Conservapedia talk:What is going on at CP?/Archive94

This is an archive page, last updated 30 March 2009. Please do not make edits to this page.

Archives for this talk page:

<1>, <2>, <3>, <4>, <5>, <6>, <7>, <8>, <9>, <10>, <11>, <12>, <13>, <14>, <15>, <16>, <17>, <18>, <19>, <20>, <21>, <22>, <23>, <24>, <25>, <26>, <27>, <28>, <29>, <30>, <31>, <32>, <33>, <34>, <35>, <36>, <37>, <38>, <39>, <40>, <41>, <42>, <43>, <44>, <45>, <46>, <47>, <48>, <49>, <50>, <51>, <52>, <53>, <54>, <55>, <56>, <57>, <58>, <59>, <60>, <61>, <62>, <63>, <64>, <65>, <66>, <67>, <68>, <69>, <70>, <71>, <72>, <73>, <74>, <75>, <76>, <77>, <78>, <79>, <80>, <81>, <82>, <83>, <84>, <85>, <86>, <87>, <88>, <89>, <90>, <91>, <92>, <93>, <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)

It's not their fault but ...

... would you want to kiss someone called Claudaniel? Not surprising he'd reached the age of thirty without a snog with that name for a handicap. _and marmite 01:10, 30 November 2008 (EST)

On the other hand, 'Melody LaLuz' is a porn star name if ever there was one. Fretfulporpentine 06:40, 30 November 2008 (EST)

The whole "no kiss 'til marriage" thing is just sad. It's not something to be proud of. Why would you NOT want to know your physical compatability with your partner, until you're married?-caius (tinker) 01:32, 30 November 2008 (EST)

Not forgetting "never been in the same house alone together", At 28 & 30!!! -shows a distinct lack of trust to me. _and marmite 01:36, 30 November 2008 (EST)

It's also a recipe for divorce - or, rather, loveless, sexless marriages. Then again, that might be precisely the point.-caius (tinker) 01:42, 30 November 2008 (EST)

<shudder> All kinds of fucked up, that story is. --Yossie^{Spring in Fialta} 03:44, 30 November 2008 (EST)

Those who read about the fucked up marriage where they didn't get around to kissing before they were married aslo want to read about this different fucked up marriage. Proxima Centauri 04:05, 30 November 2008 (EST)

These two sound like like they're incapable of acting like mature, independent adults, and that their need to be validated and approved by others mattered more to them than expressing even the most simple physical expression of affection to each other. This couple is probably going to raise some seriously messed-up kids, I'm afraid. --SpinyNorman 12:35, 30 November 2008 (EST)

Possible fun

Since the PJR vs Andy, Bugler and TK fight has slowed down can anyone think of a way to get Andy's or Bugler attention to this? Tim is even saner then PJR so it would be so much fun to watch Bugler and TK double team him --BoredCPer 01:27, 30 November 2008 (EST)

Eh...that seems kind of malicious to me. Tim's a decent guy. Why would we want to bring the goon squad down on him? Besides, that's blood in the water for them. They don't need our help. :P --Yossie^{Spring in Fialta} 03:42, 30 November 2008 (EST)

Andy's essay. It looks like he's not intelligent enough to see that once you question parts of the bible the whole starts to unravel. Where do you draw the line? Which parts of the bible are reliable? If you don't question parts of the bible you have to try and deal with the difficult bits. The sensible answer is to treat the whole bible as mythology like so many other supernatural stories. Proxima Centauri 04:15, 30 November 2008 (EST)

The question we should be asking isn’t, ‘What’s fun?’ We should be asking, ‘What damages American Conservative Republicanism?’ To me it looks likely that Conservapedia strengthens the faith of less intelligent Christian Fundies especially in the Bible Belt, even more in rural parts of the bible belt. Conservapedia also encourages more sensible Liberal Americans to go out and vote against the rubbish that Conservapedia promotes. Which effect is stronger? I’m a Brit. I can’t answer that one. I’m not sure if Americans can either. Different parts of the United States are so different. Do Americans see the whole?

One thing I can say. Andrew Schlafly is less intelligent than he thinks. He’s surrounded by flatterers online, almost certainly offline as well. He’s been surrounded by flatterers all his life and has never learnt how to face reality. Schlafly can’t face the truth about himself. He can easily go back to flatterers and avoid facing it. He overrules his own sysops and is sure he is right while they are all wrong. Someone like that will probably damage his own cause. Proxima Centauri 05:01, 30 November 2008 (EST)

I'm not sure it made sense to add that last comment to the Schlafly article - it's a bit redundant considering what's already there... but, yeah, you're right. Oh, and by the way, folks, while we may gain some small satisfactions from CP's tribulations and our minor "victories", CP really has no influence in the world. Their are many other figures far more prominent and influential than Our Andy, and quite a few of them are equally nuts. ħuman 19:03, 30 November 2008 (EST)

Who will take over Mommy's place at Eagle Forum when, as is inevitable, she goeth to meet her maker? _and marmite 19:08, 30 November 2008 (EST)

If it's Andy, RIP Eagle Forum. Somehow I really doubt he will get the reins. ħuman 20:02, 30 November 2008 (EST)

Heh! Hope he does though! _and marmite 20:05, 30 November 2008 (EST)

Scopes trial

Some of the interest in Andy's history course seem to have wane, but has anyone mentioned the Scopes Trail question 3 on homework 10? One student took to Andy about his Darwin = eugenics crap. Another student got the date wrong and still got full marks because of their superb insight on the bias. Also on the low standards side a student answered the question in such away that they demonstrated no understanding about what happened at all and still got 68/70. The part I like is this liberal media bias extends backwards in time. Also as lawyer Andy can't seem to see the difference between winning based on the outcome of the trial ("the creationist won so there evolutionist") and winning based on the scientific argument that took place in the court room like in student 14 answers. My understand was they went into the trial expecting to lose so they could appeal against the law. Also in typical Andyland fashion the students seem to be under the impression they are suppose to spin it into some sort of anti-Row vs Wade answer. - User $\scriptstyle -i\ln(-1)$ 05:07, 30 November 2008 (EST)

"Has the theory of evolution changed that much since World War II? It was only 65 years ago." *snicker* Kallium^talk 11:48, 30 November 2008 (EST)

"The Americans and President Wilson were very angry. We had no choice but to get into the war." Excellent way to boil things down to utmost simplicity. By the same logic, Bush invaded Iraq because he got up on the wrong side of the bed and thus it made him quite cranky. I wouldn't deny the events mentioned before that quote, but history is never that simple and such an interpretation, particularly at the level that this is supposed to be, certainly is not "excellent". ArmondikoV^postate 19:49, 30 November 2008 (EST)

"Honestly, i[sic] really don't have a strong opinion on the matter. I think that trying to avoid war at all costs can be a bad thing. It could end up making the opponent view the US as possibly being weak, which could provoke more violence and lead to stronger attacks on the country. So i[sic] think that the United States did need to join the war, for the sake of protecting America's reputation."

Where as starting a fight with Iraq was a good thing for America's reputation? Does Andy teach these kids any reasoning abilities? Oh I forgot he doesn't have any himself. - User $\scriptstyle -i\ln(-1)$ 19:54, 30 November 2008 (EST)

It's cute that these kids think America had much of an International reputation before WWI. EternalCritic 20:55, 30 November 2008 (EST)

America is the GREATEST COUNTRY IN THE WORLD, don't you know. and always has been. why we beat those English without even thinking (not understanding that the English were *also* at war with the French, and really put very little of their time, resources or people into our pitiful little revolution till it was too late. French were smart to *help* us along in our intellectual decision to rally against the Brits). They don't teach this stuff in schools any more, even non-conservative schools. kids thing we always were a super power.--97.118.88.42 17:31, 2 December 2008 (EST) Godot, too lazy to log in

Ed on WP

Someone's been stirring the Scheisse on WP. Ed had a quote from some guy which claimed to name a WP editor. Someone told that editor & he's deleted it - even though it wasn't correct info & was in Ed's User space. _and marmite 06:21, 30 November 2008 (EST)

Userspace isn't for the user at wikipedia, this is why CP has the talkpage rule. They all got in trouble for ignoring what said to them and deleting comment on the talkpage without response. Andy talks about "harassment on user talk" by which he means people leaving messages telling him he is wrong and then getting himself into to trouble by dismissing them out of hand. - User $\scriptstyle -i\ln(-1)$ 06:33, 30 November 2008 (EST)

Hah. I see Ed's grasp of language is as impeccable as ever. "Tabletop undid my undid". "I redid Tabletop's undid". Where do I sign my future kids up? Dreaded Walrus 07:32, 30 November 2008 (EST)

Aah; you might wanna delete that, oh fearsome mammal of the ocean, it was the guy he was quoting what writted that. _and marmite 07:45, 30 November 2008 (EST)

Oops. I see now, yes. That'll teach me to skim through pages whilst on the phone. :) Dreaded Walrus 07:51, 30 November 2008 (EST)

He's at it again on WP. _and marmite 19:25, 30 November 2008 (EST)

Doesn't Ed understand that NPOV at wikipedia (like any encyclopædia) is to state the academic consensus in neutral language? The "present both side by labelling who says it" approach was his approach in 2005 that failed to become official policy. It is now nearly 2009 Ed give it up you are not stating official policy and it is unlikely to ever become that now. - User $\scriptstyle -i\ln(-1)$ 19:35, 30 November 2008 (EST)

Actually having a quick read of WP:NPOV I can see it talks about weight. If Ed is right that only .1% of biologist support ID then as the article is 76kb long he gets to say that in only 76 bytes. - User $\scriptstyle -i\ln(-1)$ 19:39, 30 November 2008 (EST)

Flawless maths! But Ed can't really do much maths (by the looks of it at least) so that's only really useful for confusing him. ArmondikoV^postate 19:44, 30 November 2008 (EST)

76 bytes? Wow, that's a whole sentence! (If it's a short one). That's pretty generous. --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 19:47, 30 November 2008 (EST)

Claims to fame

1. My grandaddy was an accountant who helped start Grumman
2. I started over 1000 articles at Wikipedia
3. err ... that's it.
   

_and marmite 19:58, 30 November 2008 (EST)

Started is one thing, it took the dedicated work of many editors to make useful article. Also I notice he brags about be instrumental in the use of transclusion of subpage into the AfD at WP. His contribution was deleting the original page and causing a 5 minute read only backlog on the server. The transclusion of the subpages is so that now the file is small enough that if someone was to try that again it would only cause a small blip. - User $\scriptstyle -i\ln(-1)$ 20:07, 30 November 2008 (EST)

... so wait, Ed broke Wikipedia for a few minutes, and he thinks that's something to be proud of? Barikada 20:17, 30 November 2008 (EST)

Yep and they even created the Ed Poor Boldness Award as a sarcastic tribute, I suspect it was somewhat lost on him. - User $\scriptstyle -i\ln(-1)$ 20:23, 30 November 2008 (EST)

Also I notice Ed boasts about his "age template on wikipedia", I don't know if it is the current software but the first 4 edits were by him and return an error, it appears competent people got it working. - User $\scriptstyle -i\ln(-1)$ 20:31, 30 November 2008 (EST)

You wanna stick some of that in Conservapedia:Sysops/Ed_Poor. pi? _and marmite 20:36, 30 November 2008 (EST)

A bit later it's lunch time now. - User $\scriptstyle -i\ln(-1)$ 20:41, 30 November 2008 (EST)

PREVIEW BUTTON MAN! PREEEEVIEEEW BUTTTTTTOOOONNN!!!!!!!!!!! ArmondikoV^postate 05:19, 4 December 2008 (EST)

Why

is the ad at the bottom of this page always asking me why my stomach is fat -- considering that I'm underweight... --Just passing by 10:16, 30 November 2008 (EST)

Because Google adwords picks up on the many references to the Toad King here.  Lily ^{Ta, wack!} 12:04, 30 November 2008 (EST)

Really? I keep getting asked if I like certain popstars I have never heard of. - User $\scriptstyle -i\ln(-1)$ 22:08, 30 November 2008 (EST)

Rates of Radioactive decay aren't constant.

That's what Schlafly and his friends imagine. Proxima Centauri 12:23, 30 November 2008 (EST)

perhaps the immense pressure of the Vapor Canopy that existed before the flood was retarding the decay. And there was no decay before the Fall anyway, so it would be an average, and the volume that decays is greater the further back you go , so it has to be slowing , thats simple arithmetic Hamster 12:29, 30 November 2008 (EST)

Look at a lot of PJR's actual discussions about evolution/age of the earth (as opposed to the drama he's recently been involved with), and you'll see stuff like that come up a lot. It's pretty standard creationist lies "science", claiming that all dating methods are unreliable, so the earth can't possibly be older than what Bishop Ussher claims the Bible says. So you get all sorts of things about how the speed of light changes apparently at random, we can't tell radioactive decay rates because we didn't observe the entire lifespan of C-14, etc. It's all trash, of course, but it pops up in creationist arguments all the time. --Kels 12:51, 30 November 2008 (EST)

If you are allowing all atomic constants to vary, how do you define time ? Actually, you can choose the universe to be 6000 year old and radioactive decay to vary. Just operate a substitution of variables! Barraki 18:36, 30 November 2008 (EST)

If you are allowing all, or even one of the, atomic constants to vary, how do you define MATTER? It is my understanding that the fine tuning of the constants permits the universe to exist in its present state, a point that is used by creationists & IDers to shove their point that there must be a creator/designer. As usual these people want it both ways; using it as evidence for design & ignoring it when convenient. _and marmite 18:45, 30 November 2008 (EST)

I think that argument ("Everything breaks if you change this constant by the amount you suggest") also came up during the Starlight Problem solution ("C decay", if I recall the name correctly).</trivia> --Sid 19:00, 30 November 2008 (EST)

The fact that the sun neither went out not went nova at any point in the past pretty well disproves this one. (Even a miniscule change in the Strong/Weak Atomic Forces would seriously affect the ongoing fusion bomb in our neighborhood.) Unless the Creationists assume that God only changed it very locally. Which kind of goes against the most basic principle of science: Assume Nature doesn't lie. --Gulik 02:20, 1 December 2008 (EST)

Anyone can go test this right now. Point a spectrometer at supernovae that are, say, a few thousand light years away. Since there's all kinds of nuclear activity in those supernova remnants, you can compare the rates you observe in that data to rates observed now. If you find a difference in the rates, pass Go and collect your Nobel Prize. Good luck though, because somebody's already done that kind of analysis and found no differences. [1][2][3]--Bayes 14:31, 1 December 2008 (EST)

That's quitter talk. Surely you understand that due to the variable rates of the speed of light and other natural laws at the whim of the almighty for the purpose of giving humans (well, some humans) a beautiful night sky (which, by the way, disproves evolution), all of the radiation detected only gives the impression of being a long way away/long time ago, when in reality everything was created on that day 6,000 years ago, despite all appearances to the contrary. Because the Bible says so, yah? --Kels 14:36, 1 December 2008 (EST)

TK user rights now include Siteadmin- and NOW BLOCK

Can this be a good thing ) I would WIGO it but dont know how) ? Hamster 12:45, 30 November 2008 (EST)

What can a siteadmin do? Is it more or less powerful than sysoppery? PFoster 12:52, 30 November 2008 (EST)

Dunno, but someone's gotta tell Andy, "Stop hitting yourself!" --Kels 12:54, 30 November 2008 (EST)

Andy is the fool son of millionaires. His millions will comfort him when things get tough. Perhaps Andy imagines he's clever enough to stop TK betraying him a second time. Proxima Centauri 13:34, 30 November 2008 (EST)

The siteadmin can lock down the database during vandal sprees. And I WIGO'd it for you. --Sid 12:55, 30 November 2008 (EST)

Can siteadmins block/delete/rollback? PFoster 12:58, 30 November 2008 (EST)

No, they can only lock the db. You have to have sysop (admin) for all that. JazzMan 18:34, 30 November 2008 (EST)

Can it be that Andy has given in to the liberal bias in the Bible and forgiven TK for his massive, Brutus-like betrayal? If so, where exactly does Andy get his crack and how much does it cost? --JeevesMkII 13:08, 30 November 2008 (EST)

Andy gets the worst, cheapest crack there is, the sort reserved for Discovery Institute Fellows and Slashdot admins. That stuff'll rot yer brain. --Kels 13:30, 30 November 2008 (EST)

To be fair the brains of Slashdot admins have to already be rotted to be considered for the job--BoredCPer 13:55, 30 November 2008 (EST)

Can he block my sockies yet? Proxima Centauri 13:34, 30 November 2008 (EST)

What exactly does Andy think making him an admin again will do? What does he think he possibly has to offer, aside from the ability to drive away productive, intelligent, civil people like Jazz, Tim, and PJR? Actually, I think I just answered my own question... --Yossie^{Spring in Fialta} 15:32, 30 November 2008 (EST)

"Siteadmin" is as close to "One of the Cool Kids" as it gets without giving him blocking power. It's kinda useless, and he's technically not an admin (even though Bugler and the likes of course treated him as Andy's equal the moment he came back), but it's a shiny title and lets him win edit wars somewhat easier: He already tried to win an edit war by exploiting his Night Edit rights, and now he can "accidentally" lock the database for a few minutes after making his edit, giving him a nice window to call Uncle Ed for banhammer support. ;) --Sid 18:58, 30 November 2008 (EST)

That "night edit" taunt was really childish - last wordism by fiat. _and marmite 19:05, 30 November 2008 (EST)

When did he do that? Linky linky! JazzMan 12:29, 1 December 2008 (EST)

Can't remember exactly - he was in dispute (how unlike him) with someone & said " ... and in a while I'll be able to continue & you won't" [paraphrase]". It struck me at the tme as infantile. 3 or 4 days ago about CP midnight. _and marmite 12:35, 1 December 2008 (EST)

I couldn't find it. It was probably hidden within one of his huge posts of drivel and ass kissing of which I can't stand to read much more than a word or two. JazzMan 13:32, 1 December 2008 (EST)

That was the one I had had in mind at least: "I will ask you to be blocked if you continue. Your editing will end soon, mine goes all night." Note: The revert war was about TK first complaining about an unsourced statement (via a fact tag) and then inserting his own unsourced statement... while opposing a fact tag. Kinda lame, kinda lulzy. --Sid 13:39, 1 December 2008 (EST)

Ass ass ass ass ass ass! I wish he had said that to me. "I might not be able to edit, but neither will you when you are blocked. Again. Ass." JazzMan 14:14, 1 December 2008 (EST)

TK wants moar rights. Banhammer in 3...2...1... oh! It's TK, he's allowed to insult editors with impunity. Forgot about that. Give him a medal. Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 22:12, 30 November 2008 (EST)

Here a sysop who didn’t know the site when TK was last here can stick him in the Vandal bin. I know his record. I’ve discussed it. We don’t want bullies and trouble makers on our nice fair wiki.

At Conservapedia Ed Poor and Bugler both know TK’s record. He’s a bully. He can get them. They can’t get him while teh Assfly likes him. They treat him as the equal to the Assfly. Which is the better wiki? Proxima Centauri 04:30, 1 December 2008 (EST)

Easy, the one where the prodigal son is welcomed again. Not the one where Sysops who "didn't know the site" when he "was last here can stick him in the Vandal bin". If you like that sort of power, I suggest you to join and become a sysop at CP, not here. Editor at CP^{Oh, Finland! Why?} 06:18, 1 December 2008 (EST)

If I didn't know TK's record i wouldn't have binned him. I don't want power without responsibility. Proxima Centauri 13:03, 2 December 2008 (EST)

Ah, but the vandal bin still allows people to edit, it just keeps them to a daily limit so they can't overwhelm our sysops with vandalism. They can still discuss, but they can't bully. As opposed to at CP, where even people who just want to discuss are banned straight out. Wazza (Not Wazzock, Wazza)^{Approach the Presence} 06:31, 1 December 2008 (EST)

Not that TK has never been blocked here... Editor at CP^{Oh, Finland! Why?} 07:12, 1 December 2008 (EST)

I think that's probably a good place to end this line of discussion. --Arcan ¡ollǝɥ 07:14, 1 December 2008 (EST)

It's not okay to slander this site, but it's okay to smear every liberal we can get our greasy hands on. End of discussion. *puffs out chest* Karajou

And Andy gives TK blocking rights , Yay... Hamster 17:48, 1 December 2008 (EST)

...ushering in the endtimes. I wonder if I'll miss Conservapedia.-caius (tinker) 17:50, 1 December 2008 (EST)

Andrew Schlafly does the right thing.

From his latest history lecture: "At Kent State University in 1970, peaceful protesters were shot at by National Guardsmen and several were killed."--no the protests "began with violence and arson" or "his Jeep was ipelted with rocksi and one guardsman was injured" as per the CP article. Impressive. PFoster 17:19, 30 November 2008 (EST)

I couldn't find that in 12, but I did notice he is back on an old hobby horse of banning DDT which he claims was banned on unproven environmental grounds, (strange though all the reported problems seem to have gone away now it is banned). To all DDT supports, if you think it is safe, drink a glass of it to show me. - User $\scriptstyle -i\ln(-1)$ 17:44, 30 November 2008 (EST)

That's stupid. Morphine is safe, but you won't see me drinking a glass of it. Caffeine is safe, but you won't see me drinking a glass of saturated caffeine. You know what's not safe? Malaria.

DDT is safe in small doses where the risk of damage from DDT is smaller than the risk of damage from disease-born illness. The reason you saw "all the reported problesm [go away] now that it is banned" because they would go down the street spraying it in huge quantities. They had no idea what a safe dosage was so they just used as much as possible thinking more is better. JazzMan 18:37, 30 November 2008 (EST)

It's the old food chain thing. Increased accumulation as you rise up the predator hierarchy, resulting in birds of prey (for example) being killed off. This happens with DDT's replacements but not as much because DDT is persistent in subject organisms and modern pesticides are less so. _and marmite 18:51, 30 November 2008 (EST)

DDT is used and is still legal for Malaria control. It is banned in the US and most first world nations where it was mealy being used a cheap pesticide. Andy and his conservative ilk ignore that the Stockholm Convention permits its use for mosquito control in high Malaria susceptible areas, particularly for irrigation use indoors. What they want to do is over turn the US ban, so the farmers can have a cheap pesticide again, they are using the dying Africans as an excuse. - User $\scriptstyle -i\ln(-1)$ 19:11, 30 November 2008 (EST)

(EC)Agreeing with the above. Very few chemicals have ZERO as the safe level (mostly these are teratogens or really nasty and very restricted chemical/biological weapons). Anyway, DDT was just banned because of one book published by some green-nut (this is Silent Spring isn't it?), there wasn't much actual outright scientific study done until after the ban apparently. ArmondikoV^postate 18:52, 30 November 2008 (EST)

The phrase is "the dose makes the poison", but that only tends to be based on short-term bioassays and LC50s, not taking bioaccumulation into account (as opposed to biomagnification up the food chain). Several organs can act as reservoirs in which internal concentrations build over time (but not in all cases). That's one of the reasons why lead is so nasty. For teratogens in general, the trick is that many are actually necessary for development, i.e. vitamin A: none = no baby, some = normal baby, more = birth defects/spontaneous abortion/stillbirths. Kallium^talk 07:20, 1 December 2008 (EST)

Whilst the ban on DDT was premature based on the evidence at the time, it is clear now that its far more limited and target use is better. You have to remember Andy also wants to over turn the ban on the use of asbestos and use 9/11 as a reason for that. - User $\scriptstyle -i\ln(-1)$ 19:22, 30 November 2008 (EST)

I believe that would be what Private Eye refers to as "9/11 balls". ArmondikoV^postate 19:40, 30 November 2008 (EST)

Now you have gone an earned yourself a big question mark, ? - User $\scriptstyle -i\ln(-1)$ 19:49, 30 November 2008 (EST)

I find it amazing that I start a thread about how Andy actually does something right and come back to read yet another laundry list on how wrong he is on a buch of other stuff. Absolutely amazing, you people are. PFoster 19:51, 30 November 2008 (EST)

It's how conversations go. _and marmite 19:53, 30 November 2008 (EST)

I couldn't see it in the relevant lecture for the time period. - User $\scriptstyle -i\ln(-1)$ 19:55, 30 November 2008 (EST)

(ECx2)Do you even read these posts before commenting about how we're all fucking up and being morons? There's not much mention of Schlafly in the entire section after the quick tangent onto DDT. ArmondikoV^postate 19:55, 30 November 2008 (EST)

EC-AK: and asbestos. whatever. PFoster 09:23, 1 December 2008 (EST)

I have found it now, I was distracted by Andy going on about meeting Nixon. (Although if had met any past president I probably would tell students in history class as it is semi-relevant). - User $\scriptstyle -i\ln(-1)$ 19:58, 30 November 2008 (EST)

I notice he described the 1968 RNC as peaceful, as a non-American I was wondering are they normally rowdy affairs? - User $\scriptstyle -i\ln(-1)$ 20:02, 30 November 2008 (EST)

Well, the 1968 DNC was a horror show, and I imagine the point is that Dems attract violent protest, unlike peaceful, civilised Republicans--and these days cities hosting either party's nat'l convention become defacto police states (at least in the areas around the convention site) so, I guess the best answer is no, but...PFoster 20:17, 30 November 2008 (EST)

"self-centered"

Do the great people of Conservapedia ever stop to consider that perhaps the President-elect is too busy to campaign for a Georgia senator, rather than being self-centered? Going along with their line of logic, Sarah Palin is neglecting her state by campaigning for Chambliss. And if Obama did campaign for Martin, the headlines would most likely read, "Obama ignores transitioning to White House to ensure filibuster-proof Senate." Most of the time reading Conservapedia gives me an unpleasant grimace, but sometimes the sheer stupidity over there amazes me to the point where I must report my musings on RationalWiki. 75.169.207.107 20:32, 30 November 2008 (EST)

Is there much point campaigning? If the people of Georgia are sensible they wont give Obama a filibuster-proof Senate anyway. Obama will only draw attention to the fact that if the Georgians elect a Democrat they have given Obama even more power. - User $\scriptstyle -i\ln(-1)$ 20:38, 30 November 2008 (EST)

A more snark-centric world view would have it that since Governor Palin is campaigning, her opponents needn't turn out at all. They win by default. --JeevesMkII 20:49, 30 November 2008 (EST)

He certainly was self-centered. When Laura Bush said that flooding of New Orleans was "good for them", it was supposed to be a positive remark! Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 21:23, 30 November 2008 (EST)

I see TK and RodWeathers (also ignoring his "block only for vandalism" status) tagteamed Boomcoach. I ssume his "negative personal remarks" was calling Andy's blog a blog. In other news, seeing as Palin is on the campaign trail... Best.Palin.Video.Ever (h/t to Break the Terror) --PsyGremlin_Whut? 01:49, 1 December 2008 (EST)

Andy's Feeling Generous

I see RJJensen and JessicaT have taken a step up the ladder. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 10:27, 1 December 2008 (EST)

Slightly painful for Jessica that she didn't get night editing rights, since she lives in Japan.--KrissAkabusiAwoogar 11:31, 1 December 2008 (EST)

Still no sign of a new sysop though. Генгис^{Gum disease} 11:32, 1 December 2008 (EST)

I don't understand giving block rights without night editing rights. The night editing is just to prevent vandalism, right? If you don't trust somebody to not vandalize after Andy goes to bed, why do you trust them with largely defensive weapon of block? Corry^{Well, sounds like Hermano is about to get his ass kicked.} 16:40, 1 December 2008 (EST)

'Cause he needs as many policemen as possible. And the worst a blocker could do is block a bunch of people--easily undone. Someone who can edit while Andy is sleeping could really fuck up the wiki and leave hours and hours of work behind...PFoster 16:44, 1 December 2008 (EST)

My take on this:

• Block and Edit = "You agree with me a lot, I like you."
• Block and no Edit = "I trust you to block vandals, but I think that you will add Liberal Bias to my precious articles, so I will only let you edit whenever someone is around to monitor your every move."
• Edit and no Block = "I trust you to do quality Liberal-Bashing while I'm asleep, but I think you'll go nuts with the banhammer."

I'm sure there are other interpretations, but it's a start. --Sid 16:48, 1 December 2008 (EST)

I don't think Andy's that organized. I also think he sees these "rights" as little medals, and since the blocking medal has a great big picture of a hammer on it it's teh awesome. Night editing is tricky - most people who "need" it have trouble proving they "deserve" it, due to their schedules. And the medal isn't as pretty. It's only got a little quill on it. ħuman 17:32, 1 December 2008 (EST)

It's a big catch-22: if you edit a lot, then you obviously don't need it. But if you don't edit a lot, then you haven't made enough "substantive contributions". JazzMan 18:43, 1 December 2008 (EST)

Jessica now has edit rights, too! --Sid 18:33, 1 December 2008 (EST)

I wish I did - I always have to edit CP sober... ħuman 21:14, 1 December 2008 (EST)

Aunt Bee for Secretary of State, Opie for Secretary of Defense!

Yowsa!

TK's WIGO

I'm pretty sure the Barney Fife reference was an intentional insult. As for the candy company, what the hell is that supposed to mean? DickTurpis 11:06, 1 December 2008 (EST)

I would guess that the WIGO author goofed, and confused the candy company Fannie Farmer with Fannie May. TK did not make such a mistake. I'd suggest correcting the WIGO entry. The Barney Fife thing is good enough by itself. And I don't buy the theory that it's an intentional joke or insult. CP should stick to the facts, and I think most of the CP goons agree with that. If TK was intentionally doing that, he should be banned for parody. Excuse me, liberal parody, the only kind that there is. Gauss 11:43, 1 December 2008 (EST)

Well, it was on a talk page. I think you're allowed to use childish insults on liberals on talk pages. DickTurpis 11:48, 1 December 2008 (EST)

I thought the Fife line was an insult, but then why didn't he mock Dodd as well? The candy company line turned out to be a mistake on my part after all - I thought TK typed "Fannie May", which is a chocolate company, whereas "Fannie Mae" is the GSE. (Serves me right for attempting to WIGO before a second cup of coffee) Seeing how weak this looks now, I'll comment it out. --SpinyNorman 11:41, 1 December 2008 (EST)

May, Mae, Farmer? I need coffee too. I guess I don't know my fanny from my elbow. Gauss 11:51, 1 December 2008 (EST)

OMG OMG OMG OMG!!!!!!! Candy makers aside, TK's edit refers to Ed as CP's "Resident Intellectual/Professor"!!! I have more intelligence, wisdom, knowledge, learning, acumen, and erudition in my socks than he does in his brain. Gauss 12:02, 1 December 2008 (EST)

Sounds more like a veiled insult to me. --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 12:28, 1 December 2008 (EST)

It was the comment about Ed that made me think about adding this to WIGO in the first place - Barney Fife + Candy Company + Calling Ed an Intellectual would be like hitting the trifecta of stupidity. I'm now inclined to think the first and third were deliberate jabs by TK, and the Fanny/Fannie thing was my mistake, so it just didn't hold together enough to be WIGO-worthy in the end. Quality counts more than quantity, after all. --SpinyNorman 13:31, 1 December 2008 (EST)

I chuckled at "the last trained Economist to inhabit the Oval Office was Ronald Reagan." ORLY? ħuman 15:24, 1 December 2008 (EST)

I think this is more of an indictment of the US in general for choosing such ridiculous names for such important edifices. Wazza (Not Wazzock, Wazza)^{Approach the Presence} 16:50, 1 December 2008 (EST)

Well, to be fair, fannie mae and freddie mac are "pronuncializations" of acronyms - FNMA and FDMC respectively (I think). Much as HMMV (?) becomes "humvee", they acquired pronunciations for ease of communication. ħuman 17:09, 1 December 2008 (EST)

Following that logic, wouldn't they be FiNMA and FiDMaC, or something? Wazza (Not Wazzock, Wazza)^{Approach the Presence} 08:08, 2 December 2008 (EST)

Bwuh? Since when did Reagan have training as anything but an actor? (And Dubyah had an MBA.) --Gulik 17:07, 1 December 2008 (EST)

According to WikiP, he majored in economics and sociology in college. --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 17:38, 1 December 2008 (EST)

Anti-evolution D-Day?

Is this how the discovery institute describes its annual booze cruise to France, or is Ken's mania entering the terminal phase? --JeevesMkII 11:29, 1 December 2008 (EST)

Err ... I think were ignoring him. _and marmite 11:32, 1 December 2008 (EST)

Oh come on, you can't ignore him. Look at the poor little blighter, he worked so hard to get us to notice. Over a dozen edits for two sentences, and look at all those periods! It'd be like kicking a puppy. A very, very stupid, hydrocephalic puppy. --JeevesMkII 11:39, 1 December 2008 (EST)

There's only so many times he can say the same "it's coming, it's coming, did you see it, oh hang on a minute, it's really gonna happen this time, just a little bit longer" posts before it becomes painfully obvious that nothing of any significance will actually happen. Usually, the number is one. --Kels 11:41, 1 December 2008 (EST)

No no no. Sometime in the Winter of early Spring, a Very Important Website very well might post a link to Conservapedia's Evolution article. When that happens, well, you can forget about anyone except Dawkins and a few of his cronies ever taking the idea of evolution seriously again. DickTurpis 11:33, 1 December 2008 (EST)

Exciting and/or Major New Developments? C'mon Ken, the joke doesn't work anymore. JJ4E^{Veritas vincere tenebras} 13:48, 1 December 2008 (EST)

The only excitement on this debate I want on Conservapedia is Andy admitting that PNAS and Lenski seriously pwned his sorry ass. EternalCritic 14:32, 1 December 2008 (EST)

It will been a full year since the first "Ides" project come next spring. Come on, Ken... ħuman 15:25, 1 December 2008 (EST)

Renaissance Man

So Ed adds to his list of occupations and pastimes. Is there nothing this man hasn't done? (Note to self - Are his accomplishments chronicled on the Sysops/Ed Poor page?) Генгис^{Gum disease} 11:41, 1 December 2008 (EST)

Is this a claim that he took part in a firing squad? Генгис^{Gum disease} 11:50, 1 December 2008 (EST)

He could have been thinking "...in any of the movies I've seen." --SpinyNorman 13:33, 1 December 2008 (EST)

Might have been, given this was his. Of course, "I was a soldier" in Ed-speak could easily mean "I was in the reserves for a summer when I was 16". --Kels 13:42, 1 December 2008 (EST)

I don't know, how old is Ed anyway? If he's over 50, its possible he was drafted for Vietnam. He could have seen more actual combat than CP's resident bathtub sailor Karajou. --JeevesMkII 14:42, 1 December 2008 (EST)

Is my irony-meter working? This comment on AlbertW's talk page seem's almost tolerant. (Note to self - Stop writing like Ed Poor). Генгис^{Gum disease} 12:16, 1 December 2008 (EST)

Ed Poor was born in May of 1949. -Lardashe

I improovd artikl. ħuman 15:29, 1 December 2008 (EST)

If Ed had fought in Viet Nam we'd have heard about it and he would have not been so bland about just being a soldier. Генгис^{Gum disease} 16:51, 1 December 2008 (EST)

Not all draftees were front-lines, I'm sure. He could have been shifting toilet paper around somewhere... or he could be trying to keep quiet about what he did at My Lai... Wazza (Not Wazzock, Wazza)^{Approach the Presence} 16:54, 1 December 2008 (EST)

I agree with Genghis. Much like Karajou is found of throwing around his Navu speak to try and intimidate those unfamilar, Ed would be pumping (ew, brain scrub, brain scrub) this for all it's worth. He would be tossing around army jargon like he was a bloody general. Besides, after tutoring some students and friends in the math section of the entrance exams, Ed doesn't have the intelligence needed to get it. SirChuckB^{Call the FBI} 17:23, 1 December 2008 (EST)

If he'd have fought in any major conflict we would have heard of it over and over and over again. He would have been the indisputable expert on whatever war he fought in, and no-one, not even the commanding general of that campaign would be able to over-rule him. Its likely he probably sat in a military base in West Germany or somewhere, taking pictures of the local German ladies. To be even more cynical, its likely he was in the National Guard. I can't imagine him having had any meaningful role in the military and not heard of it ad infinitum. MarcusCicero 18:11, 1 December 2008 (EST)

Well, meaningful and meaningful... those also serve who stand and wait. --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 18:30, 1 December 2008 (EST)

Ed was in the army for five years. At least he's said so a few times. I don't think he's mentioned being involved in any combat, which probably means he was serving during peacetime. weaseLOId~ 08:21, 2 December 2008 (EST)

It's surprising he hasn't mentioned it every 5 minutes unlike his career as a Wikipedia admin and math genius, but yes, he has mentioned it before at least once (on Wikipedia in the talk page of the article of movie about war or related). NightFlare 10:45, 2 December 2008 (EST)

TK IS BACK, BABY!!!!

TK now has block rights. WOO-HOO!! Someone wittier than I should WIGO it. Bjones 17:54, 1 December 2008 (EST)

Genghis already merged it into another one, but I'll add it as a new one :)-caius (tinker) 18:01, 1 December 2008 (EST)

Yes, well, I'm a bit slow. Also, I'd like to think I had a little bit to do with this. But probably not. Bjones 18:08, 1 December 2008 (EST)

Boom, baby! Let the fun times begin! Blunt Knife fighters standing by, waiting for launch order... --Sid 18:09, 1 December 2008 (EST)

Start a pool on how long it takes him to ban PJR?-caius (tinker) 18:12, 1 December 2008 (EST)

You need to think in the proper dimensions: How long until Bugler's "nemesis approaches" comes true and fuses with TK's Blunt Knives to fully depower and ban Tim and Philip? --Sid 18:24, 1 December 2008 (EST)

Andy's capacity to fuck himself over never ceases to amaze me. I'd like to think that this should settle, once and for all, the debate about who's CP's Biggest Idiot. --Robledo 18:21, 1 December 2008 (EST)

I nominate him for the Dr. Light Award for Repeated Blind Trust --Sid 18:28, 1 December 2008 (EST)

That's it, I quit. Bugler as a sysop would be 1,000 times easier to deal with than TK with a banhammer. Andy is such an idiot. JazzMan 18:39, 1 December 2008 (EST)

Good call. Stop wasting your time helping a project run for the benefit of that born-with-a-silver-spoon-in-his-mouth anti-intellectual bully. Good for you. Will there be a Parthian Shot? PFoster 18:41, 1 December 2008 (EST)

And give Bugler and liar TK the satisifaction? No way, Josè! JazzMan 18:44, 1 December 2008 (EST)

At least block Andy for gross stupidity on yer way out, fella... ;) --Robledo 18:46, 1 December 2008 (EST)

No, just drop off the radar and see how long it takes TK/Bugler/Foxtrot to banhammer you because you "retired" - even though you didn't say so anywhere on CP. :P --Sid 18:48, 1 December 2008 (EST)

Remember my offer HelpJazz... - User $\scriptstyle -i\ln(-1)$ 18:50, 1 December 2008 (EST)

I already said I'm not going to give Bugler the satisfaction -- or leverage to lift himself up to sysop. Besides, I have nothing to gain. JazzMan 19:02, 1 December 2008 (EST)

You don't really have much to lose either. But it's your call. There ain't many left on CP that still have integrity.  Lily ^{Ta, wack!} 19:04, 1 December 2008 (EST)

Who cares if Bugler becomes sysop it is just an online project? One which was doomed to failure since - probably - the night of the blunt knifes. If Conservapedia ceased to exist tomorrow the world would be little changed, although we would have to make the change to post-Conservapedism faster than we are now. - User $\scriptstyle -i\ln(-1)$ 19:08, 1 December 2008 (EST)

HelpJazz, at least unblock ME.-caius (tinker) 19:09, 1 December 2008 (EST)

So, for those of us who don't know much about TK other than everyone hates him, why is this incredibly hilarious? Alecwh 19:36, 1 December 2008 (EST)

Until the others illustrate TK's milestones such as this one, I'll just point you to his blocking policy --Sid 19:44, 1 December 2008 (EST)

Just look at his contribs over the last two weeks. He's a bully, he lies, he makes up rules, and he's generally a mean person. On top of that he enforces a CPOV which Conservapedia doesn't actually have, even though he himself is more or less a moderate. JazzMan 19:59, 1 December 2008 (EST)

They just gave him 'check users' status as well. Aboriginal Noise ^Punkrock 20:00, 1 December 2008 (EST)

Well, it's not like TK didn't have Checkuser access, anyway... *cough*Ed*cough* Still, this is ridiculous and awesome. Expect convenient mass bannings in three, two, one... --Sid 20:03, 1 December 2008 (EST)

For the new people, this is what TK is-caius (tinker) 20:14, 1 December 2008 (EST)

Three /16 range blocks already....and the night is young. Did Andy bring him back cause he doesn't know how to range-block? PFoster 21:14, 1 December 2008 (EST)

Two IP blocks, really.. he somehow blocked the same one twice. Joaquin blocked PJR (a shocker from left field) instead of TK doing the honors, but one thing I did notice was TK putting his block policy on his userpage before he got block rights. He's totally sucking some... ego... behind the scenes. Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 21:52, 1 December 2008 (EST)

How big is a /16? PFoster 21:54, 1 December 2008 (EST)

If I remember off the top of my head, /16 blocks about 65,000 IP addresses, but other wikis rarely ever step over the threshold of /24, which blocks around 256. In other words, TK's power binge is turning CP into a tinier tube of accessibility. Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 22:05, 1 December 2008 (EST)

Which is his exact MO. JazzMan 22:29, 1 December 2008 (EST)

If he is trying to blacklist public proxys then thats the way to do it , if he hits a real ISP then Andy loses a big chunck of potential viewers Hamster 23:33, 1 December 2008 (EST)

A proxy is only one or a few IP addresses, what he is taking out is large chunks of cities. My ISP has only two proxies, it has several thousand users, they have blocked one of those proxies meaning that at any given time about half of the customer my ISP has can't edit Conservapedia. When you are doing 16 level blocks you are taking out multiple companies. I remember Karajou blocking a German one, which translated to something like German Telecom, probably Germany's largest telecommunications provider. - User $\scriptstyle -i\ln(-1)$ 23:47, 1 December 2008 (EST)

CP used to include that info about Deutsche Telekom Auld Nick 12:19, 3 December 2008 (EST)

I think it's appropriate to treat TK as the ultimate black-ops scoundrel: he doesn't care who he destroys, and that's always exactly what he plans for whichever site he's a part of. Based on history, this is the best way to understand any action he takes (or doesn't take). If he's actually blocking proxies now, he's just accruing capital; but don't be shocked if he starts to range-block cities. He plays a long, deep game. That's what she said.-caius (tinker) 23:48, 1 December 2008 (EST)

A 16 block will take out cities a proxy is only a single address. - User $\scriptstyle -i\ln(-1)$ 23:49, 1 December 2008 (EST)

F**K -go away from t'internet for a few hours & Andy singlehandedly DESTROYS CP!!! _and marmite 23:57, 1 December 2008 (EST)

The veiled threats begin:

My point is, as an Admin, this is something that should be argued via email, not on CP's pages. If not, I am not optimistic of an outcome all parties will like. [4]

Генгис^{Gum disease} 01:56, 2 December 2008 (EST)

That's his MO - work behind the scenes, seduce users/editors/sysops etc. in pmail, in IM, where there is no record on the site. He is a past master of this tactic, and will destroy CP from within if we only sit back and watch - no need to interfere with silly sockpuppetry, etc. Don't worry, just as TK is about to bring CP crashing down around himself like that Samson story, ApProxmate Century will make soem sock puppet and bring it all back to life. ħuman 03:48, 2 December 2008 (EST)

I wish he would destroy CP, or do something interesting. I've been waiting all night for keynote session at Nokia world to start, since I have an inkling that there's a 10-15% chance what they're going to say could destroy my business at a stroke. I have a new appreciation for what it must be like to be a condemned criminal on their final night. I need a distraction. Maybe Helpjazz would like to go on a MOAR HITLER spree or something? --JeevesMkII 01:59, 2 December 2008 (EST)

Huzzah! Looks like my livelihood is safe for the time being, plus the Nokia N97 is the new hotness. Like EXTREMELY TOTALLY the new hotness. I can cease having a heart attack now. Nokia really need to not do this to me. Everyone, have a cake on me. --JeevesMkII 03:28, 2 December 2008 (EST)

(unindent) Wow, look at him go! --Arcan ¡ollǝɥ 03:29, 2 December 2008 (EST)

Hah, months of pent up blockin' released all in one go. Each one of those is 1 / 2¹⁶th of the internet. Between TK and Karajou, they'll soon have Conservapedia totally fucked. --JeevesMkII 03:37, 2 December 2008 (EST)

Do you think he cares at all that it is overkill? - User $\scriptstyle -i\ln(-1)$ 03:53, 2 December 2008 (EST)

Heh! that last one is "Florida Institute of Technology" - good call TK - who's likely to know more about encyclopaedic subjects than them? _and marmite 04:01, 2 December 2008 (EST)

If he blocked Harvard as well do you think that would put a stop to all the articles from CollegeRepublican? Генгис^{Gum disease} 04:06, 2 December 2008 (EST)

Per JeevesMkII — With six /16 range blocks, TK has blocked about 1/10,000 of the (IPv4) Internet in the past 48 hours. Unfortunately, at this rate it will take him about 55 years to block it all. Come on, TK! Step on it! --Marty 04:27, 2 December 2008 (EST)

Well they already had a million IPs down before he started. Anybody good with those macroie thingies able to pull out of CP all the current active IP adress blocks and how long they are? Please? - User $\scriptstyle -i\ln(-1)$ 04:30, 2 December 2008 (EST)

You don't have to block the whole internet to be lethal to the project. Don't forget, vast swathes of it are either legacy allocations to now defunct companies like DEC or the US Military, and yet more of it is for things like multicast and private networks (including a whole /8 just for loopback addresses. The craq must have been good back in the day.) The rest is mostly used by unattended machines. Just a few good US ISPs and organisations down, and CP will be piratically useless. --JeevesMkII 04:38, 2 December 2008 (EST)

A nice argument is brewing with Jallen stepping in TKs mess in spite of a casual threat HereHamster 16:29, 2 December 2008 (EST)

Geo.plrd is joining in: blocking California State Polytechnic University. _and marmite 23:52, 2 December 2008 (EST)

I guess that while TK is influential it will stay easy to create a new account at Conservapedia. TK wants excues to block plenty of newcomers. he also wants to convince teh Assfly that he is useful blocking people. Proxima Centauri 07:33, 3 December 2008 (EST)

Is Ed for real ?

"History of genetics: Did Mendel do anything interesting?" How would you answerr that !
http://www.conservapedia.com/Talk:Gene Yikes! Hamster 20:01, 1 December 2008 (EST)

Maybe Ed isn't stupid maybe he is just lazy, his shitty one quote stubs is all the research he can be bothered doing? - User $\scriptstyle -i\ln(-1)$ 20:41, 1 December 2008 (EST)

Er, Dude. "Two Metres." Nuff said. --JeevesMkII 22:39, 1 December 2008 (EST)

What was on this mystical "two meters"? I've seen references galore, but it was deleted before I ever saw what was actually on it. JazzMan 23:41, 1 December 2008 (EST)

I think it said "I am two meters tall" or some such Ediocy. ħuman 00:08, 2 December 2008 (EST)

Either Ed is extremely tall or he doesn't live in a country which uses the metric system. 2 metres is something like 6' 7". - User $\scriptstyle -i\ln(-1)$ 00:43, 2 December 2008 (EST)

Back at Jazz it contained a tautology like "two meters are two one meters" and then boasted how he was nearly that tall. He was convinced to "merge" the contents into the article meter. - User $\scriptstyle -i\ln(-1)$ 00:47, 2 December 2008 (EST)

Really? I thought his "Two Meters" article just said "Two meters is 78.74 inches". Elsewhere he had had remarked about his own height. Typical Ed, some random comment inspires a VSA. Генгис^{Gum disease} 01:40, 2 December 2008 (EST)

think Genghis is right - it just converted to inches. Ed, meanwhile is still whinging on WP. _and marmite 02:39, 2 December 2008 (EST)

Ed is tall, apparently. (And ugly, as we know). You people make me edit in weird places sometimes. At least WP allows so-called "night editing" - wait, was Jimbo asleep? Drunk (I hope)? Bored? Having a life? Symptom of creating a successful wiki - not having to watch it 24/7. QED. ħuman 03:54, 2 December 2008 (EST)

I know I edit here all hours of the day and night and at all random time, but even I think Andy is on Conservapedia too much. Looking at the system clock he is on from about 7am to 12am. I know he once went to run an errand, but still is he seriously at his computer when editing is on? - User $\scriptstyle -i\ln(-1)$ 04:19, 2 December 2008 (EST)

Yes, we are, too much sometimes. But we take time off too. Days we don't care, and catch up later. Andy's a control freak. In the worst sort of way. PS, the guy how "owns" this site disappears for months at a time... ħuman 04:29, 2 December 2008 (EST)

I saw Two Metres once. If I remember correctly, it had a whole lot of conversions of different lengths. Half of them multiplied the number of centimetres by 2.5 to get the number of inches...Wazza^{Hello? Is there anybody in there? Just nod if you can hear me...} 08:43, 2 December 2008 (EST)

Andy's talk

He deletes and recreates it so often, and TK archived it the day he came back (removing the list of archives in the process, I SEE WHAT YOU DID THERE), so I'm really unable to search Andy's embarrassing history as it's been hidden away. Trying to link to BethanyS' talk to Andy about boy-girl testing equality on WIGO, but... yeah. Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 22:18, 1 December 2008 (EST)

Here I am once again to bestow gifts upon the deserving, for Norseman: the link he wanted. - User $\scriptstyle -i\ln(-1)$ 03:47, 2 December 2008 (EST)

Sir, may I have this dance? :D _{Thank you thank you thank you} Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 09:26, 2 December 2008 (EST)

Rosencrantz and Guildenstern and Schlafly Are Dead

Rosencrantz (an anguished cry): Consistency is all I ask!

Guildenstern (low, wry rhetoric): Give us this our daily mask.

Schlafly (bland): We don't worship a mindless consistency.

--Yossie^{Spring in Fialta} 23:16, 1 December 2008 (EST)

"We don't worship *" is becoming a bit of a catchphrase for him... unsigned

Coincidentally, I just added a Hamlet reference on CP! --Marty 00:00, 2 December 2008 (EST) Now if you'll excuse me, it's time to go ravel up some grub.

Excellent! You should join HenryS & I in the Danish Writing Group!!! Velkommen! ħuman 00:12, 2 December 2008 (EST)

Danish? Thanks, but I've already eaten. --Marty 03:00, 2 December 2008 (EST) knit wahr?

No silly, not that kind of danish, Danish! As in, "something is rotten in Denmark", not a tasty pastry. ħuman 03:56, 2 December 2008 (EST)

Ew, rotten Danish! You cannot feed capons so! --Marty 04:20, 2 December 2008 (EST) I've always wanted to read Hamlet in the original Danish...

Omelette! Ik ben uw vaderspook! --JeevesMkII 04:28, 2 December 2008 (EST)

Oooh, omelette... if only... if only... I could get real eggs through my freedom fries vendor... they closed, I hope she calls... meanwhile, my omega fatty acids depend on salmon fisherpeople off the coast of Alaska... WHINE! ħuman 04:33, 2 December 2008 (EST)

Vaderspook? "Hamlet... I am your father..."? --Marty 04:42, 2 December 2008 (EST) Oh. Indeed. My estimation of the originality of the name "Darth Vader" has dropped by half.

DADDY?! ħuman 04:45, 2 December 2008 (EST)

Haha, and you thought the English words with the in- prefix dropped naming scheme was how Sith lords were supposed to work all along! That's why balance had to be brought to the force, see. The Jedi really couldn't stomach living in the future where Darth Vective, Darth Novative or Darth Tense held the galaxy in their iron grip of mirth. --JeevesMkII 04:52, 2 December 2008 (EST)

Incidentally, the Danes think danish pastries are from Vienna. Wazza (Not Wazzock, Wazza)^{Approach the Presence} 08:21, 2 December 2008 (EST)

Mmm Vienna! The cakes are yummy. _and marmite 08:28, 2 December 2008 (EST)

Yes, and in Vienna, they call it a "Copenhagen Cake". The poor pastry. Nobody wants to take credit for it. :-( --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 08:43, 2 December 2008 (EST)

It was me, in fact. Me and my time-machine-oven. They should rightly be called Wazzabroed. Wazza^{Hello? Is there anybody in there? Just nod if you can hear me...} 09:02, 2 December 2008 (EST)

The death of CP

Celebrate this return of TK rather than sit around in bedazzlement. He will continue where he left off, blocking half the world and intimidating every member that joins. The only person with a half a brain continuing to contribute stuff with be Jensen, and I've a feeling he will walk soon. (I don't understand how such an intelligent man can be working there - he was a wiki-dragon on citizendium) TK will bring Conservapedia back to the days when its most paged views will be the homosexual series. RW, I'm sure (Under the auspices of the cabal) are probably working with him as we speak... MarcusCicero 08:42, 2 December 2008 (EST)

Move aside Bugler, there's a professional at work nao. Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 09:27, 2 December 2008 (EST)

Like some MMRP game, Bugler leaves little gems to be picked up. Генгис^{Gum disease} 09:55, 2 December 2008 (EST)

PJR's "substantive" edits are getting very few and far between. Maybe he's decided to quietly leave (if he's decided to leave unless Andy comes to his senses, then he has decided to leave!). Could his deprture be the "tipping point"?--Toffeeman 12:16, 2 December 2008 (EST)

The tipping point between what and what? If PJR leaves it will just mean one less reasonable administrator. (PJR might not be reasonable qua creationist, but he is most certainly reasonable qua administrator.) Now, if there are no longer any reasonable administrators, or active administrators, on CP, then eventually there will no longer be any reasonable editors on CP, because there will be no one left to unblock them.

So it could be a tipping point into total madness. Is that what you mean? But I fail to see what this has to do with the death of CP, as the death of CP and total madness have nothing to do with one another. CP will continue until Andy pulls the plug, right? Which may be never. It could be Andy and the Idiots vs the Vandals till the end of time. Or one of the two gets bored enough to give up. Bjones 12:46, 2 December 2008 (EST)

I think that PJR leaving would have a profound effect. He's been much more willing to tolerate dissent (or most reasonable positions) than the parodists/yes-men/Bugler-types. This would make is much harder for new editors to get started, especially with the ban-first mentality.-Lardashe

Well, yes, the death of CP will only occur when Andy formally pulls the plug - but if the only people contributing articles are Andy, TK and Bugler, with siesmic contributions of frivolous nonsense from Ed Poor, Its safe to say CP will revert to nothingness, the only people actually working on their articles would be socks from here, up to mischief... MarcusCicero 12:55, 2 December 2008 (EST)

From a quick glance at the whole crap, TK made a pact with the devil and vice versa. He promised total and complete loyalty to his master, which means he now has full authority to deal with the Australian problem. No doubt a bloody confrontation is coming. Bugler, of course, is playing his role wonderfully. JJ4e^{I christen thee Sir Annoyz Alot} 14:00, 2 December 2008 (EST)

From the edit histories I wouldn't be surprised if Geo.Plrd interceded on TK's behalf. TK was certainly conversing with him about IPs before he was given checkuser. Not even all the sysops have checkuser so all TK is missing is the ability to delete and move. Given TK's treachery , his rehabilitation by Andy is the first genuine bit of Christian forgiveness that I've seen Andy display. Генгис^{Gum disease} 14:09, 2 December 2008 (EST)

A little bit of lulz

Did anybody else catch this? I thought HenryS's block comment was classic. Ok, back to work. Bjones 10:01, 2 December 2008 (EST)

I had considered getting a throwaway socks to post a similar comment after one of Bungler's attacks on PJR. Генгис^{Gum disease} 10:34, 2 December 2008 (EST)

That's one of the fall-backs of parody, since the individual acts differently from who they really are and to act out for so long simply begins to work against them. TK is infamous for saying one thing in the past, getting pwned in the future, and pulling a cowardly disappearing act from the talk page. Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 10:50, 2 December 2008 (EST)

It is all kinds of fun to use parodists' words against themselves. JazzMan 13:24, 2 December 2008 (EST)

Definition of stupidity

I though the definition of insanity is doing the same thing twice, expecting different results (paraphrased). I believe it's a Twain quote? Am I loosing my mind? Smyth 11:28, 2 December 2008 (EST)

I actually thought the same thing when I read that, but I didn't want to step on someone else's work. SirChuckB^{Call the FBI} 11:47, 2 December 2008 (EST)

Whether its stupidity or insanity, I thought it was an intelligent quote until I started using computers. Now, whenever something doesn't work on a computer, my first inclination is to try the same thing again. Usually that does it. DickTurpis 11:50, 2 December 2008 (EST)

I usually look for a bigger hammer...Bjones 11:58, 2 December 2008 (EST)

In defense of your sanity Dick, it's not really trying the same thing twice. Because the conditions of the set up change. The first time you try it, your computer is, probably, working just fine, but then when you repeat the action, it's not completing the command. Trying again is a very logical step with computers. SirChuckB^{Call the FBI} 12:07, 2 December 2008 (EST)

It is "insanity;" I confused the quote (and the WIGO entry was mine). I'll change it, thanks guys-caius (tinker) 12:08, 2 December 2008 (EST)

I always thought it was from Dilbert. JazzMan 13:25, 2 December 2008 (EST)

10 minutes in the life of Ed Poor

10 Minutes in the Life of Ed Poor

A One Act Play

Ed – I am feeling bored. Perhaps I will cruise through the “P” articles and vomit some of my knowledge into these dear children’s heads. Ahh! Hear we go, Placebo! What? A placebo has no direct physical effect? A placebo has a significant physical effect! Everyone agrees with this.

Innocent bystander no. 1 - Umm…no. It is part of the definition of a placebo that it have no physical effects. The effects of a placebo are purely psychological

Ed – What does this mean? Let’s take this to the talk page!

Innocent bystander no. 1 – Ummm....okay. Here is an explanation of what the word ‘placebo’ means. Does that help?

Ed – Poppycock! That’s just semantics! I work with this guy who says he gets perked up just by the smell of a cup of coffee. Mind body problem!!!

Innocent bystander no. 2 - I am a doctor. And I concur with the other bystander.

Ed (oblivious to the noises around him)– I will now add a link to this page. Pay no attention to the fact that this link is actually to a redirect.

Innocent bystander no. 1 - I am stupider for having had this conversation. I give up. I’m going over to RW to bitch and moan.

THE END

Bjones 15:05, 2 December 2008 (EST)

Innocent bystander no. 1: thank you for this entertaining 10 minutes sketch. Editor at CP^{Oh, Finland! Why?} 16:23, 2 December 2008 (EST)

err, Gentlemen of RW, Ed has removed the cited definiton of Placebo , oops, And Brossa puts it back Here. Is there an award I can submit Ed for ? he deserves something Hamster 16:36, 2 December 2008 (EST)

Well, he has already won the RW 'Conservapedia's Biggest Idiot' award, and I believe it was at least suggested that the gap between him and second place was that large that any future round of nominations for this award should automatically exclude him. Zmidponk 20:54, 2 December 2008 (EST)

And the award now bears his name and sports his ugly mug. ħuman 22:21, 2 December 2008 (EST)

Pretty sure he's looking for some sort of lifetime (lack of) achievement award at this point. --Kels

Oh f**k me this guy is truely not all there. "If it has no effect, then why would anybody be talking about the 'placebo effect'?". Do we have to count the number of times it's been thoroughly explained? (I count 8 posts that explain it fairly well on the whole talk page) ArmondikoV^postate 07:16, 3 December 2008 (EST)

I recall my grandmother (now long deceased) saying: "I'll try some of those placebos (pronounced place bows), the Reader's digest says they're almost as good and a lot cheaper". _and marmite 10:34, 3 December 2008 (EST)

Ed & yarmulke

I suspect "on occasion" means "when at a bar mitzvah or Jewish wedding". Coarb 16:59, 2 December 2008 (EST)

I'm not convinced he wasn't making fun of Phil. As in, "Sure, my parents are Jewish, and I wear a Yarmulke, but I'm not Jewish. Just like Obama sure seems like a Muslim, but somehow isn't." It'd be odd for Ed to all of a sudden back away from his full-throated support of Bugler/teek.-caius (tinker) 17:00, 2 December 2008 (EST)

Liberal Sarcasm

You know, if anyone else had said something like that, they would have been banned. It would seem disregarding other people's arguments using sarcasm is punishable by death, unless you are the the great assfly. Crundy 17:58, 2 December 2008 (EST)

MattS requests that he be more polite, and Andy, as humble as he is great, reverts and blocks. Typical day at CP where dickless abusive administrators just look away at the corruption that continuously works against them. Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 18:15, 2 December 2008 (EST)

Oh my god, Andy is clinically insane. So someone asks him to be polite and gets banned from the site. I honestly don't know what to think any more. Is this WIGO worthy? Crundy 18:22, 2 December 2008 (EST)

Sure it is, stuff like that never gets old. Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 19:12, 2 December 2008 (EST)

Do we add WIGOs or does a RW admin do it? I'm so confused. Crundy 05:22, 3 December 2008 (EST)

replied on Crundy's talk page _and marmite 05:42, 3 December 2008 (EST)

RodWeathers block

I commented out the WIGO about the evolutionary vandalism as it is related to this reversion and not the user page. Put it back if you disagree. --  Lily ^{Ta, wack!} 19:07, 2 December 2008 (EST)

Yeah I can see how writing a statement that contradicts a 1914 textbook is evolutionist vandalism. By the way when did major churches start preaching racial equality over the curse of Ham? - User $\scriptstyle -i\ln(-1)$ 19:32, 2 December 2008 (EST)

Wow, that was a really racist revert by BrianCo. That deserves its own WIGO. You were to right to comment mine out, though, Lily, thanks.-caius (tinker) 19:26, 2 December 2008 (EST)

So the textbooks discussed "which of the races were the furtherest [sic] along in evolution". They should stop censoring and tell what those books really said! (Disclaimer: of course the books were egregiously wrong, not to mention the issue of linear, "progressive" evolution thinking.) Kallium^talk 23:49, 2 December 2008 (EST)

P.S. I thought "furtherest" might have been vandalism and therefore recent and not yet corrected, so I did not mock. But then I discovered that it's been there for OVER A YEAR. Thus, I now commence mockering. Kallium^talk 23:52, 2 December 2008 (EST)

The heat is on!

Rod's talk page has become an epic battleground! TK, Bugler, Henry, and a buncha people who suddenly found themselves in the middle of a short Block War. --Sid 20:11, 2 December 2008 (EST)

I love how Bugler is always going off on people to respect those higher up then them and do what they say (e.i. shut up PJR and let Andy rule the Obama page) but then orders Henry not to interfere but then when someone else asks if Bugler should be ordering someone higher then him he block the questioner for a week! Bugler I have to say you are the best thing to happen to RW since Conservative and I hope you never come out of the parody shell --BoredCPer 20:24, 2 December 2008 (EST)

Bugler, TK, and Rod seem to have an unholy mutual-defense pact which makes them utterly impervious to any and all criticism, even by CP standards. Publius 20:50, 2 December 2008 (EST)

I'd normally have pity for the sysops, but in this case, no. The senior sysops as a group let the new kids get away with too much by looking away or giving in whenever block abuse happened, and then they decided to give them sysop blocking authority. I just say: Niemöller. --Sid 20:59, 2 December 2008 (EST)

Oh fer crying out loud I'm so dumb. I just nearly wet myself with laughter when I realised what you'd done there. Rod Weathers = RW. Subtle... and yet not so, for those who care to look. Hence the awesome tagteaming with Auld Nick/Bugler. I can't wait for all this to play out to its explosive conclusion. Bravo, chaps, for being the most blatant parodists and yet simultaneously the most trusted guard dogs (after TK of couse) in the history of CP. Fox 21:11, 2 December 2008 (EST)

...OH DEAR GOD, I CAN'T BELIEVE I MISSED THAT. Though I dunno about the Auld Bugler one, mostly because I never paid close attention to Nick back then. --Sid 21:14, 2 December 2008 (EST)

I doubt it. Rod is over a year old, so the likelihood of being RW-initiated and surviving this long are... low. Publius 21:45, 2 December 2008 (EST)

Actually, he's only really been editing since the end of Sept. of this year. He was active one day last Feb., and two days last Dec., but it's not like he's been active this whole time and avoided the banhammer. It's entirely possible that he's someone's relatively clean sock retooled into a parodist account. --Arcan ¡ollǝɥ 21:57, 2 December 2008 (EST)

Rod's contribution (scroll down for earlies); his first few show a liberal, science minded Darwinist (few creationist like to distinguish between Darwinism and Lamarkism as by blurring the distinction it is easier to attack evolution), I reckon he saw what Bugler was doing and thought I have an old account there two can play at that game. - User $\scriptstyle -i\ln(-1)$ 22:03, 2 December 2008 (EST)

Show's over. TK has dragged both Rod and Henry into his E-Mail Shadow Realm. Good cue for me to hit the pillows, I guess. --Sid 21:14, 2 December 2008 (EST)

I sent Rod & Jallen messages about the dangers of e-mailing with TK. They are manifold.-caius (tinker) 21:51, 2 December 2008 (EST)

Boy, hope RW (RodWeathers) is a parodist, at least we'd have some good reading material when it's over. Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 23:08, 2 December 2008 (EST)

Well Tim saved Liam. Now will he save the others Bugler went after tonight? --BoredCPer 23:13, 2 December 2008 (EST)

Supreme court pic

He wouldnt have to dig much to find this which shows it to be US gov't, & therefore OK. _and marmite 21:47, 2 December 2008 (EST)

I'm not questioning the public domain issue (I googled it myself), but he credits Google as the source instead of actually showing that it comes from a .gov site. (And not every image on a .gov site is necessarily public domain, I think, but that's something I won't touch here.) --Sid 06:08, 3 December 2008 (EST)

They aren't, necessarily. "Government work" is PD, but they also hire artists to do things that are not PD. Coin designs, for example, aren't PD. PS, Andy's a twat. ħuman 17:11, 3 December 2008 (EST)

Sorry California State Polytechnic University but yer BLOCKED !!

a strange block 134.71.0.0/16 , Oh well , Uni students will be deprived of a resource comedy Hamster 00:25, 3 December 2008 (EST)

Hmmm,... That is the second university in as many days. Do you suppose they are now seriously trying to keep people who actual know what they are talking about out? - User $\scriptstyle -i\ln(-1)$ 00:27, 3 December 2008 (EST)

Yup! Beat you by over 1/2 an hour my furry friend. : ) _and marmite 01:10, 3 December 2008 (EST)

Maybe someone over there is a UC Davis fan who just hates Cal Poly.--Bayes 01:16, 3 December 2008 (EST)

I just too lazy to read it all, it wasnt TK this time either , they all gone blockie mad. Hamster 01:20, 3 December 2008 (EST)

Don't these blocks just prevent people in those ranges from signing up and editing? Or do they physically block access to the site in general? Yes, technological ignoramus here. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 05:42, 3 December 2008 (EST)

Just from signing up & editing they get a "View source" instead of "edit" tab. _and marmite 05:49, 3 December 2008 (EST)

If it has any effect, it will most likely reduce the influx of vandalism (read: accurate information inserted into articles). dream^ing _{Hail Eris!} 12:48, 4 December 2008 (EST)

So is Andy an Apollo moon landing denialist too?

See this (American History "lecture" 12). In the 13th paragraph of the first section (try to ignore the fawning over senator McCarthy) he says "On July 20, 1969, a simulated broadcast of American Neil Armstrong stepping foot on the Moon was broadcast to a record television audience ..." Simulated broadcast????

Also, I'd be interested to know who was being referred to in "Also in 1957, the U.S.S.R. (Soviet Union) launched a man into outer space ...". That wasn't until 1961. You're welcome in advance, Andy. Gauss 00:41, 3 December 2008 (EST)

No Andy just can't spell he mean simultaneous. He probably uses firefox, when I misspelt it the first option was simulation. - User $\scriptstyle -i\ln(-1)$ 00:45, 3 December 2008 (EST)

Wow, I didn't realise he knew so little of the space race history to think Sputnik was a rocket and was manned. - User $\scriptstyle -i\ln(-1)$ 00:48, 3 December 2008 (EST)

And to your right you will see home schooling at it's finest. --ScottA 00:56, 3 December 2008 (EST)

Kinda fun imagining what sort of astronaut Andy thought could fit into a 22-inch diameter sphere. Perhaps a cremated one. I also notice he quotes Armstrong as saying "That's one small step for A man..."--Neon 01:07, 3 December 2008 (EST)

Oh Good Grief ! soo many errors , so little research, the kiddies homework should be fixing that lecture Hamster 01:15, 3 December 2008 (EST)

Andy is such a fucking idiot it would be the funniest thing ever except that people are paying him good money to actually educate their kids... People like him are way places like Germany and California restrict seek to restrict homeschooling. However, in his defense on the whole one small step for a man thing, that's what his source says and their is a debate over that.... But there is no excuse for the rest of that atrocity. I mean, for crying out loud "But in 1960, while Eisenhower was still president, one of these "U-2" (not the rock group!) planes crashed and an American pilot was captured. WTF the Andy? SirChuckB^{Call the FBI} 01:33, 3 December 2008 (EST)

As regards the "a man" thing, analysts have detected the "a", it just got drowned out in Neil's accent. Wazza^{Hello? Is there anybody in there? Just nod if you can hear me...} 02:04, 3 December 2008 (EST)

Armstrong bungled his line, if that's not mentioned, the "quote" should be the "script", not the error. S P U T N I K

beep

beep

beep

beep

beep

Hello science education! ħuman 02:52, 3 December 2008 (EST)

Armstrong didn't screw up his line. Here's something I also added to CP's Armstrong article eons ago: "One small step for clarity" --Sid 07:17, 3 December 2008 (EST)

I'm afraid that's probably a 'negative' on the "step for A man" revision. NASA says that subsequent analysis didn't confirm Peter Ford's conclusion from 2006. See the notes for the period beginning 109:24:48.--Neon 23:14, 3 December 2008 (EST)

"the communists built the "Berlin Wall" quickly while Kennedy was enjoying a long vacation weekend."

Seriously, why do you nice people make me go read this drivel? It reads like a badly informed high school student's rough draft. ħuman 02:56, 3 December 2008 (EST)

Personally, I like the "Castro has been the brutal dictator of Cuba ever since" (paraphrasing, too lazy to copy the real sentence.) Yeah, except the part where he retired to brutally dictate his fluffy slippers and comfy chair. Way to keep up with history there, Assfly. --JeevesMkII 06:19, 3 December 2008 (EST)

I don't believe it. Fidel Castro has some kind of supernatural comrtact going on that states he'll rule Cuba until every last enemy of his is dead. The man just WILL NOT DIE. :) --Gulik 13:57, 3 December 2008 (EST)

*cough*Ahem*cough*. There is indeed a Sputnik rocket. HOWEVER, it most certainly wasn't manned. It's part of the R-7 family of rockets ArmondikoV^postate 13:48, 3 December 2008 (EST)

(oops) --SpinyNorman 11:53, 3 December 2008 (EST)

Funny, btw, that Andy got very quiet about manned moon missions being a liberal fools' errand when he was reminded that Bush and a Republican Congress started the whole project Constellation boondoggle in 2005. --SpinyNorman 12:03, 3 December 2008 (EST)

Will he flip-flop it to being a great achievment of a conservative government? ArmondikoV^postate 13:48, 3 December 2008 (EST)

Andy arguing technical matters "Reformatted is jargon inappropriate for a history class." perhaps his next English class ? Hamster 15:31, 3 December 2008 (EST)

Wow, Andy actually meant "simulated": "I'm not sure what is meant by "simulcast". The word "simulated" is clear; the images were converted rather than being a straightforward live telecast. See Wired magazine's article, which I'll add as a footnote.--Aschlafly 12:23, 3 December 2008". Andy, you might want to learn what it means. The first one was in '67, and nations of the world contributed bits for it, including the Beatles playing "all You Need Is Love" in a quasi-simulated live performance (they played to prerecorded rhythm tracks). ħuman 18:45, 3 December 2008 (EST)

andy is confused because the technician who built the camera system mentioned the quality in SIMULATED tests that he had conducted. Simulcast is a term meaning tv and radio at same time , like for a concert or sports event, not applicable to the moon landing . I wonder if he actually READ the referenced report Hamster 19:17, 3 December 2008 (EST)

I always thought simulcast = broadcasting on many independent channels at once. Not just "radio + tv", but more like "all over the world" at its best. But I may be wrong. ħuman 00:32, 4 December 2008 (EST)

Oh, I imagine that he read it; he just didn't understand any of it. What kind of a shitty engineer doesn't immediately grasp that one would try some simulated upconverted transmissions before committing to a worldwide broadcast? Wait, don't answer that...--Martin Arrowsmith 22:31, 3 December 2008 (EST)

Capricorn One? OJ Simpson was in that flick.--Neon 23:17, 3 December 2008 (EST)

End of Schlafistory! OJ made the moon green! With liberal cheese!

"The Ten"

Apparently, Phil's conduct so far (in standing up to Andy) has gotten him expelled from the super-seekrit inner cabal of CP, "The Ten," who're apparently now "The Nine." Discuss.-caius (tinker) 01:26, 3 December 2008 (EST)

So who are the Nine then? DickTurpis 01:28, 3 December 2008 (EST)

I'm guessing everyone who was in the SDG minus Phil. That means... Andy Schlafly, TK, Karajou, TerryH, Ymmotrojam, Geo.plrd, CPWebmaster1, DanH and RobS. Accounting for inactive members - and the fact that TK probably hasn't been invited back to any sort of SDG - that's Andy Schlafly, Karajou, TerryH, Geo.plrd, and CPWebmaster1. So, The Five.-caius (tinker) 01:30, 3 December 2008 (EST)

1 We can haz link, plz?

2. THE NINE: 1. Andy. 2. Karajou 3. Ed. 4. Dean. 5. ? 6. PROFIT! PFoster 01:32, 3 December 2008 (EST)

What? No Ed? No Dean? is CPWebmaster even a real person? DickTurpis 01:33, 3 December 2008 (EST)

The list of the original Ten is at the SDG article. I'm guessing that, with the departure of those others, they've probably recruited in Ed & Dean at least. Oh, and I forgot Jallen, she was in it too. Interestingly, Conservative was emphatically not a member, and was openly disliked by "The Ten" at least at the time the SDG was published.-caius (tinker) 01:37, 3 December 2008 (EST)

My apologies, Ed was a member when it was published.-caius (tinker) 01:39, 3 December 2008 (EST)

TK's been invited forced his way back, don't kid yourself. He probably made sure he was in before he started editing again. JazzMan 01:42, 3 December 2008 (EST)

Still waiting for relevant link re: Phil being booted from the ten.Kaythanxbai.PFoster 01:59, 3 December 2008 (EST)

Do gchats with someone who'd know count? I has no link :(-caius (tinker) 02:07, 3 December 2008 (EST)

...only now? Seriously, I had expected him to be booted months or at least weeks ago. --Sid 07:18, 3 December 2008 (EST)

And nine, nine rings were gifted to the race of Men, who above all else, desire power. Holy shit, they're even making fictional history repeat itself! ZOOOOMG! Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 12:16, 3 December 2008 (EST)

Damn you! I was about to say that the nine have ridden from Minas Morgul and that they were men once. Stile4aly 19:54, 3 December 2008 (EST)

One for the Dark Lord on his Dark Throne.-caius (tinker) 20:21, 3 December 2008 (EST)

Wait. Did he really say 'Officers'?

The link has already been WIGOd but this wasn't mentioned specifically. Is this the first use of the word officers to refer to a sysop? It's the first I'm aware of and (by thw way) I think it's the work of a genius to subtly slip it in. I do hope it catches on. There was also talk of orders (which presumably MUST BE OBAYED). StarFish 04:38, 3 December 2008 (EST) (Nadgers! I forgot to log in again. Done it now) StarFish 04:38, 3 December 2008 (EST)

No, it's the new code word for "non-sysops who gained sysop authority once the sysops erased the Block Right grandfather clause". --Sid 05:46, 3 December 2008 (EST)

I'd hypothesise that it's possibly developed from Facebook terms. "Officers" there are group members that are listed as such but have no real power like administrators do. The similarities between the these non-sysop guys who still have block rights and run the show and Officers on FB groups is quite striking. Well, I presume anyway. I wouldn't attribute it to them wanting to start a military campaign just yet. ArmondikoV^postate 07:06, 3 December 2008 (EST)

If the CP article on Poland starts referring to it as "an easily-annexed country", THEN we need to get worried. :) --Gulik 14:00, 3 December 2008 (EST)

Bugler drops another hint.

cp:Megalomaniac. Now who could he be talking about...? --PsyGremlin_Whut? 08:32, 3 December 2008 (EST)

Just like his grade inflation article. When I saw that, I knew he would be the original author, and I was right. Godspeed 08:59, 3 December 2008 (EST)

I'm sure I remember reading once on CP Bugler claiming he never comes to Rationalwiki due to this place being a bed of vipers (or some such overinflated nonsense). But I was having a read through his talk page and came across this. I am pretty sure that HelpJazz has never referred to himself as JazzMan on CP ever, so how else would Bugler know that Jazzman is HelpJazz' user name over at the "cesspit?" Bondurant 10:22, 3 December 2008 (EST)

Well, I don't think Bugler is capable of being deceitful. So there is some other explanation, I am sure. Bjones 10:59, 3 December 2008 (EST)

Bugler admitted he read RW a month or two ago in a spat with PJR. Matt oblong 11:36, 3 December 2008 (EST)

Yes, he said he reads this page to keep tabs on us 'maggots'. I must say I prefer PJR's 'sock drawer' to 'cesspit'.--KrissAkabusiAwoogar 11:51, 3 December 2008 (EST)

The question is, which of you actually is Bugler. Bluefish 12:06, 3 December 2008 (EST)

Countdown to some wag sprouting, "I'm Bugler!.... and so is my wife!" in 5... 4... 3... --PsyGremlin_Whut? 12:09, 3 December 2008 (EST)

I'm Bugler and my wife is RodWeathers. Генгис^{Gum disease} 12:11, 3 December 2008 (EST)

All right, who said Jehovah?--Neon 12:15, 3 December 2008 (EST)

Alas! Alas! Alas! Teh banhammer will fall. Proxima Centauri 12:37, 3 December 2008 (EST)

I'm Bugler of Nazareth and also RodWeathers of Arimathea, King of the Britons. Publius 14:32, 3 December 2008 (EST)

The phenomenon in the megalomaniac page is called "projection". It's a real psychiatric term. The patient, in addition to denying his own neuroses or delusions, believes that those around him harbor those same delusions. It's rather counterintuitive that this phenomenon would actually occur. Until Conservapedia I had never seen it. (If I were a psychiatrist I'd be very familiar with it, of course.)

I first noticed this with the Homosexual obsession article. You can just imagine that it's a transcript of Ken on the psychiatrist's couch. The megalomaniac page is an amazing case study. Especially interesting is "Not all megalomaniacs have a lot of power, however. Many are ordinary people who take a somewhat pathetic pleasure in wielding whatever measure of power they may have." Check yourselves into clinics while there's still time, CP sysops. Gauss 12:40, 3 December 2008 (EST)

Umm, not to be a wet blanket or anything, but Bugler's only contribution to that article was a one line definition, and the "projection" was almost certainly written by vandals. Sorry for rainin' on 'de parade. Smyth 13:03, 3 December 2008 (EST)

Mmmmmmm. Bitten by Poe's law. Nice. Well, now that they know it was written by wandals, let's see how long it takes for them to take it down. Gauss 19:00, 3 December 2008 (EST)

OOOh... forget the Moar Hitler, it's the Moar STALIN! ArmondikoV^postate 13:44, 3 December 2008 (EST)

Gauss--I see projection ALL THE TIME in Intarweb political arguments. Few things are quite as comical as a hard-core dittohead accusing others of "mindlessly repeating talking points." --Gulik 22:26, 3 December 2008 (EST)

The deafening stupidity of Crock o' Shite

Presumably, this means that concerned women of pudsville and focus on the phallus or whatever they're called will be issuing a press release condemning every single murder committed by straight people that take place from now on? No? What does he want gay activists to say exactly? "We don't recommend or condone gay people murdering other people"? I think any sane person would notice that sentence has exactly one word too many. --JeevesMkII 12:34, 3 December 2008 (EST)

You have to remember that these people view homosexuality as a cause of things, like atheism or acceptance of evolutionary theories. It will NOT occur to them that the world has more than one dimension and more than two colours. ArmondikoV^postate 13:41, 3 December 2008 (EST)

The deafening stupidity of Ed Poor...

Read the edit summary. and then ask yourself: What sort of relationship do devout Muslims have with alcohol in the first place? PFoster 12:44, 3 December 2008 (EST)

Wasn't that his point? Smyth 13:21, 3 December 2008 (EST)

No, he's not that smart. He was really asking if the 12 step thing works for Les Mohammadens. Without realizing there is no way for them to develop such a problem... Hence the Idiot Award. ħuman 00:36, 4 December 2008 (EST)

Cute!

JessicaT wields her new, shiny banhammer... and... falls over under its weight. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 13:06, 3 December 2008 (EST)

At least she recognizes when she makes a mistake, unlike some.EternalCritic 14:25, 3 December 2008 (EST)

(EC) Meh, I'd forgive her. She was likely reacting to this. Most other hammer-weilders would have blocked for it without apology then ignored please to be unblocked. JazzMan 14:27, 3 December 2008 (EST)

Don't worry! Rod found an excuse anyway! EternalCritic 14:39, 3 December 2008 (EST)

So kawaii! XD nyu~ Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 14:41, 3 December 2008 (EST)

Of course he did! We wouldn't want any unscarred editors left, now would we? JazzMan 14:42, 3 December 2008 (EST)

(undent) Speaking of Rod, apparently parodist of a feather block together.

It seems telling Bugler his negative personal comments have been well documented is...wait for it...wait..for...it a negative personal comment!. (Although, ironically, it might actually be a just application of the 90/10 rule, I didn't do the maths) Bjones 14:50, 3 December 2008 (EST)

Re:Aziraphale and 90/10, I'll just point at Azi's talk page where Jazz and TK defended him against the last 90/10 accusation. --Sid 14:55, 3 December 2008 (EST)

I missed where TK defended him. That probably speaks volumes though.

Here's something funny, Az edits a bunch on Nov 18, and is blocked for 90/10 . His next edit is Dec 3, and he is again blocked for 90/10. That means that either (a) all of his edits from Nov 18 were being counted in the 90/10 ratio (and thus no person can EVER escape a 90/10 block, because even if their first edit after the block was "good", it was preceded by 10 "bad" edits, and he is therefore in violation) or (b), 90/10 can be applied across 1 total edit. Weeeee. JazzMan 15:08, 3 December 2008 (EST)

I've seen Andy ban new users with 2 edits for 90/10, so b) isn't impossible Publius 15:48, 3 December 2008 (EST)

I've had a sock banned for 90/10 after a single talk-page edit (on Bugler's page). alt 15:51, 3 December 2008 (EST)

I guess it depends. I think it's different if someone makes one questionable edit, their only edit, and then is blocked for 90/10 vs. someone who only gets 1 edit to have a second chance. I mostly just found option (a) (which is clearly what Rod was getting at) rather interesting. JazzMan 16:06, 3 December 2008 (EST)

I should have been blocked for 90/10, but haven't been. [edit] forgot to log in, Bluefish 16:22, 3 December 2008 (EST) 16:21, 3 December 2008 (EST)