Conservapedia talk:What is going on at CP?/Archive45

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>, <39>, <40>, <41>, <42>, <43>, <44>, <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)

Fox pwning Ed

Fox, this is pure gold. Excellent pwning. Also, RTHonMP, the guy who said on the talk main page that he'd met Boris, is me. Take that, Karajou!-caius (ninja) 18:35, 2 May 2008 (EDT)

It's like shooting fish in a barrel Fox 18:46, 2 May 2008 (EDT)

More like shooting spineless jellyfish. Bravo, Fox! --SpinyNorman 19:14, 2 May 2008 (EDT)

Out of curiosity, are you implying that there are jellyfish with spines? : ) -- Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 23:10, 2 May 2008 (EDT)

Sure, spiny jellyfish! They sorta do have spines, just not vertebrae... human 20:39, 5 May 2008 (EDT)

Never edit before that first cup of joe... --SpinyNorman 20:37, 5 May 2008 (EDT)

Evolutionists claimed to have found transitional fossils of dogs evolving into jellyfish, but objective scientists have determined that they are actually proof of aquatic super soldiers engineered by an ancient, technologically advanced civilization.

...no, wait, this isn't the impersonation thread... my bad! ;) --Sid 07:24, 3 May 2008 (EDT)

Sure, Ed

Nothing Ed says should surprise me anymore, but still, how can he say that he's good at presenting both sides of controversial issues while simultaneously displaying this? DickTurpis 20:52, 2 May 2008 (EDT)

It's a special mental technique called "Doublethink". Fanatics of all stripes tend to be veritable Zen Masters at it. --Gulik 02:12, 3 May 2008 (EDT)

How is believing that socialism hasn't worked because the people in charge of it were totalitarians in any way a contradiction? And what do us socialists have to do with liberalism anyways? -The Almighty Tuna 03:09, 3 May 2008 (EDT)

Easy, actually. There is no controversy about anything liberals are involved in. They are simply wrong, so there is no need to present their views fairly. That insight is what makes Ed a Good Conservative. --Sid 07:21, 3 May 2008 (EDT)

Deborah...

...just kissed any aspirations she may have had for sysopship goodbye. Sandman 20:55, 2 May 2008 (EDT)

This has developed a bit more. I'm moving it off the talk page. Sandman 20:57, 2 May 2008 (EDT)

Operation Adelaide

I missed the details of this. What is happening, did Conservative say anything other than his usual vageness? I live in Adelaide and just the thought that Conservative is thinking about my city makes me feel dirty. 3.14159

Me too. I logged on to see he'd just deleted the Message to Us Gentlemen. Sad. Also, when are they going to block my sock so I can get back to work?-caius (ninja) 22:18, 2 May 2008 (EDT)

Aaaaaand he nabbed someone else instead.-caius (ninja) 22:35, 2 May 2008 (EDT)

Aaaaaannnd in comes Karajou and pops a cap in your ass. He's like Paulie off The Sopranos. Yes, I'm sorry I wasn't around to answer the Red Telephone, but the message got deleted from the system anyway. DogP 22:50, 2 May 2008 (EDT)

Quick! To your stations everybody! I'll get the phone....I've written down the coded message:

DogP 22:55, 2 May 2008 (EDT)

Set condition one!-caius (ninja) 22:55, 2 May 2008 (EDT)

I think I worked out his plan. He is going to streak across the oval at the Port vs West game with "Visit Conservapedia" painted on his naked body. 3.14159 23:04, 2 May 2008 (EDT)

Maybe he's been trying to convince someone named Adelaide to visit (his mom, maybe?), and that'll be one more visitor to his pet articles CP. --Kels 23:07, 2 May 2008 (EDT)

Didn't you know, Kels? Ken has no mother—he was created in a laboratory. His repressed homosexuality and rejection of science are clearly desperate attempts to reach out to his scientist creator-father-figure. -- Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 23:14, 2 May 2008 (EDT)

Dammit, would you stop looking at my ideas folder? --Kels 23:38, 2 May 2008 (EDT)

OF COURSE Ken has a mother. Any middle-aged, repressed-homosexual man has to have somewhere to live. Genghis^{Our ignorance is God; what we know is science.} 04:43, 3 May 2008 (EDT)

"If you guess what Operation Illinois is I will give you a bonus clue to another operation." Something will happen in the near future that may or may not have an impact in one or more Conservapedia articles. Did I win? NightFlare^{Speak, mortal} 23:41, 2 May 2008 (EDT)

Uh, does anyone else find it odd that he just changed the name to Operation Port Adelaide? Barikada 19:15, 3 May 2008 (EDT)

I'm so excited I think I'll go to bed. See y'all tomorrow. --Kels 23:43, 2 May 2008 (EDT)

I can't help but picture this as Kenny's Headquarters. NightFlare^{Speak, mortal} 23:55, 2 May 2008 (EDT)

Hey, I have sectional couch-thingie that looks a lot like that! Well, except for the sign, I guess. human 01:13, 3 May 2008 (EDT)

That's really quite appropriate. Conservapedia always reminds me of some little improvised shack in the woods, made out of junk by a bunch of 8-year-olds, with a sign on the door saying "No girlz or libruls aloud". --Gulik 02:16, 3 May 2008 (EDT)

Why does he keep creating pages then deleting them? This sort of crap could not be less conducive to creating an encyclopedia if it tried. 3.14159 00:03, 3 May 2008 (EDT)

What's happening in Adelaide it has been more than an hour now since it was suppose to begin I havn't felt the world tremor yet? 3.14159 00:52, 3 May 2008 (EDT)

Stealth OPS , that was mighty impressive. Whoop-dee-fucking-doo. CЯacke® 01:09, 3 May 2008 (EDT)

Nothing's Happening in Adelaide it's the most boring place in the world. Svengali

This just occurred to me: might Conservative be playing us, because he gets a thrill/ego boost in seeing his every move reported here? -- Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 03:37, 3 May 2008 (EDT)

Duh, I guess. But he should also realize that the more we report on his moves "regarding Conservapedia's Atheism article", the more we get picked up by Google for the search terms "Atheism" and "Conservapedia". :) Plus, we get to laugh at him, and other sysops are bound to groan any time Conservative posts another one of his shout-outs. --Sid 07:18, 3 May 2008 (EDT)

I mean seriously - why does he do this? It makes him look like Gareth from The Office (obscure reference to UK Sitcom) sitting drawing maps and battle plans when NOTHING EVER HAPPENS. You would really think he might give up. It's like The Ides of March bollocks. It kind of reminds me of when I was 8 with my friends drawing plans of how we would demolish the school with giant robot ants. RedDog 12:50, 3 May 2008 (EDT)

Now that would be a plan worth enacting! : ) -- Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 16:50, 3 May 2008 (EDT)

Wasn't that in a Simpsons? (I believe it was Who Shot Mr. Burns part 1). And I think Gareth is a very accurate comparison. Sycophantic as well.-Lardashe

And homophobic. Genghis^{Our ignorance is God; what we know is science.} 03:34, 6 May 2008 (EDT)

Conservapedia's silly ideas about atheism

Tnhey've got a new long article about Atheism. Proxima Centauri 03:47, 3 May 2008 (EDT)

Sorry PC User:SusanG

By the time I finished reading that, I would probably die of laughter. -The Almighty Tuna 13:20, 3 May 2008 (EDT)

Dinosaurs

God, that article is so amusing... soem of my personal high points:

• Multiple Cultures have Dinosaurs in their legends, so of course that proves they're real... It couldn't possibly be that the wide interaction between cultures resulted in the swapping of legends...
• Look at these animals... they were said to be extinct and then we found them... I would venture a small difference between a deep water fish, one species of squirrel and a Fucking Tyronosaurus Rex.
• All these people, hundres of them, including some scientists have claimed to see Dinosaur-like creatures... Yet, millions of people have seen UFOs and that's just liberals being guilible (ps, Andy does understand the difference between a UFO and a Flying Saucer right? he's using the two as if their interchangable and they're not.) This was pointed out in the WIGO of course
• My personal favorite... If the many sightings and mulptiple legends of Dragons prove the bible, what about all the other mulitple legends? Many cultures have Unicorns, Centaurs, The Pheonix, multi-headed animals and most have talking trees? Does this mean they're acceptable and true as well> Just a thought SirChuckB^{Further bulletins as events warrant} 12:59, 3 May 2008 (EDT)

When I was editing on CP I removed some of those sighting paragraphs because the sources cited were totally bogus including a "scientist" that had since withdrawn his claims and another from a Chinese magazine that is the equivalent of the Inquirer. Immediately reverted, of course. Rational Ed^perception 19:47, 3 May 2008 (EDT)

who did i accuse?

I just found out that I got blocked for a week for an accusation, I don't even know who or what I accused. What the fuck is going on at that site? 220.245.178.136 14:17, 3 May 2008 (EDT)

BTW this is DLerner

You expect rationality, intelligence, and fair play at CP? Sucker...--WJThomas 15:05, 3 May 2008 (EDT)

Ed posted on cp:Conservapedia:Censorship right before and after the block, so I guess it was your comment there that led to your "vacation". --Sid 07:10, 4 May 2008 (EDT)

Ken's deranged mutterings

Oh noes, he's at it again. For someone who doesn't read RW he seems to be very familiar with our discussions. Of course, no-one honestly believes him. Why post something if you're not going to peek at the responses? Get a life Ken, get a girlfriend, leave home. Right now you have the intellectual prowess of a pre-teen, we don't give a shit where your articles rank on Google. Genghis^{Our ignorance is God; what we know is science.} 17:27, 3 May 2008 (EDT)

Note to Ken - it's not that we don't acknowledge that your Google ratings climbed. It's that we don't care. Google rank does not mean that your positions are respectable. If it did, you'd still be losing to four+ liberal sites. Get a girl. Or a guy. See if I care. But get something.-caius (ninja) 17:37, 3 May 2008 (EDT)

I'm still sort of amused by what Ken thinks he's accomplishing here. There's nothing at all in the article that would convince someone to turn away from atheism, and a whole lot that would convince them that theists are a bunch of raving nutters. If anything, it hurts the theist cause, or whatever the hell cause he's promoting. Although it does provide a lot of laughs for those who do visit. --Kels 17:48, 3 May 2008 (EDT)

A further thought. Ken makes a huge deal about how his gaming the system promotion of the article on Google managed to push it up in the rankings temporarily. Does he intend to keep doing this indefinitely? For the next year? For the next five? Twenty? Certainly the moment he stops artificially inflating his rank, it'll drop to its natural level again. So what's the point? --Kels 17:55, 3 May 2008 (EDT)

NOTE TO "GENTLEMAN" AT THAT OTHER OTHER SITE A, GOOGLE RANKINGS MEAN NOTHING. A quick Google search is nothing. Most people don't google things like that, they go to Wikipedia or another well known site. B, Ostriches don't bury their heads in the sand, they drop their heads when searching through the ground for food. Please try to avoid overused and inaccurate cliches. C, just create a freaking username over here already. You obviously read the site, as you know everything that's going. Knock off this at the other site stuff. Just grow a pair and come over. SirChuckB^{Further bulletins as events warrant} 17:59, 3 May 2008 (EDT)

He already has one, actually. Which underlines his cowardice and childishness nicely. --Kels 18:07, 3 May 2008 (EDT)

I took a screen shite of his latest massage, in anyone gives a flying foobar about it I'll upload it. For now I'll just use it as a doorstop. human 19:09, 3 May 2008 (EDT)

I love the fact we managed to get him now to go out of his way to find a computer which has never been to CP before just to check the google rankings. 3.14159 19:22, 3 May 2008 (EDT)

Of course he'll now have to find another one for the next time he checks.Genghis^{Our ignorance is God; what we know is science.} 19:56, 3 May 2008 (EDT)

I believe the gentleman at another website may have been infected by the so-called "SEO virus" that is virtually epidemic among the more clueless members of the business world. The mortality rate for this condition is quite frightening, so I sincerely hope the gentleman at another website will seek attention from someone with a clue as soon as possible. --AKjeldsen^Godspeed! 20:09, 3 May 2008 (EDT)

He won't find them on CP, that's for sure--Karajou's banned them all. --Gulik 20:40, 3 May 2008 (EDT)

HAHAHAHAHAHA!! Looks like Ken's "Operation Illinois" was 100% successful...getting some nobody to make a blog post about it! Man, it's great to start my Sunday with a laugh. Hey, Ken! Are all your "Operations" gonna be this lame? I may need popcorn. --Kels 09:56, 4 May 2008 (EDT)

Some nobodies with an incredibly stupid (and thus amusing) website, to be precise. This is, actually, when analyzed without your liberal bias, a great achievement in the history of conservapedia. They're just that pathetic. -The Almighty Tuna 10:10, 4 May 2008 (EDT)

Oh, and I see Ken has another callout, this time apparently answering me and calling me a "gentleman" (which is almost as funny). Hey Ken, you have a look at this? --Kels 10:16, 4 May 2008 (EDT)

Bohdan HenryS call outs

So why this if you can edit here too? And he didn't call you a gentleman Ames... were you too rough with him? --Shagie 20:17, 8 May 2008 (EDT)

Angry conservatives—not just for America!

I know this isn't news for any of you, but this is the first time I witnessed angry conservatism in a Brit. -- Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 23:03, 3 May 2008 (EDT)

Oh, come on. All my "troll" bells went off while readin that screed. human 23:11, 3 May 2008 (EDT)

Can't we all just agree that both the Conservative and New Labour parties are pretty conservative? -The Almighty Tuna 01:10, 4 May 2008 (EDT)

Probably they are, yes. I don't know, though. I do know though that our two major "parties" in the US are both "conservative", or at least, "corporatist". Thank the baby Jebus for the iconoclasts with some guts who aren't... human 02:04, 4 May 2008 (EDT)

I'm afraid HoraceM is not a conservative but a member of the racist/fascist BNP. He should find a good home at CP. As for the British Conservative and New Labour parties being conservative, well by UK standards they are both right of centre on some issues but Labour is still left of centre on others. Of course by US standards they are both rather liberal so the labels are pretty meaningless in an international context. Genghis^{Our ignorance is God; what we know is science.} 02:48, 4 May 2008 (EDT)

Glory Days of Empire

Correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't those glory days you mention the colonial period? And the 19th century was about the tipping point where the whole mess fell apart? So Andy's being nostalgic for the days when Britain was Top Nation on the backs of others. Given his other views, I'm sure he'd love to see the US repeat the exercise, but without the handbacks. --Kels 23:08, 3 May 2008 (EDT)

Nah, the Empire didn't collapse until the twin burdens of WW 1 & 2. It took WW2's weakening of the BE to embolden India to actually escape the shackles. It has been the slow undoing of the Empire that has reduced Britain's power and influence (by the way, which is still the most valuable currency on the planet? Yes, the lb.) The glory days assfly longs for are not "specifically" colonialism, although that led to them. The glory days of the British Empire are what he is decrying the loss of. human 23:14, 3 May 2008 (EDT)

"The sun has set, but the night is full of stars," was the saying when I was there.-caius (ninja) 23:47, 3 May 2008 (EDT)

Did anyone else notice Andy's historic revisionism? Britain defended herself hundreds of times during WW2, and very successfully at that, whereas, IIRC, the U.S. was attacked once and its defence was an utter shambles and hardly worthy of the name. But perhaps Andy has heard of neither the Battle of Britain or Pearl Harbour.^{— Unsigned, by: 203.217.86.162 / talk / contribs}

He has heard of Pearl Harbour, at least. I remember one of my first "WTF moments" on CP was a discussion where he claimed that Roosevelt knew about the attack well in advance, but did nothing about it in order to draw the US into the war. --AKjeldsen^Godspeed! 05:44, 4 May 2008 (EDT)

Weather anyone could have defeated the Axis powers without Russia is another question - one which again I suspect my opinions may differ from the imbacile in the corner muttering about dinasaurs roaming the earth, people stealing his shoes and saying "Godspeed" a lot. RedDog 05:59, 4 May 2008 (EDT)

Hold on, so it's perfectly correct to assume (without evidence) that Roosevelt allowed Pearl Harbour to happen in order to drive the nation into war, but saying that Bush did the exact same thing after the PNAC and others had mused wistfully about "another Pearl Harbour" is a liberal conspiracy theory that must be dismissed out of hand and ridiculed? Just making sure I've got my score card up to date. --Kels 10:11, 4 May 2008 (EDT)

Essentially, yes. --AKjeldsen^Godspeed! 13:55, 4 May 2008 (EDT)

He also seems to forget that the UK is doing considerably better on (I believe) every front in comparison to the US right now. The US is on the way down.... Lardashe

Warning: Hollywood Values May Cause Cancer

At this point isn't making fun of Andy's crazy logic sort of like arguing with the man on the corner muttering about being Jesus? I enjoy WIGO, but c'mon, the guy ain't right. -Greenmango 02:47, 4 May 2008 (EDT)

Absolute classic quote. Sig material. RedDog 05:17, 4 May 2008 (EDT)

When said crazy person insists on broadcasting their views via their blog, I'd say a snarky comment or two in the comments is perfectly acceptable. The only one I feel sorry for are the folks trying to reason with him. --Gulik 14:02, 5 May 2008 (EDT)

Who do you think you are kidding Mr H*****?

So Adolf suffers the ignominity of having his page count reset. Is that just embarassment over the popularity of the subject or is there manipulation of the CP popular pages table? Really Dan, if you are embarassed by a single article then have you no shame for all the Homosexuality articles? Or has Andy commanded that they be left in peace (he inquires knowingly). Genghis^{Our ignorance is God; what we know is science.} 03:20, 4 May 2008 (EDT)

PS - real name not used out of respect for Dan. Genghis^{Our ignorance is God; what we know is science.}

Schicklgruber? -The Almighty Tuna 03:30, 4 May 2008 (EDT)

I think we should all refer to him by his full given name, Adolf Elizabeth Hitler. Viva La Musical SirChuckB^{Further bulletins as events warrant} 03:32, 4 May 2008 (EDT)

I was referring to the H in DanH's name (which I know), not Adolf's. The section title is a reference to a World War II song - Who do you think you are kidding Mr. Hitler?. I'm afraid it loses something when you have to explain it. Genghis^{Our ignorance is God; what we know is science.} 04:09, 4 May 2008 (EDT)

Pedant's corner: actually Written by JIMMY PERRY / DEREK TAVERNER 1969 for the Dad's Army series. [1]   ^Contribs_Talk 06:12, 4 May 2008 (EDT)

Damn you Susan, I knew you'd have chip in on this. Using Bud Flannagan to sing the song deceived me into believing it was a period piece. No wonder we lost the war. Genghis^{Our ignorance is God; what we know is science.} 06:29, 4 May 2008 (EDT)

(Unindent) I did catch that, but how often do you get to throw out a Producers reference? SirChuckB^{Further bulletins as events warrant} 14:31, 4 May 2008 (EDT)

Contacting CP

This probably isn't the right place to ask, but does anyone have an e-mail address for PJR or any of the other sysops? I don't want to send hate or anything I just wanted to e-mail them. I know it can be done through CP itself but all my socks are need of darning. RedDog 06:01, 4 May 2008 (EDT)

You should be able to log on even with a blocked sock - & then use CP's mail   ^Contribs_Talk 06:05, 4 May 2008 (EDT)

Ah ok. I'll give that a go. Thanks :) RedDog 06:08, 4 May 2008 (EDT)

"Wife" is back on the agenda

Bugler ( who would seem to be associated with the very Right Wing British National Party (Foxy don't like it!)) has graciously replaced and referenced "The role of the wife ..." crap.   ^Contribs_Talk 06:27, 4 May 2008 (EDT)

Actually, Susan, the partly-literate BNP apologist is HoraceM. Genghis^{Our ignorance is God; what we know is science.} 06:37, 4 May 2008 (EDT)

Yep, but Bugler's joining in on his BNP inflationary (London is regional) statements.   ^Contribs_Talk 06:45, 4 May 2008 (EDT) (BTW - didja see this?   ^Contribs_Talk 06:47, 4 May 2008 (EDT)(Aww! Foxy's deleted it!   ^Contribs_Talk 06:51, 4 May 2008 (EDT))

Not wishing to give succour to neo-Nazis, but one edit arguing that the GLA could be considered regional when it effectively administers about 15% of the population of England can hardly be construed as being associated with the BNP. I await further evidence from the "gentlemen" at another site to prove me wrong. Genghis^{Our ignorance is God; what we know is science.} 07:19, 4 May 2008 (EDT)

Furthermore, calling Andy a "pathetic piece of shit" for linking to liberal articles leads me to believe that HoraceM may in fact be a parodist. Genghis^{Our ignorance is God; what we know is science.} 07:25, 4 May 2008 (EDT)

Mmmm...   ^Contribs_Talk 07:27, 4 May 2008 (EDT)

Actually I don't really know why Fox deleted that comment on Andy's talk page. Obviously he's got a hard on for Horace and his anti-semitism, but leaving it in place would be the best way to get Horace blocked. Maybe he's just too cunning for us. Genghis^{Our ignorance is God; what we know is science.} 07:52, 4 May 2008 (EDT)

I think it was just knee jerk anti-Horace action. If he'd thought it out as you have, he'd have left it.   ^Contribs_Talk 08:18, 4 May 2008 (EDT)

Leaving it would have elicited the required response, but drawing attention to it in recent changes often elicits a more rapid response :) Fox 08:53, 4 May 2008 (EDT)

You cunning old Fox!   ^Contribs_Talk 08:55, 4 May 2008 (EDT)

The GLA is a regional level authority. It is hardly giving succour to the disgusting BNP to state that as a fact. And it is London's shame that a fascist was elected to the GLA. But I am sure Bugler is not a fascist; he probably just doesn't like inaccuracy. I'd point out to Susan that it's not 'anti-fascist' to minimise the threat of the far-right; and the fact that they are getting elected, to minor council seats and to regional level authorities such as the GLA is serious. If the UK Parliament was elected by PR, there would be fascist MPs, too. Go ahead and call me a fascist for pointing that out. I'm sure the ostrich defence will see Nick Griffin off. Fretfulporpentine 07:29, 5 May 2008 (EDT)

The GLA is a Regional body yes, but it's a pure talk shop with no more relevance , or even less, than say the Arts Council. & I don't think that broadcasting their solitary right wing member to the loathsome CP is in any way praiseworthy, even if done to publicise the inherent danger. PR would be fairly devastating to any Government as the chances of getting a working majority, with no promises to weird parties, would be fairly remote for any of the current parties. If Bulger was indeed merely trying to be honest, then I think that he is mistaken - "any publicity is good publicity".  ^Contribs_Talk 10:03, 5 May 2008 (EDT)

GLA? What are terrorists doing administering our metropolitan affairs? --82.44.64.173

any publicity is good publicity - which means 'pretending that nasty things don't happen, or in fact really aren't nasty at all'. You have been paying too close attention to Schlafly and his crew. Fretfulporpentine 14:07, 5 May 2008 (EDT)

No - just getting the noxious name out - with whatever connotation - is good for turds like N.G. & Co. Don't ignore them but neither give them free publicity - even on conservapedia where they'll be welcomed with open arms. I'm no advocate of Ostriching but please don't give the guy any more credence than you must. (Sorry for assuming Bugler was a supporter.)   ^Contribs_Talk 14:20, 5 May 2008 (EDT)

Your'e going to hate me for this Susan but that was Thatcher's argument for all the stupid actors voice-overs of the IRA spokes-weasels. I think we need to dispel the myths and address the concerns of people who end up voting for the likes of the BNP as most of them vote through ignorance. Where I live there has been a lot of anti-Polish sentiment. We even have some road-signs in Polish and the local Tesco has a staggering assortment of "Foods of the World" (99.5% from Poland). There has been a local Polish hospital since World War II when many refugees fought on Britain's side (there are still some disabled ex-servicemen living there), and our local country pub was essentially being run by a lovely Polish couple who have just gone back after it had bee run into the ground and finally closed by stupid British couple (they were featured on Channel 5's The Hotel Inspector - the loony woman with albino hedgehogs). The care home where my mother-in-law lives has several Polish workers. As I'm sure you know, these people are not taking jobs from British workers they are doing jobs that would not get done. Undoubtedly there are some immigrants (on top of the indigenous populace) who abuse our system, and these get highlighted in the likes of the Daily Mail. I believe that if we have a potential bomb in our midst then it's better to defuse it rather than trying to hide it. Genghis^{Our ignorance is God; what we know is science.} 15:34, 5 May 2008 (EDT)

Don't want to hide 'em but I'd like to only show their bad side (I know they don't have a good side!). We.ve got our share of Poles - the local angling club has had to put Polish notices up all along the canal telling them about licensing & so on (and not to eat the fish :-) )! We're surrounded by rurality & they're the backbone of the agro community and to a considerable extent the jobs that no-one else wants. D'you think I'm agin 'em? - I'm not. Thatcher was just bloody stupid with the voice overs god knowswhat she thought it would achieve! Juast don't give the fascist bastards a voice. I know whereof I speak - my father was in the BF before WWII & was interned in the actual war for it, my uncle (mother's brother) was a germanophile before te war & got out of combat by means I never knew. So I know what I'm talking about & have considerable reason to despise the BNP. I know that it was the free publicity they got through the media that enabled the BF to grow to the extent they did. I remember the Coronation, my father couldn't bring himself to go to a neighbour's (the only ones on the road with a telly) to watch it because they were Jewish refugees (before the war) from Germany. Any Publicity feeds the bastards!   ^Contribs_Talk 15:57, 5 May 2008 (EDT)

Sorry about the above rant, but its a touchy subject with me.   ^Contribs_Talk 16:03, 5 May 2008 (EDT)

I appreciate your concerns Susan, but sometimes not giving them a voice actually engenders more publicity and inculcates sympathy for the fact that they're being censored - we hear this all the time on CP (which to my mind is only one step removed from the BNP anyway). However, this discourse has rather exceeded the terms of the original post so lets agree that we have a similar POV but differ on the means. I don't know if you saw the item on the BBC site about the fascist vicar

Mr Tibbs admitted he had indeed, years before, belonged to the British Union of Fascists. They had an excellent agricultural policy, he said.

Reminded me of the old Round the Horne joke of Ken subscribing to Naturist Monthly for the "very good gardening section". Genghis^{Our ignorance is God; what we know is science.} 16:29, 5 May 2008 (EDT)

I know that CP thinks the BBC is a den of biased, anti-American, liberals but can you imagine what Andy would have made of Julian & Sandy being broadcast on a Sunday lunch-time? I knew it was funny at the time but only much later realised why. :)Genghis^{Our ignorance is God; what we know is science.} 16:35, 5 May 2008 (EDT)

I'm with Genghis on this. Sorry Susan, but not giving "the fascist bastards a voice" plays right into their hands. They go for the persecution vote and having a news blackout on them fits perfectly with what they are trying to achieve.

Personally I think the BBC has it about right. They do the odd bit of reporting on electoral success at the same time as exposing it for what it is. And then simply ignoring them. Funnily enough the Daily Mail seems to have about the same attitude to them.

If you don't give them any coverage at all, you run the risk of the aggrieved (justifiably or not) "man in the street" falling for their considerable public charm - even though we may find that charm completely false and dishonest. The fact is that for all their bluster and sharp suits they are still an extremely small elected force. The election of a few of their baffoons to local councils has the major advantage of showing them up for what they really are. Potential voters get to see them warts and all.

And on top of all that, extremism has its uses. They can be allowed to exist purely as a set of warning signs. The moment that a Tory MP starts saying similar things to Nick Griffin, alarm bells go off.

The thing is there will always be a certain type of person who would vote for the NF or BNP. Denying these parties any sort of exposure runs the considerable risk of increasing their popularity through both a persecution complex and hiding the truth about the extremists.

The same, incidentally, can be said about CP. Ajkgordon 03:30, 6 May 2008 (EDT)

My take on it was to add the edit about Barnbrook and his election to the GLA/LA, but to qualify it with the information that Boris and Ken both walked off stage rather than share it with a Nazi, and to add a link to the LA. I also find that catching them out in the talk pages is a good tactic to pop their balloons, too - eg reverting their edits and adding a link to their own manifesto which they can't deny :D Fox 07:24, 6 May 2008 (EDT)

On the subject of the IRA being censored by the Thatcher government, does anybody else remember The Day Today (a British precursor of the Daily Show) and this great clip? Bondurant 09:34, 6 May 2008 (EDT)

Hehe I'm a huge fan of Morris' works - 'Eye and Jam as well as TD2D. Classic. Fox 10:33, 6 May 2008 (EDT)

While we're still wondering whether Bugler is a parodist or not, he's busy moving ever closer to the eye of the storm. If he's not a parodist, it is simply perfect that a BNP guy might become a sysop. If he is, clever, clever work my friend. DogP 15:09, 6 May 2008 (EDT)

Important message to Ken

(1) Kels is not a dude. Gentleman K indeed.
(2) www.americansfortruth.com is "not in the top 100,000" according to Alexa. Rationalwiki is. Pwned.-caius (ninja) 10:16, 4 May 2008 (EDT)

Oh, referencing my point above, it looks like the lifespan of his front page articles over there is about a week. So is Ken gonna have to keep finding ways for it to get reposted? Doesn't strike me as a great return for value there. And again, I note that it's not promoting CP, it's promoting Ken. CP can go straight to hell, I guess. --Kels 10:20, 4 May 2008 (EDT)

Eh, boring. This is the second time already that Conservative has given Peter LaBarbera of Americans For Truth a metaphorical(?) blowjob. Did he already run out of people to offer Special Deals to? Either way, I figure we can expect him to namedrop Peter LaBarbera of Americans For Truth in even more articles than Peter LaBarbera of Americans For Truth is already mentioned in. Oh, and did he mention yet that Peter LaBarbera is the president of Americans For Truth? No? Well, Peter LaBarbera is the president of Americans For Truth. (If you think I'm kidding, do a fulltext search for "LaBarbera" in the Homosexuality article.) --Sid 10:30, 4 May 2008 (EDT)

Many thanks for (finally) getting the gender right, Ken, although you seem to have mistaken me for someone who's out grasping for blog hits, the way you are. I honestly don't care if RW gets only the people on this talk page. It's a fun hangout, and we get to make fun of some genuinely crazy people (guess who, Ken?). Watching your self-love fests is amusing, and making little deals inside your increasingly incestuous network of cranks is just as funny. Keep it up!

Just refined Kels' Alexa graph above: we appear to be meeting CP & AFT has dropped out of sight.   ^Contribs_Talk 10:39, 4 May 2008 (EDT)

The Alexa-fu is strong in this one! --Kels 10:42, 4 May 2008 (EDT)

And what's the connection with a drugs raid in Brighton (Ken's second link) apart from the name? The man's cracking up. The man's MAD!   ^Contribs_Talk 10:45, 4 May 2008 (EDT)

He's actually perfectly sane. That's the frightening bit. -The Almighty Tuna 10:48, 4 May 2008 (EDT)

And on the Americans for Truth page we have:

Americans For Truth (AFT){#1} is a national organization devoted solely to confronting the homosexual activist agenda. Peter LaBarbera, the president of Americans for Truth{#2}, said the following regarding the need for the organization Americans for Truth{#3} which is followed by two external links{#4}{#5} to americansfortruth.com and two references from americansfortruth.com{#6}{#7}.

Then on the Peter LaBarbera page we have:

Peter LaBarbera is the founder of Americans For Truth (AFT){#1} which is a national organization devoted solely to confronting the homosexual activist agenda. Peter LaBarbera said the following regarding the need for the organization Americans for Truth:{#2} (Same quote as on the AFT page) followed by another external link{#3} to Americans For Truth and four identical references {#4}{#5}{#6}{#7} to americansfortruth.com/about.

Peter LaBarbera must be sucked dry by now. Genghis^{Our ignorance is God; what we know is science.} 15:09, 4 May 2008 (EDT)

Good work, Philip! Genghis^{Our ignorance is God; what we know is science.} 06:54, 6 May 2008 (EDT)

Dropout rate

It really shouldn't surprise anyone to see Andy talking out of his ass (again) about public school. But I'm just amazed at how many myths and outright fabrications he seems to have internalized to the point of actually believing. Like how high schools are 100% gangs, how students are censored, and his latest insistence on the high dropout rate (what's the dropout rate in homeshools?). But a quick look at the statistics shows dropout rates dropping steadily over the past 45 years. It took me all of a minute to find that, does Andy really think after all his bullshit people aren'tgoing to look around for true information? Heck, him putting fingers to keys has become a prompt to bring up Google and find out what reality says. --Kels 14:24, 4 May 2008 (EDT)

Now that I think of it, doesn't that mean the dropout rates are way higher back when school prayer was legal? --Kels 14:25, 4 May 2008 (EDT)

Although I didn't drop out of public school (it wasn't public and I didn't drop out) some friends and I used to sneak into Birmingham University student's union and have a quick game of snooker to avoid school assembly & prayer. Genghis^{Our ignorance is God; what we know is science.} 15:15, 4 May 2008 (EDT)

The general disdain he has for public school seems to be based on the idea that he thinks everyone is the same. That one depressed kid that he saw means that all of them are. It also seems to be based in the philosophy that puberty doesn't happen. I went through wild mood swings during high school (rather, starting around 5th grade or so) and this resulted in me being fairly unhappy most of the time. I would have been much, much more depressed as a home schooled student though. Most of what kept me reasonably together was that I had friends at high school. Maybe Andy would like a set of dolls to play with; they will never do drugs, they will never be depressed, never worry about tests or social situations, and they will grow up to never have sex. And he can make them read the Bible every night. And maybe they could even do a little self-flagellation if they think any awkward thoughts. Andy is a man-child. He never got past the stereotypes he came up with when he was 10. Lardashe

The best part of that discussion is when people completly rebut his idiotic points and he just claims he won anyway. Also, it's fairly obvious that Andy has never actually been in a public school. I guess he thinks that maybe he'll turn into a dreaded liberal. I know I've said this before, but the man is really, quite surprisingly STUPID!!! SirChuckB^{Further bulletins as events warrant} 17:26, 4 May 2008 (EDT)

Personally, I'd be pretty depressed if I saw Andy coming towards me, too. More of a "damn, here comes a long, boring diatribe on something stupid" resignation, y'know? --Kels 17:42, 4 May 2008 (EDT)

I agree "sir" I know, I know, it's a shot at Ken Not to mention, the rest of his points seem to be drawn from watching pop culture movies and taking notes. You also gotta love the "homeschoolers never disrespect their parents" line. Hmmm, I wonder if that's because it doesn't happen, because Homeschoolers tend to be right wing, and they are well known for scaring the hell out of their children, or because homeschool isn't subject to releasing their records on student behavior and discipline.... As Arsenio Hall used to say, "Things that make you go hmmmmmmmm." SirChuckB^{Further bulletins as events warrant} 18:06, 4 May 2008 (EDT)

Channel 4 "on demand" facility where you can watch previously broadcast programmes (not available outside UK unfortunately). I recently watched a programme called Baby Bible Bashers where 7 - 15 year olds (US & Brazil) preach in public. All of the kids were home-schooled with strongly religious parents/grandparents. In one section the 7 year old preacher is not behaving quite like mommmy wants him to so we hear her say "Turn the camera off" while she presumably gives him a good thrashing. The poor kid was taken to New York to preach to all those heathens and atheists in a park somewhere. Having come from a small town where he was well tolerated, it was a big shock for him to be yelled at and cursed, which reduced him to tears. I felt sorry for the kid, but despised the parents for making him go through it all in the first place - standing outside casinos and family-planning clinics decrying their "evils". Of course those yelling at him weren't exactly endearing types. Genghis^{Our ignorance is God; what we know is science.} 03:59, 6 May 2008 (EDT)

Andy Digs Deep

The guy is painfully desperate to prove his notion that "Hollywood" and/or its values causes breast cancer: Aisha Bicknell? Julie Ege? Katy "No Relation to John or Joan" Cusack? Adamari López? Oni Faida Lampley? Give it up, you crazy old ghoul...--WJThomas 14:28, 4 May 2008 (EDT)

I have to admit, though, that stuff like "Hollywood Values cause breast cancer" is what sets Andy apart from the wannabe parodists - he's crazier than anybody could act. Classic case of "truth is stranger than fiction". --Sid 15:26, 4 May 2008 (EDT)

Someone with an available sock should start listing all the Hollywood actresses over 64 who don't have breast cancer. Hollywood saves lives!! Sandman 18:08, 4 May 2008 (EDT)

Suspected Parodist

Has anyone noticed my current argument with this guy? I think he's a parodist. What say the rest of you? --_transResident Transfan^form! 15:15, 4 May 2008 (EDT)

Looking at the more recent posts there, I'd say that it's fairly obvious ;) --Sid 15:23, 4 May 2008 (EDT)

Concur, but why expose him? Let's let him keep undermining CP from the inside.-caius (ninja) 15:24, 4 May 2008 (EDT)

Too late, he just exposed himself—and boy, am I slow. --_transResident Transfan^form! 15:25, 4 May 2008 (EDT)

How often do we need to repeat this - if you suspect someone of being a parodist, then let them be. Don't mention it on WIGO or TWIGO, there's enough craziness without the parody. The suspected parodist may even be someone from here or just someone passing by, but it's not our job to OUT them. If CP wanted our assistance then they wouldn't have kicked us all out. I think most CP refugees here actually tried to improve CP. However, as our contributions did not toe the party line we were ejected. So if the current crop of sysops are not up to the task of weeding out the disinformation then that's their own fault. Genghis^{Our ignorance is God; what we know is science.} 16:35, 4 May 2008 (EDT)

He was my sock. I probably should've kept my cool, but that was unnessecary, man. Barikada 19:20, 4 May 2008 (EDT)

Um, GK, how can we enjoy their activities if we don't discuss it here or WIGO? Let's face it, it's not like IndianaJ was "programmed" to fly under the radar and survive until he can haz edit and image rites. His style was more of a "tip of the hat" inside joke. human 19:32, 4 May 2008 (EDT)

I find this funny

Hey Andy, As a teacher in public schools, if I bragged everytime one on of my students got a scholarship, I wouldn't leave my computer.... and Liberty University isn't exactly a big name school. SirChuckB^{Further bulletins as events warrant} 15:51, 4 May 2008 (EDT)

Sure it is, isn't that where GWB announced his run for the Decideracy? Now, what's interesting, is will there be any more scholarship announcements, or did only one of the Fifty Eight get one, and that to LU...? human 16:07, 4 May 2008 (EDT)

No, I think that GW announced at Bob Jones University... Not the two aren't interchangable. But either way, it's still ridiculous to shout the accomplishments of each student. I would love to see a full chart of how Andy's kids do in the world after his courses though, and a political survey of their worldviews would be great. SirChuckB^{Further bulletins as events warrant} 18:08, 4 May 2008 (EDT)

Haha, "Andy's kids". He also claims to have taught public school kids (how exactly do they get to qualify as homeschoolers at that point?), since he can tell how different they are immediately. I wonder how much Schlaflination it takes to up one's chances of matriculating free of charge to a fine and Trusworthy University? human 19:30, 4 May 2008 (EDT)

Liberty University where they excel at everything, but apparently not the English language: "Dr. Falwell was not making hardly a single decision without consulting with his oldest son." - Dr. Ron Godwin, LU’s chief operating officer and executive vice president.[2]   ^Contribs_Talk 01:20, 5 May 2008 (EDT)

To steal a line from Dennis Miller, Liberty University's stats are cooked more than the books of Don Corleone's Olive Import business. They are well known for atttending small Debate contests against undermatched schools while avoiding most major tournaments, then winning awards by sheer point value. They've also been accused of letting Debate team students slide by while they prepare for the upcoming events. On top of that, Liberty University exerts complete Nazi-like control over their students.... Why would anyone, even a crazy Fundie want to attend? SirChuckB^{Further bulletins as events warrant} 01:59, 5 May 2008 (EDT)

I laugh at most of the schools his students go on to, not an overly impressive list. Every time I check that list I'm happy to see that none of his disciples have attended my alma mater. Jrssr5 10:43, 5 May 2008 (EDT)

Cigarettes, Whiskey and Wild, Wild, Women

Say, wasn't most of the deception on the part of the cigarette industry done by Conservative big business and free market types? How did it suddenly become, in Andy's strange brain, all the fault of TEH LIEBERULZES? --Kels 19:49, 4 May 2008 (EDT)

Hell yes. The ciggie companies are selling a legal product to willing consumers. It wuz teh liebruls who forced ciggie ads off TV, and those scary lie-boxes onto packaging and print ads. And sued their pants off, er, well, guess who pays that loss? It is also the fault of liebrul hollywood commie types that we no longer get to see a well lit cigarette in movies or on TV shows any more. human 23:34, 4 May 2008 (EDT)

Oh, I know all that. But somehow it's not the liberals' fault that the danger of cigarettes was hidden for so long. Basically now claiming that the libs were acting on behalf of the cigarette companies and against good and decent people everywhere. Which is not my recollection in any way. --Kels 23:52, 4 May 2008 (EDT)

Yeah, Andy's tripping, since in his philosophy, he can never be wrong... human 13:26, 5 May 2008 (EDT)

rkive

Can someone more motivated than I take all the pre-May WIGOs and filter them off to best of and archive WIGO/0804? Pleeez? human 23:36, 4 May 2008 (EDT)

I am a potential carrier of deadly strains of tuberculosis and fiercely proud of it

The blog linked to on the main page about the Mexican family rushing to America to give birth to triplets and spread disease thus threatening the future of the master race is one of the most amazing pieces of bollocks I have ever read (and I've read Conservapedia!) Just astonishing. I am sure it sums up the people of the Union of Soviet Mexico perfectly. I mean come on, he says "gringo" and everything! Yep he's got those Mexicans portrayed as accurately as any Speedy Gonzales cartoon. RedDog 03:21, 5 May 2008 (EDT)

What I like about it is the pretence that it's a first person account,when in fact it's been written by a staff writer.   ^Contribs_Talk 03:29, 5 May 2008 (EDT)

And ... StatsMsn might be reading WIGO or might just be marginally more intelligent than Crockoshite (not hard to do!)   ^Contribs_Talk 06:09, 5 May 2008 (EDT)

I know it's not his fault, but is John Lillpop a reasonable name for a political commentator? (What if the Native Americans had realised that tougher border restrictions would save them a whole lot of future trouble?) :-)   ^Contribs_Talk 06:19, 5 May 2008 (EDT)

Hehe, what if the Welsh had? human 13:33, 5 May 2008 (EDT)

You'd've been conquered in the 14th century, rather than the 13th. ;) :P --Robledo 18:14, 5 May 2008 (EDT)

So the native Americans would have only gained a century before the genocide started? human 18:45, 5 May 2008 (EDT)

Who knows? With a suitably robust points system, they might still have been roaming the plains today. Genocidal intent = -eleventy-one million points. ;) --Robledo 20:25, 5 May 2008 (EDT)

Phyllis Schlafly getting an honorary degree

Scooping the front page of CP before the college speaking event happens!!1!eleventy! [3][4] I wonder how much the Schlaflys had to increase the endowment to get that. Apparently professor values aren't enough to keep them from accepting awards. Congrats Mrs. S. Hopefully more women will be able to get honorary degrees in the future in spite of your efforts to keep 'em in the kitchen and pregnant.--Bayes_yikes 03:39, 5 May 2008 (EDT)

I do not beleeeeeve it!   ^Contribs_Talk 03:51, 5 May 2008 (EDT)

And here I was thinking that CP was going to be conferring an honorary degree on Phyllis Schlafly. That'd make a great headline there. They could be an excellent diploma mill. Lardashe

This makes me so angry. I'm so glad that someone else wrote a scathing post.-caius (ninja) 10:29, 5 May 2008 (EDT)

Well, as I suspected it wasn't the first. From her "official web-site":

Mrs. Schlafly has received numerous awards for service in a variety of fields. Honorary LL.D. from Niagara University. Honorary Doctor of Christian Letters from Franciscan University of Steubenville.

Of course, Andy has assured us already that these things are meaningless. Genghis^{Our ignorance is God; what we know is science.} 10:39, 5 May 2008 (EDT)

You might like to email the other Honoraria (?) expressing displeasure. Don't suppose it'll do any good but, hey, worth a try. (I've done 2 so far)   ^Contribs_Talk 10:44, 5 May 2008 (EDT)

Washington University in St. Louis likes to think of itself as a fairly prestigious university--it's usually in the top ten for U.S. undergrad institutions and its medical school is top 3. They spend lots of money trying to convince people that they can play in the same league with, or at least approaching, Harvard, Yale, etc (and their ridiculous undergrad tuition reflects that). Not that Niagara is a bad school or anything, but that Wash U would do this surprises me, even if Phyllis has St. Louis connections. Although if the alternative is having a building named Phyllis Schlafly Hall on campus, I can see why they'd opt for the degree.--Bayes_yikes 11:27, 5 May 2008 (EDT)

We should have a talk page and debate whether it's ok to call Mrs. Schlafly "Dr. Schlafly." Sterile^xx 18:45, 5 May 2008 (EDT)

'Non-violent' Video Games

Isn't it interesting how they define 'violence' for video games over CP? Mario, where you have an overweight Italian plumber jumping on creature's heads is not, apparently, violent. Madden, which typically features the crunching tackles you find in real football games, is not, apparently, violent. Sim City, which, in a lot of the games in the series, allows to unleash a host of natural (or unnatural) disasters on cities, or have them happen at random, killing thousands of people, is not, apparently, violent. Pac-Man, where, after you eat certain pills, you can turn around and eat the ghosts who were chasing you, is not, apparently, violent. However, given that they are listed under the CP Video games category, but are not listed as a non-violent video game, Adventure, the entire Breath of Fire series, all three Colony Wars games, Dance Dance Revolution, all the Digimon games, Everquest, F-Zero, Final Fantasy I, IV, V and VI, Left Behind: Eternal Forces, Zelda:Twilight Princess, Lego Star Wars, Megaman, Myst, Runescape, Space Quest, Super Smash Brothers Brawl, The Sims, The Sims 2, Wii Sports and Zelda:Ocarina of Time all seem to be sufficiently more violent not to be considered 'non-violent video games'. Zmidponk 06:52, 5 May 2008 (EDT)

Wii Sports has boxing. Teaching people to punch others through exercising and having fun is bad.

Kirby contains violence, doesn't it? I like his repetitive A attack in Brawl; he just keeps punching and punching... Fuzzy|AfD 07:02, 5 May 2008 (EDT)

Kirby is sort of a cannibal, really. I mean, his enemies aren't exactly of his own kind, but still. Anyway, being a long-time gamer myself, Conservapedia's articles on the games are hilarious, not to mention highly inaccurate (I won't point out the problems here, do your own damn research CP!). Still, my favorite item on the "Non-Violent" list is "Madden 05," because apparently, anything '04 and below and '06 and above were far too violent to be included. '05 is, of course, the year they introduced the short-lived "dandelion picking" simulator. --Arcan ¡ollǝɥ 07:16, 5 May 2008 (EDT)

I see they refer to SimAnt as well (and got it mixed up with SimFarm, BTW.) Now there's one seriously violent game. I mean, we're talking "committing mass scale genocide on opposing nests while ants are being chopped up by lawn mowers, eaten by ant lions, chrushed by giant humans or drowning in their own nests"-violent. Not to mention the spiders. Dear God, the spiders! --AKjeldsen^Godspeed! 08:21, 5 May 2008 (EDT) _{I still have trauma over those bloody spiders.}

I take control of the spiders and eat the red ants. Laser eyes ftw! -Master Bra'tac^Kree! 15:17, 5 May 2008 (EDT)

However, I defend their stance on the violent tendencies of DDR. Any unbiased observer with an open mind, not clouded by Liberal Insert Damning Term Here Will see that it caused kids to commit mass acts of violence against video game dance boards, and teaches them to do this in sync with evil materialistic music. God bless CP for taking the unpopular stand. SirChuckB^{Further bulletins as events warrant} 13:34, 5 May 2008 (EDT)

Brokeback Mountain

The article seems too unbiased. How long do you think it's going to take for that to change? I've noticed that while CPers seem to leave pretty much everything as a stub, whenever they can make an anti-homosexual/liberal/etc rant, they'll never miss a chance. So... Liberal media? :O Update: It's starting. -The Almighty Tuna 10:53, 5 May 2008 (EDT)

Banned for knowing more than Andy

Our statistician friends are waaaay out if they thought they could beat the Schlafly Statistics Machine - don't they know it's statistically 99.99999% infallible?   ^Contribs_Talk 11:22, 5 May 2008 (EDT)

Actually, it's 100% infallible, those who seeing failings are clouded by Liberal Statistical reasoning syndrome SirChuckB^{Further bulletins as events warrant} 13:36, 5 May 2008 (EDT)

Andy's rally getting desperate now_ asks a guy who's just asking for statistical evidence if he works for the tobacco industry! The guy is not deterred!   ^Contribs_Talk 16:43, 5 May 2008 (EDT)

I am not a "fag"! Genghis^{Our ignorance is God; what we know is science.} 17:03, 5 May 2008 (EDT)

Invitation to more fun

Andy's statement that "The bigger concern is the possible misuse of religion to advance a deeper ideological view" seems to be a wonderful opportunity to plunge in with some support for that view, both feet first, doesn't it? DogP 12:10, 5 May 2008 (EDT)

This quote is telling...Apparently to Schlafly religion is something more superficial than deeper things such as political leanings. Until now I had thought that the "deeper ideological views" were the religious ones that drove the more superficial (political) not the other way round. His limited and erroneous views of what constitutes "orthodox" Christianity shows that he himself is a case in point. CЯacke® 12:26, 5 May 2008 (EDT)

I was reading a great article the other day on Religious Conservatives in the United States. It stated that Religion, specifically Christianity became a haven for Bigots and Control freaks. By costuming their hatred for others not like them under the cloak of Religion, not only does it give them justification for their hatred, but gives them federal protection. They claim that their values are under attack, when in reality it's their racist views that are (rightly) under attack. The author wrote that by successfully tying Religion into Racism and discrimination, they have guaranteed that their views are still "acceptable" and will remain for many years. The whole time I was reading it, I was thinking of good old Andy and his flunkies SirChuckB^{Further bulletins as events warrant} 13:45, 5 May 2008 (EDT)

Where? When? details!   ^Contribs_Talk 13:49, 5 May 2008 (EDT)

I've been trying to find it again. I came across it by accident. I think it's still in my history at home, so I'll check after work SirChuckB^{Further bulletins as events warrant} 13:52, 5 May 2008 (EDT)

Maybe this one? (The writer makes a pretty good argument that the Religious Right's bargain with the Reactionary Right was a literally Faustian one, if their scriptures are accurate.) --Gulik 15:51, 5 May 2008 (EDT)

Main Page wars

I'm beginning to suspect that dear Crocodile is a wee bit miffed at Ken's hijacking of his domain. After all, here's the Crock with a sweet gig, all he's got to do is copy blog headlines and be rude to all comers, and he gets all the small-pond respect he can carry. And along comes this prat with a couple of ranting articles and a chip on his shoulder, not only commandeering the Featured Article spot (and expecting everyone else to do his de-redlinking work for him, the peons), but hogging top spot with stupid crap about Google France, for crying out loud. I can see a battle for top of the "news" section, since I can't see Ken giving up that prime bragging space for anyone. --Kels 19:23, 5 May 2008 (EDT)

Ken is just that awesome. --82.44.64.173

France, like the US, has constitutional separation of church and state, so of course they enjoy a good laugh over l'article sur atheism de la Kendoll! human 20:41, 5 May 2008 (EDT)

The difference is that "laicité" is enforced to the letter. If a teacher in a state school put a Bible on his desk to show his religion, he would lose his job. None of this bollocks of freedom to express his religion - he can do that on his own time at home, at church, even in the street. Nobody's fooled here by falsely innocent claims of religious discrimination. Teachers teach kids, the law says no religious indoctrination in state schools... end of discussion. Ajkgordon 03:03, 6 May 2008 (EDT)

Admirable. Genghis^{Our ignorance is God; what we know is science.} 03:31, 6 May 2008 (EDT)

Should I mention that we send our kids to a private RC school where they are indoctrinated mercilessly? Ajkgordon 03:33, 6 May 2008 (EDT)

Only if you counter-indoctrinate them when they get home. Teach the controversy and all that. Genghis^{Our ignorance is God; what we know is science.} 04:02, 6 May 2008 (EDT)

LOL, yeah! Actually, there is no controversy. They go to a RC school but never once has there been any question of religious conflict with their education. There's not even a debate about Creationism. It simply isn't an issue. If one asks any of the teachers, some of which are indeed laity, about a literal Genesis or ID, you'd just get a completely blank look. Or a "Six mille ans? Quel con a dit ça?" Like the CofE, the Catholics worked out that a literal interpretation of the Scriptures was a dead-end several centuries ago. They've moved on a bit since then as witnessed by Monsignor Georges Lemaître's excellent work. Ajkgordon 04:15, 6 May 2008 (EDT)

Google France ranks it #3? For me it's #14. Posting Google results is utterly pointless. Also, Ken apparently thinks that most of the FRENCH are going to use Google FRANCE to search for ENGLISH phrases. --Sid 07:18, 6 May 2008 (EDT)

WTF - What were the odds of people on CP posting exactly these things on the Main Page talkpage and other people WIGOing it before I wrote this post? That shows that I really should check WIGO before the talk page. --Sid 07:52, 6 May 2008 (EDT)

Also, if Croco throws a fit, Ken would just pull his "We shall ask Mr. Schlafly. Until then, my version stays.", followed by Andy just going "Yes, Ken. Whatever. Do what you please, just leave me a alone." again. --Sid 07:21, 6 May 2008 (EDT)

Getting a bit obvious

Whoever is currently running the "Deborah" sock, you need to stop and take a deep breath, count to ten.

1. Copy/pasting all that info in the effort to get "new page" stats is only okay so long as someone doesn't start googling to see where it came from...
2. Choose a persona and stick to it, preferably one you know about - the Judaism pretence phails when you suddenly announce you didn't know that there are females in the IDF, or claim that the JDO was actually called the JDL, for example
3. Posing as a "coder" on the strength of that basic list of CSS mark-up is very silly
4. Don't think you will be able to pull another lulzy stunt like the "masturbation" one for quite some time - it attracted attention for the wrong reasons
5. The "my Uni is blocked" excuse for sharing IPs with several previously banned users - who also had a thing about lists of "new pages I have made" - will only fool all of the people some of the time
6. PJR is already on to you - consider that a gypsy's warning :)

Fox 05:20, 6 May 2008 (EDT)

That whole "my University banned Conservapedia" thing screams "Sockity McSock Sock" and shows that this person isn't thinking too hard. The evil liberal American universities might ban access to pr0n from their IPs, but to something like C-pedia? Never...PFoster 10:45, 6 May 2008 (EDT)

Isn't it more likely to be CP that's done one of its blanket bans?   ^Contribs_Talk 10:57, 6 May 2008 (EDT)

I don't really understand this though. Why would he / she do this? Looking at the contributions it would appear they have done far mroe good than harm to CP. So from their point of view surely Deborah and sock it to them. From our point of view isn't it bad form to dicuss this on an open forum. Kind of gives the game away. It's like counter-espionage isn't it? It's all very exciting. RedDog 11:26, 6 May 2008 (EDT)

"what is this called and [er...] how does one explain this to a beginner to Conservapedia" hehe -- hoist by one's own petard, methinks :D Fox 11:49, 6 May 2008 (EDT)

As to our discussing it; this could be double bluff (or treble ...etc...) on our part, what better way to sabotage a bona fide CP editor than to imply they're a sock?   ^Contribs_Talk 12:01, 6 May 2008 (EDT)

Whoever it is, they're doing a good job of maintaining the new persona of poorly-educated hick :D Fox 12:06, 6 May 2008 (EDT)

I did a fair amount of legitimate stuff as Kazumaru, Barikada, and IndianaJ. Of course, when I was under the name Kazumaru, I actually thought this was a salvageable project... Barikada 12:41, 6 May 2008 (EDT)

Hehe, it wouldn't be first time that we've effectively sabotaged a legitimate editor. :) Genghis^{Our ignorance is God; what we know is science.} 13:02, 6 May 2008 (EDT)

Of course, it could be a sock & we could be claiming that we're sabotaging a real editor .... multiple layers of bluffage.   ^Contribs_Talk 13:11, 6 May 2008 (EDT)

Liberal deceit, I say! -- Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 13:47, 6 May 2008 (EDT)

"From our point of view isn't it bad form to dicuss this on an open forum. Kind of gives the game away." - not really. What would be far worse, is if T/WIGO ignored some "known" sock rather than reporting on their lulz. Basically, anything that happens on CP is fair game. With the one exception that is considered poor taste to make a WIGO item that simply publicizes one's own activities. If it's funny, someone else will notice... human 13:29, 6 May 2008 (EDT)

I agree if "known" sock is defined as one that has been found out by CP, has already admitted to being one or otherwise is completely incapable of continuing his job. There's no reason to stop a working machine even if it is on its last tracks. NightFlare^{Speak, mortal} 15:12, 6 May 2008 (EDT)

OK, I've kept quiet about this for long enough, but it looks like we're starting to talk about this openly now. Which of the big guns do we think is really a parodist? Andy? PJR? Conservative? Karajou? (add the name of your choice) I'm really sorry if I'm blowing somebody's cover here, but it's time we discussed this openly. I mean it's obvious that some of them must be parodies isn't it?--Bob^{bing up} 16:33, 6 May 2008 (EDT)

I am Ed Poor. Fox 16:35, 6 May 2008 (EDT)

Ha, do you think we hadn't noticed? Genghis^{Our ignorance is God; what we know is science.} 03:39, 7 May 2008 (EDT)

I think we should just refer to all CP editors as sockpuppets from now on to simplify this issue. human 16:36, 6 May 2008 (EDT)

SEe - Ed Poor. Is Andy here?--Bob^{bing up} 16:37, 6 May 2008 (EDT)

Or should we say, BohdAndy..? The clue was in the name! Fox 16:40, 6 May 2008 (EDT)

If I were to nominate a parody from amongst the chosen few it would have to be DeanS. He is such an over-the-top fascist bully-boy that it just makes me laugh sometimes. He is (over)playing the part of the classic henchman with breathtaking verve. You can almost see him limping around behind Andy with his miserable hunchback and his grotesquely deformed forehead, slurring, "Yes Master, the electrodes. Immediately". He just blocked an editor who is a staff member at Oxford Universtity. The poor slob tried to fix up the infamous Richard Dawkins page. The editor had the effrontery to revert Andy's reversion of his edit. Well, we all know where that leads when the Croc is on the loose... --Horace 19:35, 6 May 2008 (EDT) UPDATE: Andy, in his infinite mercy, has unblocked him. --Horace 19:56, 6 May 2008 (EDT)

Sorry, I think I mixed my henchman metaphores there. Is he a Dr. Goebbels facsist suck-up-to-Hitler type or is he a Dr. Frankenstein's helper/Igor type? I can't choose. --Horace 21:49, 6 May 2008 (EDT)

Dunno about you, but I always read Dean's stuff with a Peter Lorre accent. Makes the whole site more enjoyable. --69.196.141.215 23:33, 6 May 2008 (EDT)

Crockoshite's definitely not Goebbels, he hasn't got the intelligence. More like a cross between Uriah Heap/Fat Bastard/OddJob/Dalek. Genghis^{Our ignorance is God; what we know is science.} 03:39, 7 May 2008 (EDT)

Say, when Deborah presented the huge list of red links Ken left in his "featured" article (mostly because he doesn't give a shit about any of the other articles) and asked for help, did Andy react as if he thought she'd created all those articles? It looked like the same "wow, that's fabulous" that he gives every time Ed shows up with a list of crappy stubs quality new articles. --Kels 06:36, 7 May 2008 (EDT)

With this edit, I'm going to have to say that DeanS is certainly a parodist. Putting up links to news articles that can eaisly be read as "conservatives delude themselves" and claiming its not the conservative reading. However, I've also got to point out that with this edit, Jinxmchue links to a page that links to porn that was deleted from Wikipedia and examples of exhibitionists that haven't been. --Shagie 01:45, 8 May 2008 (EDT)

Oh really?

Well, as much as Wikipedia is the spawn of Satan, it seems that it's still a handy source for PJR to grab pictures [5][6][7][8]Psygremlin 10:01, 6 May 2008 (EDT)

Can't fault his taste in music though :D Fox 10:22, 6 May 2008 (EDT)

Andy the teacher shows his knowledge

http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk:Main_Page&diff=prev&oldid=448213 ^{— Unsigned, by: 90.199.84.62 / talk / contribs}

This is slightly WTF for another reason - she was involved in a Supreme Court Case, so Andy (who brags day in and out about CP being the Most Truest And Awesomest Supreme Court Library Ever and him being The Supreme Court Knowledge Overlord) should have recognized the name. And even if not, would it have killed him to JFGI? --Sid 15:03, 6 May 2008 (EDT)

So Andy's guilty of both conservative ignorance and conservative sloth. Conservative complacency, too, for good measure. Rational Ed^perception 15:17, 6 May 2008 (EDT)

Liberal Style #35

I think that Andy's edit was misread. He isn't saying Shame! Shame! to the editor, he's using it as a quote. Genghis^{Our ignorance is God; what we know is science.} 14:44, 6 May 2008 (EDT)

It's hard to tell (CP sysops have occasionally told people that they should be ashamed), and the absence of quotation marks doesn't exactly help. --Sid 14:51, 6 May 2008 (EDT)

Well as the following sentence is: It's amazing how often liberals invoke that ... about everyone except their own I think that makes it fairly plain. Genghis^{Our ignorance is God; what we know is science.} 14:55, 6 May 2008 (EDT)

Up to about 5 minutes ago I would have agreed with you completely. But Now that the coverup has happened it's become something bigger than ever. SirChuckB^{Further bulletins as events warrant} 14:56, 6 May 2008 (EDT)

Ok, so now I see that maybe I did misinterpret that to start, but in my defense Andy is so dumb he probably just lucked out that he wrote it incorrectly and had it come out that way. And all the coverup stuff does make it worthwhile, it shows that even his sysops read WIGO and assume he's an idiot. Jrssr5 15:00, 6 May 2008 (EDT)

He might not have textually said that his opponent should be ashamed, but it seems evident that was his purpose. NightFlare^{Speak, mortal} 15:04, 6 May 2008 (EDT)

Going by that reasoning, we should be able to completely lock up Conservapedia by WIGO-pointing at one of Andy's articles and saying "Ahaha, Andy makes the dumbest typo ever" - every sysop would stare at the article, trying to see the sailboat find the typo. ;) --Sid 15:06, 6 May 2008 (EDT)

They certainly must think their leader is an idiot, think how many parodies have been detected and deleted right before Andy comes up with something even wackier. NightFlare^{Speak, mortal} 15:08, 6 May 2008 (EDT)

It's certainly funny and weird to see how the perceived intent is more important than the message. So Hollywood causes breast cancer and guns make everything better... but only when a sysop says so. Even citing these High Quality Articles in other articles (and taking some of things mentioned to their logical conclusion) is somehow parody. --Sid 15:25, 6 May 2008 (EDT)

Ahem! KimSell, whoever she may be (I have no idea) is probably a woman. Not a man. I imagine she, whoever she may be, would prefer if you were careful about such things. ^{— Unsigned, by: 90.199.84.62 / talk / contribs}

Mystery?

My IP is blocked but perhaps someone could pop over to mystery hollywood breast cancer (where andy has made a comment on the talk page) and remind him that no one disputed Rtums claim because he actually included a link to a real study? Ace McWicked 21:40, 6 May 2008 (EDT)

You're forgetting - that's one of those evil librul studies that use 'facts'. Zmidponk 22:18, 6 May 2008 (EDT)

haha asshat is completely completly pwned over there now. Any second we are going to get a "folks, dont be lead in by librul facts. There'll be no last wordism here. You'll be blocked." Ace McWicked 22:48, 6 May 2008 (EDT)

Item of interest

Observe User:Mendacious deceit/to-them-so-called-gentlemen-at-another-website. - Icewedge 22:03, 6 May 2008 (EDT)

Well, they're gone, which just goes to demonstrate yet again that the so-called-gentlemen of that other website enjoy a good read over here on a pretty regular basis. --Horace 06:46, 7 May 2008 (EDT)

And just to stir the pot of paranoia, we need to ask just how many of those articles were actually spurious...Psygremlin 06:57, 7 May 2008 (EDT)

I checked the validity of one of them on Wikipedia and found it to be true so if they have deleted them they are actually shrinking content. LOL! Genghis^{Our ignorance is God; what we know is science.} 07:32, 7 May 2008 (EDT)

WP has *gasp* pr0n

CP linked to this article about porn on wikipedia. The list of objectionable items includes: Mammary Intercourse. I just about spit my coffee all over my keyboard laughing so hard. Jrssr5 10:33, 7 May 2008 (EDT)

Jesus H. Tittyfucking Christ. I'm surprised they allowed their own editors to mention such filth. Wazza (Yes, that Wazza)^{Bring a little light into my dim and dull existence} 10:54, 7 May 2008 (EDT)

Further proof that certain people don't know what an 'Encyclopedia' is. -The Almighty Tuna 11:15, 7 May 2008 (EDT)

I prefer the written variety.Shangrala 11:20, 7 May 2008 (EDT)

Typical conservatives: get their titillating jollies and come on all self-righteous and indignant at the same time. Rational Ed^perception

Bulverism

Not sure if this has been noticed.... http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=User_talk%3AConservative&diff=445159&oldid=445149 -Lardashe

To clarify - if you look up the word in Wikipedia, there's a link to this.... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem#Ad_hominem_circumstantial which is the attack of choice for Andy. -Lardashe

And it's no coincidence that C.S. Lewis' first example for the term is misogynistic, like, "women are so illogical". Rational Ed^perception 13:25, 7 May 2008 (EDT)

? Lewis was certainly not mysogynistic. And you seem to be attributing bulverism to him as a trait, rather than a logical fallacy which he had identified in others. Grief, you're actually committing it yourself. "He must be wrong because he's CS Lewis" Fox 20:09, 7 May 2008 (EDT)

WIGO-worthy?

A conversation is developing on the Music talk page between a new user and PJR. New user, who has already been in trouble with Ed Poor for reverting one of Ed's precious edits, is attempting to explain to PJR what "evidence" is, with little success. Is this worthy of inclusion on WIGO? ^{— Unsigned, by: 149.157.1.184 / talk / contribs}

Yes - I've been watching it unfold - "Music created in heaven" says prehistoric nutter"   ^Contribs_Talk 13:33, 7 May 2008 (EDT)

The conversation just got interesting with mention of the dreaded s*x**l interc**rse! Rational Ed^perception 13:41, 7 May 2008 (EDT)

It's interesting.... it's mostly a surprise that they haven't figured out that most of what comes from the Bible should fall into a separate category - unverifiable biblical claims. Leave it under that category, and state it like this. "According to the Bible, King David had a 4,000-voice choir." If they want it to fall into a black and white/fact or liberal deceit category, this phrasing is a fact. - Lardashe

PJR won't go there because it would be a step down the slippery slope of questioning the Bible's inerrancy. Rational Ed^perception 13:47, 7 May 2008 (EDT)

Arrows for voting

Haven't been here for a while. What are those arrows at the left for plz/thnx? ^{— Unsigned, by: 82.23.213.246 / talk / contribs}

They are for voting up or down on the WIGO items. We use the results to determine what goes into Best of and what just gets archived. It's also fun to vote. human 19:03, 7 May 2008 (EDT)

Breast Cancer and Hollywood, Redux...Bringing it all together...

Look here When Andy says "That is all the more amusing when one realizes that there is a fundamental reason why Hollywood types must have higher breast cancer incidence than the general public. Get past the symbols and look at this with an open mind, and you'll see it too..." Is he about to argue that "Hollywood types" have more abortions then others? PFoster 20:00, 7 May 2008 (EDT)

Wow... (from section above) "An astute, objective observer would expect it without seeing a single patient or reviewing data about a single case." I guess that pretty much sums up the Andean Method, doesn't it? human 20:11, 7 May 2008 (EDT)

If he's about to make the Hollywood girls=abortions=breast cancer argument, he'll need to take the (at least two) out lesbians off of his list. PFoster 20:13, 7 May 2008 (EDT)

Lesbianism causes breast cancer too! human 21:08, 7 May 2008 (EDT)

It's like abortion without the baby! Or the sperm! --Kels 21:21, 7 May 2008 (EDT)

So Assfly insists that there are only 100 young successful pop singers in the world [9]. Where the fuck does he get these numbers? We have over 2000 American female singers here, plus another 196 in Australia, 497 from England, 56 Scots, 41 Welsh, 83 Irish, and 345 Canadians. That's just the English speaking world. We can add 158 from France, 78 from Germany, 417 from Japan, 97 from Mexico, 121 in Spain, and countless other from throughout the world. Assuming only 20% or so of them qualify as young and successful by Andy's definition, that's still way more than 100 (closer to 1000). Now, he lists 2 in their 20's with cancer, 2 in their 30's and 3 in their 40's. 40's isn't exactly "young", and if the 2 in their 20's qualify he's not using extremely limited criteria. I haven't done the math yet, but looking at some real figures here (vague, but better than what Andy pulled out of his ass) it seems we're pretty much in line with the greater population. I'm sure Andy won;t see it that way, though. DickTurpis 21:07, 7 May 2008 (EDT)

He's making it all up, because he "knows" his conclusion is true. human 21:08, 7 May 2008 (EDT)

The best part is that Andy makes an incredibly stupid claim, then spends days trying to fend off the actual math behind it as Liberal Bias.... I guess we have Liberals have infiltrated the world of mathematics and specifically worked the stats to fit our worldview SirChuckB^{Further bulletins as events warrant} 21:13, 7 May 2008 (EDT)

I like how he keeps trying to pwn his interlocuters with some dumbass hypothetical about le baseball. What a tool. In response to people simply requesting his sources of data for a major claim about public health, he demands a reply to an irrelevant question. Oh, and PS, Asshat, breast cancer is not "rare". It's scarily common. When I was at the wake of a 42 yr old woman whose breast cancer had gotten into her brain, etc., there was another person there, a neighbor, not a support-group acquaintance, wearing, you know, a scarf instead of hair, also in her late 30s. Of course, that might just mean that knowing my friend (it was his wife who died) causes cancer... human 21:24, 7 May 2008 (EDT)

So the question is, is Andy actually being cagey for some reason about tying abortion to breast cancer (again) via starlets and the like, or did he just do the ABC loons trick of "I think something is bad, so I'll make it scaaaaaary and evil by tying it to breast cancer" and is trying to cover up that it's nothing but slander and lies? --Kels 21:27, 7 May 2008 (EDT)

This baseball thing is driving me AROUND THE BEND! DogP 21:28, 7 May 2008 (EDT)

Me too! Quoth the assfly:

"Again, I ask you: is it likely that an unnamed pitcher who threw three no-hitters had an overall career worthy of the Hall of Fame? That is a statistical question that you should be able to answer, but your incessant demand for more data is not going to help you solve it. There is no further specific data to be disclosed in that question, nor is additional data necessary to answer it."

Idiot! Of course there is - you need to know all kinds of data to answer that! Of the top of my head...

1. What percentage of pitchers ever pitched 3 no hitters?
2. What percentage of them are in teh HoF
3. Numbers to allow for current careers (I think you can't get into HoF until retired)
4. Data on whether Andy's brain tumor tests were positive human 21:31, 7 May 2008 (EDT)

Data on whether the assfly has a brain. Rational Ed^perception 08:27, 8 May 2008 (EDT)

The assfly continues his descent into madness and obscurity. -PalMD 21:32, 8 May 2008

I'm scared now. I have way too much in common with Andy. I would say exactly the same thing if confronted with an argument like that. I would be joking, but still, you have to admit, CP sysops can read your mind, with at least a 95% success rate. -The Almighty Tuna 09:47, 8 May 2008 (EDT)

Baseball

1. What percentage of pitchers ever pitched 3 no hitters?
   • From http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/stats/nohitters and a quick sort and uniq, I get:
     • Nolan Ryan (7)
     • Sandy Koufax (4)
     • Larry Corcoran (3)
     • Cy Young (3)
     • Bob Feller (3)
   • Still need the total number of pitchers.
2. What percentage of them are in teh HoF
   • Nolan Ryan - 1999 (98.2% first ballot)
   • Sandy Koufax - 1972 (86.7% first ballot)
   • Larry Corcoran - not in there. Not eligible, only played 7 years. 10 years is required to be in the hall of fame.
   • Cy Young - 1937 (76.12%)
   • Bob Feller - 1962 (93.8% first ballot))
   • So thats 100%. If you throw 3x no hitters and have a 10 year career, it seems like you're a shoo in.

--Shagie 22:01, 7 May 2008 (EDT)

Um, Shagie (thanks for the work!), what about Larry C.? Not in there but threw 3 NHs? That's not 100%, it's 80%. Am I right? human 00:27, 8 May 2008 (EDT)

PS, will whoever is running DanielB (etc.) try to avoid typos on the first go-round? It gives the assfly less to chew on if they don't exist to start with (you know how in assfly land a typo means you phail epically). Use firefox, free spellchecker, or preview a few times at least and copyedit. PS, nice work, whosever youse might be! human 00:32, 8 May 2008 (EDT)

OTOH, there are plenty of sub-HoF caliber pitchers, even mediocre to below-average pitchers, who have thrown a no-hitter. Gavin Freakin' Floyd (yes, the immortal Gavin Floyd) has come close to having two already this season! That plus the rarity of no-hitters makes it hard to use as an HoF indicator. Oh, and Young and Corcoran played all or a large portion of their careers before 1900. Hey Andy, next time use "Pitchers with 300 or more wins" as your crappy analogy to dodge questions.--Bayes_yikes 01:13, 8 May 2008 (EDT)

Larry C. was not elligable because he didn't play long enough to be in the hall of fame. He contracted wp:Bright's disease and probably stopped playing early because of it and died at the age of 31. If he had played for 10 years, he would have been eligible. Lets phrase it this way: "Every player who has played for 10 years (a requirement to be in the hall of fame) and pitched 3 no hitters is in the hall of fame. Of players that played for less than 10 years, none of them are in the hall of fame."

Continuing to 2 no hitters, bolds are hall of fame. Warren Spahn. Virgil Trucks (17 years), Ted Breitenstein (10 years), Steve Busby (8 years), Randy Johnson (still playing), Pud Galvin, Ken Holtzman (14 years), Johnny Vander meer (14 years), Jim Maloney (20 years, would have 3 no hitters depending on definition - 9 innings vs games), Jim Bunning (yes, he is a republican senator), Hideo Nomo (still playing), Frank Smith (11 years), Dutch Leonard (12 years), Don Wilson (8 years), Christy Mathewson, Carl Erskine (11 years), Bob Forsch (nominated, 0.4%), Bill Stoneman (7 years), Allie Reynolds (12 years), Al Atkinson (3 years), Adonis Terry (13 years), Addie Joss. Thats 16 that have been eligible of which 5 have made the hall of fame. I will point out that some of those are done by a veterans committee that votes on players of old. Addie Joss played from 1901 to 1910 and was ellected into the hall of fame in 1978. --Shagie 01:26, 8 May 2008 (EDT)

"Young"?

If anyone remembers, Andy refused to allow the Matthew Murray (age 24) entry in the Young Mass Murderers bullshit piece, because he didn't define age 24 as young. However, Cho was 23, and of course that was put in. I'd find links but I'm tired and sleepy. Basically, he went cherry-picking for details to make it the way he wanted it, and his definition of "young" clashes with the latest revelation. Someone ought to point that out... I'm Tired 01:41, 8 May 2008 (EDT)

Looks like Andy just "won the argument" by handing out 1-day punishment blocks to his critics. What an ass. --Kels 23:10, 8 May 2008 (EDT)

He comes back after ignoring them all day, says "if you don't get it, I'm not going to explain it" (OK, "Folks, the comments above are long on talk and insults and short on insights. If none of the above naysayers are even willing to figure out why Hollywood types are expected to have higher incidence of breast cancer without even having to look at any data, then I'm wasting my time on this page." That's it. It's obvious, without even stating the reason. And this brilliant statistic: "In response to the request for a population, by the way, simply take the roughly 100 or so female pop singers (which I think I suggested before)" WTF WTF WTF. Andiot, it's called "analysis", and without it, there would be no such thing as "statistics". You can't just make them up! Stick to baseball, where you are simply a nerd and harm no one. Did he really block his interlocutors? human 00:14, 9 May 2008 (EDT)

I'm back!

I'm so glad to see I'm back at Conservapedia! I was wondering when I'd be back there!-caius (ninja) 21:55, 7 May 2008 (EDT)

You've been upgraded to "cyber-terrorist". Oh, and I'm a sock of you. Apparently.^{— Unsigned, by: 85.25.151.22 / talk / contribs} 21:57, 7 May 2008 (EDT)

The ad at the bottom of the page

Was for Ann Coulter's columns. I feel unclean. (But I will click on it to cost her a ha'penny! :) --Gulik 03:20, 8 May 2008 (EDT)

"She" should really do something about "her" adam's apple. ^{— Unsigned, by: 204.248.28.194 / talk / contribs}

Kicking off again...

http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=User_talk%3AFox&diff=449530&oldid=448379

and the reason is:

http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Waterboarding&diff=prev&oldid=449061 HINT:Edit summary

Fretfulporpentine 13:46, 8 May 2008 (EDT)

The best part is that Fox was mostly poking fun at his own typo there, so this doubles the WTF value in my eyes. --Sid 13:51, 8 May 2008 (EDT)

I don't think Ed has a sense of humor. --Gulik 22:48, 8 May 2008 (EDT)

Department of redundancy department

I admit not reading WIGO prior to the redundant (axed 209), which in mine defence I was EC'ed out of fixing: updating 208. Thanks to Human and Sid for overseeing the page. CЯacke® 14:02, 8 May 2008 (EDT)

Hehe, yeah, I got EC'd three times on the way to actually deleting #209 (it had not votes, so no harm there). Poop happens... human 14:24, 8 May 2008 (EDT)