Conservapedia talk:What is going on at CP?/Archive316

This is an archive page, last updated 15 June 2013. 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>, <296>, <297>, <298>, <299>, <300>, <301>, <302>, <303>, <304>, <305>, <306>, <307>, <308>, <309>, <310>, <311>, <312>, <313>, <314>, <315>, <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)

Elementary English exercise

Turning the Nigel Farage article into proper good English with paragraph-thingies and all that. 171.33.222.26 (talk) 17:17, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

What? --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 18:16, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

He said "Turning the Nigel Farage article into proper good English with paragraph-thingies and all that." StarFish (talk) 18:48, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

That part I'm clear on. The part that's fuzzy is what the fuck that means. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 19:14, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Ey's talking about this article, and saying that it would be a simple task to turn it into good English. ^{(talk to a)} Nihilist 19:25, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Oh, I get it. I guess our esteemed bunchanumbers friend is taking the piss out of them rather than earnestly suggesting we fix CP. My bad. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 20:09, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Hey JohnMuk, PROTIP: when you copypaste from Wikipedia, the returns apparently don't come over, so you get a wall o' text. Just so you know. Godspeed (talk) 21:08, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

That happens if you copy'n'paste the rendered text into the edit box; there isn't magic to convert the rendered text into wikimarkup in your clipboard ... CS Miller (talk) 08:31, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

True. I'm always seeing bits of text with [1] and [2] in the middle on Last.fm wikipages. Sophie^Wilder 08:41, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

(reset) I was merely describing the article - the point is not necessarily to change it.

Who agrees with the haggis-eaters? 171.33.222.26 (talk) 14:23, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Beware the ides of... oops I forgot.

Hey Ken, did you forget the special report that you were supposed to issue yesterday? I know it's hard to manufacture fresh-sounding lies to report on, but you should at least have given it a go.

I look forward to your excuses. Perhaps somebody came down with a bad case of flu, or your sleep schedule didn't permit you to post. Or maybe you'll just memory hole the promise like you did for all your promises about the 50/75/100 page QE booklet. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 08:52, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Are you suggesting one of Ken's predictions has failed to come true. I'm still waiting for operation grassroots, operation afterburner, The Ides of March 2010, 2011, 2012 and 2013 the book for grade schoolers and all the other bollocks he comes out with. It doesn't even get a snigger anymore. StarFish (talk) 09:37, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Damn Jeeves. Why you gotta be bringin' up old shit? ---Inquisitor (talk) 09:47, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Because I suffer from the curse of remembering what happened last week. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 10:15, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

It's been rectified. His "authoress" (who's not too sure about "it's" vs. "its," but nobody said she was an editoress) has sent him a communiqué of terrifying import on the Ides of May. And it ends with kisses and a happy face. I wonder if her name is Dulcinea? Whoover (talk) 14:22, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Jesus, that was unimaginative even by his standards. Come on, Ken. You're not even trying. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 14:28, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

I wonder if the "authoress" is real, but is actually one of us just trolling Ken.--"Shut up, Brx." 14:37, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Doubt it, looking at the evidence she's completely fabricated. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 14:42, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Beyond pathetic

This is incredible. He actually went back and revised the old blog post, even though we already knew what it said. Compare and contrast this old version with new version. Not only did he get rid of the 5PM GMT crap, he also went and changed the dates round on when his fictitious authoress would be done with her work so he could claim his "special report" would be about that. Ken, your lies are ridiculously transparent at this point. Why are you doing this? What the hell are you going to do when you haven't got a book to publish? --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 14:42, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

He'll claim he's very busy and is pursuing some exciting business opportunities.--"Shut up, Brx." 14:47, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Wow. That's weak. StarFish (talk) 15:08, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

He didn't post the comment, but soMe Damned Bear went to the original post and asked him where his big announcement was. MDB ^{(the MD is for Maryland, the B is for Bear)} 16:10, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

LOL, "The Spring of 2013 is going to be an extremely irritating month for atheists and evolutionist." Not only does the title enlighten me to the new month of "Spring", apparently he will only irritate one evolutionist (Fergus, he is man-crushing again).--BMcP - Just an astronomy guy 16:56, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Ken, you know that feeling you get whenever you read this page? You know the one. That chill that runs up your spine when you go "Oh crap... did I really say that?", only to have it confirmed seconds later. Then that hot flush that spreads across you cheeks onto your forehead... then the feverish urgency you experience as your shaking fingers edit/delete/burn all traces of the evidence. Sucks, doesn't it? So why do you put yourself through it so regularly? The solution is obvious: stop being a dishonest shit that makes promises that you are mentally incapable of keeping. --Inquisitor (talk) 19:19, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

His latest post includes a note from a "creationist sweetheart," illustrated with a pic from Simple English Wikipedia. This one is too just too easy and I won't strike a low blow. Maybe we should have a punchline contest. Sun Tzu must have said, "feed your opponent enough lulz, and he might bust a gut and die." Whoover (talk) 00:35, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
There are times when sticking in a Picard Double Facepalm still wouldn't illustrate the level of Facepalm Kenthingy is generating. And that's just among CPs' sysops.-- ^{Jabba de Chops} 16:01, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Oh look

The minute Patmac calls Ken out mysterious people are making demands on his time again^img and suddenly he'll no longer be "as active on the main page talk page" and his replies to Patmac will be brief.

He can't even come up with original excuses for running back to his bunny hole any more. PsyGremlin^Praat! 22:34, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Some people tasked me to do stuff in 2012 and 2013 and some letter said some stuff so I'm gonna be doing some stuff with them. Hahaohwow.jpg. Real convincing, Ken. This stems from the discussion Patmac asked Conservative first about liberal christianity crap, and Conservative throws one question at another at him and demands he answers, while not answering him anyway. Waiting for Karajou to start acting like a man... Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 23:03, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

That's rich.

Karajou tells someone to act like a man^img. Oh, and to follow the rules. Not only that, he defends Conservative in the same section. What balls of irony he has! ROFL! Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 17:02, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

He's right though. He does treat everyone the same, he's ALWAYS a colossal douchewad. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 17:05, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

True, to a point that he does nothing to others with rights. He doesn't enforce "everything must be true and verifiable" on Andy, and Kenny is making troll comments literally before and after Karajou's comment in RC. Such monumental cowardice on display, it amuses me. Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 17:16, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

He did join in the posse out to lynch Rob when he saw which way the tide of popular opinion was running. He knows which way the wind is blowing, that Popeye, which is to say always from Andy's arse. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 17:26, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

AlanE should realise by now that what earns the respect of the establishment there is how skillful you are at throwing your weight around and being petty. Markman knew this, and so was supported. AlanE appears to think that simply being in the right is enough. Brenden appears to have learnt the lesson, and I have high hopes for his advancement to fully fledged prick (in the nicest possible way, of course). Damo^Hi 21:25, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

It just blows my mind that truly good faith guys like AlanE who have been around for 5 years and really helped out get treated badly when children like Brendan run around growing into more and more transparent parodists. Jesus, even fundie weirdos like Daniel1212 who contribute shitloads of consonant content don't get embraced. 23:56, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

If you're a reasonable open-minded person, then CP has no need for you. CP is revenge porn for losers who feel they've been kicked around by the liberal establishment. --Inquisitor (talk) 00:11, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

I'm actually pretty liberal myself. Brenden (talk) 00:32, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, and good luck with this dickwad^img. ken has alresady reverted you and the last person to try to challenge kenny in this way had a lot more power than you and Nobs now edits here instead because kenny perma banned him. You're on your way out, say goodbye to all your 'friends' over at cp. Oldusgitus (talk) 20:08, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

On a side note, I just love how Karajou refers to them as "the Commandments." I picture him affecting a Charlton Heston "burning bush" voice as he reads those words aloud to himself. Junggai (talk) 09:20, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

And with total lack of irony kenny boy describes swabby^img and conservapedia exactly. Oldusgitus (talk) 17:59, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Conservatives are Always Right, Whichever Side They Take

Andy says gambling is for liberals, because it's bad. But it's different when Obama says it's not a great life strategy because that proves he's a Muslim and gambling is good because Muslims think it's bad. Of course if somebody tries to outlaw it in any context, we get screams of Nanny State! Whoover (talk) 00:10, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Only liberal suckers are gamblers. Good, god fearing conservatives own the casino. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 00:42, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Andy's making an un-conservative argument; gambling is uncoerced, voluntary taxation and the exercise of individual freedom. nobs^{Ye shall all perish in flames - Kim Jong-un} 02:22, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Not sure if Andy would yell "nanny state" if politicians attempt to outlaw gambling, given opposition is usually from social conservatives.--BMcP - Just an astronomy guy 04:01, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

I was gonna say that it's perfectly reasonable to oppose gambling personally but be against outlawing it, but then I realized Andy likely isn't capable of a nuanced position--"Shut up, Brx." 04:08, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Andy is actually right about lotteries being about getting money outta the poor^img. I guess in this case Andy's fundamentalism beats out his hatred for the poor. --Night Jaguar (talk) 05:21, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Key words: "...government-promoted "powerball" gambling...." Gambling isn't bad, but government-promoted (i.e., liberal) gambling is bad. Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 18:57, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Ken's longest break yet

After having spent the last couple of weeks getting the shit kicked out of him on various talk pages, Ken decides to pack it in: "Due to various people wanting more of my time, I will not be reading any talk pages of Conservapedia in 2013, 2014 and 2015. In addition, I will not be posting to any talk pages of Conservapedia as well during this period."

Taking bets on how long that'll last. --Inquisitor (talk) 02:53, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

if he's not back in a week, I'll be surprised.

Unless Andy finally had enough of him, but decided to let him appear to be going of his own accord. MDB ^{(the MD is for Maryland, the B is for Bear)} 04:20, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

Yup, that was my immediate reaction. It really was getting a little ridiculous even for that site. Andy's not going to like the drop in page views though, given that the site is going to be a lot more boring without Ken's insanity around. Tacitus (talk) 04:52, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

Well, Rafael quickly tweaks^img kenny's nose. I can't see the 'no post to talk page' lasting long in the face of this kind of provocation. Oldusgitus (talk) 06:18, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

This is weird, the completely anonymous -and the totally unrelated to Ken- author of the wildly successful Question Evolution! Campaign blog has also decided to stop responding to comments as well. What are the odds of that? --Inquisitor (talk) 07:00, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

Is this a sign of mental disintegration? Whoover (talk) 18:07, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

He's really going to great lengths to justify ignoring his critics. To the same critics he's trying to ignore. It's sad, but his entire life revolves around the attention he gets from RW. We are the only thing giving meaning to his wretched existence. --"Shut up, Brx." 18:33, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

"I will be recruiting someone else to handle responding to blog comments." Well, talk about giving the game away Ken. You finally admit that it's just you after all. Генгис^{Is the Pope a Catholic?} 18:41, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

That "Crazy drivers in Italy" video on his QE blog is a pretty accurate description of his brain at work... or perhaps the progress of his blog. I mean, does anyone else know what the point of that video could be? Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 19:13, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

He's always parroting weird movie clips he finds on youtube, if he's not just parroting vox day or shockofgoat directly. Bloke can't think for himself. I am curious to see how long this resolution to only post actual news on his blog lasts. I wonder if this is just his way of trying to get out of this obvious charade. I mean, it's not like he'll ever have any news to report. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 19:35, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

It's a way to get out of having to debate anyone since he confirmed that VivaYeshua isn't on "Shock of God's" chatroom anymore so nobody is there to "arrange" for a debate between "Conservative" and whoever obviously finds it impossible to follow his demands. I spoke with Nightmare (or some similar handle) a few days ago. He says he hasn't seen VivaYeshua in months. Remieres says he doesn't care about "Conservative's" debate demand. He's the only other sysop I ever see there on the rare times I can log on. So much for honesty. He just retreats to his intellectual bunny hole after rightly getting pounded for being cowardly and pridefully refusing to humble himself to God and people offering good counsel. What a sad person. Nate Keaton (talk) 20:22, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

Ill Nate, ill. The sad ones are swabbie and andy. And to a lesser extent I, and others, can be called sad for pointing at him. Oldusgitus (talk) 20:35, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

"I will not be reading any talk pages of Conservapedia" - it's not like he actually read anything on talk pages, anyway... ;) --Sid (talk) 21:39, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

This behaviour seems rather unusual to me. I wonder whether some family or someone have stepped in with an intervention and told him enough's enough? Ruddager (talk) 01:43, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Na, it's standard Ken behaviour. He is a spineless child and pulls the "I'm too busy" whenever he backs himself into a wall. Aceⁱ⁹ 02:54, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

If anyone stepped in at all (and if he stays away from the talk pages, as promised, he was definitely pushed) then it was Andy. Even someone as blind as Andy must realize that the CP talk pages have become little more than an exercise in Ken baiting. Perhaps it was Andy who was on the receiving end of a long-needed intervention, with someone pointing out that Ken is destroying what little chance there is left of CP ever being taken seriously by anyone. Tacitus (talk) 02:57, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

C-C-C-Combo Breaker!

He already read and responds to a talk page post by Rafael^img, but the response is in his bunny hole protected user space. He's still going on about debating, 15 questions, and that he's possibly more than one person. Dance for us, little man! Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 19:48, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Memory holed within seconds. Oldusgitus (talk) 20:34, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

No, no, no

Ken's not reading anything you say^img Fergus, honestly he's not. Oldusgitus (talk) 06:29, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Kenneth D DeMyer, your lack of machismo knows no bounds. Fergus Mason has machismo, but do you ? I think not! Vivayeshua was banned from ShockofGods chatroom, I was there when it happened. I will happily debate you, even though I am more of a creationist than an evolutionist. Naca (talk) 08:57, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

The only one who cares is you, Ken

From the block log:

(Block log); 01:17 . . Conservative (Talk | contribs) changed block settings for MasonFW (Talk | contribs) with an expiry time of 2015-05-20T05:11:17Z (account creation disabled) (90/10 rule: excess of talk rather than edits to substantive entries: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2GOYYbiEul0. By the way, I do not have to read the talk pages or post to them to hit the revert button)

People wonder why I drink.</sarcasm> Ochotona princeps^{not a pokémon} 10:11, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

We should probably thank Ken for summing up CP's philosophy in a concise soundbite, "If we don't like you, you don't get to speak, regardless of the substance of your contributions." Cheers Kenneth. -- Iscariot ^{Andy Schlafly for Congress 2012!} 07:09, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Terry Hurlbut, recovering homosexual

Is it just me, or does Terry's last comment imply he's had some gay sex?

"I remember enough to assert that homosexuality is a developmental arrest. You and I “developed” per the usual case. Adult homosexuals arrested their development."

Used to be gay, then grew out of it? Carlaugust (talk) 01:40, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

I didn't read it that way but it is a slightly strange hypothesis. It would imply that we all go through a gay stage and those with "arrested development" stay there. However I don't remember it like that. As long as I've wanted to have sex with people I wanted to do it with girls.--Fergus Mason ^{If in the first act you have hung a pistol on the wall, then in the following one it should be fired. Otherwise don't put it there. - Anton Chekov} 03:19, 20 Ma

y 2013 (UTC)

So by this theories us Bisexuals are...?--^Mikal_lakiM 07:00, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Either stealth homosexuals (or heterosexuals), or indecisives that can't pick one or the other, depending on which extreme end of the spectrum you want to slam against. Ochotona princeps^{not a pokémon} 10:14, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Maybe Terry's misunderstood the term 'Anal Retentive'.-- ^{Jabba de Chops} 10:27, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Terry's "theory" that gay marriage Will result in empty schools is one if the dumbest things it has ever been my misfortune to rest. PsyGremlin^Khuluma! 10:39, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

But it would just mean empty public schools. Occasionaluse (talk) 13:23, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

E.g. Psy's bafflement. Why do homosexuals want to "recruit" children again? I know they're the biblical™ equivalent of child molesters, pederasts, bestiphiles, satanic through and through. Do they want to have sex with them? Eat them? Build an army of gay children to further oppress christians? None of the actual arguments put forth makes a single bit of sense. 15:39, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Sounds like he's been reading too much Freud recently. Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 15:45, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Where does Grayson Perry fit into the hypothesis (or 'Miss W######h' for that matter) 171.33.222.26 (talk) 15:43, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

To the topic: I think this has to do with the sociological phenomenon that boys become aware that girls have cooties sometime after the sexes are segregated in primary school such as has happened when Dr. Hurlbut went to school, (do they do that now?). Eventually this goes away and boys view girls with desire...the gay boys (obviously) get "stuck" and the girls always have cooties and are icky, the only other sexual choice open to them are their best buds who have no cooties. Since they are "stuck" they always see 11 year old boys as their peers and "recruit" them. This is not my opinion but a guess at Terry's view of the topic. I have been out and open since the olden days, 1979. C®ackeЯ 16:29, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

You mean when boys realise that it isn't cooties girls have, it's cootchies?--Fergus Mason ^{If in the first act you have hung a pistol on the wall, then in the following one it should be fired. Otherwise don't put it there. - Anton Chekov} 23:45, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Could someone with an account over there ask Terry where the statistics posted come from? I'd be very curious to know. The only one that makes any sense to me is that 79% of gay men have had sex with someone under 19, which, given average ages of loss of virginity & AOC laws makes a lot of sense. I'm also curious as to his assertion that it has to do with tolerance. Ken used to have that claim on his homosexuality article until I challenged it by going and getting the book he was referring to. There has been no actual evidence to suggest that tolerance of homosexuality increases incidence. It only increases openness and awareness. Ayzmo (talk) 19:14, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Those stats are plagerized from the hilariously misleading/lying/out-of-date "study" by Frank Joseph. Most of the stats on there are from the 1980's and earlier, and if you dig through each citation, you'll find that they are either (a) discredited, (b) HUGELY misleading as to what the real statistic is, or (c) outright lies. For example, that "under 19" statistic comes from a 1979 study, which, like you said, is trotted out as a scary (!) fact, until you realize that it is probably true that most people have had relations with someone under 19. Carlaugust (talk) 19:44, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

I think I can explain (well, as best as anyone can explain anything Hurlbut-related). Freud postulated that disorders with narcissistic features were the result of arrested development due to unresolved issues in childhood. Hypochondriasis is an often-cited example. This doesn't mean that everyone went through a phase where they thought they were sick against all evidence, it just means that all people with those concerns allegedly had some common set of childhood issues. What Terry is doing is dragging out something called "sexual narcissism," which has been used by various right-wing cranks over the years in an attempt to explain homosexuality and/or transgenderism. TL;DR: Terry done fucked up Freud.--江斯顿^{What is it now?} 04:44, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Night mode

Is it my imagination or is night mode being used far less at cp right now? I can't recall a single time I've logged on there recently when it has been switched on. Unless they've changed my accounts privs without me realising of course. Oldusgitus (talk) 06:35, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Oh, and I'd missed this peach^img. That's right andy, archive everything away from your talk page so you can ignore everything that is being said to you about your and kenny's idiocy. Oldusgitus (talk) 06:39, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Karajou sees through your cunning disguise!

Popeye smart! Him know that RMcForrester who no make any edits is sock of Ace McWicked. Two different people no have Mc in their names! --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 20:34, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

I wonder if he avoids going to McDonald's for that reason. Vulpius (talk) 20:54, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

That's amazing! I can edit CP in my sleep it would seem. Fantastic. Aceⁱ⁹ 21:00, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

And why not? kenny, andy, swabbie and ed seem to edit in their sleep all the time. Oldusgitus (talk) 21:07, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

I just wish I knew I was doing it...but it does explain why I wake so tired every morning. I thought it was my alcohol consumption but now I know it is my nocturnal editing of Conservapedia. Aceⁱ⁹ 21:17, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Ace has nocturnal editions? Генгис^pillaging 01:33, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Clean-up is a breeze!C®ackeЯ 02:08, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

I'm usually the most sophomoric in the crowd, but I decided to skip "nocturnal edition" earlier, as beneath this august company. I'm so ashamed. Whoover (talk) 02:33, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Pray for victims

It's not the first time Andy's given us his unique view on charity. A few Christmases ago, when PJR suggested giving to the poor and homeless, Andy was adamant that they'd be better served by his prayers. The man is a colossal douche. PsyGremlin^Runāt! 14:38, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

If I remember it was BrianCo. Or was that the Haitian earthquake? I think Andy eventually posted a link to his local church so that they could send bibles. Генгис^{Is the Pope a Catholic?} 01:25, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm sure if I'd lost my home and my possessions I'd be absolutely fucking delighted to learn that a middle class douchebag in New Jersey was praying for me. I really want someone to ask him how he thinks that will possibly help. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 15:07, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

He pulled the same stunt after the Port-au-Prince earthquake, and again after the Fukushima meltdown. Andy just refuses to post charity links, no matter what. I believe his initial excuse after the earthquake was something to do with the Red Cross and Obamacare. After that little tirade, someone suggested he put up a link to Catholic Charities instead - Andy didn't even bother with an excuse after that one. Honestly, of all the weird shit he does, this one makes the least sense.--江斯顿^{What is it now?} 15:26, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Linkee to Andy's statement.^img MDB ^{(the MD is for Maryland, the B is for Bear)} 15:29, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

It's just a shame that one cannot pray and donate money. Nope, it's gotta be one or the other. Phiwum (talk) 15:42, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

A Moment of Personal Privilege

Speaking as someone who is nominally the same faith as Andy:

Andrew Layton Schlafly, go fuck yourself. With a white-hot fireplace poker tipped with curare, arsenic, and belladonna. And no lubricant. MDB ^{(the MD is for Maryland, the B is for Bear)} 16:01, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

SNAP from me Bevo74 (talk) 18:36, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

A Little Tidbit About Fundamentalist Thinking

As someone who grew up in the evangelical and fundamentalist world, Andy's viewpoint is certainly not unique. The large majority of Christians, including fundamentalist Christians, give money and donations through charity, some will outright supply time and labor, however all will believe prayer is as, if not more, powerful than their physical efforts. It makes sense if you believe in an all-powerful benevolent, yet harsh god who demands justice (and all people are collectively sinners). There is among this a subset of thought that prayer is paramount over any material aid, as I was told once, "what good does all the food and shelter do people, if their souls are hellbound?" and "it is better to be homeless and starving and saved, than well-off and damned". They would pray for the victims recovery, but in the context that they would accept salvation, and believe by doing just this they do more than anyone supplying actual aid.

I would argue though there is another motivation among some Christians, and those types are best represented by Hurlburt. These are Objectivist Christians, who use the principles of Objectivism to justify not giving out charity, believing it would just foster and enable dependance and bad behavior. It is a selfish belief that allows them to effectively ignore the Christian theological belief that supplying need to the poor and destitute is the duty of the believer.--BMcP - Just an astronomy guy 16:34, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

I have to admit, I've never understood the "pray for them" attitude. If some schmuck in New Jersy doesn't ask God to find a little girl trapped in rubble, He's just going to let her die? What a prick. "Well, I was going to let the town be a ruin forever and all those who inhabit it die cold and alone...but since Andy asked nicely, I guess I'll inspire Obama to send FEMA." What's the point of a "divine plan" if anybody can talk you out of it? Carlaugust (talk) 17:42, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

But that's at the heart of the prayer controversy. As someone once said "You cannot petition the lord with prayer", except, of course, that's exactly what those of a religious bent do every day. I've heard the "you don't get it unless you ask for it line" but, taking the "we're all god's children position" I don't refuse to give my child what he needs just because he doesn't ask for it. Especially if he's trapped under a building. "What's that, Patrick, you're trapped. Well I'm not going to help you until you ask." Doesn't play, somehow. Innocent Bystander (talk) 17:58, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

I think my mom use to say, or imply at least, that God only does what the prayer asks if it's what he wants… even though she was also fond of quoting or paraphrasing Matthew 18:19, and that makes prayer fairly pointless. Even as a kid i didn't really understand it, but i rolled with it anyways because, hey, not everything's bound to make sense to me, right? ^{(talk to a)} Nihilist 18:06, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Prayer and the Protestant work ethic are always a great substitute for charity. Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 18:19, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, well most people actually think that "God helps those that help themselves" is actually a quote from the Bible too... --Inquisitor (talk) 18:23, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Andy is laying low because his recent "global warming hoax proved by cool weather" pronouncement is -- shall we say -- diluted by such energetic weather. That's why it was predictable his sorry Christian ass wouldn't bring it up. When called out, "but I'm praying" was his personal bunnyhole. Whoover (talk) 18:24, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

I think everyone's being too harsh on Andy. It's like he says: he's just too darned Jesus-like to give to charity. Charity is well enough for other folks, but obviously Andy can do more good by prayer alone than he could ever do with prayer + charity. Phiwum (talk) 19:36, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

I have a question...

Maybe I'm just not well enough up on my new testament, but are there actually any incidents in there of Jesus praying for someone who was in need rather than helping them? I have the feeling Andy is talking out of his arse. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 19:30, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

If he did, that brings up yet -another- good question; what the heck was Jesus doing praying to himself? "Dear me, if I could find it in my heart to help these people, I would really appreciate it. Thanks me! Love, myself." Carlaugust (talk) 19:43, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

I am not aware of a single instance of Jesus praying for any individual. I am not aware of a single instance of Him owning any personal property beyond His clothes and shoes, so He also probably did not give charity. He certainly relied on it to survive. It is now my belief that Andy believes he knows Jesus better than the Gospels describe Him. His hubris is appalling. Nate Keaton (talk) 19:53, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Maybe Andy thinks the parable of the Good Samaritan is lieb'rul propaganda...? (For anyone not brought up in a vaguely-Christian tradition, the take-home message from Jesus is, "get up off your fat lazy arse and help people in need".) Cardinal Fang (talk) 19:56, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

PFFFT! Andy doesn't care one wit about Jesus or the Bible for that matter. Seriously, just look around at the religious articles on CP. They're jokes. The article for the Sermon on the Mount(pretty much the pinnacle of Jesus' earthly ministry) is only a few paragraphs long, and half of that was added by DonnyC. 'nuff said. --Inquisitor (talk) 05:45, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Andy has a question of his own: "Do you think Jesus was somehow wrong, and liberal denial right?"^img --Night Jaguar (talk) 09:39, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

He's as bad as Kendoll when it comes to avoiding the question. Is this what happens to you when you commit to being wrong in public at all times? --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 21:15, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Another fabulous encyclopedic article from bad touch Poor.

Pure class^img as always. With, as always, that little nod towards sexism. Oldusgitus (talk) 17:37, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

I like how there's no citation. ^{(talk to a)} Nihilist 18:00, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

That's what peons are for. Vulpius (talk) 18:09, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Is "HiLDA" even a real acronym? Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 20:00, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Wow, I must've imagined all those chicks in the Biology department, then. RachelW (talk) 01:28, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

And if we're going by anecdote, my wife - a Chartered Electrical Engineer must be a figment of my imagination Worm (talk) 09:24, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Victims of feminism, every one. Whoover (talk) 21:08, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Andy Case Study #498

Noticed this in the logs from a few days ago:

1. WilliamWB does a massive cleanup of Conservapedia proven right
2. Andy notices, a week later, that an entry was removed somewhere along the line, adds it back, reverts WilliamWB's edit, and blocks him for 2 years.
3. Andy realizes his reversion re-removed the entry (because WilliamWB didn't even remove it), then adds it back, again.
4. Andy realizes his mistake and unblocks WilliamWB oops that would require Andy to admit he made a mistake, so it didn't happen. Oh well. Justice is served!

Andy, never change. Cow...Hammer^time! 20:06, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

I love how Andy's claim that Chavez secretly died back in December (rather than in March) is listed under both Conservapedia proven right^img and Conservapedia proven wrong^img. --Night Jaguar (talk) 21:18, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Schrodinger's fact? --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 21:49, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Isn't this WIGO-worthy? An obvious parodist can survive for years by feeding one of Andy's pet fantasies, but an apparently well-meaning editor is roadkill because he got too near a third rail. Whoover (talk) 00:42, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

William WB had nothing to do with removing Andy's pet "abortion causes breast cancer" entry but gets wiped out? Really, the more I see of Schlafly the more I despise his disgusting hypocrisy and ineptitude. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 01:40, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

They say you should never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.... but in this case, it seems to be both. Occasionaluse (talk) 13:05, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

"Quantum Christiaity"

Hard to add links from my current browser, but as a follow up to yesterday's sorry behavior by Andy, he's given me a new "Conservative Insight". Jesus shows us that it's "Christian" to pray for those in need instead of assisting through direct action (at least when you're not conjuring loaves & fish, curing disease, raising dead friends, or pulling drowning disciples out of the sea). However, it's also a praiseworthy example of being "Christian" for Kevin Durant to donate a million dollarsto help tornado victims when non-Christians would just stand on the sidelines and do nothing (which is totally not like standing on the sidelines and praying). Since Andy Schlafly couldn't possibly be a selfish, lazy, stingy hypocrite who expects taxpayer money to help these people in their emergency instead of charity, there must be an explanation as logical as the Bible, and then it hit me:

The answer is QUANTUM CHRISTIANITY! You're a great Christian if you help with particles (actual material assistance) or waves ("I'm praying for you guys. A lot. Really."). The part that makes it logical is that the "Christian" nature of the act is determined by the observer, and since Andy is doing the obvserving, the outcome is always as it should be.--DinsdaleP (talk) 15:03, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

the other answer is that Andy is a just a prick. AMassiveGay (talk) 15:14, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Occam's suggests the latter. --Certified _{Sick Bastard} 16:27, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Andy subscribes to the many-worlds hypothesis. He figures that in potentially far more realities, the tornado didn't even happen because Christians pre-prayed. --Edgerunner⁷⁶_{Your views are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter} 16:31, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Jesus urged the people...

Don't be like liberals.^img No doubt it says so in the Conservative Bible. Aceⁱ⁹ 00:09, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

But it's liberal denial to deny the quotes in the Bible^img. He typed that right before the "Don't be like liberals". I can't fathom the depths of stupidity. Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 02:24, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

If Andy's a parodist, he's a genius. If he's for real, he's a complete moron. Sadly, I think he's for real. --Night Jaguar (talk) 02:30, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Don't mention the war!

Oh dear, Kenny baby seems to have embarrassed the dear leader. Apparently we're not allowed to know Andy exists in real life as well as on CP. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 21:39, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Poor Ken. He thought he was the only one with a super seekrit identity. --Inquisitor (talk) 22:00, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Hilarious. I wonder if Kenny has the balls to memoryhole an edit by Dear Leader. Better not chance it Kenny, since your obvious attempt to brown nose so spectacularly backfired. I think this gives more credence to the theory that Andy had a direct hand in Ken's current talkpage hiatus. Shakedangle (talk) 22:08, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

That video is great. Lookit Andy not using a teleprompter. I want to see him LAUGHING though. DogP (talk) 22:23, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Andy's voice really is the vocal equivalent of Comic Sans, isn't it? Vulpius (talk) 23:07, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

I always thought of it as Brush Script. It thinks it's kinda fancy, but really it's fucking stupid. Comic Sans implies faux-whimsy. There's nothing whimsical, faux or otherwise, about Andy or his ridiculous voice. I love font jokes. Hiphopopotamus (talk) 23:40, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Coming up with a person's typeface equivalent is an awesome game. Andy's definitely Comic Sans - it's an ostensibly well-designed typeface, but one that begged to be grotesquely misused because of a goofy nature that could only ever be appropriate in the rarest of circumstances. Ken is Papyrus - it attempts, and fails, to be exotic and lend an air of mystery, yet is so clumsy and overplayed that nobody with the least savvy takes it seriously - relegated to the new age bookstores his cult's literature belongs in. I'm naturally Hoefler & Frere Jones' Didot - perhaps the most elegant Didone ever cast. Ace is their Knockout Middleweight - whimsical and humorous, yet powerfully frank. Sterile is their Verlag Extra Light - pure and open, oozing intelligence and sophistication reminiscent of deco letterforms, yet doggedly versatile. Genghis is H&FJ Gotham - venerable and strong of will, yet always refreshing - the typeface that won both of Obama's terms. Psy is Futura Extra Bold Condensed - bitey, powerful, well considered, distinctive, requires a wide berth. And of course, Human is Eurostile Demi, the typeface his logo is set in - attempted as a ham-handed substitute for Helvetica, Frutiger, or Univers, yet requires mastery to set well - a familiar yet distinctive workhorse that needs breathing room for its charming eccentricities to shine. 05:14, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

I don't get a typeface? I'm sad now. --Certified _{Sick Bastard} 15:00, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Great idea! Andy would definitely be Comic Sans, or even better, Kristen ITC. When I see them I'm always reminded of people trying to appear professional by using desktop tools, but coming off as amateurish in their execution. Picture any of Andy's online classes, science posts, Lenski correspondence or his legal briefs, and it's a perfect fit. Karajou would be Stencil, of course. Ken, I think, would be Tequila from the Themeworld font collection - it has the look of someone up for 23 hours straight, obsessively tracing over the same letters again and again until they look "just right". --DinsdaleP (talk) 16:34, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Nutty, I want to kiss you with tongue. PsyGremlin^{말하십시오} 20:55, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Oh man. Now I have to go through my font book and come up with some specimens. Shat, you can have a typeface, but I don't know enough about you. Send me an email describing who you are, what you do, and some of your freakiest sexual fetishes. 21:00, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Fuck email, I'll be open. I'm an eighteen year old sexually confused physics student who eschews human contact and embraces passive aggressive comments in conversation. I get bored incredibly easily and I might be Aspergic. If that is the right word. If it's not, then it should be. On top of that, I don't drink because alcohol tastes bad, I don't do drugs because I can't be bothered to try them, I'm awful at decent conversation and I haven't shown emotion for months and....fuck this, basically think of Craig Tucker and you're not entirely far off. --Certified _{Sick Bastard} 22:11, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Maybe an early blackletter like Textualis - at an age that you take yourself very seriously, complex but only confused when you don't treat yourself right, smart. Definitely not insane, residing in a creepy alternate universe, and miserably executed like this cretin Brxbrx suggests. 00:29, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

[3]--"Shut up, Brx." 22:31, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

I can understand where Nutty is coming from when he ascribes Papyrus to Ken, but to my mind Ken is a home-brewed Christian font - ones where they replace the 'T' with an oversized cross. Генгис^mutating 23:23, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Nah, surely Ken is a crayon font, like Mikie's Christmas List, but with reversed e's? Wait scrap that - he's Two Turtle Doves. The pic was a dead giveaway. --PsyGremlin^Parlez! 23:35, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Papyrus is actually a very nice face that has its uses. I just chose it because it's so easily abused that it seemed obvious. Psy totally wins. My eyes hurt as much as my brain after reading anything Ken writes. 23:52, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Brxbrx is best represented by the i and j in this delightful face. 23:58, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

I'm one of those fonts that is so understated and elegant you don't even notice it. Or it could be that I keep typing 'ALT+255' over and over. --Inquisitor (talk) 00:04, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

I did not see either of those fonts coming... I was expecting something more clinical. In the Arial family, probably. Maybe I just have trouble explaining what I'm like. Which I do (Shut up, Brx). Now, for those guys. I don't think Andy is Comic Sans, I can see where you're coming from but I can do one better (I think). He's more Qarmic Sans - it looks like you can just about take it seriously, but when you try to do it you really, really can't - Comic Sans is used enough that I kind of can. Anger Bear, Stencil is fine for him. Takes himself too seriously to realise that the army probably doesn't even use that any more, if they ever in fact used it. Kenny...Kenny boy is one of the image fonts. Wingdings or something. He can type anything in and nobody will be able to tell what the fuck he is on about. Everything just turns to mush the moment he touches it. Terry is a large array of fonts and colours, like all the .net pages he gives more credit than they should be allowed, which is none. Not sure for Ed. Probably something that takes itself far too seriousy and is funny because of it. --Certified _{Sick Bastard} 13:11, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

{reset}. What about Fractur (half the letters look alike, or weird or both). 171.33.222.26 (talk) 14:18, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Though it's perfectly respectable and continues to be appropriately used as a display face, mostly still in Germany, I avoid considering Fraktur because of its difficult context. "The Fraktur typefaces were particularly heavily used during the time of Nazism, when they were initially represented as true German script, the press scolded for its frequent use of "Roman characters" under "Jewish influence" and German émigrés urged to use only "German script". That's why I chose something based on the ornate script of the day that Gutenberg would have had cut for his letterpress. 16:09, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

${\mathfrak {Nevertheless,\;I'm\;still\;enjoying\;Fraktur:}}$_{sorry for the s} my Latin dictionary used Fraktur for the German parts and Antiqua for any Latin (or French etc.) word. I read the classic in my parents' library in Fraktur, and yes, I was annoyed when the FAZ dropped it from her headlines. --larron (talk) 18:08, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

${\mathfrak {It's\;still\;creepy.}}$ 19:50, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

@Certified, several hours ago: Ed is a font which only has A, B and C, leaving the rest of the work for someone else to do. Cardinal Fang (talk) 23:33, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Wiki Question

Is it possible to create a plug in or utility that can change the font of Talk page renderings based on the signatures? I know I could do it in VBA using the HTML file as input, but that's inelegant. It would add a new dimension of fun to be able to set up a name/font reference in a configuration file, and have talk pages appear that way by default. --DinsdaleP (talk) 16:59, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Yeah you can do it in pure CSS with CSS3 vendor codes per browser. You could also do it pretty easily in jQuery with simple CSS1 rules. Either method is solely browser side and, at least for RW's purposes, dependent on what's in the font stack on your own computer. If we signed up for a service like Typekit, anyone with javascript turned on would get the fonts we as designers want them to see. 19:55, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

From a member of the family that says there is no such thing as marital rape

Apparently Obama is sexist^img for responding in a very restrained way to a heckler. But poor old Sergio makes a racist remark quip and gets scolded for it. andy, I really thought my opinion of you could get no lower but fuck me, you proved me wrong. Oldusgitus (talk) 20:38, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Looks like it is okay to make racist comments if you're Spanish, but if you're a mixed-race 'muslim' you can't called a woman a 'young lady'. This way beyond double standards. Bevo74 (talk) 20:59, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

I thought calling a 60-year-old woman "young lady" would have been the height of Schlafly chivalry, so I checked Feminism to see what was up. Nothing on young lady, but I did learn that feminists object to other female-only names, such as "temptress." "Young lady" is sexist but "temptress" is good clean fun? Whoover (talk) 21:15, 23 May 2013 (UTC) Update: That was no parodist. Whoover (talk) 21:20, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

That's the best thing about Andy. When you swear he's hit bottom and is scraping up against bedrock... he whips out the diamond-tipped drills and high explosives and keeps right on going. --Inquisitor (talk) 21:47, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Never mind the bedrock layer, he passed through that ages ago. He's currently hanging around near the outer/inner core interface and still digging. Reckon he can break into the iron ball at the centre of the Earth? --Certified _{Sick Bastard} 22:05, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Isn't the Earth supposed fo be flat? Sorry, but I can never remember what bollocks creationists are spouting from week to week. Генгис^{Our ignorance is God; what we know is science.} 23:26, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Isn't the Earth supposed fo be flat? Typical evolutionist story-telling and misrepresentation. It was in fact revealed in the Bible that the world is round and evolutionists propogated the 'flat earth' idea to ridicule creationists. In fact, science itself comes from a christian worldview and Issac Newton, among others, were creationsits.

Sorry, but I can never remember what bollocks creationists are spouting from week to week. Resort to mockery when you have no argument. Yawn. Aceⁱ⁹ 23:31, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Don't you almost miss the guy? Something bad must have happened that he's no longer penning that epic mash letter of a wiki to his cult leaders. 00:32, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Andy dug so deep he managed to penetrate the bedrock and fall into the void.--BMcP - Just an astronomy guy 01:30, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

He probably dug straight down in his village and didn't even place any torches, so he takes everyone with him, that noob. Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 13:16, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Andy's village is nothing but creeper holes, misshapen half destroyed buildings, and dried up fallow fields, where no torches are allowed because only liberal wimps use them, and is entirely populated by creepers and zombies.--BMcP - Just an astronomy guy 14:23, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

(reset) How many levels below Hell/Tarartus/other equivalents is he? 171.33.222.26 (talk) 14:26, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Maybe he's hoping he'll go so far down he'll get to heaven from the opposite direction.-- ^{Jabba de Chops} 14:46, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Are you saying that for Andy heaven will be entry from the backside? Генгис^pillaging 17:08, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

You git – now I can't get this out of my head.-- ^{Jabba de Chops} 18:00, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Main Page Talk

Given that the peons are in open revolt on Main Page Talk every time Andy opens his mouth, how long do you think it will be before Andy relents and starts letting Ken use the Talk Pages again? More importantly, will it be before or after he screws up his Texas job in front of the courts?-- ^{Jabba de Chops} 14:55, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Ken would be finished were Andy a completely gutless and a miserable manager. Ken's also been in open revolt for more than a year now, taking progressively bigger shits on the faiths of nearly all CP admin and just making a shameful mockery of conservatism, christianity, and even his cult of creationism, since he's now become such a hate-filled extremist that he's a christian in name only. I predict Ken will return, first tepidly, then very quickly with greater contempt for every single person he interacts with, and Andy will sit there like a little bitch letting a mentally ill person with the emotional capacity of an infant and the lack of intellectual integrity typical of creationists, which is even gleefully less honest than Andy's brand of reality. 16:14, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

I'm guessing that a parodist will seize upon the opportunity, and start blocking all dissenting voices. --Inquisitor (talk) 17:21, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Dance little man.

Dance for your masters^img. Oldusgitus (talk) 20:31, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Those three years flew by fast. What did I miss? --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 20:37, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Kenny is still pushing the graphene-thin charade of anonymity and is still a gibbering idiot. Nothing much else. --Certified _{Sick Bastard} 21:57, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Since Ken is honest and incapable of telling a lie, I can only assume that Ken has somehow developed time travel. This means what we are reading is from Future Ken. So now that there are two Kens present on this timeline, you can understand his strange usage of personal pronouns. Furthermore don't be surprised when archeologists unearth some ancient stone tablets that begin with the words "Gentlemen..." --Inquisitor (talk) 22:27, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Don't you think it's a bit unfair and irrational to claim that he is "dancing" for us when he's merely responding to us? That mentality is really just reminescent of that of a grade school bully. That being said, his whole "I/we" thing is crazy.WilliamR (talk) 06:44, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Jesus, he's really pathetic. Yes, Ken, you totally didn't read that comment about you before you decided to block a user after one edit. We believe you. What the fuck is wrong with you? --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 07:03, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Why pretend not to have read the comment? He's just claimed that he finished those three years work in less than two weeks and doesn't have to save time by not reading comments anymore. Once again, I'm trying to look for logic where there isn't any. Spud (talk) 11:40, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Walter Scott wrote Oh what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive, and Ken's mask slips with the giveaway "my announcement". Keeping up an artifice requires extreme care and Ken hasn't the guile to maintain it 100%. Генгис^{Our ignorance is God; what we know is science.} 07:16, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Since when was the Oort Cloud referred to as a Liberal fictional places? Answer me that Ken. Ooh an a reference to PJR, nice one Ken, maybe you should start editing over there now that Mean Old Andy has told you to bugger off. Naca (talk) 07:47, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi Ken, don't think oversight works on the deletion log Naca (talk) 07:56, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

I've read other creationist sites which dispute the existence of the Oort cloud. Ken's not original enough to come up with things like that on his own. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 12:01, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Terry doesn't believe in it either, despite the fact that we can actually see things (Sedna, for example) that are in it.--Fergus Mason ^{If in the first act you have hung a pistol on the wall, then in the following one it should be fired. Otherwise don't put it there. - Anton Chekov} 13:33, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Terry actually starts an article

On ADHD, dismissing it, of course, as all made up. So Ken, without a trace of irony comes along and helps Terry out^img. Oldusgitus (talk) 05:05, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

I hate to say it, but Ken's edits there aren't the worst in the world. It's refreshing to see him do something in mainspace beyond spamming links to his sophomoric essays about flying cats and gay people.--"Shut up, Brx." 05:10, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Totally agree actually brx, my point was more that it took him 37 edits over 4 hours to do it. Oldusgitus (talk) 07:20, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

No irony is intended as Ken is probably speaking from personal experience. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 07:25, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Lol he's added shit about magnet treatment. Doesn't that fall into the "woo" category? Just as soon as it seems like this guy is making worthwhile contributions, he quickly steers himself right back into crazyville. I bet he's got a collection of those magnetic bracelets you see on informercials at 3am.--StephenCocktail (talk) 14:35, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Ken's very clearly been through the gauntlet of psychiatrists and therapists trying to cure whatever the hell is wrong with him. He's now more or less down on all doctors probably because he didn't get any better, and he's always promoting quackery as the solution to his problems (which will be fixed any month now!) It's a shame, because he clearly needs something. I guess it's just not something the US health care system is set up to provide. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 14:57, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

All burned. We seem to have hit a nerve. Whoover (talk) 00:18, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

I have a theory that Ken has manic episodes when he posts this personal stuff but later comes to his senses realizes he's said too much for his committee of mystery identity. One could make many diagnoses based on his actions and ramblings - bi-polar, schizophrenia, epilepsy - none of which we know to be true; the only apparent certainty is that he is not a mentally well individual. Генгис^{You have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you.} 08:51, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

As a sysop, Ken's edits are automatically patrolled and leave a indestructible shadow in the patrol log... --larron (talk) 09:25, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

That burst of obsessive concentration, followed by the guilty cleanup, is hard not to see as orgasmic. Whoover (talk) 14:13, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

Oh dear goat, seeing ken in the same sentence as orgasmic is not somethingI ever wanted to do. What is seen can not be unseen sadly :-(. Oldusgitus (talk) 15:26, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

It's now official

Reagan was a RINO^img. There is now noone left who is actually a real, true and honest rethuglican I guess. Oldusgitus (talk) 16:01, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

The best part is that he wasn't a true conservative because he wasn't a friend of the working class. Liberal denial at work. Whoover (talk) 16:35, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Next Andy is going to tell us that "Saint" Washington was actually the AntiChrist. Quazywabbit (talk) 17:09, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Andy's tough on the old guy. Most on the right forgive Reagan's 1994 support of gun control since he was diagnosed with Alzheimer's that year. No easy outs for Andy. Whoover (talk) 18:22, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Actually what has been made official is that Andrew Layton Schlafly Esq. is conservatism. --Inquisitor (talk) 19:26, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Its truly Andy VS the world now. --Revolverman (talk) 20:25, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

I look forward to the day when Andy claims to be more Christian than Jesus. Spud (talk) 09:14, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

But the word Christian is liberal. So he could only claim he was more Christ than Jesus. Ajkgordon (talk) 09:23, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

Do you think that if Andy claimed to be the messiah, Ed would become his disciple? --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 09:58, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

And what would he do with his handkerchief? Генгис^{You have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you.} 13:31, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

The Internets are Really Creationist

Internet expert discovers Google USA estimates 101,000,000 search results for the search "Evolution and just so stories". Unless you remember the quotes. Whoover (talk) 21:13, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

A more relevant search is "evolution and 'just so stories'", which yields about 100k - 125k hits. The first few seem relevant. Phiwum (talk) 21:30, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

But searches like this are much more fun. Whoover (talk) 21:56, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

You certainly can have fun with Google. If I type "ken demyer" into a Google search box the first suggestion is "ken demyer mentally ill", followed by "ken demyer conservapedia". YMMV. Генгис^{You have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you.} 01:03, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

News, Ed Poor Style.

New York Times editors are all gay! At least they were 11 years ago, when this "news" was published. At least Wing Nut Daily said so 11 years ago. Of course, they've never told us who these 75% of gay NYT editors are. They're still working on it. Whoover (talk) 17:17, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Good old Ed. Always finding new ways to nauseate us. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 18:18, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Typical of a retrenched bigot. Генгис^{You have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you.} 18:33, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

I have heard from a very trusted source that 75% of Conservapedia editors are closet cases. Vulpius (talk) 19:15, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Considering that (I would guess by pulling a figure directly out of somewhere) about 95% of cp editors are parodists I do wonder where you got that figure from. Now, if you said 75% of cp sysops then I would accept that without question. Oldusgitus (talk) 19:23, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

And the dancing continues. Somebody points out the age of this "news item." And He Who Reads No Talk Page independently realizes the same thing, merely relying on his eidetic memory for all things gay. Whoover (talk) 22:27, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Three years flies by fast, redux.

And that's the other part of his vow broken^img. Why bother saying you're going to refrain from posting non-news items when you know you can't resist the allure of cheap alexa gtaph spamming? Once again Ken promises the world and delivers nothing. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 17:01, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

Silly boy. Did you really think he could keep his word about taking a break when he has persistently broken it in the past? Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 18:57, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

Didn't he say he was taking a break from just talk pages? Mainpage isn't a talk page. DickTurpis (talk) 19:26, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

Nah, I'm talking about the thing he said in his bizarre Italian driving post. He promised faithfully that all future posts would be about QE! campaign news. Except he has no news because the entire campaign is in his head, so he had to go back to "LOOK AT THIS GRAPH! IT'S KINDA DOWN!" posts. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 21:19, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

Hah, I knew this was coming

What it said before

What it says now

Yep, as soon as I pointed out that he'd broken his promise of course he went back and edited it. Of course I kept a tab open to await this event, so now I have screenshots. He's always on about morality and how his real, true Christianity keeps people honest, yet somehow he's the most dishonest, lying douchebag in the world. Doesn't he ever worry that he might be going to hell for all this crap? --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 23:06, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

Come on Ken

I'm stoned and bored. Do something really stupid for my amusement. How about releasing your book? Or blowing me away with oepration grassburner or something? And anyway isn't it time to start warning us about the ides of June? StarFish (talk) 19:16, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

This goes beyond "Andy fails reading comprehension, part umpty-seven"

This is Andy just not caring about the point of the article.

Andy: Conservatives are getting more conservative!

Bob Dole: The current Republican party would never nominate many of our icons. We have got to rethink things. MDB ^{(the MD is for Maryland, the B is for Bear)} 10:47, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

I was going to point that out to him on the talk page but decided not to bother. Oldusgitus (talk) 11:52, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

I love it. Only Andy could view a concern that the Republicans have gotten too radical for Nixon, Dole, the "Contract With America" Republicans of the Congress of the Nineties, and even Reagan as a good thing. bad news Andy, the large majority of America doesn't think like you do.--BMcP - Just an astronomy guy 12:15, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

But those aren't real americans! Remember, Obama never got the majority of "american" votes. --^Mikal_lakiM 16:16, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Whenever Mr. Schlafly says "people are becoming more conservative!" remember that he also says "people are getting dumber!" Random surfer (talk) 16:22, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

Gotta love his new headline: "Michele Bachmann won repeatedly in a liberal district." The 6th District of Minnesota has a Cook PVI of R+7, making it the most conservative district in Minnesota. Nets awesome (talk) 22:22, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

R+8, actually. They went for McCain by 12 points in 2008 and Bush by 17 in 2004. It's 96% white. A real liberal district. Whoover (talk) 23:01, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

Anything outside Andy's house is liberal ground in his eyes. Vulpius (talk) 00:11, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Even funnier was that Andy originally touted her as a undefeated, five term congressman^img. --BMcP - Just an astronomy guy 12:34, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

It's fair to give her credit for winning the 2014 election, which she clearly would have done had she not set her sights on higher office. Whoover (talk) 17:19, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Strange Bedfellows

Andy and CAIR are demanding investigations into the FBI killing of Ibragim Todashev. CAIR thinks he was killed because he was a Muslim. Andy thinks he was killed because he knew too much about why Obama is protecting the Tsarnaevs. His theory seems to be that the FBI assassinated the guy to take the heat off of Obama's buddy Tamarlan. Andy's ignoring the FBI's claim that Tamarlan was involved in the murder that Andy says Obama is making the FBI and Boston PD cover up. That's justified because nobody's shown Andy the DNA test. Whoover (talk) 02:28, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Nope Ken

You don't read^img talk pages^img at all anymore, do you^img? Oldusgitus (talk) 09:55, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

The premise of the article is mind-boggling: that racism is an outgrowth of belief in evolution (this is why Ken's head-scratcher about "liberals" makes sense to him). Calling a black person or an aboriginal an "ape" is not about appearance -- it's about Darwin. So when the Koran declares Jews to be apes it's because of Mohammed's reading of Darwin, I guess. In the hierarchy of crazy, we sometimes forget the distance between Ken and CMI is not always significant. Whoover (talk) 15:30, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, racism so totally didn't exist before the mid-Nineteenth century nor justified by men for religious reasons, nope, never.--BMcP - Just an astronomy guy 16:32, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Also, it doesn't take very long to write a short book, does it, Ken?--Fergus Mason ^{If in the first act you have hung a pistol on the wall, then in the following one it should be fired. Otherwise don't put it there. - Anton Chekov} 21:00, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Nice, Fergus, very nice. Complete smackdown. Fergus 1, Ken: still zero after all these years. Aceⁱ⁹ 21:07, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Bitchslap and plug, all pulled off in one very slick move. Nice one Fergus.-- ^{Jabba de Chops} 21:17, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Well, who could resist that delicious combination of idiot-prodding and shameless self-promotion?--Fergus Mason ^{If in the first act you have hung a pistol on the wall, then in the following one it should be fired. Otherwise don't put it there. - Anton Chekov} 21:35, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Well you have utterly pwned him. Despite all his wankery over you, you have accomplished something. Something ken has promised to do but failed to deliver on for over a year. But Ken doesn't read these pages anymore so he'll never know... Aceⁱ⁹ 21:43, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Oh, it gets worse. In the time Ken has been banging on about his 15 Questions book I have written six short books. Two are for use in schools, three are published and another was finished yesterday. If he wants his crap written quickly and professionally he should ask me to do it for him - but it won't be free.--Fergus Mason ^{If in the first act you have hung a pistol on the wall, then in the following one it should be fired. Otherwise don't put it there. - Anton Chekov} 21:46, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Correction. At least 5 years on CP. He also never followed up on all the super duper research defending his positions when he was clowned on other fora back when he was using his own name. 21:47, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

By way of an exciting trip down memory lane, we're now at about the 1 year, one month anniversary of this book being started, and we're coming up on the one year anniversary of it being half finished. I guess the first half took 90% of the effort, and the second half took the other 540%. It was supposed to have been finished before last September. I'm looking forward to November, and the second anniversary of the QE! campaign promising the earth and delivering nothing. Surely this epic trollfest can't go on much longer than 2 years. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 22:02, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

I wonder if Ken has heard back from his Swiss friend about Heribert-Nilsson yet. Aceⁱ⁹ 22:04, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Interesting. I'm not sure how long Ken's been doing this crap, but I published my first novel on January first, 2012. Shameless plug here, except it's permanently free, lol. Since then I've written four more novels (some under a pen name), many short stories, and a serial that has seven parts (part seven got published yesterday!). So how's that lauded Protestant work ethic working out for him? --Sasayaki (talk) 04:25, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

I've downloaded your first novel, so hopefully that'll give me something to keep me occupied during any free time I get this weekend. Interesting to see a PLAN officer as a heroine.--Fergus Mason ^{If in the first act you have hung a pistol on the wall, then in the following one it should be fired. Otherwise don't put it there. - Anton Chekov} 17:59, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Cheers mate, thanks. Enjoy! --Sasayaki (talk) 03:56, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

AP

Andy's comment on Adrian Peterson has to be the strangest thing I've ever heard in my life.

"The media is publicizing the speech by the NFL MVP in part because some want to see his career limited because of his views."

That's right, in order to curtail the freedom of speech, the media is widely and accurately relaying a story they disagree with! It's actually pretty ingenious. Wait,no, not ingenious, I mean stupid. Carlaugust (talk) 02:39, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

And remember when he was bitching about how much coverage Jason Collins got when he came out? I won't ever understand his views on the media. He just seems like a drunk old man that constantly whines and bitches any more. At every single thing that the media covers.--StephenCocktail (talk) 03:59, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Every time I read something like this I imagine it to be a product of Andy's bitter rage. "Why am I not the President when Obama got two terms?! Why!". --Sasayaki (talk) 04:28, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

You forgot "I could probably do that, he's not such a famous sports star!", and "Why is this bad person getting so much attention compared to me?!"

The latest main-page talk sections are good examples just how far he'll go to push his views while calling it a wiki. Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 12:44, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Ken out Ed's Ed Poor

What a catchy and concise category^img Naca (talk) 05:20, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi Ken, Still reading those talk pages I see. Maybe you should start oversighting the comments once you have read them, that way no one will know if you have read them or not :) ^{— Unsigned, by: Naca / talk / contribs}

When most of us see a big surge in hits from China on our servers, we assume hackers. We're usually right. Ken assumes end times for evolution. Think he'll share the IPs? Whoover (talk) 18:00, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

I read that as "Ken outs Ed" Vulpius (talk) 20:02, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Andy doesn't get the worlds oldest pun? no surprise.

As you may or may not have been aware of, Jesus invented humor, so a prechristian pun is no pun at all. --Opcn ^{with regards to regarding my regardliness} 11:34, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

I once worked for a company with a lot of saberim on the roster. Sorry I can't spell that in Hebrew, but it's the plural of "prickly pear cactus" and means native Israelis. They would call each other "Adam" in the same kind of contexts that a US English speaker would use "man" or "dude." They did have an interesting sense of humor. My boss, in a meeting, once asked the group, "What do we do now, slap our asses and shout 'hurrah'?" That may be a post-Christian idiom, though. I believe it comes from a Yiddish expression (Patsh zich in tuchis und schrei "hooray") something like a remedy for boredom. Sprocket J Cogswell (talk) 20:18, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Andy gets destroyed

I love it when Andy tries to politicize sports as he does here [1]^img. Even though Andy is a professional at making broad and moronic proclamations about topics he knows nothing about, his fore into the world of athletics is perhaps the most telling. Here his ignorance is made abundantly clear to even the most causal fan, as this kind of sports talk is grounded in inarguable statistics. Although I wouldn't be shocked if he claimed that liberals were cooking the stats a la global warming. Just like his belief that Chavez died three months before he actually died, this kind of paranoid fantasy is unique to Andy. I wonder if he brings up his feelings about Lebron James to people at his church, I can't imagine how they'd react. --Marlow (talk) 19:01, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

The fact that Andy thinks this statement about Tiger Woods belongs in an encyclopedia really says it all: "He is perhaps the most self-centered and overpromoted favorite of the liberal media in the world."^img That's the second sentence in the Tiger Woords article, right after his name and that he is a professional golfer. --Night Jaguar (talk) 01:27, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

I remember the early naive version of CP, when the homeskolars were creating cursory history articles and compiling lists of terms (which could have been replicated with proper use of categories. Andy was against large articles because too much detail made it more like liberal Wikipedia. Of course, that didn't apply to Ken's monstrous articles. I think Andy would say that CP tells you the important stuff that you need to know without being bogged down in liberal facts. Генгис^{Gum disease} 08:47, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Hey, Ken! It's June already

Don't you think it's about time you took that January calendar picture off the main page? You might also want to change "10 reasons why 2013 will be a BAD year for Darwinism" to something like "So far, 2013 has been the worst year in the history of Darwinism and it's only going to get worse" or some other complete lie. Spud (talk) 13:35, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Your wish is his command. Cantabrigian (talk) 10:30, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

My god! Talk about pulling his strings! Scream!! (talk) 11:09, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Pull the string! Aceⁱ⁹ 20:47, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

I love that he bases his judgement about which years have been good and bad on random website traffic graphs. I guess all those years before 1970 must have been bloody good years for atheism. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 11:15, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Hmmm. My wish is only partly his command because that January calendar picture is still there on the main page. Admittedly, it's buried pretty deep on that page, so Kenny Boy might have forgotten about it. Spud (talk) 14:05, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

You're right, and now I come to look at it I see that it shows February starting on a Sunday, which means it could come from 2004, 2009, 2015 or 2026, but not 2013. Maybe Darwinism will survive a little longer after all. Or maybe it's already been smited destroyed and no one has noticed. Cantabrigian (talk) 14:20, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Smitten, surely? Somehow smitten doesn't quite have the right wrath of god connotations that the root word suggests. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 15:38, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Darwinism has been well smitten in the fires of peer review and wrought into a marvelous elaborate shape, the contemplation of which can only lead to wisdom. Sprocket J Cogswell (talk) 17:24, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

"Smited" is Kennish for "smitten" - there's still one instance of it on MPR ("RichardDawkins.net keeps getting smited!"): catch it while you still can.. Cantabrigian (talk) 20:06, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

The correct word is "smote". Sokar (talk) 20:25, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

'Smited' makes logical sense and sounds fine to my English ears. I dislike Ken as much as the next RationalWikian, but give him some linguistic leeway. — ^{(talk to)} /æn əˈmɛɹɪkən ˈnaiːɪlɪst/ 20:27, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Not really. smite/smote/smitten is analogous to write/wrote/written. In careful writing, "keeps getting wrote" seems out of place, and "writed" is the kind of thing a young child would say, while still in the stage of mis-applying the regularities of language. Sprocket J Cogswell (talk) 20:46, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Patmac

Throws his toys^img out of the pram. Yeah, good luck with that whoever you are patmac. Oldusgitus (talk) 15:47, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

I'm sure that the Conservapedia sysops really care about a lame-ass threat like that -- it's like telling an outspoken atheist that you're going to report their disbelief to your parish. ^{(talk to)} /æn əˈmɛɹɪkən ˈnaiːɪlɪst/ 16:26, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

It looks like Karebear killed it with fire. [2]^imgBobafan (talk) 16:59, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

I don't care, this is War, I am in the process of reporting this hate filled site and having it declared a hate group. Bollocks to Demeyer, It is now Schlafaly I am after, I will do all i can to discredit his reputation as a lawyer, which will be greatly damaged by being the leader of a hate group--Patmac (talk) 17:01, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

He still has a reputation to discredit? ^{(talk to)} /æn əˈmɛɹɪkən ˈnaiːɪlɪst/ 17:05, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Andy would wear an SPLC hate group designation like a badge of honor. --Inquisitor (talk) 17:09, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

I think you are on the right track, Patmac. I support your action 100%.Bobafan (talk) 17:22, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

I guess CP sysops read here. 3 days gentlemen, sort your site out, remove the hate or I go ahead with my promise--Patmac (talk) 17:42, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

CP sysops can read??--Fergus Mason ^{If in the first act you have hung a pistol on the wall, then in the following one it should be fired. Otherwise don't put it there. - Anton Chekov} 17:47, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

What you're asking is for them to take down the site. — ^{(talk to)} /æn əˈmɛɹɪkən ˈnaiːɪlɪst/ 17:46, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

And now Brenden^img asks to be blocked by taking on the karajerk. Way to commit wiki suicide guys. Oldusgitus (talk) 17:50, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

(EDIT CONFLICT) Yeah Patmac, that isn't likely to happen. I don't believe that the SPLC will really go after CP, considering it is

A) A website and B) A lot less controversial/offensive than certain other targets which the SPLC will likely pursue.

I'm sorry it had to end this way - your contributions on CP were valued, but please, on any website, legal threats should not be simply laid down, regardless of how tasteless some user's comments were. Brenden (talk) 17:52, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

The more I think about it, I don't see you as a parodist, Brenden. You're a concern troll. I will not be the least bit surprised when Karajou blocks you for being like the little kid who goes over to his neighbors' house to tell them how to behave. Get over yourself. 21:34, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

And honestly, who is going to give a fuck? It's a dying website with a self-important failure, a lunatic and a sociopath all trying to cling to their last shreds of relevance. Really, this "IMMA GONNA GET DA FBI ON YOU!" type behavior is just as pathetic when you do it as it is when the CP denizens do it. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 18:11, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

I loved his 'ill get the home secretary on you' bollocks. As if Theresa May is going to give a flying fuck about kenny boy. We've just had a sqauddie literally hacked to death in the street and you REALLY think TM is going to give 2 fucks about ken demeyer? Oldusgitus (talk) 18:30, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

You have a point, the post was made in rage, and I disrespect the young drummer in suggesting i waste the governments time. I was wrong.--Patmac (talk) 18:36, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Well thank you for admiting that. But you really shouldn't let ken get to you. He's a moron. He will never inspire anyone to anything, I doubt he can even really inspire himself to anything. It wouldn't surprise me if he has someone watching him when he ties his shoelaces and correcting him when he makes a mistake. All you have just done is given him something to jack off over tonight, and he'll claim it as another 'scalp' in his non-existant campaign. Oldusgitus (talk) 18:41, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

I'll give you one thing however, you have REALLY upset anger bear which is always something worth doing. Oldusgitus (talk) 18:43, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

I think that's the angriest I've ever seen Very-Petty Officer McDonald. Nice one. Cardinal Fang (talk) 19:58, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

What I love with Anger Bear's First Amendment rights rants, is that yes, they have the absolute right to post their bigoted crap, just as people have the absolute right to point at them and laugh for posting their bigoted crap. He just handily forgets the latter part. Ironically, Karajerk probably has no problem with David Barton saying Christians shouldn't drink Starbucks, because the latter supports gay marriage. (Of course, we know that you shouldn't drink Starbucks because it's crap). --PsyGremlin^Snakk! 22:12, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

In response to Karajou's blog post, I actually do think it should be illegal to use semicolons as much as he does. He overuses the fuck out of them; and most of the time; they aren't even used correctly; --StephenCocktail (talk) 23:22, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

I don't care as much about Kara's weirdo rants as I do about his semicolon use, and it has bothered me for a long time. I use semicolons all the God damend time; most of my work emails have a least one. You're ruining them for everyone! Stop it - and God help me if you start using hyphens; I may freak out. Carlaugust (talk) 13:37, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

My fear is that he discovers the em dash — imagine the possibilities. En dash abuse – like this – might be easier to take than clueless semicolon sprinkling, but I agree that hyphens in lieu of dashes would be more his style. Whoover (talk) 15:13, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

I was going to comment how utterly weak sauce Patmac's attempt at "intimidation" was, then I saw Kara's response in the link a few replies above. Anyone else would have, and Kara should have, responded to Parmac thusly: "Lol.. Lame troll is lame". Instead Kara goes off on some crazy rant about the first amendment. Parmac if you are a troll then I salute you, for you manage to make Kara rage to obvious trolling.--BMcP - Just an astronomy guy 15:22, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Actually I was not a troll, I do feel honoured though, never before in my life have my actions been considered "News".--Patmac (talk) 15:43, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

And you made that news as a famous British liberal. Whoover (talk) 15:57, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Not trolling. Right. You're an admitted liberal on Conservapedia doing very little but artlessly antagonizing a developmentally delayed adult. And then you, in all seriousness, threaten to turn the Man of Mystery in to British Immigration so he can't gain access to the country as a "persona non grata," and refer Andy to the SPLC. Anyhow, I echo BMcP's kudos - there's no telling what's going to get stuck in Karaturd's craw. You managed to get him going on this deliciously absurd First Amendment kick. Love it! He even called you a hypocrite as he hypocritically hypocrited you. That's awesome. 19:14, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘Let's be slightly fair, patmac may not know kenny's history as well as some here. He may not even know about the FBI incident. But it was still a silly thing to threaten. Like kenny will ever get a passport, anger bear will ever go somewhere where there are foreigners other than on his 'active service' (now burnt) and like andy would ever leave his comfortable mummy financed fluffy dream world. Not going to happen and thank goat for that. Oldusgitus (talk) 19:47, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Lovely Iranians

The new photo in the 'Ethnic Groups Gallery' on CP's main page is of two lovely girls (OMG I sound like Father Ted) from Iran. Is some subversive at work, showing CP-ites that Iranians are human beings after all and will not necessarily benefit from being bombed? Cardinal Fang (talk) 00:15, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

The "Ethnic Groups Gallery" is another baby of Joaquin Martinez, who never met a Middle Eastern dictator he didn't like. So, yeah it could be part of Martinez pushing his agenda which is quite different (but just as loopy) as that of everyone else on CP.

By the way, am I the only one who finds the idea of an "Ethnic Groups Gallery" a bit disturbing? At the least, it seems rather old-fashioned and quaint. I can imagine that a 19th century anthropologist would be interested in compiling something like that. Spud (talk) 13:58, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Shockingly, the CP article on race is untouched by race "realists" - [4]. Hipocrite (talk) 14:07, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Not to mention it isn't shoehorned into a "liberal" or 'conservative" construct like Andy has tried with everything else. In fact, aside from the length, it looks like a (reasonably objective godless liberal) Wikipedia article. Arcane (talk) 17:51, 4 June 2013 (UTC)Arcane

@Spud: Yes, the idea of a gallery of ethnic groups is quite old-fashioned. Perhaps Joaquin could post some more tasteful pictures of ladies from around the world so we can decide one way or the other. Cardinal Fang (talk) 23:22, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Well, have a look at JoMar's attempt to catalogue and classify all humanity^img. You might find a few more tasty birds in there who tickle your fancy. Mention must be made of the use of Mother Theresa's picture on that page. Of course, you can easily identify any and all Albanians by the blue and white saris and wimples they wear, not to mention their deeply wrinkled faces. Spud (talk) 13:08, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

Yes, quite a bizarre collection. I get the impression there are a few (OK, a lot) stereotypes there - the intellectual Bengali, the Mongol horseman in the snow... It's an interesting collection of photos of people but not exactly encyclopedic. Cardinal Fang (talk) 16:00, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

Someone want to talk to VivaYeshua...

I'd love to know what he thinks of this if one of the various people who know how to contact him want to find out. If what's been said about him being banned from the shockofgoat chat room is true, either this must be very out of context or just plain fake. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 15:41, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Yes, he's been banned from Shock's chatroom. What interests me is that Ken is now saying Viva is a christian. He's not; he's a messianic jew.--Fergus Mason ^{If in the first act you have hung a pistol on the wall, then in the following one it should be fired. Otherwise don't put it there. - Anton Chekov} 17:44, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Who the fuck trumpets about "miscellaneous news"? If I want miscellaneous news I'll call my grandma and ask how her day has been. Aceⁱ⁹ 20:52, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

I'd like some miscellaneous news, so Ace, how was your grandma's day? -- Iscariot ^{Andy Schlafly for Congress 2012!} 21:16, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

She drank two cups of coffee and had a bowel movement. Not bad for a ninety year old. Aceⁱ⁹ 21:28, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

That's nothing: i had a cup of icecream and two bowel movements. Beat that, (Ace's) granny. — ^{(talk to)} /æn əˈmɛɹɪkən ˈnaiːɪlɪst/ 22:20, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

They believe in Christ so messianic Jews are Christians. What they're not, are Jews. Whoover (talk) 20:54, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Well, Viva insists that he is not a christian.--Fergus Mason ^{If in the first act you have hung a pistol on the wall, then in the following one it should be fired. Otherwise don't put it there. - Anton Chekov} 22:12, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

I have a coworker that self-identifies as a messianic Jew, and does not consider himself a Christian either. --Inquisitor (talk) 22:21, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Jews don't buy it. They can call themselves anything they want but the "Is a Jew" flowchart starts with "Accept Jesus as Your Savior?" and the Yes branch dumps to "Not a Jew." It's like being a vegan who eats no meat except bacon. Whoover (talk) 22:35, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Whoover, I smell what you stepping in. I had an atheist girlfriend who self-identified as a Jew because she was ethnically Jewish. People self-identify in all sorts of strange ways, regardless of what other people call them. For example, as an African-American, I have a different label for black Republicans and Tea Party members than the ones they would choose to use on themselves. --Inquisitor (talk) 23:16, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

"...as an African-American, I have a different label for black Republicans and Tea Party members than the ones they would choose to use on themselves." Jesus. You are an idiot, aren't you? Faced with mysteries dark and vast/statements just seem vain at last. 23:38, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Clearly. --Inquisitor (talk) 23:51, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Also, I thought you were German? Faced with mysteries dark and vast/statements just seem vain at last. 23:59, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

No. You might be thinking of Inquisitor Ehrenstein. But I could be wrong, being the simpleton that I am. --Inquisitor (talk) 04:13, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

People can call themselves whatever they want, but a word's definition or a label can only stretch so far before it starts to become meaningless. — ^{(talk to)} /æn əˈmɛɹɪkən ˈnaiːɪlɪst/ 23:42, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

The reason this particular self identity pisses off Jew (including the 90% of us who are atheists, like your ex-girlfriend) is that it's dishonesty being used as a recruitment strategy. Whoover (talk) 23:51, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Someone I know well follows Messianic Judaism. Frankly, I have no idea what the supposed difference is between it and Pentecostal Christianity and whoever wrote the WP page seems equally puzzled. So far as I can see, MJ's emphasise the Jewish heritage of Jesus but their theology is otherwise pretty much mainstream Protestant, whether they call themselves Christians or not. Cardinal Fang (talk) 00:02, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Well, from an outsider's perspective the granular divisions between sects can be nearly undetectable. Yet to members of the in-group the divisions appear as huge chasms. The model tends to hold true for any hobby or activity that attracts a passionate following. It's like pointing out to a fan that the only difference between two football teams is the color of the uniforms. --Inquisitor (talk) 00:14, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Messianic Jewery keeps the trappings of Judaism, but adds on top of it the beliefs of Christianity. The vast majority reject replacement theology, and the abrogation of religious laws that came with such. As such, they often keep kosher, wear tifilim, and engage in all of the various ritual judaism that many jews do not. One of the major recruiting tactics, like the hasids they emulate, is an attempt to use ritual judaism to indoctrinate. They typically reject the "trinity," in favor of the view of Jesus not as the literal son of god, but rather the Messiah. From a flowchart perspective, I would say that the "are you a jew" flowchart starts with "do you think you are?" and then, in America, proceeds to "do you believe that Jesus was more special than any random guy who could have said what he said?" Hipocrite (talk) 13:56, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Wait, I missed a pretty big memo here, if feels like. Why was Viva banned from Shock's chat room? Umichcynic (talk) 14:07, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Overrated Sports Stars

Here is a great picture of overrated sports star LeBron James, whom Andy has been strangely silent on after the Game 7 win. I'm used to him pouncing with all the reasons that only 32 points, 4 assists and 8 rebounds in a 99-76 game proves he's overrated. (I expected him to open with "real stars never need a game 7.") It'll come. I'm confident. Whoover (talk) 21:52, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

A nice pic of two overrated sports stars shaking hands.--Patmac (talk) 22:00, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Trying to figure out why Andy has such a hate boner for LeBron. Is it his success? Wealth? The fact that he has both, yet is not overtly and pompously religious? What exactly?--BMcP - Just an astronomy guy 00:14, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

Could have something to do with stuff like this. --Inquisitor (talk) 01:56, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

I mean I think for most people it's something to do with this: super douchey thing to do. Also I really think the evidence doesn't support that James is the best player ever; it's just a reality that he doesn't dominate the game like Jordan did - he might come to because his game is improving. But yeah he's clearly the best player today - Durant - who I would say is second - just isn't there; although, he might develop more too.--Iduan (talk) 16:57, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Oh Ken, you never learn

Gee, another post highlighting Rationalwiki? And how we lack machismo. This from the guy who consistently runs away from any offer to debate him/her/them/it? Projection much?

I was going to pull up a comparative graph between us and your little "blog" but sadly "historical data not available for sites ranked > 100,000." Well, let's look at some other stats shall we (for what they're worth, coming from Alexa):

• Rationalwiki: Rank: 35,295 US Rank: 13,286 Reputation: 2,675
• Ken's blog: Rank: 2,258,657 US Rank: 368,865 Reputation: 44
• Conservapedia: Rank: 73,814 US Rank: 26,473 Reputation: 2,829

Oh yes, and it seems most of those 44 sites are you link whoring yourself, such as questionevolution.blogspot.de and questionevolution.blogspot.ru.

And looking at this graph, you might want to have a chat with Andy about his site's complete lack of machismo. I mean, a bunch of fat nerds are kicking his ass. What's up with that?

And just to send you back to your bunny hole, I challenge you to a debate. A spoken debate - you can nominate which of the Ken's will represent the amorphous collective - on Google Hangout. Not a written debate, and not with anybody other than you. You may now display your lack of machismo by vanishing any reference to your last post. --PsyGremlin^Sermā! 20:06, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Have you noticed the latest triumph trumpeted further down in Ken's blog post? A pastor has given the QE booklet to 8 children and told them to read it by the middle of next week, although he doesn't expect them all to finish it (Hopefully because they'll be rolling around laughing). Evolutionary biology is doomed! Doomed, I tell you, doomed! Cardinal Fang (talk) 22:33, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

How Do They Keep This Stuff Straight?

Patriot Act good. But not for Muslim presidents. Or something. Whoover (talk) 20:17, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Never mind that - you've got Andy ranting about how some "young mass murderers" used Facebook - Jacob Tyler Roberts and T.J. Lane - and Ken complaining that "Obama administration mining Facebook data to predict crimes." Damned if you do... damned if you don't... --PsyGremlin^{말하십시오} 20:27, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

If X (X being the democrats, obama, or whatever trait/group gets to be todays liberal standard bearer) is true, Then Evil. Thats how it works.--^Mikal_lakiM 21:54, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Conservative doublespeak

According to Terry Tossbotty, democracy is only good if far-right extremists are guaranteed to win^img. Cardinal Fang (talk) 13:19, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Don't be silly. CNAV loves the "not a democracy, a republic!" argument -- which is conserva-speak for "the ideas we like aren't the majority view!" MDB ^{(the MD is for Maryland, the B is for Bear)} 13:32, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

It is always funny watching Tosspot et al arguing for somebody to gain office and rule with a dictatorial fist. It's almost as if they've been inspired by Hugo Chávez.-- ^{Jabba de Chops} 13:57, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Terry Hurtbutt is just mad that he can't get a medical license with a Fisher Price diploma. Umichcynic (talk) 14:11, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

He went to Yale. 14:02, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

I like "Hurtbutt". Cardinal Fang (talk) 14:25, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

I like the Hugo Chavez analogy. Or Ahmedinajad, maybe. Or... thinking of some other bloke who got elected democratically then governed dictatorially... Cardinal Fang (talk) 14:24, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

(reset) The 'any discussion on Usenet will eventually devolve into a rant on....' argument? 171.33.222.26 (talk) 14:37, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

I'm afraid so. It's honestly the first time it's happened to me. Cardinal Fang (talk) 15:35, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

(reset): You'll be surprised how many will take the generalised version of "democracy is only good if (whoever you support) are guaranteed to win". [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 23:36, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

Well there we go

The user, or is it a collective, known as conservative sees 3 years just fly^img by. And normal service is resumed. Oldusgitus (talk) 10:37, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

Well, Ken's finally become a parody of himself. But how any of Andy's goons can read that and not think "What the fuck is wrong with you?" is beyond me. Still, it is cute that he's using Andy's blog to troll us, because we are the only ones who still pay attention to the Mentally Disturbed One. --PsyGremlin^Prata! 10:58, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

Behind closed doors, Ken is well known as a crazy person but someone who produces a lot of content. Andy doesn't think Ken's sane. Nobody does. --Sasayaki (talk) 12:16, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

I think we're all well aware of that Sas. Incidentally, does anyone else think that we can take his comments that "The purpose of my aforementioned policy was to replace my/our interactions with evolutionists who are unwilling to debate " as tacit admitance that he has been slapped down by andy and told to behave better on talk pages rather than simply link-whoring to his qe blog? Oldusgitus (talk) 13:23, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

Nah, just typical Kendoll behaviour. If he gets his arse spanked enough he just totally runs away from all discussion. Hence his 90 day/3 year sabbaticals and mystery illnesses. Eventually though he recovers enough shards of his ego to glue back together and wants to go back to his trolling, so has to "modify" his previous statements. Which is to say, try desperately to forget he ever said them. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 13:36, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

"Lissome white girls"?

Methinks this comment is a bit more revealing than Terry realizes. Aside from displaying even more paranoia than I'd thought he had, that is. --Kels (talk) 15:34, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

Reading the edit summary in Recent Changes, I assumed that this thread would be about Ed. Faced with mysteries dark and vast/statements just seem vain at last. 15:53, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

Anyone else detect an air of bitterness over having been scammed in such a fashion from Tossy? especially given the detail he went into this scenario, or is my contempt for him just making me see humiliation where none occurred. Judge Holden^{The Judge Smiles} 16:15, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

He does sound bitter, I don't even understand why he would bring it up. The fact that he had any communication whatsoever with any random woman from Ghana, white or otherwise, is telling; isn't he married? Someone should let him know that you're supposed to just delete those emails. Marlow (talk) 17:44, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

I think he;s widowed. At a tangent, is it true he is setting up some kind of creationist peer review panel? London Grump (talk) 19:15, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

He's so up the arse of Walt Brown, it wouldn't surprise me if he did get a bunch of his crazy friends together to rubberstamp whatever madness he comes up with. On the other hand, this is the same man who said he was going to build a physical creationist hall of fame. Do you think that's ever going to happen? --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 21:11, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

It's built, but it won't open until Ken finishes writing the guide book. Sophie^Wilder 21:43, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

A creationist hall of fame mapped out by the arch manchild Ken would be like Hovinds Dinosaur Adventure Park crossed with Ryleh. As for the possibility of him putting any IRL effort into building something like that, I think we can jot it down as another self indulgent fantasy from the same man who fantasies about ruling over the capital wasteland with legions of raider minions through the power of his basement generator and copy of Ayn Rand for dummies. As for the peer review panel, I daresay it will either fold and run for the generator room the moment people start bringing actual science on their arses, or fall victim to a parodist creationist theory and end up humiliated publicly. Judge Holden^{The Judge Smiles} 22:19, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

Apparently Noah's Ark theme park and the Creationist Museum are sliding into a financial hell. Генгис^pillaging 22:49, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

Couldn't happen to a nicer group of people. I hope their ark sinks them. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 23:17, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

Nothing says you're a serious museum like the addition of a zip line. If anyone wants to try a zip line made by anti-science creationists, well, do so at your own risk. --Night Jaguar (talk) 03:34, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Gravity is just a theory, after all. — ^{(talk to)} [æn əˈmɛɹɪkən ˈnaiːɪlɪst] 03:39, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

It'd be fun to go there and loudly proclaim that the zip lines looked poorly manufactured and completely substandard. When the management tried to assure that the lines were made to the highest quality standards, that's when you hit them with "How do you know? Were you there?" --Inquisitor (talk) 03:45, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

I'm surprised nobody's commented on the racist overtones of the "lissome white girls somehow living in Ghana" bit. We get after Andy for the racism of going after Obama (although he'd probably be just as deranged over any Democrat in office), but this seems quite a bit more blatant. --Kels (talk) 01:13, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

The only appropriate comment is "ewww." The only rational reaction is to do what it takes to shake the image. For me it was armagnac. Whoover (talk) 01:51, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

This is tosser we are talking about. Racist overtones are part of the standard hurlbut package to the point where its no longer worthy of comment, same way brain bleaching creepiness are part of the Ed Poor package (though Hurly seems to be aping this aspect with this comment as well).

As for his anger surrounding these fraudulent sexy white ladies, either he is so anal he feels compelled to thoroughly investigate any and all spam emails to find the true origin and purpose of such communiques (possibly out of a view that one of his many, many, many personal nemeses are trying to set him up) which suggests a huge level of paranoia and hilarious naivety of things like spam emails, or he is just another far right psycho who is at heart a dirty, stupid little man who jumped for a promise of sexytime and feels humiliated about it to this day. Either option is possible in my opinion Judge Holden^{The Judge Smiles} 10:22, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

You might be right. IIRC there was a lovely mail from in the ZB admin group, where it turned out somebody had created an account on Creationwiki, using the name of a Japanese porn star. He was convinced this was a set up a honey trap for the founder of Creationwikwi. Ah, here it is. I do like his last line in the original post (which was lost when set up online): "This shows that CreationWiki is much easier to find than some of us might have supposed." Um... sure that's the fucking point of having a website?? --PsyGremlin^Sermā! 10:53, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Again the dilemma, was this just paranoia or did he recognize the name from the super sekrit naughty VHS collection under his bed? Honestly though, I think a lot of flinganus's issues could be partially explained by him repeatedly falling for online scams and then blaming it on the satanic leftist untermench rather than admit he was duped. Judge Holden^{The Judge Smiles} 14:18, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Like this Terry?

You know, I think we've been ignoring the bigger humiliation for Chucky in all this. Isn't admitting you aren't rich the ultimate humiliation for a Randroid? It's quite amusing that he fails his own test for the measure of a man. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 13:14, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

He would likely claim either it was all the EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEVIL muslamic antichrist's taxation conspiracy against him or that his lack of wealth is a sign of his selfless sacrifice to spread the wingnut gospel instead of becoming the multi millionaire he could easily become if he tried. Judge Holden^{The Judge Smiles} 14:18, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Typical wingnut paranoia to assume that he's being targeted . This is a copy of some of the ones I got on my Skype account. They are so obviously bogus that I block and delete on sight. However, Terry seems to know that they are "wanting me to send money to prove my affection for them", which makes me wonder for how long was he interacting with them? 17:54, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Like I said on a comment on the pic -- Rob liked his pics of Kara Duhe; anyone who falls for this nonsense is after a more personal kind of contact. Faced with mysteries dark and vast/statements just seem vain at last. 17:56, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Rat out Obama ...

... and you get praised on the front page. Rat out George Bush, and you're a criminal and a faggot. Faced with mysteries dark and vast/statements just seem vain at last. 22:31, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Eh. I personally tend to think that the current leaks are more defensible and even praiseworthy than what Manning did, and I don't think that Bush was a better president than Obama. That's not to say that CP isn't hypocritical, of course, but that these two particular situations aren't particularly clear evidence of hypocrisy to me. Phiwum (talk) 11:38, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Question Economic Policy BlogSpot

It seems the Question Evolution Campaign is brancing out, or perhaps Big C lost an argument with British editor Ryancsh. [5]--Patmac (talk) 23:35, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Why the fuck is Ken talking about me all of a sudden?^img What gives DeMyer? Aceⁱ⁹ 00:00, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

"Ken and Ace, sittin' in a tree, K-I-S-S-I-N-G. First comes love, then comes marriage, then comes Ken with a baby carriage." Faced with mysteries dark and vast/statements just seem vain at last. 00:05, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Given Ken's mental age kissing him could be considered child molestation. Aceⁱ⁹ 00:08, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Hey, be proud. You're apparently Popeye's nemesis and you didn't even have to do anything. You menace him with your complete lack of interest in his affairs. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 01:02, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

That is weird given I haven't edited CP in over a year. Aceⁱ⁹ 01:18, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

And why is he getting a hard-on over Popeye's oversight rights? He's had them since I was a sysop there. Still, it's nice to see Ken cheering on conservative deceit. --PsyGremlin^Hable! 12:13, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Ace and Fergus, the Goldsteins of Conservapedialand.--BMcP - Just an astronomy guy 14:34, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Guessing AceMcNice wasn't you then Ace ? Ghost (talk) 15:27, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

No it isn't...but I think I know who it is. Betcha it was a Filipino IP and not a NZ IP address. Aceⁱ⁹ 20:44, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

There he goes!

... The Invisible Man^{I spoke to Him} 14:04, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

It's like the crap that backed up is flowing explosively. Britain's economic problems are because Irish Catholics? Whoover (talk) 14:12, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Like Andy, Ken doesn't read articles either. "The joke sport of 'rhythmic gymnastics' has been added to the 2020 Olympic Games roster"^img according to Cowardly Ken, but the article he cites clearly states that rhythmic gymnastics is one of the eight sports vying for a spot.--BMcP - Just an astronomy guy 14:32, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Hey Ken, if rhythmic gymnastics is such a joke, let's see you and Andy do this. Just don't let Creepy Uncle Ed watch it. --PsyGremlin^Sermā! 15:08, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Credit where it's due chaps. The inner circle may be a bit extreme but they are clearly experts in their field. Andy for example is able to thoroughly disprove relativity, something that the otherwise great physicist Fred Hoyle was never able to do(He does seem to miss the point that Hoyle's rejection of the big bang theory was because he was so convinced in his atheism that he hated the theory for providing a moment of creation). Ken will be, by the end of the year, world famous for disproving evolutionary pseudoscience once and for all, and now he has provided the blueprint for the resolution of two of the British Isles most lingering problems; If the UK were to remove Darwin from his money and the Republic of Ireland admit they were wrong and beg to be part of the UK again, the world would be a better place. With these insights I would not bet against Ken at least being nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize in 2014 and to share the Nobel Prize for physics with Andy in the near future--Patmac (talk) 15:47, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Is CP blocking my IP?

I've noticed that, for the past two weekends, I can't to CP from my iPad when I'm at my partner's apartment. My Spider-Senses tell me the IP is blocked. Is there someone who can look at their IP blocks and see if 98.252.51.22 is blocked? MDB ^{(the MD is for Maryland, the B is for Bear)} 11:22, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Nothing in the logs. But if you can't access it, then you're blocked at server level (503 error?) and that won't show in the logs. --PsyGremlin^Speak! 11:35, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Partner? Is it a beautiful, long-haired creationist girl? Faced with mysteries dark and vast/statements just seem vain at last. 14:21, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Handsome, short-haired evolutionist gentleman, thank you very much. MDB ^{(the MD is for Maryland, the B is for Bear)} 10:44, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Somebody missed the memo. If you're blocked at the server, it will merely refuse the connection and you won't get any http response, error or otherwise. Whoover (talk) 14:55, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Honestly, we went out for the day not longer after I asked, and I didn't remember to check this until I got to work this morning. I'll be at his apartment again tomorrow afternoon and will check to see exactly what happens then. (All I can remember is "I can't get there"...) MDB ^{(the MD is for Maryland, the B is for Bear)} 10:44, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

I simply got no response, not an error. MDB ^{(the MD is for Maryland, the B is for Bear)} 10:15, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

If they've blocked an IP address at server level, you'll get an HTTP 403 "forbidden" error - I'm not sure if some fancy-dan tablet browsers and suchlike hide all those confusing responses from you though. DeltaStar_{Senior Sysop}^{Speciationspeed!} 11:52, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

There is any number of ways to server block someone using Apache mods. When I get server blocked from CP, it's because I mistakenly hit the same page too many times in one second. That gives me a timeout. I think that's what Andy was doing for the wide swaths of IP addresses he was blocking back when TK was pissing in his ear. Bear, is your partner clickbotting? 12:34, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Unless he has a virus on his computer, no. He's not a techie. MDB ^{(the MD is for Maryland, the B is for Bear)} 11:53, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

mod_security has two distinct actions: deny returns a 403 and drop refuses the connection. Whoover (talk) 14:22, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Andy uses a cPanel based system on Dreamhost - do you know what the standard response is to a perceived DDOS and what the timeouts are? My IP address hasn't changed but after a few months Apache is no longer refusing connections. 14:25, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

More Whatthefuckery from Schlafly

Foreign issues is (sic) under military jurisdiction. Do the State Department know?--Fergus Mason ^{If in the first act you have hung a pistol on the wall, then in the following one it should be fired. Otherwise don't put it there. - Anton Chekov} 20:55, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Don't suppose Manning came under military jurisdiction because he was in the military, do you? - π 09:51, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

For sure. It's just funny to see a Harvard Law grad write "Foreign issues is under military jurisdiction." Godspeed (talk) 13:32, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

I hope the person whose spot at Harvard was stolen by the well-connected Schlaflys has had a good career. --TheLateGatsby (The end of the dock ) 14:55, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Betcha she did better than teaching in a church basement. Faced with mysteries dark and vast/statements just seem vain at last. 14:56, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Unlike the State Department, the NSA is part of the military. If Bush said, "bad guy in Yemen calls bad guy in New York who calls other bad guy in Boston, and we can connect them because we have all the call records in a database," the right would be calling anyone who objected Mooselem-lovers. Because there's a commie in the White House, it's "domestic spying." The right has all the behavioral subtlety of a pigeon in a Skinner box. Whoover (talk) 16:05, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Another pigeon in the box. Whoover (talk) 04:52, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Remember when...

Andy was constantly trumpeting about how each month was a record number of visitors to CP? Wonder what happened to those... that's the problem with lies, it becomes so hard to keep up. --PsyGremlin^Khuluma! 08:47, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Childish vandal ...

... is childish, but I can't help but giggle. Horace ... hehehe Ruddager (talk) 13:12, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

And it's all gone, although RyanCsh now has blocking rights, which is pretty decent for only a week or so of decent editing. What is the bet he turns out to be a parydyst too ? Ghost (talk) 13:47, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Not me. A number of other Horaces appear to have sought to join CP since I last edited there. --Horace (talk) 15:52, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Missed it all. "Homosexuality and ear infections" is worth the price of admission, I must admit. Whoover (talk) 15:54, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Another obvious parodist popped up last week but has gone silent. Watching the dance of the parodists over there is really the only entertainment left. Ken's crap is just tedious and the few other serious editors have gotten boring. But watching parodists welcoming new parodists with subtle winks or "reporting" other parodists, blocking and unblocking them -- all the while Andy not having the slightest clue -- that's what CP is all about. Whoover (talk) 17:11, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Another explanation is that he knows full well what's going on, just like he knows Ken is off his nut. The parodists do a merry job of making it look like Schlafly's blog is still a going concern. They block each other and clean up wandalism, and since no one is ever going to be promoted to sysop ever again they do it for no reward. He's probably overjoyed that people still bother to lick his arse. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 19:42, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

I reckon they know damn well that most accounts over there are parodists. Sure you get a few, like AugustO who I think is genuine, who are not but they are well aware that markman is a parodist. But he is a useful idiot, as Jeeves says, blocking and cleaning up vandalism and saving andy and swabbie the trouble. Then one day he'll overstep the line and swabbie will banhammer him and that will be the end of markman. Oldusgitus (talk) 22:00, 12 June 2013 (UTC)