim of his career, the swimmer with the most medals in the history of the Olympics shouldn't underarchieve here! The only option that doesn't reveal him to be a secret atheist will be to set another world record! But he doesn't he isn't fast enouth! Outside of the Aquatics Center we already here the mighty rawl of good as a thunderstorm destroys the communist infested Big Ben and kills the heathens of this damned country! But Phelps isn't fast enough and there behind him is the bottomo of the pool already breaking up revealing the fires of eternal hell! Phelps doesn't satisfy God, nobody can! Phelps is fighting against the drag from the hell opening just behing him while the Center already is field with vapor, and there is Phelps trying to swim without water! Now, holding on to the little bottom of the pool that still is there, but he can't make it! And... And... And that's it the fires of hell has just killed Micheal Phelps and proven that he is an atheist, a heathen, a sinner damned to eternal torture in hell. Hallelujah! Hallelujah! Hallelujah! — Now for the 200 butterfly semifinals..." --K. (talk) 21:10, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

How on earth could you reasonably bring up hell in olympic commentary? Unless someone loses an event because they dove into the crowd and ate a child, expecting commentators to bring up hell in any context is ridiculous. X Stickman (talk) 21:18, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

I believe Andy's olympics coverage would be along the lines of "And the plucky young man from Japan wins gold in the weight lifting! An astonishing feat for someone in his weight class. But he shouldn't celebrate too soon, because statistically speaking, he's probably going to hell. TURN OFF YOUR TV AND READ THE BIBLE, LIBERALS!" --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 21:24, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

I... I think this is the most bizarre Andy has been lately. And considering the 2012 Olympics article, that's saying a lot. Vulpius (talk) 00:52, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Oh, yeah, the media's full of no end of bloody happy talk. The news is a laugh a minute these days.

This would seem to be further evidence, if any were needed, that Andy doesn't actually enjoy anything. There's too much happiness on the telly when we should all be really miserable because there really is a Hell! (And we're all going there, except for Andy, Tim Tebow and a few other uderrated outspoken Christians).--Spud (talk) 09:40, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

I can only assume that Andy wants all TV to be Trinity Broadcasting, populated by red-faced Scottish fire and brimstone preachers? It's a bizarre statement, even by his standards. Clearly he feels that everything must be about religion all the time. --Psygremlin (talk) 09:57, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Psy, you're forgetting - Scotland is part of atheistic Britain with a history of supporting the homosexual agenda^img, so why would the US have such limp-wristed, liberal 'preachers' from such a country on TV? 86.136.4.190 (talk) 12:33, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Oh god.... I made the mistake of looking at the list, and finding out not only that "The Greasy Spoon" is a conservative term, but that it reflects "biblical scientific foreknowledge about the digestive system". I know this has been said ad nauseum, but how the fuck is andy this fucking stupid? Judge Holden^{The Judge Smiles} 12:29, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

My guess - practice. 86.136.4.190 (talk) 12:33, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Andy Murray wins!

I'm guessing all those atheists were praying for him.

heh, I could probably nail Andy to my ceiling and use him as a fan, he'll be spinning so much. --Psygremlin (talk) 15:58, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Who's underachieving now, bitch? --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 15:57, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Or perhaps I should say, Mystery: Did America's lack of socialised health care cause Roger Federer to lose to Andy Murray. Or perhaps just a plain "fuck you Andy, you're a dick" will suffice. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 16:06, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

That^img doesn't look like spinning at all. --K. (talk) 18:10, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Just had to point this out: Question: "will one of the Greatest Conservative Sports Stars -- such as Novak Djokovic -- win the gold medal? Will Andy Murray of atheistic Britain underperform?". Answer: (1) No and (2) No! Take that, Schlafly. The Real James Brown (talk) 18:19, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

We may be increasingly atheistic but our national anthem is "GOD save the Queen". That explains our success to date. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 18:33, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

He... he wouldn't do that would he?! He has already gone to insanity and beyond in ranting about how atheistic, liberal and worthless the UK is... so there is just NO WAY IN HELL he is gonna just fucking retcon tha....fuck it hes gonna do it isn't he? Judge Holden^{The Judge Smiles} 23:42, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

An adequate day for Atheistic Britain

OK, I'll admit to a certain amount of jingoistic pride but Team GB aren't quite fulfilling someone's expectations. Most golds won in a single track session, first men's 10,000 metres ever, first long jump since the sixties and poster girl Jesse Innes, three personal bests in seven events to storm to victory. Yay! Yay! and thrice yay!

OK, I'll calm down now. On second thoughts, it doesn't get any better than this. Yay! Bad Faith (talk) 21:59, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Never mind all that bollocks. We lost another penalty shoot out! UNDERACHIEVEMENT! --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 22:22, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Quarter final penalty loss, surprise bloody surprise. And the 10000m winner is nationally Somalian! But seriously, there's got to be a medal for how he's going to twist this into an underachievement. I was in Hyde Park today, and when Ennis won the hept, red white and blue streamer cannons went off. Mo Farah go a blast too. --جئت ورأيت أنا القرف ^{gross, isn't it?} 22:37, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Oops, excuse my increasingly atheistic typo over Jesse Ennis name. Bad Faith (talk) 22:53, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Andy's upcoming twist is obvious. He's claimed that the atheist effect is primarily in team sports, so GB's soccer losses are all that matters. Duh. Phiwum (talk) 23:22, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Didn't Andy describe rowing as the ultimate team sport? We've done quite adequately there as well. Bad Faith (talk) 23:32, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Nah, he thinks "rowing is great exercise." It's doesn't require dynamic teamwork like that socialist soccer." Hiphopopotamus (talk) 01:07, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

At this point it wouldn't be shocking if Andy complained about Ennis...being a woman. Osaka Sun (talk)

Personally I have been embarrassed no end by Britain's underachievement in this Olympics and the complete shambles of the spectacle and organisation. Andy's schadenfreude really hurts. Генгис^{Gum disease} 09:21, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

I see that on CP's 2012 Olympics page, underachievement by atheistic countries in team sports was seperated from underachievement by those countries in general on July 31, not by Andy unfortuanately, just by some little suck-up. I wouldn't be surprised if the non-team sports section were later to disappear altogether. Keep shifting those golaposts, Conservapedia!--Spud (talk) 09:59, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Yes, it's been a complete disaster. I was in London yesterday. All the soldiers were threatening, the laughingly-named "Olympic Ambassadors" were surly, the thousands of foreigners milling around were abused verbally even physically by aggressive locals, the streets are all over-flowing with socialist propaganda, Team GB should be at the top of the medal table with its host nation advantage, the London 2012 colours of mauves pinks and purples look decidedly homosexual, there are no posters of Jesus running the 100m, all the London attractions are shut for maintenance, and a Muslim atheist Briton won the 10,000m but only because nobody else was trying. Worst Olympics ever? Just as Conservapedia predicted. Muppets. Ajkgordon (talk) 11:41, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

...Did that start out serious and transition to sarcasm in the middle, or was it sarcastic right from the start? See, this is why sarcasm tags are a big help. --_transResident Transfan^form! 15:15, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

All sarcasm. London yesterday was buzzing. Absolutely brilliant! Ajkgordon (talk) 16:28, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Having been to two events so far, there's a big difference between Olympics London and the rest of London. The rest of London is quieter than usual.London Grump (talk) 18:03, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Of course not, darling. It's August, nobody of quality is in the metrop. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 18:59, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Plus the silly season has started. Darkmind1970 (talk) 00:13, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Let's all remember that Jess has a black father and a white mother, I'm counting down until Andy starts asking to see her birth certificate. -- Iscariot ^{Andy Schlafly for Congress 2012!} 01:07, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

As an Australian, most Brits would be aware that for me, writing the following is less pleasant than a prostate exam, but here goes - Team GB, you have kicked major arse. A massive "well done" all around. You have truly wiped the floor with us at this Olympics. VOX^HUMANA 01:57, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Well home advantage counts for a lot as does massive investment in elite sport. Still it's very gratifying. Many people thought Team GB had set the bar very high four years ago finishing fourth in the medal table and it would be difficult to repeat. Still, it's atheistic liberal Britain remember, so all the events where we've won a medal are obscure and all the winning competitors will be tested positive for drugs anyway. Deny this and lose all credibility. Ajkgordon (talk) 10:05, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Oh, and I must admit to checking in at The Age website every now and again. Sorry! Ajkgordon (talk) 10:05, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

JPratt finally catches on

Ken is a troll.^img -- Iscariot ^{Andy Schlafly for Congress 2012!} 01:13, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Why, because he's randomly predicting that evolution will fall in four decades, in the middle of a conversation about Clint Eastwood's political leanings? Haven't we all done that at some point in our lives?--Thunderstruck^{A Bastard Poster, For Bastard People} 01:45, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Gone, and Capturebot failed. Did you manually screencap? --Sasayaki (talk) 03:38, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Does the Pope shit in the woods? -- Iscariot ^{Andy Schlafly for Congress 2012!} 10:31, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Oscar Pistorius

Even though he finished last in his Semifinal heat, can we just take a moment to recognize how cool and inspirational it was for a double-amputee to even make it that far? That's fucking incredible. And how about that "increasingly atheistic British" crowd giving the underdog an incredible round of applause? Well done Brits. Well done. Hiphopopotamus (talk) 03:36, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, a semi-final spot puts him in the top 16 in the world. That is quite simply, astonishing. I can't even bicycle that fast. VOX^HUMANA 04:00, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

I don't like it. It might sound harsh, but people need to run on their own limbs, not on artificial ones. I would not have allowed him to compete. --Damo^Hi 06:07, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

I too have my doubts about how acceptable this is, especially since it was a 400m event where endurance comes into play more than a shorter sprint. X Stickman (talk) 06:11, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

While it's a fair comment, this dispute has more or less been resolved - if you want you can review the five years of testing, arbitration and court cases that preceded his appearance in 2012. He was denied entry into Beijing, but in 2009 it was finally concluded that his prosthetics gave him no advantage. (Plus it's not like he had his feet cut off just so he could cheat at running.) VOX^HUMANA 06:16, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

As an avid sports follower I am aware of the all the process that went into this decision. I still think it was wrong to allow him to compete. I thought it important that someone point this out on this page before the praises got too gushing. Damo^Hi 06:19, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Fair enough - your opinion is no less/more valid (take your pick) than anyone else's :) At least this argument takes our mind off what happened in Wisconsin. VOX^HUMANA 06:33, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

(EC) I don't agree at all. There's absolutely no advantage to having artificial limbs. I don't know if you've ever known someone who is an amputee, but they're actually kind of at a disadvantage. Everything requires more work and more effort. So for a DOUBLE amputee to make it to the semifinals at the Olympics, it's quite an accomplishment. Not to mention the inspiration that it provides for people who are disabled or also amputees. I just thought it was pretty cool and worthy of our respect and acknowledgment. Hiphopopotamus (talk) 06:39, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Actually, it's being a DOUBLE amputee that gives him such a huge advantage. Unsurprisingly, the first complaints against his unfair advantage were by single leg amputee runners. Editor at CP^{mały książe} 07:21, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

I'm really torn. While part of me is glad that he was able to compete on such a global scale, another part recognizes the danger of setting up this precedent. I was reading an article from an actual Olympian who made the great point of what happens when technology improves and we start to see an advantage? It's gonna be an interested debate to track. SirChuckB^{DMorris for new Jinx!} 09:05, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

As precedents go, I don't think having your legs chopped off to compete in the olympics is ever going to be a popular one. I also highly doubt any unpowered artificial legs are ever going to be as good as the real thing, and anything power assisted would doubtless be banned. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 09:54, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

If he had won, I think there might be some cause to wonder if he has an advantage, but seeing as he didn't, I think we can all sit back and admire the courage and dedication of the man. Not to forget Natalie du Toit, our one legged swimmer who competed at Beijing. --Psygremlin (talk) 10:49, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

I feel it's like Muralitharan's bowling action [*]. I'm content that people who know a very great deal more about sports science than I do have ruled that Pistorius's blades are OK. The Real James Brown (talk) 11:42, 6 August 2012 (UTC) [*] Specialist point for the half of the world that does understand cricket.

And yes, his courage and determination are inspirational. The Real James Brown (talk) 12:08, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

The track itself has been tweaked to give faster times and in Beijing many swimmers wore synthetic suits (now banned) that gave them an advantage. There is a possibility that the technology of prosthetics might give an advantage over certain distances, but they have to be weighed up against the disadvantages of not being able to use starting blocks (for example). Until prosthetics-equipped athletes start beating all-comers on a consistent basis then the question of eligibility is a moot point. Генгис^{Is the Pope a Catholic?} 12:16, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

And kudos to Kirani James of Grenada who swapped name tags with Pistorius. Генгис^{Is the Pope a Catholic?} 12:24, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

I imagine we're not too far away from a scenario in which prosthetic legs can give an advantage in jumping, if not running, I'll be curious to see how this is handled. DickTurpis (talk) 12:45, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

This argrument actually kind of reminds me of the gay marriage argument. "If we allow people to run with prosthetic legs (marry people of the same sex), then pretty soon people will be running with rocket-powered skates (marrying goats)." As people have noted, the Olympic Committee has faced this before with the supersuits. A group of rational people were able to sit together and say "Hey, you know what, this isn't really fair." And it's not like Pistorius ran a 40 second 400. His strides were all of (Olympicially speaking) average length and speed. In conclusion - I'm glad they let the poor guy race, and when a guy comes in with pogo-sticks for legs, we'll tell him no. Carlaugust (talk) 13:18, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

. Bad Faith (talk) 13:24, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Okay, so we're covered if this guy shows up in Rio. MDB ^{(the MD is for Maryland, the B is for Bear)} 15:32, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Disagreed, regardless of any animated gifs. I'm not disputing that he's a great athlete, but the fact is that running on prosthetics is just a completely different discipline than running the "normal" 100 meter sprint. In a world like the Olympics where all the sports are highly formalized to make the playing field as equal as possible, I don't think he should be able to compete in the same category. Now I'd love to see a separate category where everyone wears the prostethics, but I don't think it should be mixed. Also, it would be nice to see a similar separate event for swimmers who use flippers instead of feet, in which the paraplegic also have a fair chance. --GTac (talk) 13:43, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

GTac, I understand your objection. I just think that since it has not been demonstrated that his prosthetics give him an advantage, there's no reason to seperate him. If he had prosthetic hands, there wouldn't be an objection to him running, because they would not give him an advantage. If it can be shown that his blades give him an x second increase in his 400m, then I would firmly be on your side (and, since I have done next to no research, I am open minded to a change in opinion given appropriate citations). Until then, however, I think sending someone his is undoubtably an Olympic caliber athlete to the Special Olympics is kind of a slap in the face. Carlaugust (talk) 14:03, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Slight correction to the above: that would be the Paralympics. The Special Olympics are something completely different. — Unsigned, by: ORavenhurst / talk^{Do You Believe That?} 14:08, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Good poing; Paralymipcs. As an aside, I just want to say - I'm glad we can all discuss this in a calm manner. While we may not argee, we're not calling each other Hitler. I think you all have valid points, and have expressed them very clearly, and I happen to have different thoughts on the issue. More of this would make the world a hugely better </sentimental rant> Carlaugust (talk) 14:22, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Wow, where did the Hitler come from? Anyways, I think it's completely besides the point to discuss whether the prosthetic legs are an advantage or not. I think it's not about advantage/disadvantage, the problem is that (unlike athletes with a prosthetic hand) prosthetic legs provide the athlete with a completely DIFFERENT form of running, which should be classified in a different sporting discipline. I don't even think it has to be a Paralympics event, since "normal" athletes should be able to wear similar prostheses too(1). It would be like volleyball and beach volleyball, I don't think one is better or stronger than the other, they are just different disciplines which require different strengths from the athletes..

(1)On a sidenote, this would also get us closer to Monofin races, something I've always wanted to see. --GTac (talk) 15:16, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

1) The Hitler reference came because I was reading one of Karajou's posts. Dude loves him some Hitler.

2) So, I think our disagreement comes down to the fact that you think prosthetics make the race different enough that it should be seperated off, and I don't see as strong of a distinction. I think that's a fair place to stop the argument, since it's pretty subjective after that, and I honestly don't know enough about running.

3) Monofins look awesome, and I would kill a man to see them added to the Olympics. Carlaugust (talk) 18:43, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

GTac is right to say that it's clearly different from the way able-bodied people run a foot face. The actual experimental data says that these prostheses offer a considerable advantage in terms of energy efficiency on a straight line run, if Bolt somehow sprouted these at the 25 metre mark he'd have probably beaten nine seconds for the hundred which is crazy. Pistorius argued (successfully) that the experimental data didn't prove he necessarily had an advantage over able-bodied athletes in the 400 metres because the prosthetic limbs make his start slower and the experiment didn't investigate his cornering, but notice that nobody did any further science. What we have are hard numbers which show a concrete advantage during one phase of the race plus a lot of arguing about potential downsides in other phases, and the practical result that he wasn't faster than a handful of the world's fastest men over four hundred metres this time. Overall I sympathise with GTac's position and I think it's unfortunate that Pistorius's appeal was successful though I'm glad for the man as an individual that he got his chance. 82.69.171.94 (talk) 20:06, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Conservative triumph!

Seems Wikipedia is down (Downforeveryone agrees) - soon the masses will be flocking to Conservapedia for their information! --Psygremlin (talk) 13:39, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

I'm reminded of that quote during the SOPA blackout: "Wikipedia's blackout is a frightening glimpse into a web where no knowledge is allowed. So is Conservapedia, which remained online." (or words to that effect - somebody with Google-fu needs to find that) --Psygremlin (talk) 13:46, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Video games, redux.

At least he waited a day this time. Theory of Practice "Trampoline" is an Olympic sport now? 15:10, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

"Video game style massacre". I don't believe Andy has ever played a video game. X Stickman (talk) 15:15, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

If anybody over there actually played video games, they'd realize that something 'video game' style would probably have to have inherent rewards or at least a goal in mind. Even in Grand Theft Auto, shooting everybody has penalties or otherwise non-goal, non-reward results. Sandbox games usually have self-imposed goals to very clear desirable results... such as not dying or succeeding within the game. When somebody is just a whacko, nobody's going to be rewarding them for such a shooting, there is no framework of even an open-ended scenario. Ironically, the gud christian boyz across the pond soldiering up those dirty brown people are probably doing things more video-game style than a crazy person shooting people in Wisconsin. The closest thing I can think of would be that a crazy gunman would be doing something griefer-style on a horrible macabre scale... and the whole point of griefers is that they abuse the game's intended framework or capability to torment others, rather than actually playing the game (spawn camping, filling everybody's minecraft base with TNT or sponges...) ±KnightOfTL;DR^{critical thinking is the key to success!} 15:23, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Sure. It's video games that taught him how to kill. How DARE you blame the army! --Psygremlin (talk) 15:27, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Joke noted! But if you think about it, the army works in a very structured, goal/objective-oriented manner with very controlled conditions and even procedure for unknown environments that make it very similar to a game scenario. Then again the military is America's penis honor and righteous might! It can do no wrong!±KnightOfTL;DR^{free guybrush threepwood! no new taxes! down with porcelain!} 15:42, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

I wonder if the fact that the army regularly uses video game simulation to train (to the point of commissioning games from developers) is lost on him. I'm sure he'd try to spin that in somewhere. "Video game training in the army is corrupting our heroes and turning them into domestic terrorists! See?!" Q0 (talk) 21:34, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

I'm rather suprised he didn't take the "white supremacist" = "Nazi" = "Socialist" = "Liberal" spin. On the other hand, the shooter killed non-white non-Christians, so it's of course the evil liberal media who are spinning this. Wait for it, when he'll claim that arguing for gun control after two shootings in 16 days with 19 victims with over 60 victims is abusing the situation for political gain. --K. (talk) 16:13, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

I'm just waiting for Terry's take on it. I'm sure he'll find some way to make this an operation of Obama special ops squad for the purposes of taking away guns. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 16:23, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Oh dear.

Andy's homeschooled sweetheart, Gabby Douglas, came last in the uneven bars... beaten by a probably commie Russian, a definitely commie Chinese and an atheistic Brit. How long until gymnastics becomes an obscure sport, practiced by the upper middle class? --Psygremlin (talk) 15:45, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

I'd really love to see him declare gyms "elitist"... 99.50.98.145 (talk) 16:04, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Of course they are! You can only enter gyms if you have those insider 'badges' given out by the leader of each previous gym! If you don't have them, there's usually some guy out front that keeps you from entering, telling you you aren't tough enough... and sometimes even some lunatic at the edge of town that keeps you from leaving until you've gotten the gym's badge! You can't even light up a cave or get past a skinny tree without permission from the gyms' leaders! I guess everybody who just can't get into the gyms are piss out of luck. What's up with that? The big brass up top are even called the elite four?! How much more elitist can gyms get?!±KnightOfTL;DR^{going galt: the literal crazy train} 18:27, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Are these the same gyms where us overweight atheists go to train and delay the amount of time it takes for us to get to Heaven become more healthy to live longer, more productive lives? Because none of the gyms I've been to will turn down the common person who has the money to pay a membership fee—not in this economy. Also, being anti-gym is not the same as supporting an Anti-Gym. -- Seth Peck (talk) 20:06, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

IN A WORLD where you can't Fly, Surf, Dive, Rock Climb, or even Cut down trees without carrying the right gym badge, one "are you a boy or a girl?" will shake the very foundations society is built upon! When the only schools and places of learning are devoted to helping you compete at the gym, hospitals are only for recovering after you've been bruised and beaten, and every store focuses specifically on items that help you earn more and more gym badges, it can seem impossible to break through the bureaucracy. But this fall, in the color and/or gemstone themed adventure of the year, our hero will do just that. Herman Cain 2012: a story of friendship, modest means, and fighting against the odds! Q0 (talk) 21:28, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Well, there's a surprise.

Politics interferes with objectivity^img says JPratt, blithely unaware of the kiloton scale irony meter explosion happening just behind him. Tell you what, JPratt, you tell the Republicans to stop trashing the conclusions of scientists and endorsing god-fuelled nonsense instead, and perhaps some more scientists might be inclined to vote Republican. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 19:08, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

JPratt is too dim to realise what he's just posted. I remember Stephen Fry writing about complaints by the tories that all the intelligent people were on the left; this is the same sort of thing in an American context. rpeh •T•C•E• 19:27, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Spin time Andy

Come on Assfly, that great Christian adoption success story, Nick Delpopolo, was thrown out of the Olympics for testing positive for Mary Jane. Not many of the reports I've read mention that the number one Judoka in his weight class in all of the US went to Bergen Catholic High School.

Shall we take bets on the spin? It's certain he's not going to complain about Nicky boy's schooling not being mentioned, the hypocritical shit that he is. -- Iscariot ^{Andy Schlafly for Congress 2012!} 22:59, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

If he wasn't a raging right-wing Fundie, he'd point out how dumb it is to nail some for a performence HANDYCAPING substance. --142.179.61.214 (talk) 23:52, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Ken fails on Yahoo Answers (Again)

On Conservapedia's mainpage left Ken claims "American Christian confounds atheists"^img, which in reality is Ken himself under another obvious pseudonym. On the actual link is Ken asking what atheists will do since their numbers are supposedly in decline, thinking he has all atheists behind the eight ball with his ever so clever thinking, (in reality just a link back to his personal QE blog with the same poorly researched claims). The results are predictably hilarious as he is repeatedly raked over the coals as he is continuously shown wrong in both his premise and in the facts, all the while being ruthlessly mocked. Fun stuff.--BMcP - Just an astronomy guy 08:45, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

The minute I saw the headline, I though "Ah, Ken's Yahoo-spamming again." What a sad man. Also "Thoughtful and effective Christian evangelism vs. inept atheism evangelism" - Ken, I hope your English teacher rises from the grave and murders you. More proof that the whole "people pay me to write" is another of your fantasies. --Psygremlin (talk) 09:12, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

DeMyer's Law: The minute you start making your own evidence to support your arguments, you have lost the argument. --K. (talk) 10:27, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

So is that going to be DeMyer's Fourth Law or DeMyer's Minus Oneth Law? --جئت ورأيت أنا القرف ^{gross, isn't it?} 10:51, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Ken, you are a lying sack of shit. Not one single atheist was "confounded" by your question. Now, why don't you sock up as "TheAtheist" or some other equally unconvincing name and post, "Oh, no atheism is in decline. I must be wrong! Save, me Jeremus!" then sock up again and vote for that as the best answer over and over again? Go on. You know you were going to do that anyway.--Spud (talk) 13:12, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Wow, Ken, epic fail there! Darkmind1970 (talk) 14:56, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Has anyone ever said what pathetic loser Ken is? </rhetorical> Pongo^{Orangutans are sceptical} 16:28, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

anyone who has to stoop to trolling Yahoo! Answers has lost the game argument.

And all reference to the American Christian who confounded atheists on Yahoo Answers (by getting forty-one of them to laugh at him and tell him that a creationist blog is not a reliable source) has disappeared without trace not only from the Main page but from its talk page too.--Spud (talk) 10:49, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Ken wins another debate! Ole! Ole! Ole!^img --Psygremlin (talk) 11:52, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

This is how Ken seems to spend his free time. Engaging in circle jerks on Yahoo! Answers. I guess it's only fitting that he'd spend time there. Unlike Conservapedia, this site full of brainless idiotsthe Best of the Public gets tons and tons of traffic because it doesn't ban everyone on sight. Ochotonaprinceps^{not a pokémon} 10¹³ points 14:01, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

"Why do atheists constantly bash God but are eerily silent on Satan?" That must be amongst the dumbest thing I have ever see Ken utter. Here's a thought Ken - try getting Satanism taught in schools and then see what atheists say. --PsyGremlinParlez! 14:09, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

To give Ken the absolute minimum fairness, he didn't actually ask that question, he just answered it. He answered with a Creationist high-five, but still, we can't blame Ken for every bit of stupidity there. And pretty much almost all the other answers tore it apart as usual. Naturally, the questioner picked Ken as the best answer for being a good circle-jerk partner. Ochotonaprinceps^{not a pokémon} 10¹³ points 14:26, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Oh, and to compound it, Ken's had his stupid shit deleted on multiple occasions off Yahoo! Answers as well. Note that this is a Google Cache copy of his question ("Why did my question get deleted did I make the evolutnists cry?") because it was also deleted, presumably for giving the same link that likely caused Ken to violate the community standards with the first deleted question. Ken's not used to being on the business end of the delete/block/oversight stick. Bonus: The linked site is straight out of Web Design 101 circa 1995. Ochotonaprinceps^{not a pokémon} 10¹³ points 14:49, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Okay, this one takes the cake. Ken spreads unvarnished blatant homophobia on Yahoo! Answers. Ochotonaprinceps^{not a pokémon} 10¹³ points 14:54, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Swimming: an obscure event.

Awesome spin from Andy. Theory of Practice "Trampoline" is an Olympic sport now? 23:38, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

What atheists don't understand is that the fact that Phelps is an atheist communist liberal[*] implies that any event he wins is by definition obscure. (Presumably it was a different M.Phelps who attracted an audience of 10 million or thereabouts in the UK alone to see him win his last-ever swimming race.) [*] i.e. a fact in what passes for Schlafly's mind. The Real James Brown (talk) 23:46, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Since the USA won the majority of their medals in the pool, is Andy saying the USA is shit at real sports? --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 00:06, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Holy crap, Andy has just cemented my wife's undying hatred - my adopted stepson did a lot of swimming, and the sheer amount of effort and training he put into it was astounding according to her. Darkmind1970 (talk) 00:10, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

I'd be really curious to know what sports Idiot doesn't consider "obscure". I know, anything that a "Conservative Sports Star" wins, but it would be great to get an idea before the outcomes are determined. Hiphopopotamus (talk) 00:33, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Evidently, the 100m final is the greatest sporting event of the decade. I really don't follow the Olympics. Is there any reason at all that this particular footrace is a greater event than, oh, let's say the 2009 Pittsburgh Penguins winning the Stanley Cup (which was totally freakin' awesome)? Phiwum (talk) 00:43, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

I see now that it's merely the greatest Olympic event of the decade. Phiwum (talk) 00:44, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

It's WAY more impressive than an American winning the most medals of any Olympian ever, because liberals. I know I'm not alone in having the Olympics bring about at bit of jingoism in me, but while I root for Americans, I don't root against athletes from any other country. They've all worked hard and to see that work pay off and a lifelong dream realized is what makes the Olympics so special and exciting. If an American wins gold, I'm happy for them and for the country. If a Chinese athlete wins gold, good for them and their country. If a Brit wins, good for them and their countries. I just cannot possibly fathom how this fuckstick can reconcile actively rooting against Americans because they don't share his increasingly narrow ideology. He's such a fucking asshole. Hiphopopotamus (talk) 01:24, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Meh. If Karajou were competing in some Olympic shooting competition I'd actively root against him, even though he's technically my countryman. I don't root for Americans more than anyone else anyway, in fact, I generally prefer they don't win. I know as an atheist I'm not supposed to support the underdog, but I do anyway, which means rooting for non-Americans, in general. Not that I actually give a shit about the Olympics one way or the other. I can't blame Andy for not supporting an athlete simply because they happened to be from the same country he's from, though as someone who's allegedly ultra-patriotic (something I certainly am not) it does seem like he really should be. DickTurpis (talk) 01:48, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ Well swimming is clearly a trivial sport, I mean it was only added to the Olympic calendar in 1896. And while it pains me (as an Australian) to acknowledge an American swimmer (for those unaware, swimming is a HUGE deal here, the national championships is on prime-time TV, swimmers do cereal commercials, the whole shebang), there's no denying the fact that Phelps is simply the greatest swimmer of all time, and arguably the greatest Olympian of all time. VOX^HUMANA

Of course, but if Andy doesn't want to root for him because he's a potsmoker then he doesn't have to. It might seem odd for someone as allegedly super-patriotic as Andy rooting against an American, but that's his choice. Dismissing Phelps' wins as an obscure sport is ridiculous, we all know. That said, as has been pointed out elsewhere, swimming does offer many more opportunities for medals than most sports, there being over 20 competitions to compete in. A tennis player, for example, can get what, two? Singles and doubles? Not sure, but it's a hell of a lot less than a swimmer, so comparing these sports isn't entirely fair. DickTurpis (talk) 02:14, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

(EC)I certainly don't fall into the "'Merica, Fuck Yeah!" category and I don't mind people criticizing the shit out of it, because fuck all, there's a shit-ton to criticize, I still do like America and I like the Olympics a lot too. So they bring my national pride to the surface more that just about anything else. You don't care about the Olympics? Cool, I get that. But Idiot is trying to pretend he's all about sports these days, and he's such an out of control nationalist that this active rooting against Americans makes me hate him even more. No, he doesn't NEED to root for Phelps. I could choose not to root for Gabby Douglas because she "gives glory to God" and I don't, but I would never do that. She's a sweet kid, with a great story, who realized her ultimate dream and brought about quite a bit of national pride for America. I'm proud of her and happy for her. Idiot's just a fucking asshole. Hiphopopotamus (talk) 02:36, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Totally irrelevant aside - if you ever visit Australia, it is worth knowing that over here the phrase "to root" means "to engage in sexual intercourse with". This had lead to some very amusing exchanges with young Americans girls who choose to innocently expound on how much they root for the Dallas Cowboys (as an example). VOX^HUMANA 02:41, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Ha! Now that you mention it I remember having that conversation with an Australian a few years ago about this exact cultural difference. Hiphopopotamus (talk) 02:51, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Re winning medals, you're correct as compared to tennis, but IMO not so much as compared to Athletics. There are more track and field events than swimming events, so an amazing athlete could win the 100, 200, 400 individual, the 100 and 400 relays, plus the hurdles, long jump and a few others for a similar massive medal haul. (Carl Lewis did come close to this sort of achievement). The fact that Phelps is so dominant at some many different distances and strokes (in an era of such specialization to boot) is what makes him legendary. VOX^HUMANA 02:23, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Right. While I think it's pretty cool that an American did it (because I am too) I would still feel really lucky to have witnessed such an historic career if he was an Australian or an Israeli or a Soviet (I forget, do they still exist?) The point is, we saw an individual win 22 medals including 18 Gold medals. That's awesome and Andy's an asshole for trying to diminish that. Hiphopopotamus (talk) 02:48, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Phellps' sport is obscure but Missy Whatshername's isn't. Great Doublethink Andy. Sphincter (talk) 03:25, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Obscure=Elitist, I guess. Unless you're a Protestant attending a Catholic school, maybe. "Phelps is not 'the undisputed greatest Olympian in history.' Phelps competed in an upper-middle class sport inaccessible to most Americans, let alone most of the world. The swimming events (and medals) are repetitious to the point of being absurd."^img Says the man whose family money allowed him to attend two prestigious universities. But I guess Andy believes a "Communist gymnast" is more impressive. A question though, which successful Olympic athletes haven't been part of an elite training program? Idiot. Hiphopopotamus (talk) 03:52, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Updated to include the above load gem. C®ackeЯ 04:16, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Yes we need more of those sports intended for the common person, like dressage, archery, and yachting. VOX^HUMANA 03:56, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

I guess you could make the argument that, outside of the olympics, swimming is fairly obscure for the majority of people. But that'd apply to basically every olympic event other than football and tennis. X Stickman (talk) 04:01, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Basketball is pretty big globally now as well, there are professional leagues in Europe and Asia (it's the second biggest sport in Turkey after football). Bafflingly, baseball was dropped because only 4 countries play it seriously, yet handball was kept (despite only being played in Scandinavia AFAIK). And Rugby is being reintroduced in 2016. (None of the preceding contradicts your point in any way, obviously). VOX^HUMANA 04:14, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

As much as I'm a Baseball fan and slightly pissed about the IOC decission, that handball is only played in Scandinavia is just not true. If you take at a look just at the teams this year you see countries from all around the world, like Tunisia, Angola, Brazil, Argentina and South Korea. And that's just the ones that qualified. True it's most popular in Scandinavia and Germany (2nd after football), but France is the current world champion and Spain's club have on occassions beaten up on the rest of Europe. It is an international sport, just dominated by teams from Europe, but take away Brazil and Argentina from soccer and it would the exact same thing. --K. (talk) 07:21, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

What the what?^img Exactly whom (or is it who?) would be able to beat Phelps? Sure Phelps wouldn't be able to beat Kevin Durant is a game of hoops, but I doubt KD could beat Phelps in the Butterfly. Idiot. Hiphopopotamus (talk) 04:26, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

So swimming is the sport of the upper middle class. Does that mean Andy favours sports that the common man can play, like socialistic soccer? --Psygremlin (talk) 10:41, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

First I've heard of swimming being "upper middle class". (1) In the UK swimming is, if anything, a working class sport because it's relatively cheap (most swimming pools are owned or managed by local councils and offer generous season tickets to regular users). (2) Phelps's dad was a state trooper and his mother a middle school headteacher. I didn't know that policemen and teachers counted as upper-middle class is the US of A. (3) Can I say "Idiot!" again? The Real James Brown (talk) 11:37, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Depends on what income levels you use to define "upper middle class". I can tell you Phelps is from the Baltimore suburb of Towson and, while it's not exactly Beverly Hills, would be considered a pretty comfortable place to live. MDB ^{(the MD is for Maryland, the B is for Bear)} 12:09, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

The Best Of The Public, that's who. Remember, in Andyland anyone can participate in the Olympics. Vulpius (talk) 12:57, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

This is what happens when you try to pass off a blog as an encyclopedia. If Andy just admitted that his "thing on the internet" was a blog, he could say, "I don't like Michael Phelps. I think he's an atheist" and that would obviously just be his opinion. Having labeled his shite site as an encyclopedia, he's forced to make increasingly ludicrous claims that explain why his opinion is the truth and then has to keep jumping through hoops to defend those claims. And can I just say, Who's underachieving now? In your fucking face, Schlafly!--Spud (talk) 12:30, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

I may not have been paying attention but I learn from TOW that his full name is Michael FRED Phelps. Why is the lamestream media not mentioning this? Генгис^{You have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you.} 12:39, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Yeah... can you put those goalposts over there? Fine. rpeh •T•C•E• 20:47, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

If the media were fawning over a non-Catholic-school-going female, it would be considered feminism/Title IX/other things considered bad by Andy standards. But because Ms. Franklin is a Catholic-school-going female, she is underrepresented. Aboriginal Noise ^{What the hell is that thing?} 13:24, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Romney vs Obama

An unbiased opinion from Terrence Chuckarse. "This cute fluffy kitten would have died without Mitt Romney" vs "Obama only eats aborted fetuses". What's really scary is that Flingbooty probably believes this is a genuine comparison. rpeh •T•C•E• 19:35, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

It's Roseann Salantiri, not Terry. MDB ^{(the MD is for Maryland, the B is for Bear)} 19:40, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Boy, that's a slimy photo. Vulpius (talk) 20:24, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Fuck. The number of times I've complained when somebody credits Terrence when it's really Unsanitary, Skin Disease or someone else... and I've done it myself. As a penance I will read the next ten of Ken's

QE blog posts in full without head-desking. Wish me luck. rpeh •T•C•E• 20:27, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Let us know how that booklet is coming along. I'm dying to read that thing and can barely make it through a paragraph of that weirdo blog. Cow...Hammer^time! 20:29, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Or maybe I'll just watch an episode of the Krypton Factor. rpeh •T•C•E• 20:30, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Is it Stephen Fry day for you or something? Phiwum (talk) 21:01, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Every day should be Stephen Fry day. Vulpius (talk) 21:02, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

One thing I've noticed that bothers me even more than Salantiri's weird generalized comparison (Romney will give out twenty dollar bills and h***j**s, while Obama will have intercourse with your wives!), is how much of her and the right's criticism is because of who he was born to. Father was a Kenyan? Can't be president. Parents weren't married? You're not off proper enough birth. Dad wasn't a millionaire governor? What could you know about being a leader in the government. I swear, these people would be happy to go back to the days of hereditary rule like all of you cod-eating Brits (disclaimer: I don't know if Brits eat cod, nor if it is offensive to say that they do. I don't know much about insulting the British, but please know, stereotyping and offense were intended) Where was I? Oh yeah. Terry and company should read the Declaration of Independence, particularly the part about how it doesn't matter who your sodding father was. </rant> Carlaugust (talk) 21:08, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Cod and chips? Luvverly. BTW, what's Rob Smith up to? London Grump (talk) 21:16, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Father is Kenyan? Can't be President. Father is Mexican? That's okay. -- Seth Peck (talk) 21:42, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, a lot of Brits eat cod. I think a lot of people in other places eat cod too. Anyway, the Queen doesn't rule, she reigns. Remember the British experimented with republicanism already (long before the US Founding Fathers existed) and didn't like it. They put a King back on the throne, but everybody (especially the monarch) understands that what was done once can be done again, albeit this time there probably wouldn't be a public beheading. So there's no more chance of Liz ordering people about than of Obama disregarding the election results and declaring himself President in Perpetuity. The Crown Powers are not available to Liz and are instead exercised by the government and its agencies on her behalf (e.g. crown power of pardon is used by the Home Office to fix injustices, not like a US Presidential pardon which is used to get your crooked friends and business partners out of jail) 82.69.171.94 (talk) 22:20, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

(EC) Some of my favourites:

"Obama was conceived out of wedlock." Just for-fucks-sake/headdesk-moment.

"Romney grew up in America and was taught about our heritage and history. " / "Obama grew up in Indonesia." Millions of students of American studies would facepalm.

"Obama’s early education taught him there are 57 Arab states." Kill him! He knows about other countries!

That one is either a joke, based on a tired Obama misspeaking during the 2008 campaign, or a real paranoid belief that it revealed his true colors (except there aren't 57 Islamic states. Whoover (talk) 03:12, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

She really say there are "57 Arab states"? Sounds like someone is mixing Arab and Islamic again.--BMcP - Just an astronomy guy 12:55, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

"Obama was an unsuccessful Community Organizer." Dude got elected President, dude pretty good at organizing folks. --K. (talk) 22:24, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

And just in case...

...you weren't already under the impression that the Poison Dwarf is more insane than Launchbooty - Obamacare discriminates against Christians in favour of Muslims. --PsyGremlin^Snakk! 16:26, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Someone who isn't banned, go over there and mention the office of faith based initiatives. Just for shits and giggles.--Thunderstruck^{A Bastard Poster, For Bastard People} 17:09, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Medal predictions

Next Sunday evening, Schlafly will undoubtedly claim that <number of medals won by GB> will equals underperformance because it will be enormously lower than <number pulled out of his arse>. No matter that it will almost certainly be their best overall performance since 1908(?) Same applies for the atheist communist liberal evolutionists in Canada, France, Germany, Spain, Somewherelse, Anotherplace, Etcetcetc. For the record, here's a table of the best available prediction of how many medals each country is likely to win, based on a statistical model including population, GDP, historic record and being the host country: here's an explanation from Auntie and the table itself. So far, top over-performers look like GB and S.Korea and bottom under-performers among the leading countries may be Germany (not the Aussie bastards - surprisingly?). Happy to do some statistical stuff on the final medals table if it won't bore everyone to death. The Real James Brown (talk) 22:34, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

There's a table of medals per GDP and per capita here, the USofA is well down the list; Grenada is at the top of both. The only one the US is doing well in is medals /(GDP/Capita), aka medals * Capita / GDP. CS Miller (talk) 09:29, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Do any of these "USA RAH! RAH! RAH! types" (and i get shcafly is only that way for the RIGHT USA atheletes) get the fact that China and the US have the largest GNP, and general population that isn't in abject poverty, to build these atheltes from? So when UK with what, 1/5th the population of the US (?) is 4th in the medal count, that basically is better than the US. just saying.... or rather "rah rah rah, go usa".GodotL'important c'est d'aimer 22:54, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

1/4.99th if you want to be pedantic, for 2010 estimates, according to WolframAlpha CS Miller (talk) 09:17, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Remember to disregard the swimming medals, because they are redundant. Aboriginal Noise ^{What the hell is that thing?} 23:16, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

My one achievement on CP before I got banned was to add the poorly conceived "Expected Medals" table to the 2012 Olympics, so when the UK smashes through the GDP-expected 32.4 medals, Andy will have to explain why they did so much better, along with why the US fell short of their expected 209 medals. Carlaugust (talk) 23:50, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Since we all know Andy is going to say Conservapedia is proven right no matter how many medals Britain wins I was hoping someone would try to pin him down on what exactly they would have to win in order not to embarrass themselves, but I guess it's too late now. Considering what he said about Canada in 2010 it's pretty clear Britain cold win the gold in every single event and they'd still be dismissed for winning too many joke sports. DickTurpis (talk) 01:48, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

He's been asked but went on about small town US beating big cities. Bevo74 (talk) 07:58, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Now he's been reduced to claiming conservative (small-town) New Zealand is humiliating left-leaning Australia. Генгис^{You have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you.} 08:20, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Oh man, that is fucking gold. NZ is conservative? Brilliant. Ace^{The Rep Grows Bigger} 20:33, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Yes. As a resident of New Zealand you are clearly a conservative, and as you are a known liberal you can't dispute that. rpeh •T•C•E• 20:42, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

I am considered centre-right in NZ. Ace^{The Rep Grows Bigger} 20:57, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

New Zealand is conservative? With its socialised medicine? I can hear two things right now... Ace laughing and Rob's head exploding.

Also, I think I love CPalmer.^img Intentionally or not, he's just told Andypants that by him writing off swimming, the US would be behind atheistic Britain in the medals table, if you ignore the swimming medals. Beautiful! --Psygremlin (talk) 11:11, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Andy is now focusing on Australia because the distance he would now have to move the goal posts for Britain being an "underachiever" in the Olympics would force him to place them well outside the stadium. He still needs his "atheistic boogeyman" of the Olympics and given China and several European nations are doing so well, he needed to look pretty far down the list. Have no fear though; through propagandist twisting of the facts and a liberal dose of censorship with a dash of burning the evidence, he will make it so CP will appear right all along. --BMcP - Just an astronomy guy 12:36, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Whoa.^img X Stickman (talk) 22:39, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

The Curse Of Schlafly has now struck again. No sooner does he proclaim Australia's underachievement than they win three golds in quick succession and propel themselves ten or so places up the medal list. MrChris (talk) 22:53, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Make that up 14 places, we were at 25th, now 11th (with another gold due today in the yachting, as our boys only have to finish the final race to win gold). Not the 16 golds of 2000, but at least we've recovered a bit. VOX^HUMANA 23:00, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Karajerk

Are you fucking kidding me?^img This fucking asshole is going to use crosshairs and a cross to claim some sort of imagined persecution of Christianity? One fucking day after someone ACTUALLY opened fire in a Sikh Temple? Someone needs to punch him in the face. Hard. I'm fucking seething. Hiphopopotamus (talk) 03:52, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

If I understand Karajou's "ten commandments" argument correctly, it is... because Christians are not permitted to purchase (using taxpayer funds) Christian monuments and erect them (on state land), in a manner (prominent display) and location (outside a court of law) which heavily suggests that the rule of law is a secondary consideration to ten Biblical commandments, the first of which ("You shall have no God before me") is a direct contradiction of the separation of church and state, because of this, Christians are persecuted. Persecuted so badly that they put crosshairs over the cross, like they were about to be shot. Because everything's not All God, Our God, All The Time, that's persecution akin to being murdered. Coming from the section of the population that is the overwhelming majority of the population, and also massively represented in the senate and congress. Did I get that wrong? --Sasayaki (talk) 04:23, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Alternatively, that as an atheist I should be EQUALLY outraged that I cannot have a giant sign "THERE IS NO GOD/ALLAH/YAHWEH" outside of court rooms in the US? Or NASA offices? --Sasayaki (talk) 04:27, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

You covered it well, but you forgot to mention he's a fucking asshole. Hiphopopotamus (talk) 04:34, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

That's pretty evident, so it should be taken as a given. I also heard an unsubstantiated rumour that he felches dogs on his free time. Ochotonaprinceps^{not a pokémon} 10¹³ points 08:03, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

What pisses me off is that there are places in the world where Christians genuinely are persecuted. Claiming American Christians are persecuted cheapens the suffering of people who really have reason to live in fear because of their faith. MDB ^{(the MD is for Maryland, the B is for Bear)} 11:56, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

I agree, if there's one place where Christians are not persecuted then it's the USA. If they think they're being persecuted then they should try going undercover and masquerading as atheists. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 15:30, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

My response to American Christians who claim persecution is, "I invite you to visit a synagogue and explain to the members the horrors of Christian persecution in America today. It should be especially instructional to explain that to a member over eighty years of age who was born in Europe." MDB ^{(the MD is for Maryland, the B is for Bear)} 16:06, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

It must be rough when a scant 88% of all congressmen are of your religion. How could you possibly expect fair treatment? I once heard a statistic (don't quote me) that the US Congress is more Christian than China is Chinese. Poor, poor Christians... Carlaugust (talk) 17:32, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Now we know Andy's problem

"People Without Facebook Accounts Are 'Suspicious'." --Psygremlin (talk) 10:07, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Actually, I would not be surprised to learn Andy has a Facebook account, just with privacy settings set very strict so only people he approves can see him. It would be okay for him to have one, just not anyone else. Kind of like how girls can't excel in math and science, when he has a daughter who is an engineering major and is married to an MD. MDB ^{(the MD is for Maryland, the B is for Bear)} 11:42, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

I have one, but I don't use it much at all, mostly as re-posting of whatever my Twitter feed sends it really. Friends don't say much of significance on it most of the time, and I don't care to post any of the mundane and routine events of my life personally, (oh yay, I cleaned the house again!). I avoid all the games because of their addictive nature, (I'm terrible when it comes to addictive games); not to mention I loath their willingness to give out your information and their less than stellar privacy features, but that is just me.--BMcP - Just an astronomy guy 12:07, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Erm, what? I've never had a Facebook account. Everything I've seen about it makes it look like a massive, online version of 'reality TV shows' like Big Brother, which I find pointless and boring. So, I'm 'suspicious' because I have taste? 86.147.107.92 (talk) 18:58, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Clearly, if you have not drunk the fuck-privacy-broadcast-my-every-move-to-the-Internet kool-aid, you are suspect. You are not freely telling anyone who'll listen what you had for lunch (or dinner, or breakfast, or a snack), so you must have something to hide. Ochotonaprinceps^{not a pokémon} 10¹³ points 22:49, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Pregnancy as a sport?

This has just occurred to me, but on that masterwork that is the Olympics article, "8-month pregnant athlete" is in the "sport" column. In fact, please double-check this for me, but at no point anywhere does it mention what sport Taibi actually did. ^moral 11:51, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Well having crotch droppings is a GOOD AND GODLY SORT OF THING FOR A WOMAN TO DO so obviously that's the highlight of her existence. Don't want those female homeschoolers (are any left?!) to get the idea that they can play sports without being a Good Christian Mother eventually! Conservapedia's lack of tact aside, she is Malaysian and seriously: good for her participating in the shooting competition. The whole you-can't-do-anything-while-pregnant myth effects women even if they don't plan to have kids, considering how many women are put on mommy tracks for their career once they get married regardless if they wish to breed or not. ±KnightOfTL;DR^{longissimus non legeri} 12:01, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Well, there's handling teratogens... ^moral 12:43, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Conservapedia means I can no longer watch the Olympics...

Not because of that batshit crazy article, but because the high jump is on and the commentators keep saying "two meters". Grumble-grumble-grumble... ^sshole 19:41, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Two irony meters? Генгис^{Is the Pope a Catholic?} 20:07, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

I keep thinking "is this athlete overrated?" and "is this an obscure sport?" Time for Forum:Conservapedia ruined my life, I think. Sophie^Wilder 20:20, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

I'm just surprised Andy hasn't found some way of blaming Barack (Hussein) Obama for some failure, perceived or actual, of the Olympics or the US team. Is he (Andy) losing his touch or has the failure of Britain to fail as required finally shut him up? The Real James Brown (talk) 21:32, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Capturebot broken (sticky)

Capturebot appears to be still down, going by the large number of red img tags i see on this page. Don't forget to screenshot manually, people. Sophie^Wilder 14:32, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

"The Chief Administrative Officer and Chairman of Committee Translations at the Conservative Bible Project"

Launchbooty really does have a high opinion of himself.

I can't remember if this was ever covered when the CBP was topical, but it's worth repeating, if only for more proof that Hurlbut is batshit insane outside of CP and CNAV. --PsyGremlin^Hable! 11:13, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Sweet Jesus. Neither of them comes off very well in that clusterfuck. Theory of Practice "Trampoline" is an Olympic sport now? 17:17, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Chuckarse is a pompous, egoistical git. Генгис^{Is the Pope a Catholic?} 17:24, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

"Hurlbut studied Latin, he said." "He said" seems about right. --جئت ورأيت أنا القرف ^{gross, isn't it?} 17:25, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

My only reaction to this part:

BARNA: “You’ve translated Revelation where there is language about the Antichrist. Is President Barack Obama the Antichrist?”
HURLBUT: “I am not prepared to say that… . Obama is someone who accepts things close to divine honors, but whether he is the beast from the sea … the false prophet will have to be out of Jewish extraction. I don’t deny Barack Obama could be The One…. [Hurlbut begins to ramble] Those of us who genuinely believe in Christ … will suddenly disappear … one minute will be driving in a car, the next minute the (car) will be driver-less.”
BARNA: “You discount the scenes of Jesus forgiving the adulterous and the multitude from the cross.”
HURLBUT: “This is something Jesus did not mean to say, that adultery was not a serious offense… . If we want the Bible, we want something that is accurate. [Hurlbut goes on to impugn Jesus' words, "Forgive them, Father, for they know not what they do."] When they say they don’t know what they are doing, someone might use that to mean they literally do not know why they set up a man to be executed.”

Is: "Sweet fucking Jesus, he's a lunatic." --Sasayaki (talk) 18:01, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Somewhere in Conservaleaks there's an exchange between TerryH and Karajou about someone on a horse in the Egyptian upheavals being one of the four horsemen of the apocalypse. Nutters, the lot of them. Генгис^{Is the Pope a Catholic?} 19:26, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

It wasn't even someone on a horse. It was a lens flare that happened to look a bit like someone on a horse. The best part about the exchange was Karajou saying that, whether or not it was real, it was evidence of Jesus' imminent return. «-Bfa-» 20:20, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

It's the part where Andy talks about strangling women that scares the crap outta me. --Yossarian 19:30, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

HERE on CP there is a debate whether a man can commit adultery, with Roger RSchlafly taking the, "no, it is always the fault of the slut woman! " C®ackeЯ 20:50, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

So, then, in the Schlafly-verse, Bill Clinton was the innocent victim of evil trollop Monica Lewinsky? MDB ^{(the MD is for Maryland, the B is for Bear)} 15:44, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

I have immense respect for Bill Clinton. I mean, the man got a blow job from a Jewish girl. That's saying something. --PsyGremlin^Praat! 15:48, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Personally I love the bit where Hurlbut states "This is something Jesus did not mean to say". They are such amazing Christians, they know better what Christ meant to say than Christ does! --GTac (talk) 08:59, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

I loved this by Andy: "We respect the original intent (of Bible authors). We are pealing away the political bias. We are purifying the Bible". --Night Jaguar (talk) 12:25, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Sometime this week, CP will hit a million edits...

...as seen here. Not counting the hundreds or thousands that have been lost due to technical incompetence, of course. Nonetheless, we should throw them a party. Theory of Practice "Trampoline" is an Olympic sport now? 17:33, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

100 more to go... TheLateGatsby (talk) 16:06, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Evidently, it happened, but there seems to be a bunch of revisions missing... oversighted? TheLateGatsby (talk) 12:46, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Paul Ryan

Looks like CP still don't know what to say about Paul Ryan despite 'predicting' him being the pick http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Paul_Ryan&oldid=999684^img for Mitt Romney's VP. Nil Einne (talk) 21:43, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Fred Phelps - liberal

Sure Jpatt.^img Because all gay-lovin' liberals believe in God and want US soldiers to die because of teh gays.

Next you'll be saying Pat Robertson is a liberal.--PsyGremlin^Khuluma! 11:28, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Well, Robertson does back legalizing marijuana, but I think that's more a case of the nut finding a blind squirrel. --Night Jaguar (talk) 12:24, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the ride in the time machine, Psy. Theory of Practice "Trampoline" is an Olympic sport now? 13:46, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Any time. The classics never get old. --PsyGremlin^Speak! 13:53, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

I wrote a thing quite some time back taking CP's own twisted definition of liberal and seeing how many of their concocted traits applied to Phelps. Even by their own definition he fit just about none of them. DickTurpis (talk) 02:55, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Study shows Christians have Higher BMI

Ha, haha, hahahahahahaha Religion linked to BMI in obesity study Someone send this to Conservative. RyanC (talk) 12:32, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

I think User:C must already know of this article since he's the cover boy for it. C®ackeЯ 12:45, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

As someone with a BMI of 31.4 can I just say "high BMI" ≠ "fat". Pi 3:14 (talk) 01:49, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Says you, fatty.--Fergus Mason ^{Thruppence I got for selling my coat, tuppence for selling my blanket. If ever I 'list for a soldier again, the Devil shall be my Sergeant.} 02:40, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

When you're talking about a statistically significant number of people, "high BMI" = "fat". Occasionaluse (talk) 13:24, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Did you, Pi, deliberately aim for a BMI of 31.4? Are you like two-face, but obsessed with the number pi? ^{ONE / TALK} 13:25, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

I didn't notice that, but now i'am going to have to control my bulking and cutting phases to maintain a bodyweight so my BMI is 31.4. Pi 3:14 (talk) 05:58, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Unrelated. I just checked my BMI. 22.2. I guess I can see it being "normal" for a 6 foot tall man to weight around 160 lbs (my ribs stick out, but yeah). I can't see how it's anything but dangerously unhealthy for a 6 foot tall man to weigh as little as 138 lbs. That ain't normal at all. That's eating disorder territory. What the shit? 13:39, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Keep in mind that it's gender neutral. Occasionaluse (talk) 13:58, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Another adjective for Conservapedia.

"Secessionist." Theory of Practice "Trampoline" is an Olympic sport now? 14:58, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

I think the North would happily wave them goodbye. And then build a 20-foot wall separating the two. What would the South call themselves? Jesusania? If they did secede, I'd give them 20 years before their educational policies destroy their economy. --PsyGremlin^Hable! 15:08, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

And the North could join Canada. I'd actually like to see the Theocapitalist ideology espoused by the Tea Party in action, more specifically two decades afterwards the millions of immigrants towards the North. Can you imagine it? a country only with private health care, no unemploment insurance, no social system and a completely deregulated market and poorly educated electorate. It's like Latin America at it's most ignorrant. --K. (talk) 15:29, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

I wonder how Andy can espouse such an enthousiasm for tghis book, while claiming to love the USA and the Constitution. ^{— Unsigned, by: 109.132.146.195 / talk / contribs}

I can only presume Andy didn't read beyond the headline, since the book seems to be about how to get shitheads like Andy out of the hair of the sensible people in America so that they can get things done. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 20:39, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

I wonder how a guy who represents the worst of Yankee elitism--Princeton, Harvard--can see himself as anything other than what I presunme is the target of the book's argument. Theory of Practice "Trampoline" is an Olympic sport now? 20:45, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

It's a beautiful day when Andy links to an AlterNet article. Vulpius (talk) 22:02, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Perhaps he's gotten so far to the right that he's starting to loop back around to the other side...--Umichcynic (talk) 22:20, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Credit where credit is due

Andy thanks the UK for being a fabulous host. One day he'll learn the difference between England, Britain, Great Britain and the UK. --PsyGremlin^Sprich! 15:41, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

I'm glad Andy and so many other people enjoyed "our" hospitality. Now fuck off and give us our city back.London Grump (talk) 15:46, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

He's got a nerve. This was a nation he predicted, indeed hoped would do badly, a country he describes as in a pathetic state, and his site describes being in serious moral decline. He can go to hell. MrChris (talk) 20:52, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

He does so on the talk page too. "The Brits were fantastic hosts, proving once again to the world that the British Empire can run things well.--Andy Schlafly 12:59, 12 August 2012 (EDT) " ^{— Unsigned, by: 109.132.146.195 / talk / contribs}

Including the United States? Does Andy favour rejoining the Commonwealth? --Sasayaki (talk) 18:09, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

The Empire shall thrive again. Daaaa daaaa daaaa daaaa dadaaaa daaaa dadaaaa. Daaaa daaaa dadaaaa daaaa dadadada, da-daaaa daaaa dadadada, da-daaaa daaaa oh screw this, find it on YouTube. --جئت ورأيت أنا القرف ^{gross, isn't it?} 18:34, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Andy underlines his qualifications to teach history for money, the British Empire ceased to exist 15 years ago when Hong Kong was handed back. -- Iscariot ^{Andy Schlafly for Congress 2012!} 18:44, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Contentious point, given the ambiguous nature of the Empire. Did it begin and end with the Raj? Or did it end at Suez? Or Thatcher's Nationality Act, the one the Argentines misread along with the defence cuts of 1981? Or Hong Kong? What about the 15 or so colonies the British still own? Does it even matter, seeing as Andy is a dickwad? London Grump (talk) 19:09, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

I have some friends in Derry who would argue vociferously that the British Empire by no means came to an end with the Hong Kong changeover. Theory of Practice "Trampoline" is an Olympic sport now? 20:48, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Fun to see Andy do a complete 180 on the UK/England/whatever he wants to call it Olympic predictions. --Revolverman (talk) 22:03, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Don't worry. If CP is still around at the next world cup, I'm sure this new found magnanimity will have worn off. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 22:28, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Somewhere I'm missing the "Conservapedia proven right again". Генгис^evolving 23:05, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Andy couldn't resist

Just when you think Andy can be gracious and just simply thank Britain without adding some political quip against supposed enemies... You be wrong^img.

The first thing I thought about when they played Imagine at the closing ceremony was "Andy won't like that". Генгис^{You have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you.} 06:47, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

I'd complain that you can't see it as well from the Lagoa side. It's also sometimes hard to see through the low clouds they get in winter. It's pain in the ass to get up there. Oh and the monkeys stole my cigarettes and knocked my beer over. *Shrug*. Anyone else? 13:44, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

I don't know if User:Conservative or Andy understand French...

But in Quebec, the fact that a person running for office who would likely be named Minister of Health if his party wins is overweight is making the news. I do not know in Dr. Barrette is also an atheist, but given the way that they have picked on the Surgeon General for her weight issues, Andy and Ken may get some mileage out of this. Theory of Practice "Trampoline" is an Olympic sport now? 21:05, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, ToP, but you'll "have to pay an independent translator to confirm your report and plus say what the news organization's source of this claim is" - or at least you would have if CP had consistent sourcing standards. --Sid (talk) 21:33, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

But... but... automated translating is sooo reliable today! --K. (talk) 22:27, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

For someone with a penchant for ponies and teaching English you'd think that Ken could spell beastiality bestiality correctly. Генгис^{You have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you.} 23:15, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

One of my favorite quotes by Andy of all time: "The Greek and Hebrew languages are well understood and readily available to any internet user. In this electronic age a laptop and a browser are superior to (and fast than) the finest Greek/Hebrew scholar. Some may wince at that observation, but it's the same reason that sales of the Encyclopedia Britannica declined and Borders has gone bankrupt." The crazy-to-word ratio is so high! --Night Jaguar (talk) 02:18, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

in teh "yeah but" category, have you seen Barrette? He's not fat, he's out right huge. Unless he's published something about a health issue (which he might well have) it is a legitimate concern. Doesn't mean he's not qualified, but it does mean he aught to be making weight an important topic in Quebec. --GodotL'important c'est d'aimer 02:56, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

In the late eighties Britain's health minister was an obese, whisky-rinking cigar smoker. And we thought Thatcher had no sense of humour. Rennie McGreet (talk) 09:35, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

I can think of nothing worse than a scrawny, teetotal, vegan as health minister. Steven Kavanagh (talk) 09:44, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

I'm sure fairly we've had the occasional normal person doing the job. When it's not Enoch Powell or Virginia Bottomley, whose name is an anagram of I'm an evil tory bigot. Sophie^Wilder 16:58, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

So far as I can see, Andrew Lansley (current Health Secretary) is pretty normal in size and weight. Is that a recommendation????!!! (For US readers, the Andrew Lansley MP you see is merely a Dr Jekyll concealing a Mr Hyde beneath the skin.) The Real James Brown (talk) 12:22, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

He's a normal size and weight because kittens and babies aren't fattening.London Grump (talk) 21:19, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Romney & Ryan

If this is what conservatives think, I'm feeling more optimistic about the US presidential election. 1972 in reverse? (For the youngsters, a good but not unbeatable Republican - Nixon - thrashed a poor but not hopeless Democrat - I've forgotten who he was - not least because the latter messed up his choice of vice-prez candidate. The parallels are starting to build up...) The Real James Brown (talk) 21:56, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

It was Nixon vs. George McGovern. McGovern picked a guy called Eagleton who turned out to be a manic-depressant who'd had electroshock therapy. Ace^{The Rep Grows Bigger} 22:08, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

OK. What I remember was that McGovern (thanks for reminding me!) chose a VP running-mate who was even more left-wing than himself - Sargent Shriver, who I see replaced the original choice of Eagleton as the Democrat VP candidate - and deterred rather than attracted floating voters. With luck, Paul Ryan will have the same effect on Romney's campaign. The Real James Brown (talk) 23:09, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Andy continues hinting that he thinks Romney should make another choice.

Andy is nuckin' futz if he really thinks Romney should say, "whoops, bad idea, I'm picking somebody else." That would doom his campaign. It would be him basically declaring, "I screwed up my first Presidential decision". MDB ^{(the MD is for Maryland, the B is for Bear)} 15:56, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

It's quite funny to see CP, within a few lines of each other, going "Ryan is the bestest choice evah!" and "Eerm... is this the best Romney could do?" --PsyGremlin^Tal! 16:09, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

And a rift forms between Andy and Terry -- now all we need is a golden apple with the inscription "For the Conservativest". MDB ^{(the MD is for Maryland, the B is for Bear)} 16:12, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

"Conservativest"? Mother Tongue has just taken out a hit on you for that. --PsyGremlin^Praat! 16:14, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

I'm claiming literary license. MDB ^{(the MD is for Maryland, the B is for Bear)} 16:15, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Conservapedish? Conservapediest? Are we making up synonyms for 'the one with the most machismo?' Fairly sure even Eris would avoid Conservapedia. I am not sure how they took authoritarianism so far it turns into total discord, but they did it somehow. ±KnightOfTL;DR^{walls of text while-u-wait} 16:34, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Oh, my McGovern/Eagleton button must be worth something! Czolgolz (talk) 22:46, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Although Andy and Terry are both conservative Christian fundies, Andy tends to go for the religious credentials before fiscal policy; that's why he doesn't appear to be much of a tea-bagger. Terry on the other hand is a moralising scrooge; money matters more to him. Генгис^{Is the Pope a Catholic?} 16:44, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, Andy's really not thrilled with the Ryan pick. I think he's setting the table for the "Conservapedia Proven Right" angle in advance of Romney's defeat. Theory of Practice "Trampoline" is an Olympic sport now? 00:38, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Didn't he all ready take care of that? After all, if Romney loses, it'll be evidence that the Republican party should have picked a more conservative candidate! --Andy Franklinson (talk) 21:41, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Romney overshadowed by Ryan. I do appreciate the Twilight-Pandering. That's what we're down to, in "Journalism". --TheLateGatsby (talk) 12:29, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

To clarify, the Daily Show does a pretty good job of showing the degraded state of Journalism in the US, once more. --TheLateGatsby (talk) 12:32, 15 August 2012 (UTC)