Conservapedia talk:What is going on at CP?/Archive47

This is an archive page, last updated 14 April 2010. Please do not make edits to this page.

Archives for this talk page:

<1>, <2>, <3>, <4>, <5>, <6>, <7>, <8>, <9>, <10>, <11>, <12>, <13>, <14>, <15>, <16>, <17>, <18>, <19>, <20>, <21>, <22>, <23>, <24>, <25>, <26>, <27>, <28>, <29>, <30>, <31>, <32>, <33>, <34>, <35>, <36>, <37>, <38>, <39>, <40>, <41>, <42>, <43>, <44>, <45>, <46>, <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)

Chapter Twelve, In Which Our Hero Single-handedly Blows Evolution Out Of The Water

This comment caused the hemispheres of my brain to fuse together. Could we possibly hire a seven year-old to explain the concept of evolution to Andy in a way he'd understand?^{— Unsigned, by: 166.166.166.166 / talk / contribs} 10:00, 14 May 2008 (EDT)

I absolutely love his very first example. "no servant is ever greater than his master." I really don't know what makes him think that could possibly be true but even if it was why is his very example literally one of master/slave? The man's mind is an overflowing squat-toilet of red-neckery. RedDog 11:02, 14 May 2008 (EDT)

I'm also quite taken by his second: "no child can be genetically superior to both parents". Here we have the Aschlafly in a nutshell. A knock-kneed dribbling mess of oedipal neuroses, cowering, trembling and clutching nervously at his shorts whilst at the feet of his mother. Charles SubLunar ^(mr) 11:07, 14 May 2008 (EDT)

That's another point to the Aschlafly as parodist theory.

But the concept of progress from random change has been examined very thoroughly in simulation. I happen to have mislaid the link I need to demonstrate this, but it has nonetheless. If this is his "scientific objection" to evolution then the man is officially a moron.^{— Unsigned, by: 166.166.166.166 / talk / contribs} 11:15, 14 May 2008 (EDT)

seriously. "no child can be genetically superior to both parents"?! Does he not know how viruses (or is it viri?) mutate, so that the child is genetically superior to the parents?! BeastmasterGeneral 11:23, 14 May 2008 (EDT)

Sometimes I suspect the main motivation behind CP for the Assfly is to taunt liberals and frustrate them with patently ridiculous arguments thrown out with patrician authority. Rational Ed^think! 11:56, 14 May 2008 (EDT)

By the same "logic", airplanes can't exist. Since humans can't fly, it would be impossible for us to create them. :-P --Gulik 12:59, 14 May 2008 (EDT)

Can't wait until the first computer able to out-think Schlafly arrives - oh my mistake it already has; it's called an ABACUS. Marghanita Laski 13:25, 14 May 2008 (EDT)

Correction - it's called a pile of rocks. --SpinyNorman 13:29, 14 May 2008 (EDT)

I'll thank you not to refer to the Macintosh in that manner.^{— Unsigned, by: 166.166.166.166 / talk / contribs} 13:31, 14 May 2008 (EDT)

Fractals are actually quite beautiful. Fuzzy|AfD 19:11, 14 May 2008 (EDT)

The same thought came to my mind, but fractals actually aren't random. That's not to say that randomness can't create beauty, but that example doesn't hold. --Linus^{(plot evil tech)} 12:04, 18 May 2008 (EDT)

Your first comment here for ages and it's incomprehensible. Bad Kettleklick. Jellyfish! 19:13, 14 May 2008 (EDT)

Greatest Conservative Legislation

This should attract some interesting debate in short order [1] --SpinyNorman 13:22, 14 May 2008 (EDT)

Maybe it's some newfangled definition of "essay", but 5 bullet points? --Psygremlin 14:15, 14 May 2008 (EDT)

I don't know why the Andes made it an essay at all, it's more encyclopedic than most of his steaming turds. And it does invite readers to "add more, especially from earlier periods in history". I can't wait to see what some people come up with... human 14:29, 14 May 2008 (EDT)

I'm shocked the Dred Scott Decision isn't up yet. Or maybe the decision, back in Lincoln's day, that granted corporations legal personhood? --Gulik 00:59, 15 May 2008 (EDT)

Check the talk page for it now. Great talk about the Volstead Act. Andy seems to think that prohibition was not a serious boon for gangsters. By his logic, outlawing abortion won't have any effect at all. -Lardashe

250%

The 250% comment is an amusing quip, but far from a legitimate criticism, as it assumes each category is mutually exclusive. Clearly something can be both 70% liberal and 100% secular, just like I can be 100% human and 25% Italian, without making me 125% anything. I just wanted to say this because I really don't think it belongs in Best Of or anything. DickTurpis 14:55, 14 May 2008 (EDT)

Seconded. Genghis^{Our ignorance is God; what we know is science.} 19:28, 14 May 2008 (EDT)

It does show, however, that Steven is also quite capable of pulling Schlafly statistics out of his arse. Psygremlin 01:23, 15 May 2008 (EDT)

Turded. (I mean, I agree with Dick and Jane GK.) I also agree with PG, but it's a crappy WIGO. human 01:46, 15 May 2008 (EDT)

Me too - it's a perfectly reasonable to thing to say, really. We might accuse CP of being 10% science and 100% batshit insane, but it doesn't add up to 110%. This WIGO is disapproved of! Mind you, I do like the appalling grammar. DogP 03:15, 15 May 2008 (EDT)

Correction to WIGO

TerryH is not one of the sane ones. His reasoning typically comes down to because I say so and because I know more than you. Everything else is just legerdemain and petty hagiography. ^{Exasperate me!}Sheesh!_{Not the most impressive contributor here} 14:59, 14 May 2008 (EDT)

If you insist on utilizing your erudite diction, do make sure we have no parentally-educated in the audience—you don't want their undeveloped brains damaged, do you? : ) -- Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 15:11, 14 May 2008 (EDT)

Note to home-schoolers. I was making poetic use of the term hagiography i.e. I don't think that Terry really writes biographies of even perceived saints, e.g. Andy, Ronald Reagan, The Grand Dragon, the definition of the term from WordNet (linked above) is the nearest to the sense I intended. P.S. The cake is a lie! P.P.S Thanks RA! ^{Exasperate me!}Sheesh!_{Not the most impressive contributor here} 15:21, 14 May 2008 (EDT)

Liberal TV

TerryH keeps refering to a Newton Minow quote about the quality of tv which was from 1961! Does he not know the speech is almost 50 years old? Jrssr5 15:39, 14 May 2008 (EDT)

Yeah! The "vast wasteland" is not only almost universally in living color now, it's also distributed in teh awesome surround sound! Sheesh! human 15:52, 14 May 2008 (EDT)

Archive

Does anyone else think this page is ripe for archiving? Angband 16:48, 14 May 2008 (EDT)

Yes.^{— Unsigned, by: 166.166.166.166 / talk / contribs} 16:49, 14 May 2008 (EDT)

Joaquin's still at it

I was ready to dismiss it as a language issue, but no, Joaquin really is too stupid for words. Fox does a major overhaul to clean up Joaquin's pitiful painting article, an make it so the images were actually of paintings, and what does JM do? Puts the obvious non-painting right at the top. How thick can a person's skull be? And why am I surprised at anything that happens over there anymore? DickTurpis 17:19, 14 May 2008 (EDT)

Ahaha, and then he locks it and plants his flag in it. Foxy's pissed too. DogP 17:38, 14 May 2008 (EDT)

Not to worry, for the experts are coming!131.111.8.97 17:51, 14 May 2008 (EDT)

Like I said in the section wayyy above: Seeing JM at work there is oddly satisfying (even though I do weep for Fox's work being effectively flushed down the toilet). It's a non-political Evolution/Atheism/Homosexuality all over again: "I have this really weird idea, so let's make it the center of that article, block everybody who disagrees and lock it."

And this JM quote from the talk page really sums up the entire situation: "NOT TO CHANGE THING IN A HURRY! I expect to be clear enough." --Sid 17:52, 14 May 2008 (EDT)

"Look, not only have I weird ideas, I also have irrelevant quotes to somehow back my point!" - This is getting better and better by the minute. --Sid 18:16, 14 May 2008 (EDT)

Perhaps Joaquin has never heard of Boolean?

I offer this in a spirit of friendly clarification, on the offchance he watches RW. Charles SubLunar ^(mr) 18:17, 14 May 2008 (EDT)

This puts our Bible/bible edit wars to shame. Nice Venn diagram, by the way. human 18:48, 14 May 2008 (EDT)

You mean bible/Bible, I'm sure.Jellyfish! 18:51, 14 May 2008 (EDT)

Or for maximum conciseness, "[B/b]ible." --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 19:32, 14 May 2008 (EDT)

Upper or lower case "b"? Who cares?

Now, should the second "b" be optional, Bi(b)le, makes it interesting (at least in English).

CЯacke® 20:02, 14 May 2008 (EDT)

I always thought it was 'Bibbel', myself. DogP 20:05, 14 May 2008 (EDT)

Funny, mine says "Holy Bible" on the cover. But it might be a typo or misprint. human 20:21, 14 May 2008 (EDT)

You bought a Bible? When's the book burning? </sarcasm> (you can't block because of that) SHahB 01:52, 15 May 2008 (EDT)

No, I was given it by a Congregational Church when I was young. I don't burn books, even my creation Science homskollar text. human 14:49, 15 May 2008 (EDT)

<---Anyone else notice that JM's english normally is better than anyone here, but when he gets questioned about something he added the language barrier becomes an issue? His defense seems to be to bust out the poor grammar and act confused. Jrssr5 09:06, 15 May 2008 (EDT)

Meh, I could give a monkey's toss about it all now. I just finished downloading and patching the AoC early access client so I got more enjoyable ways to waste time than trying to knock sense into an ignoramous. Fox 10:35, 15 May 2008 (EDT)

Well that's good news Fox, because it seems... Andy doesn't give a monkey's toss either!. And why should he even listen to you when you let those fake cave paintings (obviously a liberal hoax) stand without comment? Yet you continue to waste time with your overly literal definitions, criticizing Joaquin's interpretation of "painting". Try coming back with an open mind, and perhaps you'll be able to see my truth the truth more clearly!

Godspeed. :) Uchiha^KATON! 14:47, 15 May 2008 (EDT)

Going off track

I went through a little investigating and came upon something rather funny. Despite Andy and CP's claims that only Liberals vandalize things cause we're all so dirty and decietful... If you look at Wikipedia and go to any of the Liberal sites, like ACLU or DailyKos or Al Franken etc... The history is full of vandals... I'm assuming Andy would simply claim that it's liberals attempting to make Conservatives look bad... but I wonder... How hard do you have to work to ignore the obvious evidence around you? SirChuckB^{Penguin Knight, First Class} 22:39, 14 May 2008 (EDT)

Pretty hard. But it's easier when you isolate yourself with a protective ring of suck-ups to echo your delusions. --Gulik 01:02, 15 May 2008 (EDT)

Oh no - that isn't vandalism. That's people trying to post the truth, only to be censored. - Lardashe

Exactly, expressing a liberal opinion is by definition trolling or vandalism. Expressing a conservative viewpoint is an attempt to bring an atheistic liberal out of the darkness. Rational Ed^think! 11:23, 15 May 2008 (EDT)

It's very easy to ignore obvious evidence: It's wikipedia, it's not real evidence. Armondikov 12:41, 15 May 2008 (EDT)

I can't really tell what you mean by that... I'm not discussing the actual articles on Wikipedia, whose merit can and has been argued for and against many times. I'm talking about looking at the history of some Liberal pages and looking at the blatant vandalism that has taken place. Things like this and this and maybe even this really clever one SirChuckB^{Penguin Knight, First Class} 13:29, 15 May 2008 (EDT)

I think Andy would attribute that kind of vandalism as a liberal trying to be funny. I don't think that the cognitive dissonance would bother him. - Lardashe

(unident)I know that... which brings me to my orignal query... how can you be so willing to ignore all the evidence and proclaim yourself the only true logical one SirChuckB^{Penguin Knight, First Class} 14:03, 15 May 2008 (EDT)

Uncertainity and doubt can be very uncomfortable even when you are self aware and mature. Imagine how hard it must be if you are clueless and childish. Being sure and wrong simply doesn't hurt as much if you can stand walking around with blinders and ear plugs ^{Exasperate me!}Sheesh!_{Not the most impressive contributor here} 15:12, 15 May 2008 (EDT)

Andy and Evolution

Andy's said a few times that he used to belive evolution was true, and was convinced by "logic" that it wasn't. He even repeated that a few days ago. It's always made me wonder what he meant by that. Could this be what he meant? --Kels 23:32, 14 May 2008 (EDT)

He is, to coin his own phrase, clueless. I thought the Catholic church actually is in favour of evolution and the big bang, so how Adam & Eve fit into the picture is beyond me. It must really stick in Andy's gullet that the faith of his youth - not to mention 1 billion other catholics - directly contradicts the YEC view. Could it be something to do with the overwhelming mountain of evidence against YEC? If Andy had been around in the 1630s, he'd have been at the head of the queue to denounce Galileo and have him burned at the steak stake , or even worse, forced to attend an Andy-hosted homeschooling lecture on how the Earth is at the centre of the universe. Bondurant 05:01, 15 May 2008 (EDT)

The Catholic Church recognises evolution and the big bang. This is only an issue in America, let me remind you. No one else in the world gives a crap about whether the world was made in six days or if God runs about killing the Muslims and gays... MarcusCicero 09:45, 15 May 2008 (EDT)

Hehe - believe it or not, according to PJR, the life-long house arrest of Galileo and the banning of his work was nothing to do with the fact he was proposing something that directly opposed the Church's interpretation of the Bible at the time, but was, instead, down to 'personality clashes'.[2] Urushnor 16:55, 15 May 2008 (EDT)

(And PJR's little bit of Australia!) :)   ^Contribs_Talk 09:50, 15 May 2008 (EDT)

Most of the RCC are cautiously supportive of evolution, as seen e.g. by John Paul II's 1996 Message to the Pont. Academy, or the statement by the British Council of Bishops a few years ago. However, that support has not been dogmatically defined, which means that believers are free to believe what they want about the issue. It's certainly possible to find even high-ranking Catholic supporters of both ID and creationism, such as that Austrian cardinal a while back (forgot his name - Schönbraun or something?) Anyway, as is usually the case, it's probably better to view the RCC as one huge debating society, rather than as a group with one common opinion. --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 10:08, 15 May 2008 (EDT)

Is there much YEC fundamentalism in Oz? How representative is PJR? Ajkgordon 10:10, 15 May 2008 (EDT)

No idea. Have we any users there?   ^Contribs_Talk

Yes you do. And no, there is not much YEC fundamentalism here. It's actually quite civilized. --Horace 17:47, 15 May 2008 (EDT)

I'm interested by Andy's contention that the reality and message of Jesus depend on a literal interpretation of Genesis. I'd guess he picked that up from Augustine, who believed mankind were permanently stained by Adam's sin. Rational Ed^think! 10:45, 15 May 2008 (EDT)

So that explains the dark spot I can't scrub off my ass SirChuckB^{Penguin Knight, First Class} 11:05, 15 May 2008 (EDT)

Augustine himself did not believe in a literal interpretation of Genesis: he stated quite clearly in his De Genesi ad Litterum that he believed everything to have been created at once and that the "days" were of a time-based or temporal character but not physical days. Fox 11:03, 15 May 2008 (EDT)

Fox - good to see you! Funny you should mention Augustine, he came up just the other day in a conversation ('cause of the Dylan song); can you recommend anything to read about him? (And it doesn't matter what a lout like him thinks, only Andy may dispense wisdom on such topics, right?) PFoster 11:07, 15 May 2008 (EDT)

Susan asked about YECers in Australia before. I am in NZ and have 2 brothers in Australia and I have never been exposed to it before. I dont think, aside from a few weirdos, that we have these sorts around here. However both NZ and Aus a filthy liberal countries and, shock and awe, NZ is run by a woman! Ace McWicked (couldnt be bothered signing in)

There aren't many YEC in Australia as they all have headed to the States. One of the two guys that founded Answers in Genesis was Australian. I think they go over to the US as they find a more reseptive audience to their ideas and they know that a paper dog could chase an asbestos cat through hell before creationism or some facsimile would be taught in Australian schools. I think it is because we have neither a state religion nor the prohibition of a state religion that people are not moved either way about religion and government and so tend to ignore it. 192.43.227.18 20:46, 15 May 2008 (EDT)

Cave paintings: Liberal Hoax

http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=User_talk%3AAschlafly&diff=453598&oldid=453515 Fretfulporpentine 10:24, 15 May 2008 (EDT)

Well, they look like obvious hoaxes to Godspeed - case closed. Silver Sloth 10:27, 15 May 2008 (EDT)

Doesn't look like Fox managed to get Andy's attention regarding the fact that the painting article is illustrated by non-paintings - Andy and Company are too obsessed with evolution to fix an article on painting. Why does Fox waste his time with them? Rational Ed^think! 10:34, 15 May 2008 (EDT)

See [3]. Off to sharpen my sword :) Fox 10:37, 15 May 2008 (EDT)

Nicely put fox!^{— Unsigned, by: 217.41.92.46 / talk / contribs}

[The paintings at Chauvet] depict a cute collection of horses, rhinoceros, lions, buffalo, and mammoth. ... "Cute?" Good grief. --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 10:47, 15 May 2008 (EDT)

But no dinosaurs. =< Genghis^{Our ignorance is God; what we know is science.} 11:19, 15 May 2008 (EDT)

No, their Dinosaur article claims a cave painting as proof of the co-existence of dinosarus and humans.Rational Ed^think! 11:26, 15 May 2008 (EDT)

That's why I made the comment. But of course there is no question that the one with a dinosaur is genuine. Genghis^{Our ignorance is God; what we know is science.} 11:28, 15 May 2008 (EDT)

Good example of selective use of "evidence". Sorry I missed your irony. :( Rational Ed^think! 11:29, 15 May 2008 (EDT)

Deborah's Google vs. Yahoo project.

I love the part where she asks why liberals are obsessed with homosexuality. What a fuckin' tool _{or brilliant parodist.} PFoster 13:15, 15 May 2008 (EDT)

And that CP is the epitome of true conservatism. Any site that came up before CP must not be truly conservative. If it was a joke, it'd actually be funny, but she really means it. Bottomless stupidity. Note: I just noticed that the ad at the bottom of the page under this suggested "Reclaim Your Brain." How appropriate!Rational Ed^think! 13:19, 15 May 2008 (EDT)

What amazes me is that there are 18 pages before CP's on liberal denial on Google. And really, just how many sites focus on professor values? I think a number 1 ranking is probably a gimme there; ditto conservapedia. Doesn't this obsession with rankings remind you of a bunch of little kiddies at a party, all going "pick me! pick me!" --Psygremlin_Whut? 14:42, 15 May 2008 (EDT)

So let's make an article called "Everyone at CP is a Dolt", or "Andy Schlafly doesn't know his asch from a hole in the ground" and see what ranking it gets on Google. Rational Ed^think! 14:52, 15 May 2008 (EDT)

What, it's not good enough we made a whole wiki about that? --Kels 23:08, 15 May 2008 (EDT)

Spooky Andy

I love this picture of Andy—he appears delightfully spooky. Even more, I love how Ed Poor felt the need to qualify it with "Andy in an academic setting". Anyone have a witty response to that? -- Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 14:53, 15 May 2008 (EDT)

Lot of tension around the mouth. Rational Ed^think! 14:58, 15 May 2008 (EDT)

Looks more like an outtake from Psycho III to me. Damn, he looks like Norman Bates in that pic! Time to make some LolcAndys!!! human 14:59, 15 May 2008 (EDT)

Couldn't someone get a clip of Psycho stabbing soundtrack to play everytime the photo is accessed? Rational Ed^think! 15:17, 15 May 2008 (EDT)

That would be teh awesome. How about lolcandy1: "I kan haz room now?" 2: "Mai muther iz kreepier!" human 15:19, 15 May 2008 (EDT)

Oh exploitable!!! --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 15:19, 15 May 2008 (EDT)

I kan haz stoodintz? Mai homskollars wil goe hear! human 15:26, 15 May 2008 (EDT)

(interrupts conversation) It's like being two feet away from Wolfe Blitzer! Lyra (subtleknife) 17:27, 15 May 2008 (EDT)

Competition   ^Contribs_Talk 17:40, 15 May 2008 (EDT)

Dude, I'd totally win that contest. My adam's apple would open a can of whoopass on Andy's. DickTurpis 17:48, 15 May 2008 (EDT)

Susan, I'm sure it was intentional, but you miszpelled Conservapedia! human 19:08, 15 May 2008 (EDT)

Heh! That's how i used to spell it as a Brit & I just thought I'd start again!   ^Contribs_Talk 19:12, 15 May 2008 (EDT)

I love the caption to the picture - "Andy Schlafly in an academic setting". Dmyerken 17:51, 15 May 2008 (EDT)

That's why I called it that when I copied it here ;) (well, without the "schlafly") human 19:05, 15 May 2008 (EDT)

Mother! Oh God, mother! Blood! Blood!

Couldn't resist... --Robledo 20:37, 15 May 2008 (EDT)

Nice work! human 20:42, 15 May 2008 (EDT) (added to his article)

Thanks, fella. ;) --Robledo 20:49, 15 May 2008 (EDT)

Bravo! Now we just need Phyllis' head superimposed over the body of Mrs. Bates in the chair.--SpinyNorman 21:23, 15 May 2008 (EDT)

Article of the Year

I think it speaks volumes about the level of anti-evolution internet "scholarship" that Ken is, at least according to his contacts, near the top of the heap. How sad is that??-caius (ninja) 21:16, 15 May 2008 (EDT)

Linkie? human 21:49, 15 May 2008 (EDT)

I like how he used the word Conservapedia four times in his "news" item. Very creative. human 21:57, 15 May 2008 (EDT)

All over the place. Current Main Page mentions it left and right (literally), Talk:Main has JBrown questioning this (and then suddenly cheering Ken on), Talk:Andy has a fair share, too.

In a nutshell: Ken sent Very Important Mails to Unnamed People at Unnamed Organizations, the Atheism article will be featured on the front page all year long, and it will be expanded even more. --Sid 22:02, 15 May 2008 (EDT)

Thanks for the links. I appreciate not having to pore over RC at CP when there are others doing it already ;) Yah, Kendoll is tweakin'. human 23:04, 15 May 2008 (EDT)

PS, where's the thing about him being on the top of the (steaming) heap? human 23:05, 15 May 2008 (EDT)

Just some of the more "important" (LaBarbera) of the online-only homophobic agenda seem to actually care about him, and I think that shows a lot about how... intelligent... those movements are, if they think he's a breath of fresh air.-caius (ninja) 00:20, 16 May 2008 (EDT)

All this fuss, and no-one is noticing that Ken wants it to be Article of the Year....for six months? DogP 00:39, 16 May 2008 (EDT)

...and he believes that his article is poised to "become a pitbull that helps gobble up the dead corpse of atheism on the internet." Right after that, Kenny will be proclaimed King of the Galaxy.--WJThomas 09:02, 16 May 2008 (EDT)

No, it's emperor of the galaxy, silly. Or didn't you watch Star Wars? -- Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 11:52, 16 May 2008 (EDT)

Not WIGO-worthy, but still amusing

I was just looking at Ed Poor's user blocks, and smiling at the serial hypocrisy they represent. After viewing a page of these, I wondered if you can identify a CP Sysop just by the reasons they used in their last 20 blocks. (Oh yeah? I can name him in 10! Okay, name that Sysop!) --SpinyNorman 21:37, 15 May 2008 (EDT)

I think Ed, Kara, and maybe CrocoDean are fairly easy to spot once you've watched them for a few days. The others are somewhat harder because they block fewer people (subjective gut feeling, also excludes the obvious wandal blocks since those tend to have no or just generic block reasons). But the moment I see things like "bigoted and racist troll" or "MYOB" in a block summary, I'm quite sure who is responsible. --Sid 21:57, 15 May 2008 (EDT)

Here's a few Lulz for you as well.... I guess Ken would be the one to know about fools covering their ignorance with certain words... and bonus points for using the term Evolutionary Fairy... HI KEN, You're a DICK SirChuckB^{Penguin Knight, First Class} 22:40, 15 May 2008 (EDT)

@ssShoes and Clinton

I am quite curious as to why Aschlafly is so concerned about the media bullying Clinton? Is it because he knows Obama would beat McCain? Ace McWicked 23:03, 15 May 2008 (EDT)

Operation Chaos much? Lyra (dust) 23:14, 15 May 2008 (EDT)

hmmmm good point. Still, Aschalfy is taking a strange angle. But then again, he is a strange man. Ace McWicked 23:19, 15 May 2008 (EDT)

I suspect it's just because Andy doesn't like Obama, and/or it's another peg to hang his Obama/affirmative-action hat on ("Obama would have lost if Hillary hadn't been bullied into dropping out").--WJThomas 08:53, 16 May 2008 (EDT)

If you think about their lives, with an emphasis on college, you an get an idea about why that would be… --Linus^{(plot evil tech)} 10:10, 16 May 2008 (EDT)

So, just what inspired Ed Porn to experiment with deleting the Barack Obama page? Genghis^{Our ignorance is God; what we know is science.} 13:02, 16 May 2008 (EDT)

By insisting that every accomplishment Obama has achieved in his life is due to "affirmative action", the Assfly has demonstrated that he is a true racist. It is no wonder he'd prefer Clinton. Rational Ed^think! 13:57, 16 May 2008 (EDT)

I don't really think Andy is racist as much as he's just taking advantage of whatever cheap shot he can to discredit his liberal adversaries, he usually comes out as a fool but in this case he also comes out as racist. NightFlare^{Speak, mortal} 22:37, 17 May 2008 (EDT)

Ides Of March??

Does anyone know what this is about??

Attention - I am a conservative user of both Ration-alWiki and Conservapedia. You all know me but I must hide my identity by using Tor. Anyways, have you been watching RW lately? I have every reason to believe their Ides project is serious. You MUST leave your database locked for all of tomorrow. TRUST ME. And pray.-BewareTheIdes 00:56, 16 May 2008 (EDT)

From the main talk page by a user apparently called Beware The Ides. Is it just someone trying to sow seeds of paranoia? I would imagine they would find Conservapedia to be fertile ground... RedDog 02:33, 16 May 2008 (EDT)

I've no idea, but he removed it dismissing it all together (edit summary says "bye chicken little"). It's an obvious paranoia ploy to shut CP down for a day, basically saying "RationalWiki wins" by falling for it, regardless of any plot or not.

Then again, Kenny seems a bit OVER THE TOP (LOL) at lesbians. Someone should point out HE is just as obsessed as those evil liberals are! Norseman^Wassail! 09:09, 16 May 2008 (EDT)

"it wouldn't surprise me if [lesbians] sometimes smoked big cigars like men folk sometimes do"[4]. Is it me, or does anyone else sense a tinge of envy here? Charles SubLunar ^(mr) 09:18, 16 May 2008 (EDT)

Heh. That is truly a concatenation of supposition upon supposition! (if...if...if...)   ^Contribs_Talk 09:36, 16 May 2008 (EDT)

It's a long time until the ides of March. May, however... Sterile^xx 11:32, 16 May 2008 (EDT)

...was yesterday. Yawn. PFoster 11:34, 16 May 2008 (EDT)

California approved same-sex marriage. Conservapedia adopted a new orphan, Kendoll's "article of the year". Not a bad start ;) PS, if "ides" is Roman for "fifteenth", why does it start off with "49"? human 12:47, 16 May 2008 (EDT)

The Ides of May wasn't meant to be taken literally, it was a reference to Ken's Ides of March, but really refers to NotBK and RW's birth, which happens to be a bit after the Ides. As Andy might say, only a liberal would take these things so literally. Genghis^{Our ignorance is God; what we know is science.} 13:06, 16 May 2008 (EDT)

I still have no idea what "NotBK" is. -- Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 13:07, 16 May 2008 (EDT)

"Night of the blunt knives" Genghis^{Our ignorance is God; what we know is science.} 13:10, 16 May 2008 (EDT)

This user was purged in the Night of the Blunt Knives.

"Nightwatchmen of the Burger King" --Edgerunner⁷⁶_{Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?} 13:14, 16 May 2008 (EDT)

I thought it meant something like "Not of the Burger King". -- Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 13:23, 16 May 2008 (EDT)

Not British Knight. Not too bright, either ;) human 14:00, 16 May 2008 (EDT)

Mommy Schlafly booed in St. Louis

RationalWikians in an academic setting

Washington University gave an honorary degree to Mamma S. The students reacted in a predictable manner. http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/stories.nsf/education/story/A02BA1C6B3FED3C186257449000D9AF4?OpenDocument

It's times like this that you can really understand why people might believe in Heaven and Hell. If Hell existed, it would be quite reassuring to know that one day soon she'll be there. Sadly, she, like us all, has only oblivion to look forward to. --Edgerunner⁷⁶_{Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?} 10:07, 16 May 2008 (EDT)

Reading her crazy comments it is apparent that the apple doesn't fall far from the tree. ^{Exasperate me!}Sheesh!_{Not the most impressive contributor here} 12:06, 16 May 2008 (EDT)

Rotten to the core! Genghis^{Our ignorance is God; what we know is science.} 13:13, 16 May 2008 (EDT)

Hey now... Phyllis #2 doesn't seem to have turned out that badly... Uchiha^KATON! 13:44, 16 May 2008 (EDT)

You know, we've all known about her hypocrisy for years (making a successful career out of telling women to not have a career) but this really shows it. She and her spawn talk about professor values, about how no non-christians schools are worth anything, about how only Liberals care about counting degrees, etc... But she still gladly accepts her honorary degree. Not to mention, the article talks about how she worked in an ammo plant... sounds like a male job to me... maybe Phyl is a closet Lesbian... but if so, she'd probably be obese and smoke cigars huh... SirChuckB^{Penguin Knight, First Class} 14:45, 16 May 2008 (EDT)

This annoys me more than anything else ever to take place on Conservapedia. Andy could not pile on enough about college, universities and professors, telling everyone how immoral they are and yet his mommy recieves an award from them. If she and her family are so above this amoral world don't accept honourary degrees. 3.14159 05:48, 17 May 2008 (EDT)

That family stinks. Proxima Centauri 08:48, 17 May 2008 (EDT)

Naw. Only when it comes to work and defending their beliefs. Sure, they overstep bounds a few times, but (not brainwashed) I overstep my bounds in other things too--mainly for what Society thinks is "bad". That's probably why I hate society and what still makes me a "liberal".

Also, Grandma Phyllis was on CNN last night talking about the protest and stuff. -_- Fuzzy|AfD 11:00, 17 May 2008 (EDT)

This might be a silly question, but are those really RationalWikians? <font=""; face="Comic Sans MS">Jellyfish!^{Holy Roman empire} 12:54, 17 May 2008 (EDT)

They might be. Who knows? Actually this was just meant to parody CP's pictures that Andy posts (usually without any explanation), of politically "significant" protests, debates etc. where Conservapedians are involved. It does lose something when I have to explain it though. Genghis^{Our ignorance is God; what we know is science.} 13:56, 17 May 2008 (EDT)

I thought that was it. But I wanted them to be RatWives. <font=""; face="Comic Sans MS">Jellyfish!^{Holy Roman empire} 13:59, 17 May 2008 (EDT)

They are. Ed Poor is 2nd from the left. Fox 14:06, 17 May 2008 (EDT)

Isn't :P <font=""; face="Comic Sans MS">Jellyfish!^{Holy Roman empire} 14:11, 17 May 2008 (EDT)

I captioned them at the image page ;) human 17:41, 17 May 2008 (EDT)

You sir, have too much time on your hands. If you're really feeling that bored, you should help flesh out "my" Clogosphere article. It's puntastic. <font=""; face="Comic Sans MS">Jellyfish!^{Holy Roman empire} 17:47, 17 May 2008 (EDT)

"Dr." Schlafly

I find it interesting that the "Dr" is scare-quoted in the broken news item, but used with no sense of shame whatsoever in the photo caption there and in her article. No, an honorary degree mot certainly does not make one a "Dr". Sheesh! human 17:34, 17 May 2008 (EDT)

It's scarier with the accent on the second syllable, doc-`tor. CЯacke® 18:06, 17 May 2008 (EDT)

The people have spoken. <font=""; face="Comic Sans MS">Jellyfish!^{Holy Roman empire} 18:57, 17 May 2008 (EDT)

You don't fool us with that Liberal Nonsense. Liberals have nothing better to do than sit at their computers and intentionally disrupt polls, something Conservatives would never do ::coughoperationchaoscough:: Anyone with an open mind, free of Liberal Bias can clearly see that "Dr" Schlafly is an important American thinker who braved the trials of Liberal Media and succeeded against the Feminist's wishes. Godspeed SirChuckB^{Penguin Knight, First Class} 21:58, 18 May 2008 (EDT) I guess I can do a good Andy, you just have talk out of your Ass because your mouth knows better

Ken's Atheism Article

Do we need a separate WIGO for Ken's Atheism Article on its own? - Should produce much hilarity in the future.   ^Contribs_Talk 09:33, 16 May 2008 (EDT)

Do you think that Ken is really as much a closeted atheist as he is a closet homosexual? He really seems to be trying to convince himself that he believes in religious hogwash more than convert others. --Edgerunner⁷⁶_{Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?} 10:14, 16 May 2008 (EDT)

The two do correlate to some degree, the "reasoning":"I am a boy man with same-sex attraction "issues", contemporary medical/psychological science says this is natural and normal for me, but I reject that as I do not wish to be a hell-bound, disease-ridden, social-pariah so I will turn to the only outlet for "healing" this "choice" that the devil, (obviously the devil, since it cannot be from me that these desires are stemming), JEBUS!!!

Now, I could be like those poor souls in Exodus International...struggling for years upon years with these desires or I can proclaim (to myself, no-one else need know), that dear, sweet JEBUS has "healed" me from this "choice". I will show JEBUS how much I appreciate this healing by being the most batshit insane JEBUSITE I can. Believing the Bible Word-for-Word thereby keeping God in the box the Bible itself has built to house Him.

CЯacke® 11:40, 16 May 2008 (EDT)

As you can see...

From the block logs, Kektk blocked himself again. =_= Fuzzy|AfD 10:08, 16 May 2008 (EDT)

Irish? Gaelic? I fixed your face. LAWL =_= Norseman^Wassail! 15:56, 16 May 2008 (EDT)

Heh, I couldn't figure out what you meant last night, but now I know what you're asking. The words after vacation are, because of the geek I am, Al Bhed. +_+ Fuzzy|AfD 10:55, 17 May 2008 (EDT)

Ides

You could have picked something less.... conspicuous, don't you think? Goat? Lyra (dust) 13:19, 16 May 2008 (EDT)

We have an article on it - Conservapedia:Great Purge. Genghis^{Our ignorance is God; what we know is science.} 13:27, 16 May 2008 (EDT)

I have a feeling it doesn't stop there. Lyra (dust) 13:26, 16 May 2008 (EDT)

No really, was that you? Lyra (dust) 14:22, 16 May 2008 (EDT)

Was I not supposed to notice that cp:Goat gains 25 views a second? Lyra (qed) 18:20, 16 May 2008 (EDT)

Could someone please tell me what this "Ides Of March" thing is about before I start sacrificing friends and family to Heidrun out of insanity? Thanks. 213.94.179.100 14:51, 17 May 2008 (EDT)

Ed's Racism

Here

Hang on a sec. Isn't it true that there are studies (however discredited) that show that black Americans have an average IQ lower than white Americans? And isn't what Ed is saying a bona fide attempt at undermining the claim that it has anything to do with natural "born" intelligence but everything to do with socio-economic factors? Much like criminality rates? "There is no evidence that Asians and whites are inherently smarter than Hispanics and Blacks." OK, so his language isn't exactly PC, but I don't think this is an example of Ed's racism. And yes, the rest of that missive is baloney. Ajkgordon 04:38, 17 May 2008 (EDT)

It is his second paragraph that seems racist to me,

"Intelligence, first of all has multiple aspects. Academic achievement, as well as reasoning ability in general, is affected by emotional factors such as confidence, pride, being well-regarded by others, etc. Some social groups provide more of this than others, in addition to other things such as parents requiring children to do all homework before turning on a TV, paying for tutors, etc."

Ed Poor essentially says the "Hispanics and Blacks" don't distill confidence and pride and don't require much of there children. This is rubbish. 3.14159 05:42, 17 May 2008 (EDT)

Sadly, there is a vocal minority of conservatives who spout racist crap and then excuse it by saying they're 'just not politically correct.' I've noticed it's gotten a lot uglier since Obama became so popular. Mr. Schlafly can't accept the fact that a poor mixed race man made good, and chalks everything up to affirmative action (as opposed to the self made man Geo. Bush is). Sadly, a lot of it translates to 'I just don't want a nigger to be president.'Czolgolz 09:12, 17 May 2008 (EDT)

On Political Correctness: This hasn't been called out enough and perhaps it is obvious to most of us but I'd like to point out that the term political correctness and its varients has currency almost exclusively with the right. 25 or so years ago it was, for a brief and shining moment, a live idea that meant something like: don't say things at work or in the public sphere that are blatently offensive to a particular group e.g. don't tell your secretary she has a nice ass. Don't ask your black colleague how much he likes fried chicken, don't mock your english-as-a-second-language colleagues with 'funny impressions' of them. This all seems pretty obvious to me now; we should not simply blurt out every nasty thing that pops into our heads. But at the time there weren't many institutional checks and balances to address the common problem of offensive jerks making the workplace miserable for others. This isn't oppression or the thought police. This is common sense applied to instutional settings. The right has taken this perfectedly reasonable idea, don't be blithely offensive, to its ridiculous extreme and then used its inverse, "I'm just not politically correct' to justify this resurgence ( reemergence in the public sphere) of racism and sexism disguised as virtue and love of god. /tangent over. ^{Exasperate me!}Sheesh!_{Not the most impressive contributor here} 10:15, 17 May 2008 (EDT)

This is all something the late political blogger, Steve Gilliard, used to talk about a lot, being black himself. As soon as you get a black candidate even for VP, let alone president, the strong undercurrent of racism and intolerance in the Republican coalition is going to start bursting at the seams, possibly coming into full daylight. The racism, sexism and general screaming intolerance of others has been barely held in check, putting a candidate like Obama out is practically taunting them, and this is hardly a demographic known for restraint. One of his successors, Lower Manhattanite, also black, has already brought up the idea that by virtue of race alone, Obama is at a much higher risk than people like Bush or Clinton for assassination attempts, and you can be sure the Secret Service is all too aware of it. This is gonna be an interesting year. --Kels 10:22, 17 May 2008 (EDT)

Kels, I agree with what you've wrote but am a bit uncomfortable with the truism that a black president is automatically gonna have Andy, Karajerk, and Ed Poor et al weapon-of-gunning for him/her. I suspect this is also used as a scare tactic to disuade undesirables from positions of power and to move some of the great unwashed margins away from voting for them or at all). To the larger point, I do think the current political environment in America is going to give an opportunity for bigots of all stripes to rationalize their sickness and then crow about it to their fellows. 2lazy2log-in -Sheesh!

You know what, I hope to hell I'm wrong. Or rather, that the person who I was referring to is wrong. But the fact is, when he gets up in front of those big rallys, there's gonna be that fear, that "when's it gonna come"? After all, you've got a Conservative news media (Coulter, Limbaugh, O'Felafel, Savage, etc.) who have spent the past thirty years teaching folks not to hold in their hatred, it's a very emotionally charged situation. The chances that someone's gonna pop when the nomination is someone visibly different aren't that small. But again, the SS knows all this, so there's gonna be a lot of work for them behind the scenes in the next year. And hopefully the next four after that. --Kels 14:37, 17 May 2008 (EDT)

I may be garbling this, but apparently in the lest day or two some guy was giving a speech to some NRA-types and made a sort of "joke" along those lines. To the NRA-types' credit, there was no real laughter at it. Better info on this I should find for youse all. human 15:33, 17 May 2008 (EDT)

Looks like it was the always-hilarious Mike Huckabee. And it looks like my comments re: Secret Service were pretty much on the money, even though I hadn't checked. Depressing, that. --Kels 19:24, 17 May 2008 (EDT)

(UnDENT) If Obama wins the nomination but does not win the presidency, does anyone else but me think that this will speak to the racism not of the Republican Right, but the racism of the of the Democratic Left--in that it would show that Democrat supporters will have switched their votes to the white guy from the party they would have normally have supported. I say this pretty often around here, but it bears repeating - Liberal/Democrat ==/== not racist. Racism is built into the foundations of Euro-American society and appears in all politics in one form or another. PFoster 14:52, 17 May 2008 (EDT)

Absolutely right, there are Lib/Dem racists. But that side of the aisle hasn't had a deliberate strategy and noise machine to cultivate them. More often than not, the left is willfully blind to it, but they haven't been openly and actively courting the racists, the God-botherers and other less than sociable types. However, it's absolutely certain that Obama would pick a white candidate as his running mate, which would provide a figleaf of sorts for those who don't want to vote for a black man. --Kels 14:58, 17 May 2008 (EDT)

Actually, Obama has an overwhelming support base of liberals, much more than McCain (obviously) or Clinton. But you have to acknowledge that race is a factor, which is why there's pressure on McCain to pick Condi Rice as his running-mate. Lyra (semper) 15:01, 17 May 2008 (EDT)

Absolutely right, there are Lib/Dem racists. But that side of the aisle hasn't had a deliberate strategy and noise machine to cultivate them. You don't think so? Obama: "So, former President Clinton dismissed my victory in South Carolina as being similar to Jesse Jackson..." And Bill boasting about his office in Harlem as giving him black street cred? Calculated. PFoster 15:09, 17 May 2008 (EDT)

I'm not disagreeing, I'm saying that most liberals are not racist in the classic way. Democrats can be, however, vis-a-vis such characters as Bill Clinton. But Republicans such as Strom Thurmond are much more racist. The GOP doesn't have a monopoly on bigots, however, look at Hillary Clinton! Lyra (semper) 15:16, 17 May 2008 (EDT)

I have to disagree with you, holder of the Golden Compass... I think Bill and Hillary Clinton have done more for black people in America than an president since the 70's. Now, I'll concede that they could have done more, but in terms of truly caring about and helping people, they've done great. I also agree with Kels and Foster. This country doesn't deal with our racial problems, we all sweep them under the rug and pretend they don't exist. So when something like Michael Richards, Don Imus, Rev. Wright, etc pops up. We feign surprise and indignation, swear to change our ways and let it go a few days later like it never happened.

You misunderstand me. I meant (by "vis-a-vis") that Bill had tried to appeal to bigots, not that he himself was one. And we're in modern times. Racists have no place in Murka except perhaps M*t*p*dia. Lyra (suspected Lilliputian) 23:26, 18 May 2008 (EDT)

(unindent) Ah, I understand now, and apologize for the misunderstanding. I agree with you 100%. But until this country steps up and really deals with our not so hidden race problems, we're not going to get any better. The worst part is that people like those who found Conservative Wikis hide their racism under terms like old fashioned morals and conservative stances. Not saying that all conservatives are Racists, because I know that's not it. But they allowed the bigots to inflitrate and it gives them all a bad name SirChuckB^{Penguin Knight, First Class} 23:54, 18 May 2008 (EDT)

As it's mine

I guess I ought to defend my reasons for pointing out Ed Poor's selective racism. We know he's a Unification church goer and supporter, perhaps he even ascribes divinity to Rev Moon, so his isn't the knee jerk, "if it's white, it's alright" Metapedia type racism. No. And I don't think he himself would think himself as racist, still...
Here's a link to WP's page titled Race and intelligence, guess who made the first few edits? So Eddy's been thinking about this for a while.

The curse

Ajkgordon will likely know, as will some of the rest of yinz, that a son of Noah, Named "Ham" (as if that wasn't bad enough punishment) was cursed by his father and this Biblical dysfunctionality was (supposedly) passed down through all the begetting that went on to the present day and even a BIG (yet not quite "mainline") church, namely, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, had, until fairly recently (like the late fifties---early sixties), a "doctrine" that said those people of today who were "colored", were colored as part of the package of curses that had been passed down the generations. The LDS has since repudiated that doctrine...but the doctrine didn't arise out of The Prophet's mind but out of the "need" to have a reason why white folk could look down on people of color and still consider themselves good, loving people, "I would love to have a black son-in-law, but then my grandchil'ren would be cursed and I won't have that."

I think what bothered me about Ed's post (which he was using as an example of how not to use critical thinking, or the misuse of it), was that he started off discounting that race is a primary factor for lower IQ scores and then

“”Intelligence, first of all has multiple aspects. Academic achievement, as well as reasoning ability in general, is affected by emotional factors such as confidence, pride, being well-regarded by others, etc. Some social groups provide more of this than others, in addition to other things such as parents requiring children to do all homework before turning on a TV, paying for tutors, etc.

In tackling the straw man he had set up in his opening, he came out with the above gem of "Their parents don't raise them right because they don't know any better."

It bothers me because he had to rationalize, to think and to reason his way from, "It's not because they black that they're dumb, it's because they're dumb and cannot raise and support their children the "right" way. CЯacke® 18:58, 17 May 2008 (EDT)

Yes, I know what you mean, but Ed's comments here, detached from other racist stuff that he may have posted elsewhere, quite clearly detach IQ results from inherent intelligence and blame social effects for American blacks' apparent lower IQ scores. This is the same argument that many use for explaining the much higher level of criminal incarceration among US blacks than whites - that it is born from a social phenomenon rather than anything inherent.

TBH, I feel you might be misinterpreting a rare moment of Ed sanity. Ajkgordon 17:13, 18 May 2008 (EDT)

Fair enough, I'll comment it out. CЯacke®

Then again...see the WIGO that begins "Well, Eddie, I guess your memory is a good source..." Of course he could be taking the piss on RW here just too see if'n we jump. CЯacke® 22:31, 18 May 2008 (EDT)

JM & Fair Use

Does somebody feel like socking up and whispering gently in Joaquin's ear that simply quoting the website you stole your pictures [5] from doesn't constitute "fair use". Especially,when the site in question has "All rights reserved. All images are protected by copyright laws and may only be used by written permission." [6] at the bottom of the friggin PAGE. Alternatively, somebody feel like dropping the gallery a note, letting them know?

And he ignores this fairly detailed copyright info for this image. I supposed they'll bleat that they're an educational institution, but I see no mention of "all copies must include any copyright notice originally included with the Material."

Update: Don't worry, just mailed the gallery myself. I don't suppose anybody knows schalfy's e-mail address do they? Think I should mail the Field Museum too? --Psygremlin_Whut? 08:20, 17 May 2008 (EDT)

The Main Page should have a link close to the bottom about DMCA/copyright stuff. *checks* Here it is, along with the instant "We can claim fair use for practically anything" excuse. --Sid 08:30, 17 May 2008 (EDT)

Ferpect! Thanks Sid, info duly forwarded to gallery. --Psygremlin_Whut? 09:01, 17 May 2008 (EDT)

Surely by now this topic deserves it's own article, or at least a major section on JM's article about "JM and the Art World" or some such? human 15:35, 17 May 2008 (EDT)

From what I saw, his "articles" would be excellent fodder for the "Blatant Plagiarism" section. Most of his stuff seems to be either copy-pasted or minimally rephrased. --Sid 20:19, 17 May 2008 (EDT)

What I find funniest is that he barely figleafs the fact that he's copying everything without permission, but overreacts like a drama queen the moment anyone even questions it. I suspect TK's teachings play a role, since this really started to crop up when the two of them were ganging up on PJR. --Kels 10:12, 18 May 2008 (EDT)

cp:Liberal values

How do you like that? Lyra (maelstrom) 13:28, 17 May 2008 (EDT)

It took me a bit of rooting around to see what you mean. Nice job :) I bet Assfly takes it over pretty soon -- it needs more grammatical inconsistency and jarring first-person references. <font=""; face="Comic Sans MS">Jellyfish!^{Holy Roman empire} 13:32, 17 May 2008 (EDT)

It's an opposite clone of cp:Conservative values, but that part about the Seven Deadly Sins is my own. Lyra (maelstrom) 14:00, 17 May 2008 (EDT)

You also know how to use capital letters. DLerner has missed the context and nommed it for deletion, though. Ouch. <font=""; face="Comic Sans MS">Jellyfish!^{Holy Roman empire} 14:01, 17 May 2008 (EDT)

What did I miss DLerner 14:17, 17 May 2008 (EDT)

It's parody. We "win" if it stays. <font=""; face="Comic Sans MS">Jellyfish!^{Holy Roman empire} 14:22, 17 May 2008 (EDT)

Blocked for TWO HOURS for "parody?" TWO HOURS? Lyra (semper) 14:24, 17 May 2008 (EDT)

Funny, I think you deserved at least a few days. ^{— Unsigned, by: Elassint / talk / contribs}

Right... I better explain Poe's Law to him when it expires... Lyra (semper) 14:27, 17 May 2008 (EDT)

Ruh-roh, the page is gone already.--SpinyNorman 14:28, 17 May 2008 (EDT)

I am going to speak to him about this. mark my words. Lyra (semper) 14:29, 17 May 2008 (EDT)

Sorry guys

http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=delete&user=Aschlafly&page=Goat. Lyra (semper) 14:45, 17 May 2008 (EDT)

It had over 850,000 though at tod. Lyra (semper) 14:46, 17 May 2008 (EDT)

I actually just noticed this looking to see if the page had been recreated...but why do they have an article on The Pet Goat and, more importantly, why does said article have almost no information about the damn book? Holly Shit man SirChuckB^{Penguin Knight, First Class} 15:00, 17 May 2008 (EDT)

This was the "Ides" plan, Chuck! Goat had over 850,000 views when Schalfy leaned down from his cloud and struck it down with lightning. Right after he blocked me, coincidentally. Lyra (semper) 15:04, 17 May 2008 (EDT)

Happy birthday guys, I was monitoring this. Poison Ivy 15:37, 17 May 2008 (EDT)

Ah, cool, it did break a million then! I got a screencap at about 911k, which I thought was cool. Too bad there's no timestamp on the image we have :( (whine). Thanks for getting the million-mark capture! (PS, the pet goat isn't a book, it's a story in a book) human 15:41, 17 May 2008 (EDT)

OK it looks like Andy has given the goat CPR. Genghis^{Our ignorance is God; what we know is science.} 15:55, 17 May 2008 (EDT)

They're just friends! That's all! --Kels 16:16, 17 May 2008 (EDT)

I have been amused. :) Uchiha^KATON! 19:20, 17 May 2008 (EDT)

'Moronic pageviews'? What? Most of their pageviews are probably from people laughing at them. So why punish the 'goat' article? -Judas Reward 05:42, 18 May 2008 (EDT)

Free(?) dinner

Subsection 0 edit button

Anyone near northern New Jersey that fancies going to the Censorvapedia dinner event? It might be lulzworthy. Unfortunately I'll be at the opposite end of the country in Alabama on that day. Genghis^{Our ignorance is God; what we know is science.} 17:19, 17 May 2008 (EDT)

Bring your own plate and silverware! --Kels 18:36, 17 May 2008 (EDT)

Gawd, I'd love to sneak in. 200 attendees??? Teh Awerd will be awerded, too! What a bash. human 19:22, 17 May 2008 (EDT)

Presumably awarded in absentia. Unless it's to Phyllis the Elder. --Kels 19:40, 17 May 2008 (EDT)

If the award was to "mommy dearest", wouldn't it be hoot if there was an RW protest about it outside? Genghis^{Our ignorance is God; what we know is science.} 20:09, 17 May 2008 (EDT)

Roast goat do you think? Genghis^{Our ignorance is God; what we know is science.} 19:35, 17 May 2008 (EDT)

I don't know if it got burnt yesterday but it sure was HOT. CЯacke® 19:38, 17 May 2008 (EDT)

200 attendees? What the fuck is Andy smoking? Are they all supposed to be Conservapedians? Who's going to break it to Andy that there are nowhere near that many involved with his blog? 20 would be a huge stretch. I want to go just so I can see him hand out a few awards no one cares about to an audience of 5 in a room set for hundreds. I might almost feel bad for the guy. DickTurpis 02:09, 18 May 2008 (EDT)

Well, he didn't say all the attendees would be Conservapedians, it could be 4 Conservapedians with 49 guests each, most of which have never heard of CP.

I'm figuring it'll be Andy, Phyllis, Ed Poor, Ken/Conservative, and 196 of Ken's relatives to be on hand when he received the Article of the Year award. --SpinyNorman 11:19, 18 May 2008 (EDT)

I assume you mean little Phy and not mommy whe you say Phyllis. Because as Andy says, "Dr." Schlafly is not associated with CP, and if you don't believe that then you believe Hillary Clinton's right wing conspiracy. Liberal! Of course we could also expect the invisible College Republican to show up if he wants pocket money for next year without having to work in MacDonalds. 209.59.62.112 14:37, 18 May 2008 (EDT)

Tickets are $15. If you're a homeschooler and you sell 2 tickets, the 3rd is free of charge. I think Mr. Schlafly's class had 20 some kids, include the parents, ya have at least 50 attendees from one source. +_+ Fuzzy|AfD 14:55, 18 May 2008 (EDT)

$15?! That's like, almost three king-sized whopper value meals! I'd better get some lobster for $15... yes I'm a tightass. Hope it's a buffet +_+! Nomnomnom Norseman^Wassail! 15:03, 18 May 2008 (EDT)

Will the menu be kosher? Vegan-friendly? PFoster 15:05, 18 May 2008 (EDT)

Halal? (snigger)   ^Contribs_Talk 15:07, 18 May 2008 (EDT)

Good point, Kettle o'Fuzzy Caterpillars. If Andy can rope in the "Class of 57" (or however many), two or three parents of each, and perhaps another sibling or friend, that hits 200 pretty quickly. I hope he hired an accountant to keep track of expenses and income on this one, he could get in trouble... human 15:26, 18 May 2008 (EDT)

He has hired some of his students because he has been "swarmed with new clients recently". I do not know about the menu. The room it is in is huge. There were arguments (debates) about music and possibly dancing, but they have to consult the other possible attendees to see what they would prefer. I think some of Andy's clients' families are attending too. +_+ Fuzzy|AfD 16:24, 18 May 2008 (EDT)

Dancing!? There'll be no dancing in my town!! --Kels 16:51, 18 May 2008 (EDT)

The dancing part was debated, then tabled for later input. The girls were all for it, and all the guys were against it; Mr. Schlafly is going to ask what the other expected attendees would prefer. +_+ Fuzzy|AfD 17:13, 18 May 2008 (EDT)

What kind of guy is against dancing? --Linus^{(plot evil tech)} 17:43, 18 May 2008 (EDT)

And you need chaperones, obviously. :) <font=""; face="Comic Sans MS">Jellyfish!^{Holy Roman empire} 16:27, 18 May 2008 (EDT)

I thought a CP bureaucrat would be enough. And not many homeschoolers are the kind to engage in such behaviour... the "cool" homeschoolers probably won't show up to this dinner anyway.

I also forgot, there will be speakers! One of which is a "prominent" conservative homeschooler! +_+ Fuzzy|AfD 16:40, 18 May 2008 (EDT)

And lo, I did create an edit button

Define "prominent." PFoster 16:44, 18 May 2008 (EDT)

(Stop edit conflicting me!) The cool homeschoolers know it isn't rad, ya turkey. I like the bureaucrat idea, though. "You kids keep it down or I'll desysop you, y'hear!" <font=""; face="Comic Sans MS">Jellyfish!^{Holy Roman empire} 16:46, 18 May 2008 (EDT)

I don't know what "prominent" means, it's just something I overheard while the class was talking about the dinner on Mr. Schlafly's last day for the writing class.those kids sure can cook+_+ Fuzzy|AfD 16:52, 18 May 2008 (EDT)

I'm so going. I'll hop NJT from work :-)-66.108.90.86 16:53, 18 May 2008 (EDT)

Even if his homskoolerz and their parents show, I really can't see it reaching 200. How many students does Andy actually have in his pitiful excuses for classes? I'm sure his figures are all exaggerations. In any case, his delusion that people are going to fly to Jersey for his sad little dinner is pretty amusing. I'll give you a few students and a few parents, and maybe some locals like Ed "Glorpus" Poor (he's a New Yorker, no?), but no one is going to fly in for this. I, however, have half a mind to go. I'm just hours away, and I'm always looking for an excuse take a weekend in NYC. Hopefully he's not to far from there. I'll have to keep watch for the details. DickTurpis 17:06, 18 May 2008 (EDT)

You probably need a trusted CP account to get in. <font=""; face="Comic Sans MS">Jellyfish!^{Holy Roman empire} 17:09, 18 May 2008 (EDT)

He has had other classes, so all the alums from those classes are also invited. +_+ Fuzzy|AfD 17:13, 18 May 2008 (EDT)

Do you think I could sneak in if I said something like "Don't you remember me? You taught me to love the world!"...? <font=""; face="Comic Sans MS">Jellyfish!^{Holy Roman empire} 17:15, 18 May 2008 (EDT)

You still have to buy a ticket in advance though. I don't know how outside people will buy tickets... hmm. Perhaps I should sell tickets (if Andy doesn't mind me doing so). +_+ Fuzzy|AfD 17:24, 18 May 2008 (EDT)

And how do you expect a jellyfish to hold a ticket?? Bad kettleick. <font=""; face="Comic Sans MS">Jellyfish!^{Holy Roman empire} 17:28, 18 May 2008 (EDT)

I wonder if it might have something to do with this? The only thing that doesn't match is the date, but I don't imagine Andy's beyond lying to keep the riff-raff out. I doubt it's a CP event at all, really, but an event he and some others (probably the homskullarz who are nominally members) would be attending anyway, just like all the other events he's mentioned in the past. --Kels 17:26, 18 May 2008 (EDT)

Excellent detective work, Kels!!PFoster 17:28, 18 May 2008 (EDT)

Google, she is mah biach! --Kels 17:29, 18 May 2008 (EDT)

June 5th is the same date he told the whole class this past Thursday. I do not think he would email each student to say, "Hey, that was a cover-up date, this is the real thing..." +_+ Fuzzy|AfD 17:33, 18 May 2008 (EDT)

IS THERE NO DEPTH TO THE MAN'S EVIL!! --Kels 17:41, 18 May 2008 (EDT)

I believe you mean "IS THERE NO END TO THE DEPTH OF THE MAN'S EVIL!!". Unless you're suggesting that his evil is two-dimensional, of course, although if your measurements are from a certain perspective, that would also be invalid, so, extending the same observation to one-dimensional object, I believe that… Sorry. --Linus^{(plot evil tech)} 17:49, 18 May 2008 (EDT)

Pedant. =P --Kels 17:53, 18 May 2008 (EDT)

He has as much evil as you do. +_+ Fuzzy|AfD 17:43, 18 May 2008 (EDT)

That much? O.O --Kels 17:46, 18 May 2008 (EDT)

unindent

Was it me or did I see somewhere, someone using the phrase "cool homeschoolers" without a trace of sarcasm? CЯacke® 22:42, 18 May 2008 (EDT)

Yep, that was me... but that's to be expected, correct? +_+ Clone 11:28, 19 May 2008 (EDT)

Another legal threat from Aschlafly

He blocked Liberalpig for this... not really WIGO worthy but a laugh... Lyra (suspected Lilliputian) 20:04, 17 May 2008 (EDT)

In related news, in Schlafly law, accessing a computer network "with the permission of the owner" is a crime. PFoster 22:05, 17 May 2008 (EDT)

Wow, the idiot has not fixed his typo yet, either... human 22:32, 17 May 2008 (EDT)

At least Kendoll spends 12 edits fixing his crap after the first "draft". Andy takes years. Both morons, in different (indifferent?) ways. human 22:40, 17 May 2008 (EDT)

Note to gentlemen and idiots at "another site"

Please add a "references" section and <references/> tag to Manchester United F.C., you morons. human 00:33, 18 May 2008 (EDT)

Thanks Lyra. Teh Assfly actually saved this "improvement" ("explained further"): "Marcus Borden, for defending prayer with as a public high school football coach; atheists succeeded in eventually prohibiting from even from bowing his head."[7] Andy, lay off the jui-jui-jui-juice, eh? human 01:48, 18 May 2008 (EDT)