Conservapedia talk:What is going on at CP?/Archive39

From RationalWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

This is an archive page, last updated 4 January 2012. Please do not make edits to this page.
Archives for this talk page:
<1>, <2>, <3>, <4>, <5>, <6>, <7>, <8>, <9>, <10>, <11>, <12>, <13>, <14>, <15>, <16>, <17>, <18>, <19>, <20>, <21>, <22>, <23>, <24>, <25>, <26>, <27>, <28>, <29>, <30>, <31>, <32>, <33>, <34>, <35>, <36>, <37>, <38>, <40>, <41>, <42>, <43>, <44>, <45>, <46>, <47>, <48>, <49>, <50>, <51>, <52>, <53>, <54>, <55>, <56>, <57>, <58>, <59>, <60>, <61>, <62>, <63>, <64>, <65>, <66>, <67>, <68>, <69>, <70>, <71>, <72>, <73>, <74>, <75>, <76>, <77>, <78>, <79>, <80>, <81>, <82>, <83>, <84>, <85>, <86>, <87>, <88>, <89>, <90>, <91>, <92>, <93>, <94>, <95>, <96>, <97>, <98>, <99>, <100>, <101>, <102>, <103>, <104>, <105>, <106>, <107>, <108>, <109>, <110>, <111>, <112>, <113>, <114>, <115>, <116>, <117>, <118>, <119>, <120>, <121>, <122>, <123>, <124>, <125>, <126>, <127>, <128>, <129>, <130>, <131>, <132>, <133>, <134>, <135>, <136>, <137>, <138>, <139>, <140>, <141>, <142>, <143>, <144>, <145>, <146>, <147>, <148>, <149>, <150>, <151>, <152>, <153>, <154>, <155>, <156>, <157>, <158>, <159>, <160>, <161>, <162>, <163>, <164>, <165>, <166>, <167>, <168>, <169>, <170>, <171>, <172>, <173>, <174>, <175>, <176>, <177>, <178>, <179>, <180>, <181>, <182>, <183>, <184>, <185>, <186>, <187>, <188>, <189>, <190>, <191>, <192>, <193>, <194>, <195>, <196>, <197>, <198>, <199>, <200>, <201>, <202>, <203>, <204>, <205>, <206>, <207>, <208>, <209>, <210>, <211>, <212>, <213>, <214>, <215>, <216>, <217>, <218>, <219>, <220>, <221>, <222>, <223>, <224>, <225>, <226>, <227>, <228>, <229>, <230>, <231>, <232>, <233>, <234>, <235>, <236>, <237>, <238>, <239>, <240>, <241>, <242>, <243>, <244>, <245>, <246>, <247>, <248>, <249>, <250>, <251>, <252>, <253>, <254>, <255>, <256>, <257>, <258>, <259>, <260>, <261>, <262>, <263>, <264>, <265>, <266>, <267>, <268>, <269>, <270>, <271>, <272>, <273>, <274>, <275>, <276>, <277>, <278>, <279>, <280>, <281>, <282>, <283>, <284>, <285>, <286>, <287>, <288>, <289>, <290>, <291>, <292>, <293>, <294>, <295>, <296>, <297>, <298>, <299>, <300>, <301>, <302>, <303>, <304>, <305>, <306>, <307>, <308>, <309>, <310>, <311>, <312>, <313>, <314>, <315>, <316>, <317>, <318>, <319>, <320>, <321>, <322>, <323>, <324>, <325>, <326>, <327>, <328>, <329>, <330>, <331>, <332>, <333>, <334>, <335>, <336>, <337>, <338>, <339>, <340>, <341>, <342>, <343>, <344>, <345>, <346>
, (new)(back)

Pointless Redirect Hell[edit]

Minor WIGO this, but I just love it. Ed sets up a new article titled Primates, then redirects that to another new article titled Primate (biology), which he then redirects to Primate. When you finally get there, that article begins with the word Primates. Brilliant! DogP 12:42, 4 April 2008 (EDT)

Then I come along and fix all that. Fuzzy|AFD 13:06, 4 April 2008 (EDT)
Damn you to Hell, Kektkktkickikt. How the hell can anyone spell your name? DogP 13:34, 4 April 2008 (EDT)
Just call him Fuzzy? Fuzzy Kettleticket. Yeah, that's the ticket. Just don't abbreviate it to KKK, he's not a German turbine. humanUser talk:Human 13:42, 4 April 2008 (EDT)
Fussy Kittytickler. Rational Edfaith 13:47, 4 April 2008 (EDT)
What is it with all the weird names on CP? I mean, there was already Zmidponk, then this guy. I'm guessing very few want to use their real name on CP, or a username they use elsewhere, so you wind up with vaguely pronouncable nonsensical letter combos. --Star of David.png Radioactive afikomen Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments. 15:44, 4 April 2008 (EDT)
You mean like Raioactiveafikomen? Rational Edfaith 15:45, 4 April 2008 (EDT)
Perhaps because of the complicated history of my presence in CP and RW, I use there my "standard" username, while this is a sock. I guess my values are quite skewed, what do you say? Editor at CPfor a change 16:48, 4 April 2008 (EDT)
Same thing for me as well... bizarre. UchihaKATON! 19:16, 4 April 2008 (EDT)
Hey, that's how I got my username. Barikada 17:55, 4 April 2008 (EDT)
I'd be using my real name here, except I wanted one layer of anon on CP so I used "human" there. Then on RW1 it made sense to keep continuity, and so here I am now, just another generic hominid. humanUser talk:Human 12:57, 5 April 2008 (EDT)

"Fuzzy" is the nickname Phy gave me... because my hair ish fuzzy-like. Kektklik, like I've explained before is my writing alias from 2001. It's native writing is Keklik. (Pronounced: Keck-tlick)

Trying to find a page - think for yourself[edit]

I bet it would make WIGO material. [1] - somewhere, either Ed or Andy had written about liberal code words or something of that nature which had a 'translation' of "think for yourself." --Shagie 19:59, 4 April 2008 (EDT)

Ed's handy translation guide? --Gulik 20:05, 4 April 2008 (EDT)
Also: Liberal code word --Sid 22:40, 4 April 2008 (EDT)

Wow. Apprently in Andy-speak, "think for yourself" means "agree with my batshit insane theories". --Kels 21:58, 4 April 2008 (EDT)

CP motto: "My lies shall set you free." humanUser talk:Human 21:59, 4 April 2008 (EDT)

WIGO Report[edit]

Here's the amount of times sysops have been referenced in March's WIGO, entries are divided in "Negative", where their stupidity/meanness (if that's a word) is shown, and "Positive", where they go against CP values and make stuff that makes sense (Note that this is not indicative of how good a sysop is, as WIGO entries tend to focus on the former, its more or less a sign of said sysop's tendence to correct/disagree with others). Also note that this includes repeats, and the entry's text has the last word on whether something is positive or negative (sometimes its ambiguous).

User Negative Entries Positive Entries
Almighty Schlafly 52 0
Kenny 6 0
CPWebmaster 1 0
Karajou 14 0
PJR 5 1
Poor Ed 24 0
CPAdmin1 0 1
Fox 6 8
Croco 14 0
DanH 6 1
Joaquín Martinez 2 0
Bohdan 0 1
Iduan* 1 0
TerryH 3 0

* Not sysops but they might as well be.

NightFlareSpeak, mortal 20:09, 5 April 2008 (EDT)

Very nice work there NF. CЯacke® 20:38, 5 April 2008 (EDT)
Thank you. NightFlareSpeak, mortal 20:59, 5 April 2008 (EDT)
PJR only has one positive mark? How odd...</gut feeling> --Sid 20:40, 5 April 2008 (EDT)
And it was for this entry:
  • The only thing you'll ever need to know about this concept is that evilutionist lieberal athiest demoncrats can't explain it. UPDATE: PJR settles things "right".
Which is not too flattering. NightFlareSpeak, mortal 20:59, 5 April 2008 (EDT)
Just confirms my contention that PJR is highly overrated. Maybe he just looks good compared to the vile company he keeps. Rational Edfaith 22:56, 5 April 2008 (EDT)

February fatalities:

User Negative Entries Positive Entries
Almighty Schlafly 70 0
Kenny 2 0
CPWebmaster 1 0
Karajou 11 0
PJR 7 1
Poor Ed 5 1!
CPAdmin1 1 2
Fox 6 0
Croco 18 1
DanH 3 1
Joaquín Martinez 3 0
Bohdan 0 1
Iduan* 8 0
BethanyS 6 0
BrianCo 1 0
HelpJazz* 1 0

* Not sysops but they might as well be.

I'll add that Andy got more negative entries that every other sysop combined. NightFlareSpeak, mortal 01:57, 6 April 2008 (EDT)

Someone else for the chopping block[edit]

Some poor girl called Veronica’s about to get banned.
Here’s how she tried to make it a bit more moderate.
Here’s how Assfly wants it.
Assfly gave it his personal attention.
Headdesk. How would you advise Veronica?Barbara Shack 21:40, 5 April 2008 (EDT)

Change careers. She's toast. CЯacke® 22:36, 5 April 2008 (EDT)

I can smell toast burning.Barbara Shack 02:33, 6 April 2008 (EDT)

Sorry I've been away this week. I'ver been doing wonderfully creative writing at this wonderfully creative site. And I've edited responsibly and nobody's asked any questions.Barbara Shack 17:36, 10 April 2008 (EDT)
That sounds... wonderful! Come back by whenever you want to play, but best of all, enjoy yourself! humanUser talk:Human 17:39, 10 April 2008 (EDT)

Perhaps later I cans whow you what i've written. At the moment my little Sockie stays in the closet.Barbara Shack 22:22, 10 April 2008 (EDT)

Ninja Mail[edit]

I know its an old WIGO but I love these....

Please check your email. I just sent you a important message. Conservative 19:21, 15 August 2007 (EDT)


Time for an archive[edit]

Both WIGO & Talk:WIGO could do with archiving, I'm a bit busy at the moment could someone take care of it? Jollyfish.gifGenghis Marauding 06:56, 6 April 2008 (EDT)

What's the rule again? 10+ items to Best Of? --Sid 07:02, 6 April 2008 (EDT)
I believe that's what Trent said. I would leave the last ten entries up even if they're into Best Of territory so we don't end up with an empty list. Jollyfish.gifGenghis Marauding 07:19, 6 April 2008 (EDT)
Done, I think. I moved the 10+ entries to Best Of and split the non-Best Of entries into the March/April archives. (Freaky - I'm one of the main WIGO dudes, and yet this was apparently my first archiving) --Sid 07:57, 6 April 2008 (EDT)
We still need for someone to reset the WIGO vote counter thingy. I think that is a ROOT access thing. CЯacke® 11:03, 6 April 2008 (EDT)
Yes, it is. Someone email Trent to get his attention. humanUser talk:Human 14:40, 6 April 2008 (EDT)

Ed, TK, CopyVio[edit]

Uh, Cracker? I was referring to this archived WIGO:

As usual, Conservapedia Commandment #1 does not apply to TK. On second thought, maybe it's better this way: the non-copied entries are dreadfully concise.

The current "update" to the 194 entry isn't connected to the 194 entry itself: That one was about the Liberalism template being added everywhere and Ed being a dick only to non-TK people. Since the Ed/TK gig is a sort of common theme, I'll leave it as it is, but my reasoning and phrasing was sound: It was an update to an archived item. --Sid 11:15, 6 April 2008 (EDT)

Oh okay. It's back. Though they still look like the same diffs to me. You're THE WIGOmeister. CЯacke® 11:24, 6 April 2008 (EDT)
Somebody added the update to the 194 item after I put up the 196 one. I agree that there is redundancy now, but I'm not sure which to comment out. On the one hand, it's somewhat clumsy to quasi-update an archived entry. On the other hand, the 194 update isn't strictly an update, but more of a "See also". I dunno, I'll leave this one to the others since I'm torn myself. My point was more about the reference of my WIGO note and not what should or shouldn't go. *helpless shrug* --Sid 11:29, 6 April 2008 (EDT)

An old joke, but it fits: Q What's 12 inches long and hangs between TK's legs? A Ed Poor's tie. The Clerkenwell Kid 12:08, 6 April 2008 (EDT)

I don't get it. CЯacke®
Welcome to RW, the family friendly wiki. Editor at CPfor a change 12:21, 6 April 2008 (EDT)

Speaking of Ed and TK's ongoing Blue dress saga.... Has anyone else noticed that he's going out his way and out of his mind acting as TK's personal bodyguard? It's like now that TK can't do it himself, Ed's gonna serve his master (pun intended) and delete anyhing bad about him. Conservapedia: The trustworthy, non TK offensive Encyclopedia SirChuckBWill Sysop for food 13:48, 6 April 2008 (EDT)


Up and running, again...

Anything here that hasn't be rehashed a dozen times over? UchihaKATON! 12:45, 6 April 2008 (EDT)

Oh god no, exactly the same circular reasoning from Andy as before - Dawkins CV is wrong, because it doesn't agree with what Oxford say. But Oxford are wrong because they don't agree with his CV. However I have now finally been blocked by Ed for making "false statements" when I pointed out that Oxford have confirmed Dawkins' position. It seems that the only thing that will confirm Dawkins is a legitimate professor is a full audit of his submissions to the faculty review panel in 1995/6, plus the minutes of the Committee's investigations, and a sworn affidavit from Lord Patten the Chancellor. From which I infer that Conservapedia are now accusing Oxford University of breaching their regulations and charter, their Vice-Chancellor of fraud, and their information officer of contravening the Freedom of Information Act 2000. Heady stuff. User:OurMike 13:09, 6 April 2008 (EDT)
Actually, Ed compared Oxford University to Conservapedia, so through that analogy he's pretty much accusing them of all that and more. UchihaKATON! 13:15, 6 April 2008 (EDT)
Maybe in October after the then ex-"professor" Dawkins retires from his post, we'll read about how he traveled to NYC to punch a certain lawyer in the nose. (Or just as likely a certain lawyer in NYC used his largely defensive weapon of gun to ward off a "stalker".) `CЯacke® 15:04, 6 April 2008 (EDT)
I thought Andy lived in New Jersey? (And I am mildly surprised that Dawkins hasn't threatened to sue. Maybe he just doesn't want to give Conservapedia the publicity?) --Gulik 19:06, 6 April 2008 (EDT)
Has anyone checked to see whether Andy really was a professor or did he make that up? Jrssr5 08:58, 7 April 2008 (EDT)
"Adjunct Professor" = Lowest rank on the academic totem pole. PFoster 09:20, 7 April 2008 (EDT)

<--Low man or not ... was he peer-reviewed for that position? I'd hate to see him use deceit. Jrssr5 09:51, 7 April 2008 (EDT)

Conservapedia is full of liberal bias![edit]

I am looking at some Conservapedia articles and see they are full of liberal bias.

  • cp:New World Order: "The New World Order is a staple of many conspiracy theories involving world-wide governments, and oppressive, imaginary, totalitarian regimes." Imaginary? Only to liberals.
  • cp:Gender role: "Gender roles refer to the social constructs, by which men are assigned to some traditional duties, and women to others." Social constructs? Only to liberals.
  • cp:Paganism cites the arch-liberal Isaac Bonewits as its only source and uses Bonewits' classifications.
  • cp:Jim Webb repeats liberal criticisms of Webb's "Women Can't Fight" article.
  • cp:The Bell Curve Any real conservative encyclopedia worth its salt would praise the book as an important part of the culture war against political correctness, but instead we get this: "The book pushes the envelope by dealing with two taboos at once: the authors are simultaneously rocking the boat and upsetting the apple cart. Either point by itself is an elephant in the livingroom. Tackling both at once got the authors into a lot of hot water, as their argument was perceived as the thin end of a highly controversial wedge. As a result, they have since been given the cold shoulder by many in academia, who take their findings with a grain of salt." Huh?
  • cp:Ralph Nader is a complete puff piece that could have come straight out of the pages of Mother Jones: "Nader is an outspoken critic of multinational corporations and of a dangerous convergence of corporate and government power and its impact on developing nations, labor, and the environment."

Somebody has clearly been asleep at teh wheel keeping this liberal bilge out of his encyclopedia. Secret Squirrel 12:58, 6 April 2008 (EDT)

The Bell Curve is pretty clearly parody, where somebody thought it would be funny to describe the book using as many nonsensical metaphors as possible. Actually, I saw that one as kind of clever - but it won't be up for much longer now :( UchihaKATON! 13:10, 6 April 2008 (EDT)
Aw shucks, did I has messed up sekrit infiltrashun plan to has write parody articls? Secret Squirrel 13:18, 6 April 2008 (EDT)
Yes, actually. DickTurpis and I are not amused. DogP 13:26, 6 April 2008 (EDT)
Yes, that is one of my favorite additions to CP. Right up there with DogP's (now reverted) prepositionfest. The funny thing about both artiles is that, if you look at the history, you see they're merely an extension of what Ed was already doing. DickTurpis 17:06, 6 April 2008 (EDT)

Anyone Else Notice?[edit]

On the second piece of crap about homeschooling that Conservapedia posted here They actually use this phrase

After the teacher said that the student had “signed away his First Amendment rights,” the student respectfully protested by tearing the signed document in half.

Correct me if I'm wrong.... but tearing a document in half hardly represents a respectful form of protest.... and while I'm on the subject... didn't Conservatives cheer the supreme court ruling that schools can censor student speech in the "Bong hits for Jesus" case? Gotta love that double standard. SirChuckBWill Sysop for food 15:36, 6 April 2008 (EDT)

Now we know where she came from![edit]

Is anyone else amused by Ed's subpages: Devil->evolution->coulter SusanG 18:18, 6 April 2008 (EDT)

How about we ignore Conservative[edit]

That way he might stop humillating himself, I mean, who else has cared enough to even comment about it? (The guy who asked what it meant doesn't count.) NightFlareSpeak, mortal 20:23, 6 April 2008 (EDT)

Nah, it's funny when he humiliates himself. It's what he does best, and if we didn't, he'd find someone else to do it. Although I'm finding the whole "Kenmentum" thing especially hilarious, since when I Google "atheism", CP doesn't even come up on the first page. --Kels 20:29, 6 April 2008 (EDT)
Come up on the first page????? I just checked quite a ways, and couldn't find it. I gave up at #160. What is going on? Do they think that saying "Our article is ranked #6 in Google" will make it so? Their front page article says it's #6. It isn't! What kind of world do they (Not just Ken; Lies don't get put in the news column without approval of others.) live in???? Gauss 12:05, 7 April 2008 (EDT)
I think if you're logged in to Google, it keeps track of the searches your doing to some degree, so for Ken it would come up higher than everybody else, but only because he checks it every 30 seconds to see if it's moved. It's been pointed out to him before, but I'm not sure if he's capable of learning. --Kels 12:10, 7 April 2008 (EDT)

Cripes, have you looked at the damn thing? I swear, Ken's getting entirely too much out of watching the Google ranking fluctuate, while the rest of us are over here either laughing or going "meh". "The excitement is raging" indeed! --Kels 23:08, 6 April 2008 (EDT)

Ken is so excited that he's struggling to add his new coup, google Ireland. 6 edits so far to get the wording wrong. I am not nearly classless enough to suggest that it could be the result of typing one-handed. Dmyerken 01:09, 7 April 2008 (EDT)
He's up to 8 now...and still can't spell atheists right. Dmyerken 01:11, 7 April 2008 (EDT)
Actually, I've been wondering if there's a way to google bomb some obscure article about atheism so that we can push CP's article down in the rankings. Although I worry that Conservative's head might explode. Stile4aly 01:55, 7 April 2008 (EDT)
My head hurts :) "Conservapedia's atheism article has now become a worldwide phenomenon!" That's why it's called the "world wide web", Kendoll. When are you going to translate it into Chinese? With the Olympics, and all, you ought to be able to make some kind of triple crown coup out of it! humanUser talk:Human 02:03, 7 April 2008 (EDT)

Not WIGO-worthy, but...[edit]

"When she sees a shiny object"?!?!!? - I'm not sure if that's loathsome, or parody, or both....but I laughed anyways. I'm going to hell, aren't I? PFoster 11:02, 7 April 2008 (EDT)

TK Language[edit]

I love it: this is such a prime example. "Pardon while I ape my masters to try to curry their favor."-αmεσ (pirate) 14:09, 7 April 2008 (EDT)

Wait, did TK just publically admit that CP is a blog, and not an encyclopedia? --Kels 15:19, 7 April 2008 (EDT)
It's hard to tell. What he did appear to say was that CP can "print" anything they want to, without needing substantiation, due to the First Amendment's protection of "free speech". humanUser talk:Human 15:22, 7 April 2008 (EDT)
I got that, but it seems he's saying here, "we do not demand a person have absolute or even anecdotal proof to make a statement of opinion" that CP is not presenting itself as fact, but rather opinion. Which doesn't seem to match Andy's version. --Kels 15:33, 7 April 2008 (EDT)
I like it is completely unfair and unacceptable for foreign citizens to try and impose their ethical and moral concepts on the citizens of another place. Currently fighting the urge to call him out as a deceitful lib'rul moral relativist... --Robledo 16:27, 7 April 2008 (EDT)

FOR GREAT HATRED! --Kels 18:44, 7 April 2008 (EDT)

And "a liar who says it was copied from WP" apparently. Wow, that place got even crazier since I got booted! Who is he? Ed's short-tempered apprentice?
Since I was bored, I made a more detailed side-by-side comparison using the WP version of that time. Guess I'm a liar now, too. ;) If there is a better place to post such comparisons, feel free to move it there - I'm more of an occasional visitor than a hardened veteran here, so I dunno all the Cool Kids Places yet! --DHayes 22:59, 7 April 2008 (EDT)
Welcome to Kool-Aid Anonymous. CЯacke®


With that article, it was in the uncategorized pages, so I was just looking to get it out of that section. =_= Fuzzy|AFD 14:15, 7 April 2008 (EDT)

Ken is SOOOOOO pathetic[edit]

I don't think this is WIGO-worthy but after Ken's begorrah post to Oirish atheists, Andy added a CP page view update and tribute to Charlton Heston which pushed Ken's trumpeting down the page. So Ken re-edits it to say "Irish theist eyes are smiling" and puts it back at the top! Jollyfish.gifGenghis Marauding 18:41, 7 April 2008 (EDT)

Jimmy hath layeth the Smackdown[edit]

And a fine rant it is, too. Anyone want to start a betting pool on how long 'til he gets blocked? (I emailed him about rationalwiki, assuming he's not already a member.)

Apparently Civil War is a copy[edit]

I was told in pmail, of the Time Life books cited as "sources." But... I don't have those books.-αmεσ (pirate) 22:29, 7 April 2008 (EDT)

Try your local library? --Gulik 00:01, 8 April 2008 (EDT)

Anyone want to help out TK?[edit]

We just need a few examples of CP sysops deleting posts from other people's talkpages. Bonus points if it's him. --Gulik 01:20, 8 April 2008 (EDT)

It was Inigo, not Fezzik ;-) Bondurant 06:27, 8 April 2008 (EDT)
Is "ad-hominem attack" TK's new phrase of the week? Anyway, by now, PJR posted to the effect that sysops can remove "vandalism" and "offensive material" (which is true). Of course, the issue is what is regarded as offensive - and who gets to decide that. --Sid 06:58, 8 April 2008 (EDT)
New phrase of the week: So it would seem. Ironic, considering how fond he is of using them himself. BTW, rhetorically speaking, it's interesting the way TK seems to latch onto certain words or phrases and use them repeatedly. It used to be 'hate' or 'hatred', then 'disingenuous', and now apparently 'ad hominem attack.' Bit of a weakness there if you ask me. --AKjeldsenGodspeed! 07:21, 8 April 2008 (EDT)
Less of a weakness (although it's certainly not a strength, either), but it is somewhat uncreative. And as a rule of thumb, using phrases when you're not clear about when to use them properly is a bad idea and results in slap-downs like PJR's "TomMoore's post was not an ad hominem argument, but asking the user's identity is" there. Okay, so I guess in that sense, it is a weakness. --Sid 07:55, 8 April 2008 (EDT)
I know TK did it to me a bunch of times before he perma-banned me last year.Jrssr5 10:50, 8 April 2008 (EDT)
TK's in trouble! I'm on it! We must help him! Wait, how would this help him?-αmεσ (pirate) 10:57, 8 April 2008 (EDT)
"Sir, I'd love to help you out. Which way did you come in?" (It'll help him look like an even bigger lying fool, but someone beat us to it.) --Gulik 11:53, 8 April 2008 (EDT)


I have made a Word document with a side by side comparison of the UCLA plagiarism, including references. Could someone wikify it for me?  Lily Ta, wack! 14:38, 8 April 2008 (EDT)

E-mail it to me or you can probably save as HTML & post the appropriate bits . SusanG 14:56, 8 April 2008 (EDT)
Saving MS Word as HTML usually results in some sort of monstrosity (depending on version) that's barely fitted for direct web use, much less wiki use. :/ --Sid 14:58, 8 April 2008 (EDT)
Somebody above did a side-by-side, too (without refs, though). But I could give it a spin, too, if you send me the DOC via mail... (I sent you one so you got the address) --Sid 14:57, 8 April 2008 (EDT)
Sid's probably your best bet. :) SusanG 15:02, 8 April 2008 (EDT)
Thanks Sid, I've sent it off.  Lily Ta, wack! 15:49, 8 April 2008 (EDT)
Here you go! Took a bit longer than anticipated, but I think/hope this is what you had in mind :) --Sid 18:16, 8 April 2008 (EDT)
Nice work to Lily and Sid. Thank you both very mulch. CЯacke® 19:16, 8 April 2008 (EDT)

Bibical authors[edit]

It is interesting (not really, not surprising at all that Andy wants to read the Bible selectively) that CP has brought up the debate of inserted passages and stories into the Pauline epistles. My favorite obvious insertion is in 1 Corinthians 14:33b-35[2][3] Looking back at the early church, there were dueling dogmas and early copiers would insert passages to support their own position (yes Andy, the Bible was an early Wikipedia, and should respected with similar skepticism). When one sits down and looks at what is actually there and not the work of later authors different stories emerge. However, it is intellectual dishonesty to throw out one addition and yet cling tightly to others with fingers stuck one's ears saying "everything else is right, just that ones that are used by liberals are forgeries." --Shagie 17:37, 8 April 2008 (EDT)

Hah! That sounds like something an academic, with all their professor values, might say. --AKjeldsenGodspeed! 17:47, 8 April 2008 (EDT)
I wonder if he will ever venture into the question of if more recent individuals claiming to be prophets are divinely inspired or not with similar veracity as he is taking to this story which is accepted as cannon. I'd love to see Andy and Crokie get into a boxing match. --Shagie 17:56, 8 April 2008 (EDT)
He actually already did, if tangentially. If the Bible is complete, and the Bible is the only canon, then I guess the rest follows logically... --AKjeldsenGodspeed! 18:04, 8 April 2008 (EDT)
So, here's the question then. The Bible as Christians know it became canon in 367 with Athanasius, Bishop of Alexandria saying that a set of books is kanonizomena (the word for canonized). The Senate of Hippo in 393 approved the list and added the Septuagint. Is material written prior to that but a forgery canon? Then the adulteress story would be part of the canon. Alternatively, is it anything that wasn't in the original text? Then you get parts of the NT that become non-canon (like that 1 Corinthians 14 passage and a bunch of others). --Shagie 18:23, 8 April 2008 (EDT)
It's not quite that straightforward, since (at least formally) Athanasius and the Senate of Hippo did not have authority outside their own provinces, so such decrees would not be binding on all Christians, such as e.g. a church council would. Interestingly, it wasn't until the Council of Trent in the 16th century that such a council formally established the Biblical canon, as a response to the Reformation. However, the majority of the canon has been well established since the 3rd century, although there has been some lengthy controversy over certain epistles and OT books. Of course, we've passed way beyond anything that Schlafly's simplistic theology can comprehend by now. --AKjeldsenGodspeed! 18:37, 8 April 2008 (EDT)
"Obvious" forgeries -- by your proclamation. The difference is comparing the scriptures to the scriptures and the writings of the early church fathers. The passage in John, along with that in Mark, are seen as suspect. The idea of deciding what you like and what you don't doesn't come into play. I journal and do a good deal of writing. I would not want to see how much of my writing would be considered to be "forgeries" by those coming later without a clue and placing over it their own creations of what I should have been saying, what conflicts were taking place, etc. Learn Together 01:10, 9 April 2008 (EDT)
Obvious if you read the Greek and compare writing styles and word choices and flow of the text around it. I once again extend my offer to purchase copies of Lost Christianities and Lost Scriptures for you. Put them on an amazon wish list, link it here, and I will get it for you. --Shagie 01:55, 9 April 2008 (EDT)
You would find the same thing with my writing, telling me places where it is evident someone else wrote it. In an age where there were no footnotes, and based on the way that men actually think, 100% flow as you interpret it should be written is not going to occur. If it did, the same works would be held as "proof" of alterations having been made because they were too perfect. That is the folly of people trying to piece together how something should have been written to match modern sensibilities when we have only a fraction of the writings and knowledge that they had in ancient times. Let's be honest, look at the writings of John Adams. How many errors would you find where it would show you it wasn't his work? All of his thoughts, especially in his writings to Jefferson, don't appear to be consistent with earlier sayings of his, or, in some cases, even consistent within the same letter -- when held to the way we expect writing to occur. Learn Together 02:55, 9 April 2008 (EDT)

I like the way the Assfly unwittingly describes his own MO "Motivation (politics) is relevant to understanding why logic and proof are rejected..."[4] Auld Nick 18:28, 8 April 2008 (EDT)

I don't know, it looks like something he would repeat endlessly even if people pointed out what it implies. NightFlareSpeak, mortal 18:41, 8 April 2008 (EDT)
Fox permanently banned me from CP for agreeing with Andy that the Bible should be examined for passages of dubious provenance that lend themselves for use by liberals. Rational Edfaith 18:52, 8 April 2008 (EDT)
Pity he couldn't ban Andy, too. --Gulik 20:57, 8 April 2008 (EDT)

Can I wade in at this point? I'm only vaguely watching what is going on at the moment, due to far more imortant IRL events :) but I wanted to add a few POVs. Firstly, on the story itself: Alan Watson of the University of Georgia School of Law sheds some interesting light on the "meat" of what is actually happening. He also goes quite some way to explaining why this episode presents problems for Christians, at least the early church, and hence why it took a while to find "a home" in the gospels. I don't claim to know if this is the definitive explanation, but it certainly makes more sense than Andrew's "scholarly" explanation of "I don't like it, liberals do, therefore it is false". Secondly, the Armenian (one of the most ancient) translation of the New Testament says: "Bowing His head, He wrote in the dirt to make known the sins of these men and they themselves saw their various sins on the rocks". Specifically, it does not use "grafein" (write), but "katagarfein" (write an accusation against). Thirdly, Andrew himself proves the reason for its omission at various times: It was removed in many ancient manuscripts because of the fear that it would tend to weaken the seriousness of adultery among married women through misunderstanding Jesus' words and actions. Andrew wants it removed because it means most of his blogging is clearly un-Christian and in contradiction/disobedience of G-d's Word. Last point: John tells of seven miracles, five of which are not recorded by the other gospels - can we say then that Jesus did not turn the water into wine/raise Lazarus/heal the man born blind/heal the nobleman's son/cure the paralysed man by the pool at Bethesda? Matthew, Mark and Luke all omit these "signs" so perhaps there is very good reason to doubt their veracity. Surely things as important as these would have been written in ALL of the gospel accounts? V. vulpes 04:14, 9 April 2008 (EDT)

Sorry, more to add. I find it interesting that WeirdEd feels he is in any position to comment on any aspect of the Bible's veracity as though from a Christian's point of view as he subscribes to a belief system which asserts:
  1. No Trinity, Jesus is not G-d
  2. G-d is an oriental deity
  3. Rev. Moon is the real god
  4. Jesus meant well but was a failure
  5. Jesus was crucified before he finished his mission
  6. Moon is the 3rd Adam, Lord of the Second Advent, and the Messiah
  7. Salvation by good works for Moon and blood purification by Moon
  8. Christianity offers no hope
  9. G-d discarded Christianity as a corrupt and outdated religion
  10. Bible can only be translated in light of the Moonies' sacred text, the "Divine Principle"
  11. Christ’s resurrection is blasphemy
  12. Jesus was the 2nd Adam and came to fix Adam’s failure (procreation of a perfect family)
  13. Jesus is the bastard son of Mary and Zechariah
  14. Sin is genetic, not a moral choice
  15. Eve had sexual intercourse with the serpent Lucifer
  16. Abel started the spiritual lineage of the democracies in South Korea and the US
  17. Cain’s offspring became the seed of Communism
  18. The battle line of good (G-d) and evil (Satan) is the 38th parallel between North and South Korea
  19. Sprinkled soil from Korea makes any spot "holy ground"

Nice to know you "teach" at Sunday School Ed, just not so nice to know what you're teaching. V. vulpes 05:16, 9 April 2008 (EDT)

Is Ed a Moonie? Ajkgordon 07:35, 9 April 2008 (EDT)
He is indeed. I'm sure he used to say so on his CP user page, but doesn't anymore. Also on his WP userpage. The photographs someone linked to here recently were also at Moonie meeting. V. vulpes 07:44, 9 April 2008 (EDT)
Jesus. I mean Moon. Ajkgordon 08:50, 9 April 2008 (EDT)

I do find it quite odd that an "encyclopedia" whose main purpose is to reflect mainstream Christianity has, as two of its biggest players, a Moonie and a Mormon (who are also two of its biggest assholes, coincidence?). Fox, not a Christian at all, seems much more in place. Looking at CP's article on the Moonies, I see Fox included Moon's anti-Semitism (sort of explains a lot don't it, Ed? Is there anything on how they don't like blacks either?). I wonder if Ed noticed. What I really wonder is what Assfly's take on that "church" is. He can't be a big fan, can he? Maybe someone should ask him. DickTurpis 09:59, 9 April 2008 (EDT)

I'm beginning to suspect that Assfly is not really a Christian at all. He uses Christianity as a convenient tool to give his rather ideosyncratic conservative views a "moral" underpinning. Rational Edfaith 10:08, 9 April 2008 (EDT)
Its pretty scarey (for "believers") that we have here a so-called "Conservative Christian-encyclopedia" that is written (and heavily "overseen") by non-Conservative non-Christians. The probem they all face is they trip over their own doctrinal falsifcations. If the millennial reign of Christ is near, then everyrthing they complain about is a portent of the End Times, and should be welcomed! Jesus told us to be "not afraid" because "these" were the signs that He was due to give the world its final wake-up call, with no resort to the "snooze" button. As the Jehovah's Witnesses teach, why bother sending your child to school when this worldly realm is about to be resculpted by the returning Christ? Why bother having children at all, in fact? (An actual teaching of The Watchtower.) Funny how the main players either are believers in NON-CHRISTIAN religions/denominations (Mormonism, Moonies) or feel that the Bible is subject to 21st century revision for "socio-political purity"... And TK, of course, the ultimate Judas Iscariot. He took his 30 rat-wiki silvers, betrayed his brotherhood, and somehow was welcomed back among the flock. But of course, they were non-Christian to begin with, so it didn't matter to them. I for one would have shed no tears - YES, ED, FUCK YOUR "FORGIVENESS" EPISTLE ON MY TALK PAGE- I'M NOT YESHUA - had he hanged himself. You have to ask yourself how a Christian Conservative encyclopedia feels it can explain/justify its existence by the strength of its "Atheism" and "Liberal" articles..? The articles on Conservatism/God/Christianity are a joke. Read them. See if I lie. More to the point, why are they defining themselves by what they dislike rather than what they like?? When I explain my politics/religion to someone, I tell them its positive points - I don't define myself by what I disagree with. That is the last refuge of the uneducated/unthinking bigot.
I pity those "lesser" editors at CP. They're all (in my humble Jewish kike Messianic opinion) gonna be dragged into metaphorical lakes of fire/eternal death by the hell-bound sinners and liars spreading the Gospel of Satan that is Conservapedia. Atheists? In my religion's view, if you are wrong then at least my Merciful G-d gives you a second chance to express belief or desire to be at one with Him. Likewise, homosexuals, liars, murderers, thieves - you are ALL my brothers and sisters, and I will INSIST I stand up before my Creator and be counted - Yeshua promised salvation to all who asked - as so for you when the time comes. After all, that's What Jesus Would Do. Are you watching, Andrew/TK/Ed/Crocoite/PJR? Meh, PJR (and LearnTogether)almost doesn't necessitate inclusion in that list - of all the editors at CP, he is one of the few that at least tries to follow the instructions of G-d's Word. You see, there really is a difference between being genuinely mistaken and being malignantly deceiving. Ed Poor, TK, etc - malignant deceivers - cancerous tumours spreading among the "youth" they claim to be enlightening. I pray for your EXCISION!! V. vulpes 11:33, 9 April 2008 (EDT)
Nice analysis, Zorro. You confirm my contention that anyone who stays with CP is either a hypocrite, a masochist or a fool. I can almost forgive you for banning me from CP. Rational Edfaith
Nice post, Fox, even though it was a rant :)
I find this Biblical innerency displayed on CP rather difficult to grasp. So it's innerent unless you don't agree with it, like the Adultress Story? This is always the mistake made when politicising religion. The overall message is lost and the Bible is quote-mined to back up POV.
The Christianity that Aschlafly and others preach bears almost no relation at all to the Christianity I was brought up with or even the Catholicism of my wife and children. Almost anathema actually. Ajkgordon 12:29, 9 April 2008 (EDT)
The rich and powerful have always used religion to their own ends, i.e. keeping and enhancing their power and wealth. I believe that selfishness lies behind the Schlafly's worldview (mom & son). Why give aid when you can pray? The American conservative mindset is all about keeping their little paradise nice and comfy for the elite, bugger the poor and uneducated working for $7 an hour. Keep out the immigrants except to mow their lawns and clean their houses on the cheap. It is much easier to enforce a simple literal interpretation of the Bible (skipping over the bits you don't like) rather than an airy-fairy Church of England open to interpretation version of Christianity. The latter way means that people must think and in Andy's newspeak of "open your mind" he really means "open your mind and we will fill it with what we want you to think, then close it again forever". Jollyfish.gifGenghis Marauding 12:33, 9 April 2008 (EDT)
I wouldn't say that the Church of England version is "airy-fairy". I'd say it requires more critical thinking. More theology. There's no theology in Aschlafly's brand of Christianity. Only ideology Ajkgordon 13:02, 9 April 2008 (EDT)

{Reset indent)Ah, I apologise, it was a bit of a rant wasn't it? But I stand by every word regardless. Sorry. My wife is working in Brussels, my youngest children are all staying with grandparents, and I've been out "on the town" with my eldest, in the incredibly strange situation of pulling up sandbags and swapping war stories. You can't begin to comprehend how how jarring that is lol. Anyhoo - yes, rant; but still no word of a lie. I'm a crazy old Jew, we rant. It's our preorogative (or so I will claim). V. vulpes 13:57, 9 April 2008 (EDT)

No apology required! And no lie detected. (Although I do take exception to homosexuals being lumped in with liars, murderers and thieves.) Ajkgordon 16:00, 9 April 2008 (EDT)
Hm, good point; although I wasn't consciously grouping them all together, I was sorta trying to show CPs grouping. If you see what I mean. V. vulpes 18:52, 10 April 2008 (EDT)

"Revert the Bible to rid it of liberal bias."[edit]

I just read that edit aloud to my girlfriend. Wow. The man is clearly becoming unhinged. He thinks he's on a mission from God... PFoster 22:19, 8 April 2008 (EDT)

Yes, he's finally passed beyond the colorably insane to the truly insane.-αmεσ (pirate) 22:26, 8 April 2008 (EDT)

Jake and Elwood did it better. --Kels 22:28, 8 April 2008 (EDT)

I wonder how User:C is going to take this: his mentor now (seems to) claim that HE, alone, can discern what texts are Canon. CЯacke® 23:18, 8 April 2008 (EDT)

I say we should encourage Andy to rewrite the Bible. The New Andy Edition is needed. DogP 20:12, 9 April 2008 (EDT)

This is too far, even for CP, it's fraking crazy! Armondikov 08:34, 10 April 2008 (EDT)

Can this go into the artifcle about Andy. Perhaps he'll get himself certified insane and save us a lot of trouble. Barbara Shack 17:32, 10 April 2008 (EDT)

done. PFoster 17:41, 10 April 2008 (EDT)

The relativity rant[edit]

My law student wife pulled out the article that he is making reference to. While it's technically correct, he put it in the wrong place. Someone want a copy of the paper? Lardashe

Which relativity rant is this?-αmεσ (pirate) 09:42, 9 April 2008 (EDT)
I'd also like to note that law students are hot.-αmεσ (pirate) 09:45, 9 April 2008 (EDT)
They sure are. :::
That rant.Lardashe
That's an extremely odd article - Tribe at his most obtuse. What do you mean he put it in the wrong place?-αmεσ (pirate) 09:54, 9 April 2008 (EDT)
Well.... it doesn't be long under Theory of Relativity. At best, it belongs under Obama's article, but it just looks like he wants to smear Obama in as many locations as possible.
Correct, good point. And I love how his argument sums up to, "people who believe in science are more likely to be liberal." !!!!!! He apparently seems to think that, if science pisses him off in some way, it is all of a sudden voidable, as long as he can find some quack to say something stupid.
In any event, he seems to think that Tribe is actually using relatively to redefine law; instead, Tribe is just using it as a motif to explain his theory that subtle state action has a ripple effect. He's apparently conflating the metaphor with the idea. Epic meta-phail.
Also that's a super-cool article upon reinspection. Yeah, if anyone wants it I'll send it to you, and Lardashe will too :-). Thanks for pointing this out!-αmεσ (pirate) 10:09, 9 April 2008 (EDT)

The HelpJazz Quest[edit]

Let's see, first it was "by the end of the weekend", then it was "Monday", and now here it's...what?...Wednesday, with no Jazzy night edits in sight. Must have slipped Andy's mind. Plus, Feebs rubs a little salt in the wound. Anyone want to take bets on how long HJ will wait before begging some more?--WJThomas 09:28, 9 April 2008 (EDT)

It is amusing to watch Andy torture HJ by keeping him hanging on one transparent excuse after another. HJ is a fool for even wanting to support the project, and for putting up with such demeaning treatment. Andy is an egotistical petty tyrant. Pathetic all around. Rational Edfaith 10:12, 9 April 2008 (EDT)
I was wondering if Iduan would've been given night edit rights if none of the teacher hacking/impersonation/whatever happened and Andy received a single, clean e-mail from a real teacher. NightFlareSpeak, mortal 12:53, 9 April 2008 (EDT)
I doubt it. Andy requires worship, and promoting all loyal followers to his priest caste (i.e. sysops) would leave no churls to beg for his blessing. --Arcan ¡ollǝɥ 13:03, 9 April 2008 (EDT)
That's a convincing explanation. And the cringing, humble pleading for attention and promotion feed the emperor's ravenous ego. Rational Edfaith

Dr Sandstone[edit]

He apparently thinks I'm a condescending asshole. Hey, at least he didn't call me a kike. The user formerly known as DLerner 11:59, 9 April 2008 (EDT)

Heh, incidentally, I don't mind being called a kike. Even by my goyim associates and friends. It isn't like the (unwritten) rules of the use of "nigger", in as much as only another Jew could call me a kike, but perhaps more in the sense that "faggot" is used: it is the context in which it is used. I think it goes a long way to disarming bigots/anti-semites when we rob them of their terms of abuse in this way. Sure, they find new ways to abuse us, but we will eventually render those impotent, too. Turning our enemies into figures of fun to be laughed at and ridiculed ultimatrely holds greater power than when we retaliate in kind. Although, a smack in the chops still often works wonders and serves as a suitable, if crude, response to people who can't control their vocal chords :D Meh, I will be testing the legalities of that response shortly in Winchester Crown Court when I am up on charges of ABH against a person who took the piss out of the Holocaust/Israel/Jews/my daughter and myself and received 11 stitches for his troubles. *gallic shrug* C'est la vie.V. vulpes 19:05, 10 April 2008 (EDT)
I'm still trying to work out how many of the three participants in that discussion are parodists. At least two of them. All three, perhaps? GNUSMAS : TALK 12:03, 9 April 2008 (EDT)
And he is blocked. But according to Ed, it's because he told me to learn to read.

The user formerly known as DLerner 12:07, 9 April 2008 (EDT)

Nope, not me, I never vandalize, it's against my code of honor. The user formerly known as DLerner 12:08, 9 April 2008 (EDT)

I didn't say vandal, I said parodist. By which I mean someone who doesn't subscribe to the warped Shcaflyl worldview, and is at CP more for sport than to support the aims of CP. Maybe parodist isn't the right word either. GNUSMAS : TALK 12:28, 9 April 2008 (EDT)


Has anyone invited him to come over to us?--TimS 14:43, 9 April 2008 (EDT)

Drew University bash[edit]

Anyone go? Andy seems to think it was lively, and I for one would love to know what went on. DogP 22:38, 9 April 2008 (EDT)

Lively eh? As with all student arranged talks it was lively for the 4 that showed up. Ace McWicked 23:42, 9 April 2008 (EDT)

Fetus rights[edit]

Here are my comments on the subject of fetus rights, enjoy. The user formerly known as DLerner 03:13, 10 April 2008 (EDT)

1st amendment's freedom of assembly is an important one though, at least in the case of multiple fertilization. Trying to break up an assembly of triplets could get messy. DickTurpis 09:43, 10 April 2008 (EDT)

Ed Poor's Muck[edit]


There is one person I'd love to punch if I ever met him in real life. Such a smug, gimpy, unfunny little twat. MarcusCicero 08:59, 10 April 2008 (EDT)

Good heavens, I remember jokes like that being outdated in the seventies. But I guess that applies to Ed too. Nice to see his "alienate all non-sysops" project is proceeding well, though. --Kels 09:41, 10 April 2008 (EDT)
Methinks he was seeing if anyone was awake to do him's spele checking for him this a.m. That or Edbot has developed moer of a conscious than it's owner. re:
  • 10:01, 10 April 2008 EdBot (Talk | contribs) deleted "Permission" (Really Pointless)
10:40, 10 April 2008 (EDT) CЯacke®
Did I miss anything of significance there? I've been out and away for a good while, so I never saw it... --Sid 16:26, 10 April 2008 (EDT)
The article was more or less like this: "what you ask your parents for." No need to say who the author was. NightFlareSpeak, mortal 16:32, 10 April 2008 (EDT)
It's been odd watching him go from slightly conceited and paternalistic to downright infuriatingly douchy suck-up. TK's influenzace?-αmεσ (pirate) 16:41, 10 April 2008 (EDT)
Its just like old times... though somehow trying to picture Joaquín Martínez in the Goatse position for TK is painful to think of. That said, Andy is still ignoring TK on CP. Come to think of it, Andy appears to be ignoring everyone in that clique except for the occasional "good boy, here's your pat on the head" when Ed goes begging for attention on his talk page. He will occasionaly debate with PJR on aspects of biblical interpretation and advocate purging the bible of all liberal influence. If he doesn't watch out, TK will try to stage another coup. --Shagie 18:46, 10 April 2008 (EDT)