Conservapedia talk:What is going on at CP?/Archive31

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

This is an archive page, last updated 27 November 2009. 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>, <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>, <296>, <297>, <298>, <299>, <300>, <301>, <302>, <303>, <304>, <305>, <306>, <307>, <308>, <309>, <310>, <311>, <312>, <313>, <314>, <315>, <316>, <317>, <318>, <319>, <320>, <321>, <322>, <323>, <324>, <325>, <326>, <327>, <328>, <329>, <330>, <331>, <332>, <333>, <334>, <335>, <336>, <337>, <338>, <339>, (new)(back)

Non-US English[edit]

Despite the removal of US-only spellings from the CP Commandments (or wherever it was) Andy still gets a hard on for British spellings. And it is predominantly in talk pages anyway so it isn't exactly subverting his precious "encyclopedic" content. The guy acts just like a nine-year old. Jollyfish.gifGenghis Marauding 10:00, 4 March 2008 (EST)

Stop insulting nine-year olds you ageist cad. Auld Nick 10:51, 4 March 2008 (EST)
That wasn't ageism, it was a smear by association. What do you have against nine-year olds, GK??? humanUser talk:Human 15:01, 4 March 2008 (EST)
I'm more disturbed with what Andy places has against them. --Kels 17:21, 4 March 2008 (EST)
Mea culpa. I can't stand OPCs. Jollyfish.gifGenghis Marauding 08:20, 5 March 2008 (EST)


Oh, dear God. Where do they dig up these random bible quotes? (Scroll down a bit to see.) --Star of David.png Radioactive afikomen Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments. 14:51, 4 March 2008 (EST)

That reminds me of some of the ones I looked up in my YEC homskollar science textbook. I stuck them in our article about biblical scientific foreknowledge - some had no bearing on the claim made at all. humanUser talk:Human 15:04, 4 March 2008 (EST)
My WTF is actually behind the Bible quote:
This problem of young ice on Charon is only the tip of the iceberg (pardon the pun.) So far, astronomers have discovered over 1000 Trans-Neptunian Objects (TNOs) with a large number having young ice on the surface. The only observed geyser is the one spewing forth new theories of those seeking the magical shoe horn that will fit young surface ice on TNOs into the extant evolutionary cosmology.
Good to see that CP sysops have abandoned all pretense of writing an encyclopedia. --Sid 15:15, 4 March 2008 (EST)
What? I thought they dropped the pretense a long time ago? Somewhere between Homosexuality and Murders and Liberal friendship, I believe. --Star of David.png Radioactive afikomen Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments. 15:21, 4 March 2008 (EST)
Dear God, I actually missed the "Homosexuality and Murders" one! And yeah, but those are by Conservative and Andy. TerryH seemed to take things halfway seriously on some level so far, I think, But puns and this cheap editorial style... bah. --Sid 15:25, 4 March 2008 (EST)


Am I looking at this wrong, or does the current choice depict prostitutes? --Kels 21:17, 4 March 2008 (EST)

Yes. Yes it does. In that vein, it reminds me of a large mural downtown, that depicts a brothel—something most people in my town don't even realize. --Star of David.png Radioactive afikomen Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments. 22:06, 4 March 2008 (EST)
I'm surprised they haven't exhausted the pool of masterpieces that display neither tits nor cock yet. Damn those liberal art critics! --JeɚvsYour signature gave me epilepsy... 05:02, 5 March 2008 (EST)

Ha. Mary Cassett was a notable "confirmed bachlorette". --PlantB 23:01, 6 March 2008 (EST)

Schultzie's Gone[edit]

Le sigh.

Heh! Just put it on WIGO! Susanpurrrrr 22:57, 4 March 2008 (EST)
He'll be back... I hope. But I guess he should've known better than to trifle with engage in any sort of contact with Kookagoogoo. UchihaKATON! 23:00, 4 March 2008 (EST)
Bummer, man... But seriously, Karajou's responses are really messed up. He doesn't even get a line in before he tries to intimidate me with his oh-so-glorious service record. Hell, I was even polite to him... But you know what my favourite part is? Even Andy sees it's plagarized Barikada 23:17, 4 March 2008 (EST)

Ok, I'm never going to get unbanned, and I'm tired of buggering around over there with no hope of reason taking any hold. So, the great reveal is: I am Spartacus, er SSchultz. At least I got a few solid bon mots in there before I was shitcanned. Stile4aly 23:29, 4 March 2008 (EST)

Well! Congratulations on lasting so long. Susanpurrrrr 23:31, 4 March 2008 (EST)
*claps* NightFlareSpeak, mortal 23:37, 4 March 2008 (EST)
Congrats, mate. I've gotta admit-- I admired your work. Barikada 23:40, 4 March 2008 (EST)
Wait. Are you really Sschultz. Don't be mean to him if you're not, he was a good guy. Um, but assuming you are, sorry, you were a fantastic voice of reason there. UchihaKATON! 23:39, 4 March 2008 (EST)
I really am. I have chat logs with TK and emails from Andy to prove it. It was a good run. Stile4aly 23:45, 4 March 2008 (EST)
You did a fabulous job. Drinks all around! Your only mess-up was your last; let this be a lesson to any other socks - don't stand toe-to-toe with Karajou. He's unbalanced, aggressive, and mindlessly devoted to the first thing that comes into his mind. Of course, in a world with just laws, that'd be no concern; a wise higher-up would demote him or ensure he didn't get to a place of power in the first place. But CP is not that type of place; it encourages his schoolyard bully side, and he doesn't think twice about stepping on anyone that gets in his way. Really, it brings to mind a picture of an enraged elephant, reflexively stamping on things that get in its way.
Say, I wonder, do you think that's why Petty Officer Karajou didn't ever get higher up in the ranks? That his commanding officer realized what a maniac he is?-αmεσ (soldier) 23:57, 4 March 2008 (EST)
This is really probably the best anyone can do about Karajou. Backing down snarkily after a threat. That is, if you want to live to fight another day.-αmεσ (soldier) 23:58, 4 March 2008 (EST)

I really is funny that Kukaju did not provide an answer to why the wiki formatting is exactly like Wikipedia's. After all did he intend on adding those links all by himself or was he going to copy and paste once again?--TimS 00:02, 5 March 2008 (EST)

And his reply to AmesG's ref above leaves one a little taken aback: "respect"! What has K ever done to earn respect? Susanpurrrrr 00:03, 5 March 2008 (EST)
He was a seaman?--TimS 00:04, 5 March 2008 (EST)
I know, he lived on a boat defending this great country of ours that is why we must respect him. On that note, I was in Army in Afghanistan, RESPECT ME!!! Boy do I hate those people who were in the military who can not get it out of their heads. I will match my DD214 with Kukaju's anyday, lets see how many silver and bronze stars he has.--TimS 00:09, 5 March 2008 (EST)
Also, damn right Tim! Congrats on your service & making it back in one piece.-αmεσ (soldier) 00:20, 5 March 2008 (EST)

Ames: You made me laugh. Rock on, dude. Barikada 00:16, 5 March 2008 (EST)

Thanks! Thanks to you, and please keep providing me free entertainment... this is good shit.-αmεσ (soldier) 00:19, 5 March 2008 (EST)
Heh-- No problem. It's fun to see how psychotic Karajou gets whenever he's questioned. Barikada 00:24, 5 March 2008 (EST)
Um ... err .. He's gone quiet - will Barikada be up for manslaughter if he has an apoplectic fit & dies as a result of the "lack of respect"?Susanpurrrrr 00:37, 5 March 2008 (EST)
More like a medal. Pinto's5150 Talk 00:39, 5 March 2008 (EST)
Parade and holiday in their honor! --Star of David.png Radioactive afikomen Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments. 00:42, 5 March 2008 (EST)

Alright. Who here is Pheba? Susanpurrrrr 00:41, 5 March 2008 (EST)

Superb work, really. You had a nice, nice run. Hats off to you for some fine, fine work. DogP 01:28, 5 March 2008 (EST)

Rum SODOMY and the lash....-- Asclepius staff.png-PalMD --If it looks like a donut... 01:30, 5 March 2008 (EST)
Well, they seem to have banned me for being a 'troll'. Trying to point out basic vulcanology and geology with PJR was interesting. I'd have had more fun bashing my head against a brick wall. Darkmind1970 05:58, 5 March 2008 (EST)
And it would be less painful. --Star of David.png Radioactive afikomen Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments. 06:00, 5 March 2008 (EST)
Their ability to bend facts around their preconceived notions is almost amusing. PJR was quite convinced that everything I said was wrong and he kept repeating 'sedimentation!' like a mantra. Ah well, my wife will be pleased. She has said that it's no use arguing with nutcases like that lot, as all that happens is that my blood pressure goes up. Darkmind1970 06:39, 5 March 2008 (EST)
Rejoice! ;) --Sid 07:12, 5 March 2008 (EST)
Have I ever mentioned that sedimentation sounds like a method of cooking? --Star of David.png Radioactive afikomen Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments. 13:02, 5 March 2008 (EST)

Ed's Words of wisdom[edit]

We're not as bad as X so it's OK? So: if I only kill 500,000 Jews it's not as bad as the Nazis so it's OK? Susanpurrrrr 12:39, 5 March 2008 (EST)

No I am NOT AliceBG. Susanpurrrrr 12:48, 5 March 2008 (EST)
Suuuuuure you're not, Susan. ;-) PFoster 12:53, 5 March 2008 (EST)
I would NEVER claim to be Xtian!!!!! Susanpurrrrr 12:56, 5 March 2008 (EST)
Which would make it all the more clever for you to do just that. PFoster 12:58, 5 March 2008 (EST)
Ah! Gotcha - I'm not that clever! Susanpurrrrr
You should have a go at that argument. Edit whatever passes for CP's Israel Vs. Palestine conflict page and note that although Palestinians have killed x Jews during the various Intifadas (Intifadae?) that it's absolutely fine because Hitler killed six million Jews, and cite Ed as a source. See how long that lasts.... --JeɚvsYour signature gave me epilepsy... 13:23, 5 March 2008 (EST)
I'd love to but I'm NOT AliceBG Susanpurrrrr 13:26, 5 March 2008 (EST)
I wasn't suggesting you were. You are allowed to have an account at CP, you know. Briefly, anyway. --JeɚvsYour signature gave me epilepsy... 13:27, 5 March 2008 (EST)

It wisna me, It wis the ither laddie that rin awa...[edit]

Fox cleans up after NOT Auld Nick

Flattered as I am, I cannot take credit for the good work of others, even if the Foxmuppet is helping build a personality cult about me. Tempting as it is to become a living legend with an ego bigger than Andy's, I only operated as Auld Nick and WIGO. Auld Nick 17:29, 5 March 2008 (EST)

You've got a devoted, and talented, imitator then! Susanpurrrrr 17:32, 5 March 2008 (EST)
It wasn't imitation, it was a different style of genius. Auld Nick 17:51, 5 March 2008 (EST)
I think Fox has a crush on someone! --Kels 17:55, 5 March 2008 (EST)
Huh?!? PFoster 17:57, 5 March 2008 (EST)
I begin to think that every sysop has a personal nemesis or two. So everything bad they find automatically becomes the work of whoever they think of first. --Sid 18:54, 5 March 2008 (EST)
He's cleaning up Scotland anyhoo: Susanpurrrrr 20:09, 5 March 2008 (EST)
I've moved the image up, Susan. It looked a bit weird since it mostly reached into the section under this one otherwise. :) --Sid 06:20, 6 March 2008 (EST)
Michty me! Tod Lowrie has been busy. In the process he has removed a lot of stuff that was accurate leaving a number of articles which are little more than "X is a town in Scotland". Just the kind of educational, clean, and concise entries that the Assfly is so proud of. Encyclopedicaly useless of course, but quantity beats quality any day in the encyclopedia game. Hell, with all those liberals dumbing down education and all that.
Foxybabes seems to have appreciated the funnies and is decent enough to admit that he unfairly attributed them to me. Apparently SusanG was perhaps the culprit.
This is getting silly. Look who he's replying to. He thinks AliceBG is me (unlike all you Ratwikians who know I'm not). Susanpurrrrr 11:33, 6 March 2008 (EST)
Do we? PFoster 11:35, 6 March 2008 (EST)

"And you wonder why these guys were ever fed to the lions."[edit]

Wow. I'm gonna leave that one up there. TmtamesP 00:14, 6 March 2008 (EST)

Because they might have been irritating, intolerant pricks in 50 AD, just as they are in 2008 CE? "...what is wrong with a teacher telling the truth by saying that there is one God?" Some might disagree - and expect tolerance, in a multicultural, religiously tolerant society. One that PJR, although a generally amiable fellow, does not seem to have any understanding of. humanUser talk:Human 00:57, 6 March 2008 (EST)
Although he's got the bit about science not proving anything right. That should be removed from WIGO because, even though it's constantly used to downplay scientific evidence, scientific theory, and empiricism when they conflict with YEC, the statement is essentially correct. Ajkgordon 05:48, 6 March 2008 (EST)
Uh, last time I checked, science in the wider sense proved a helluvalot unless I have a brainfart... *points at proofs in math and physics, especially in the theoretical sectors* --Sid 06:22, 6 March 2008 (EST)
Note: I've commented it out for the time being to be on the safe side until it's discussed/clarified. I don't see how science is unable to prove anything, but I didn't have my coffee yet, so it's quite possible that I'm wrong. --Sid 06:26, 6 March 2008 (EST)
OK, mathematical and logical proofs, fair enough. But PJR is talking about empirical science which doesn't actually prove anything, as far as I understand it. It's how theories work, always up for a challenge. The point though is that a theory like general relativity would stand up in court and be "proved" right in a legal or colloquial sense. But not in scientific one. Which is, of course, what YECers rely upon in comparing their "science" with that of evolution or plate tectonics. Ajkgordon 06:29, 6 March 2008 (EST)
I... see where you're coming from, but going from what he actually said, I'd say you're interpreting a lot of sense into his words:
Are you saying that the only things that schools can teach are things that are scientifically proven? In that case, you might as well close down the schools, because science is unable to prove anything.
Apparently, they don't teach math at Australian schools or something :P I'll leave it commented out, though - my contribution to fairness by not being nitpicky with PJR Literalism. ;) --Sid 06:37, 6 March 2008 (EST)
Interpreting a lot of sense into his words? I may be good but I'm not that good :) Ajkgordon 06:38, 6 March 2008 (EST)
To say that science doesn't "prove" anything is just more kreationspeek. Of course science proves things, or, at least, comes as close as ontologically possible. Creationism, however, doesn't even come close. You can't say that because scientific proof is not 100% unassailable, then creationism is just as valid. PJR is a fucking idiot---i've alway said it, and always will. I don't give a flying fuck how amiable he is, he's an inflexible dolt.-- Asclepius staff.png-PalMD --If it looks like a donut... 08:22, 6 March 2008 (EST)
No, you can't. But they all do, including PJR. As I was saying somewhere else here the other day, one of YEC's greatest successes has been hijacking scientific terminology and applying it to its faith. A bit like fascists calling everyone else fascists, e.g. the BNP. Ajkgordon 08:28, 6 March 2008 (EST)
It is surreal to read people communicating with their computers over the internet saying science doesn't prove anything. The technology developed using the scientific method provides more than adequate proof for the validity of scientific theories. PoorEd 09:27, 6 March 2008 (EST)
If all currently accepted scientific theories have been "proven" correct, why are there still theorists working on them? Science has the ability to stack incredibly massive amounts of evidence in favor of or against some idea, but it can't ever say that the accepted theory is 100% foolproof--although it can come arbitrarily close to the 100% barrier given enough evidence. The problem with creationism is that it rejects the massive amounts of evidence for an old universe in favor of the << 0.000000000000001% probability that what we observe today is the result of a 6000 year old universe.--Bayesyikes 10:51, 6 March 2008 (EST)
Indeed. It's the old "it's just a theory" argument dressed up in apparently scientific language to try to put creationism on a par with evolution. It's at the root of PJR's arguments against evolution. And those of the YEC/ID movement generally. Ajkgordon 16:00, 6 March 2008 (EST)
Well, God is in the details infintesimall robabilities Exasperate me!Sheesh!I said what? 11:14, 6 March 2008 (EST)

Alternate Home of CP Main Page[edit]

Agh! Now look what you filthy Atheist scum have done! You've gone and made us Brits unbanninate blasphemy NOOOOES!!!! Iis1stConservapediaSockMonster 01:50, 6 March 2008 (EST)

Thank fucking Jesus Christ for that then! Jollyfish.gifGenghis Marauding 03:26, 6 March 2008 (EST)

Extraordinary they haven't front paged this yet. Maybe a little bump will help them. DogP 13:42, 6 March 2008 (EST)

CP admits bible supports geocentricism?[edit]

In their featured article no less.(link: live, permanent) - Icewedge 03:09, 6 March 2008 (EST)

You'd think they check for that crap before promoting their articles to Featured status... (and several diffs later, it's still in there) --Sid 05:36, 6 March 2008 (EST)
Oh dear God! This thing has been in there since FOREVER:
Wow... notable users that have edited the article (often just to revert vandalism, admittedly) without touching this or the "Shape/Position of the Earth" bits: PJR (though he tried once, at least), MountainDew/DanH, Yommotrojam, Ed Poor, Crocoite, Bohdan, BenjaminS, Jallen, Learn together, TK, Conservative, SharonS, Tash, TerryH, Iduan, Karajou, BrianCo... and the Hall of WTF: Tmtoulouse (tweaked it), AmesG, ColinR, Human, and Hojimachong XD --Sid 06:05, 6 March 2008 (EST)
Wow, something completely unexpected happened: PJR all of a sudden removes the section! *waves at Philip* Hiya, how's the weather over there? :D --Sid 06:28, 6 March 2008 (EST)
"Featured Article" = "Article we need RW to review for us" Matt 06:32, 6 March 2008 (EST)
You'll find the same pap on the Geocentric Theory page, and an argument I had with Robert here (as NitramNos). Robert's last entry at the bottom was so good we had to let it stand as the last word. PoorEd 09:17, 6 March 2008 (EST)
He must like fictitious forces. NightFlareSpeak, mortal 00:15, 7 March 2008 (EST)

Headline from the magic eight ball: Public Schooled Liberal Atheists Blow up Times Square: Restrictive Hand-gun Laws prevent conservatives from stopping them[edit]

I see the future:

Where's my weapon of gun??!!?? Where's my weapon of gun??!!?? -- Asclepius staff.png-PalMD --If it looks like a donut... 08:55, 6 March 2008 (EST)

I can say with 98% certainty that the man who threw that bomb does not believe in school prayer.-- Asclepius staff.png-PalMD --If it looks like a donut... 09:04, 6 March 2008 (EST)

only liberals throw bombs. conservatives build them into trucks the way God intended. Exasperate me!Sheesh!I said what? 10:24, 6 March 2008 (EST)
More to the point, only liberals ride bicycles rather than SUVs. --JeɚvsYour signature gave me epilepsy... 10:41, 6 March 2008 (EST)

Following the "PJR, I'm as scared..." WIGO...[edit]

...leads to, imo, the funniest bit of it, Andy's diff summary: "typo" 11:09, 6 March 2008 (EST)

Ed complains about "Unisex movement" article[edit]

Isn't he just trying to get attention to one of his articles by throwing up a target for others to shoot at? Susanpurrrrr 14:12, 6 March 2008 (EST)

Funny - it appears you're right about that. Odd that you would notice such a thing. :-) PFoster 14:18, 6 March 2008 (EST)
F U C K ! ! ! ! Susanpurrrrr 14:20, 6 March 2008 (EST)
Yeah, it's fairly weird that he first "writes an article" and then complains about it. What's next? He takes out one of the quotes and then complains about how somebody took out the quote without discussion? And why did he insert the quotes if he knew the result would be an unbalanced article? I mean... bwah? --Sid 14:26, 6 March 2008 (EST)
He is actually complaining that there are JUST two "opposition" quotes, so this entry is wrong. 16:31, 6 March 2008 (EST)
Azi, wasn't it? I think semantics are on my side (considering how I added the entry) in this one: "This stub article is unbalanced. It just has two opposition quotes." If it was your version, he would have said "It has only" instead of "It just has". Ed does know the meaning of the word "balance", I know he wouldn't say "This article needs more balance by adding even more quotes for one side!". If you meant that he's complaining that there are just the quotes and nothing else... I also doubt it because he quasi-emphasized that the quotes are both in opposition.
But no matter what way you turn it, it's Ed complaining about an article he alone authored (aside from somebody categorizing it, IIRC - was it you? I'm too lazy to check right now...), so the entry is not "wrong" in my eyes. I could offer you to modify it to include the word "just" (in that case, I'd just quote his "just has two opposition quotes"). That would give more accuracy, I guess. --Sid 19:03, 6 March 2008 (EST)
Actually, now that I think about it (and took a closer look at my own wording), I'd guess that you meant "The current entry makes it look like he thinks it's unbalanced because there are opposition quotes", which of course is misphrased. Either way, I'll edit the entry to quote Ed - I guess that's the safest thing to do. --Sid 19:23, 6 March 2008 (EST)
Ed's intention is confusing. Your wording is correct now. If nothing else, I suppose it's funny that he's complaining about his own article. I'd take my negative vote back if could. :-( 21:07, 6 March 2008 (EST)
You can vote it up twice if you voted it down once, I think. NightFlareSpeak, mortal 00:00, 7 March 2008 (EST)
Only if you use a different IP address. Votes (I think) are limited to one per IP. humanUser talk:Human 00:05, 7 March 2008 (EST)

Female Mormon[edit]

Crocodile finds a good looking Mormon (no -not an Osmond) & is so amazed that he has to upload her picture. Susanpurrrrr 14:49, 6 March 2008 (EST)

Meh, I wouldn't say 'good looking'. It looks like her eyes weren't put on at the same time, like badly put-up picture frames. --מְתֻרְגְּמָן שְׁלֹום
I wouldn't exactly say 'bad looking', either. Wonder what Mrs. Crocoite thinks about this, though. --AKjeldsenGodspeed! 14:56, 6 March 2008 (EST)
The more the merrier? Though, she knows that he's not got a chance - she's Mormon rather than fringe. --Shagie 16:44, 6 March 2008 (EST)

Racial censorship[edit]

Andy has such a hardon for his "affirmative action" article, he feels the need to create this to link to it. If Walter Williams hadn't already coined the phrase, I'm sure Andy would have invented it sooner or later himself. Bondurant 14:53, 6 March 2008 (EST)

I'd guess he made up the term, did a search for it before writing an article, and couldn't believe his good fortune in being handed an opportunity to quote and disparage an affirmatively actioned individual. PoorEd 14:57, 6 March 2008 (EST)

Quote mined[edit]

I am so looking forward to andys response to my accusation to quote mining. He'll no doubt have some kind of justification i.e. It was a liberal trick, part of the homosexual agenda etc. Its friday so I need a laugh or two. MetcalfeM 15:47, 6 March 2008 (EST)

Swift-Boating---Created by Conservapedia[edit]

Apparently Crocodile gave Swift-boating its CP "definition". [1] Except, as I pointed out to him, the article he references in the Swift-boating entry gave that EXACT definition three days before he wrote his definition!--Jdellaro 17:20, 6 March 2008 (EST)

Nice find. That was remarkable. Wow. I can't wait to see the reaction; I'm betting he just wet his Temple Garment.-αmεσ (soldier) 17:22, 6 March 2008 (EST)

I've read cp's version & googled it: can someone explain it to a mere Brit please? Susanpurrrrr 17:21, 6 March 2008 (EST)

Well -there you go: It's not what you say it's who you say it about! Susanpurrrrr 17:24, 6 March 2008 (EST)
Susan, do you still need help on this? Jollyfish.gifGenghis Marauding 18:12, 6 March 2008 (EST)
Well, I still don't know where it came from or really what it means, Genghis. Susanpurrrrr 18:15, 6 March 2008 (EST)
When John Kerry was standing for President a load of "Swift-Boat veterans" appeared out of the woodwork to dispute his military record as an officer on Swift-boats in Viet-Nam. It was widely seen as a Republican dirty-tricks campaign. Of course no-one could even find Bush's war record. Jollyfish.gifGenghis Marauding 18:21, 6 March 2008 (EST)
Thanks Genghis - alles klar! Susanpurrrrr
I really just want to scratch my OCD a bit, but since me categorizing the article led to somebody here noticing it, leading to Crococite going apeshit, nevermind. Back to painting minis or something... 18:23, 6 March 2008 (EST)
Sorry about that Anonymous! Susanpurrrrr 18:26, 6 March 2008 (EST)
Az, try playing some Dwarf Fortress a little and then poking at the dwarf fortress wiki. Lots of OCD stuff to do (fixing plurals and caps for starters). --Shagie 18:35, 6 March 2008 (EST)
Not trying to be anon, just can't remember my password, don't have email enabled... *shrug* Not a crisis. Az, aka 18:48, 6 March 2008 (EST)

Love the new definition of Swift-Boating, "On Conservapedia, Swift-boating means exposing hard truths about liberal editors who censor or distort the truth, or engage in deceit." Of course, in my short time at CP I had never seen it used. So I did a search on it and lo and behold, it's been used once. Approximately 14 minutes before the new definition went up, Crocoite used it on Parthian Shot. Of course, I had to point out the rare use of the term on CP. --Jdellaro 19:44, 6 March 2008 (EST)

I dont think Croc-what-the-fuck was hugged enough as a child. And why is Andy ignoring me? Its not like he has anything better to do. MetcalfeM 20:04, 6 March 2008 (EST)

Could be you've got him over a barrel & he's about to BANHAMMER you? Susanpurrrrr 20:06, 6 March 2008 (EST)(on 90-10 of course - not because he's been caught out. Susanpurrrrr
Oh-oh: he's given the "I'm right, you're wrong" defence. Susanpurrrrr 20:09, 6 March 2008 (EST)

I have asked him if he is a liberal....the shadow of the banhammer is looming. MetcalfeM 20:12, 6 March 2008 (EST)

Well. That what I wanted from my friday. A few lunch beers, some noodles, a good laugh and a 1 day ban for being smarter than insulting Andy. MetcalfeM 20:44, 6 March 2008 (EST)

What the heck timezone are you in, where your Friday is already getting inventoried? humanUser talk:Human 21:22, 6 March 2008 (EST)
From his post at CP MetcalfeM appears to be a Kiwi. Jollyfish.gifGenghis Marauding 03:34, 7 March 2008 (EST)
Smear campaigns are suddenly ok now? I can't wait for the next term, "George W. Bushing" to come out. That's when you call up voters in South Carolina and ask them if they would vote for John McCain "if they knew" he had an illegitimate child, when you know that he doesn't (a la Bush supporters in the 2000 Republican primary). The Michelle Malkin/CP definition of that process probably involves "exposing the potential infidelities of democrats and liberal republicans."--Bayesyikes 11:03, 7 March 2008 (EST)

School - classroom[edit]

Getting smaller
I was writing this when it appeared on WIGO but here it is anyhow:

The School of the gaps get smaller: School Prayer has been reduced to Classroom prayer. (Note: Instead of moving the whole article ASSFLY copied and pasted the contents only losing 63 chars (?) in doing so.) (image coming up) Susanpurrrrr 20:28, 6 March 2008 (EST)

I like the way it's a new article but the edit summary says improved! Jollyfish.gifGenghis Marauding 03:37, 7 March 2008 (EST)
Feel free to replace the current entry with yours! Or merge them... Extra snark is always welcome ;) --Sid 20:29, 6 March 2008 (EST)
Narr! (it's not a competition) folks'll see this here anyhow. Susanpurrrrr
What's funny is that as a mild sportsfan I see prayer in "public" all the time. Any number of cagefighters (mostly from Latin America, it seems) fall to their knees upon victory. Hell, zillions of baseball players "thank the Lord" with obvious gestures when, say, rounding second base while running out a home run. I think someone should start a liberal atheistic article on CP "Why prayer in sports should be banned" (PS, I know this made no sense at all). humanUser talk:Human 21:19, 6 March 2008 (EST)
Why would anyone want to watch sports? --Star of David.png Radioactive afikomen Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments. 01:01, 7 March 2008 (EST)
To keep themselves away from the clutches of Conservepdia. Jollyfish.gifGenghis Marauding 03:37, 7 March 2008 (EST)

Nepotism, anyone?[edit]

Looking forward to more rape jokes from Andy's future son-in-law. One word son; plastics. PFoster 21:19, 6 March 2008 (EST)

Are you implying he is dating a woman twice his age? (Lil' Phyl would be shocked!) humanUser talk:Human 21:20, 6 March 2008 (EST)
No - just the awkward talking-to-the-father-in-law moment...PFoster 21:24, 6 March 2008 (EST)
I was wondering how long it would take for this sentence to be commuted. Will Andy now consider reducing some of the other disproportionate bans on Conservapedia? Jollyfish.gifGenghis Marauding 03:39, 7 March 2008 (EST)
Well, although it wasn't Andy, I guess Wikinterpreter's unblocking by Fox is a start. Only another 18,000 to reconsider. Jollyfish.gifGenghis Marauding 06:21, 7 March 2008 (EST)
While I applaud Fox's gesture (even though I do wonder why he thought of this just now, after more than half a year), the problem is a lot bigger than this: They still got trigger-happy sysops like Crocoite and Karajou who love to throw around blocks and bans whenever somebody points out that they are wrong about something. And their policy does wonders for the site: Look at the hundreds of active and happy editors! ...oh, wait. (Yes, I'm preachy/cranky/bitter - I didn't have my caffeine yet) --Sid 07:31, 7 March 2008 (EST)
Maybe that's part of the reason for the unblocks; Fox realizes they're rapidly running out of productive/non-batshit insane editors over there. Assuming he actually cares about the project, it's not too much of a stretch. UchihaKATON! 21:14, 7 March 2008 (EST)

Poor Crock-o-shite[edit]

He can't tell the difference between "Israelis" and "Israel is...". DickTurpis 09:48, 7 March 2008 (EST)

Anti-semitism at CP, yea or nay...[edit]

I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around this one, and I'd like some opinions. While CP is, no doubt a forum for a particular brand of racism (a racism that argues the "right" kind of African American [what some people call a 'house n****r'] is okay, but that there is something fundamentally wrong with blackness), I'm not so sure where the Jews and Judaism fit in. While the site loves to brand groups like ANSWER or anyone who dares criticise Israel as antisemitic, the "there is no way but Jesus" mentality ain't exactly Jew-friendly...nor are the proceedings detailed in WIGO re: the yeshiva shooting. So, does anyone have a clearer sense on where CP stands re: Judaism? PFoster 11:50, 7 March 2008 (EST)

Ann Coulter said it all. The fundamentalist Christian point of view is that Christians are "perfected" Jews. The funadamentalist apocalypse depends on certain events taking place in Israel, including the restoration of the temple. So fundamentalists favor a strong Israel to bring about the Second Coming and keep access to Jerusalem until that happens. Once JC makes his appearance, those of the Jewish faith will have the choice of converting to Chrisianity or being left behind to eternal damnation. PoorEd 11:59, 7 March 2008 (EST)
I can't pinpoint any particular quotes but I seem to remember that Fox complained about some anti-Jewish sentiment one time. The problem with CP of course is that they don't subscribe to NPOV so both LDS and Jews can be bashed without too much worry. If people don't like it then the can always leave. This becomes a bit of a dilemma for those who are forced to decide between their religious and their political affiliations. Jollyfish.gifGenghis Marauding 12:12, 7 March 2008 (EST)
Well, there's definitely a pro-Israeli stance - but I presume that's just the Republican element coming out. (Dunno about Crocodile though) Susanpurrrrr 12:16, 7 March 2008 (EST)
There is a certain paradox amongst the political right that they support Israel (which is a democracy) but don't like Jews. Of course, it may be attributed to the fact that they dislike Arabs even more, so Israel is the lesser of two evils (metaphorically speaking). Also in the US (without getting into conspiracy theories), there is a large Jewish lobby which tends to be pro-Israel. When they can influence the tone of the media then the unthinking masses absorb it subliminally. Jollyfish.gifGenghis Marauding 12:33, 7 March 2008 (EST)
Likewise there is a paradox on the left for those who like Jews but aren't too fond of Israel (or at least many of their policies). I know some Jews who fall into that category. DickTurpis 13:04, 7 March 2008 (EST)
Like me?  : \ --Star of David.png Radioactive afikomen Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments. 13:06, 7 March 2008 (EST)
You know at least one Brit Female! :) Susanpurrrrr 13:09, 7 March 2008 (EST)

Strange bedfellows[edit]

There is an odd eschatology that brings the Christian fundamentalists in support for the nation of Israel. [2] is good reading and [3] has some British insights. is a site critical of Christian Zionism from a Christian perspective. And then you've got Christians United for Israel [4] which is a bunch of evangelicals touring Israel, trying to get the conditions right (Jewish control) [5] (youtube [6] 10 minute documentary, kind of scary). --Shagie 13:32, 7 March 2008 (EST)

Weird stuff. Keep in mind that until WW2, it was "ok" for Christians to be anti-Semitic. It all kind of blew up in their face when they allowed the Holocaust to occur as a result. So now, they loves them their Jews - or, at least, the bulwark against the Arab oil countries that the US' military outpost in Israel provides. humanUser talk:Human 13:39, 7 March 2008 (EST)

Huzzah for virginity![edit]

I love that news item. It's like no one in a boy band ever has a girlfriend, Simon Cowell definitely isn't gay and lucy in the sky with diamonds definitely isn't about drugs, no sir. Don't I remember Britney Spears publicly claiming her chaste purity for years before she came out and admitted she'd been shagging all comers since the age of 14? Ah, the only values better than Hollywood values are PR men's values. Trust Conservapedia to believe the hype when it suits them. --JeɚvsYour signature gave me epilepsy... 12:29, 7 March 2008 (EST)

She must've sold out to the Christian lobby.  : ) --Star of David.png Radioactive afikomen Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments. 13:07, 7 March 2008 (EST)


I love the way when people compare crime rates in much of thoroughly gun-controlled Europe with the United States, you always get the response of cultural differences which make the comparisons meaningless. But compare Israel and the US, well, that makes perfect sense. Are we supposed to believe from the information given that we're safer on the streets of Jerusalem than we are in NYC? DickTurpis 13:57, 7 March 2008 (EST)

It would appear the answer is yes. And given the state of the breaking news section today, I have a suspicion that foxy was throwing down a gauntlet, rather than trying to be educational. He must like living dangerously. Robin Redbreast 14:16, 7 March 2008 (EST)
Very interesting. The overall rates are very close (5.7 to 5.4) but I guess Israel does have a lower murder/terror/blowup/whatever rate. Though, if I may be a bit pedantic, the numbers don't tell the whole story and I think, for the average person/visitor, would be safer from being killed streets of NYC than Jerusalem. Most murders in NYC going to be drug or gang related, or non-random disputes between people known to one another, and if you stay away from those, you'll probably be fine. Suicide bombers are not quite so selective. Of course, your probability of being killed by a terrorist in Jerusalem are still very small. Regardless of all that, the huge cultural, geographic, and historic differences between the US and Israel make any comparisons in crime based on accessibility to guns completely worthless. DickTurpis 14:55, 7 March 2008 (EST)