Conservapedia talk:What is going on at CP?/Archive97

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>, <47>, <48>, <49>, <50>, <51>, <52>, <53>, <54>, <55>, <56>, <57>, <58>, <59>, <60>, <61>, <62>, <63>, <64>, <65>, <66>, <67>, <68>, <69>, <70>, <71>, <72>, <73>, <74>, <75>, <76>, <77>, <78>, <79>, <80>, <81>, <82>, <83>, <84>, <85>, <86>, <87>, <88>, <89>, <90>, <91>, <92>, <93>, <94>, <95>, <96>, <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)

RING RING RING

Phil's answer is here. Are you sure it isn't red, Phil? It could be red, but painted over! :D Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 09:08, 10 December 2008 (EST)

Wow, two edits later Bungler tells him he oughtn't be having a discussion at all! ħuman 13:48, 10 December 2008 (EST)

Apparently, answering the question was a bit too much to ask poor, beleaguered Phil. So, instead I get a bunch of creation on the web links which boil down to "It's too complex to measure, so we'll just say that specificity is a part of what "information" is, and approximate that by measuring an entity's ability to reduce entropy in its environment." *sigh* I guess a little intellectual honesty was too much to ask. Phil, the answer you were looking for is as follows: "I'm sorry, I have no demonstrable basis for claiming that a fish that loses its eyesight is a result of a loss of information, other than it seems intuitively true. Furthermore, I have no idea how to measure information, nor do my buddies at the discovery institute." And once again, Creation on the Web is not the font of all knowledge. You might do better if you broadened your horizons somewhat. Have you tried subscribing to New Scientist, or some other such popular science mag? --JeevesMkII 22:51, 11 December 2008 (EST)

He did make another brief answer, but it seems to be just more of the same, with a subtle touch of "They're all against me because I'm so devilishly handsome a YEC." --Kels 23:10, 11 December 2008 (EST)

Blue Telephone for PJR

PJR steered us in the way the article on information. Someone tried to tempt PJR over here, but got reverted and banned by Buggers: clearly they are not going to allow a debate on this on their turf. So...

Where information covers the same set of propositions it can be fairly straightforward to rank statements in terms of information content. PJR does it by quoting

She has a yellow vehicle.

She has a yellow car.

Which is pretty clear. However if one piece of information is different (other than in precision) the comparison in terms of quantity of information doesn't really make a lot of sense. We cannot choose on the basis of quantity of information between:

She has a yellow car.

She is going to vote for the Liberal Democrats

What matters is 'what' it is saying, rather then how much. The former is a lot of information to a car manufacturer. It means little or nothing to the political researcher, who is far more interested in the latter. Try setting the two statements to levels of precision where you think they are “obejctively” equal in information, say:

She has a yellow Ford Mondeo.

She is going to vote for the Liberal Democrats

You can then massively increase the information in the former without interesting the political researcher at all. He, frankly, doesn't give a **** whether she owns a 2002 car with 65,000 on the clock and furry dice in the windscreen. And 'tis the same with natural selection. Natural selection will select on the basis of 'what' a trait is, not whatever we can come up with as an “objective” measure of information content. In front of the court of Natural Selection a species cannot plea that its useless growth is a lovely useless growth that took absolutely loads of negative entropy to get just so complex as it is. The species that can run, simply, survives.

So we are after 'new' and 'varied' traits, rather than more information laden traits. We are after 'new information in the genome' Does it arise? Yes, of course it arises. It arises all the time, constantly, without pause. Let us define terms:

1.Information. Has to have specific entailements, something has to occur because of it or we have to be able to know something because of it.

2.Arising. To “arise” this information must not have been around at time T. Post T it must be around.

Can I give an example? Yes, new information in the genome arose 9 months before PJR's birth. The new information was “PJR”, the unique DNA that entails him (and would be plenty enough evidence to convince a court that Bugler is not his love-child). It tells us something, it didn't exist 10 months before he was born and it did 9 months after he was born.

Right. I'm going to read the Demski paper referenced by PJR. I don't want to do an Andy and rubbish a paper before I've read it. And so I have to see his argument that information “cannot be created by natural (non-intelligent) causes”. Seems like absolute nonsense to me: a river bed give plenty of information of where the river runs, the moraine tells us where the glacier used to be etc. Limiting “information” to “signal” information reduces the quote to a tautology: information someone produced to communicate can only be produced by someone. And, of course, that is not at all necessary for evolution.--Toffeeman 15:37, 10 December 2008 (EST)

Not having read the paper myself, and going purely on that summary of his argument, it would seem, just off the top of my head, that Dembski perhaps made the error of confusing 'information' with 'information that is obviously meaningful'. Where that falls down is that, just because information isn't obviously meaningful, this doesn't stop it being information, it simply means it's not easy to understand what it says. For example, if I were to type 'nav HablI', I'd imagine most people wouldn't have a clue what I was saying, and would perhaps think that is random gibberish. In fact, that is 'fax machine' in Klingon. 92.0.208.241 18:58, 12 December 2008 (EST)

Andy's take on Blagojevich

..of course mentions Obama and combines guilt by association with the fallacy of many questions. "Obama preferred Senate Candidate 1" and "will have to explain what he knew." Not mentioned, of course, is that Senate Candidate 1 was the one who refused to offer Blago anything: "Blagojevich said he knew Obama wanted Senate Candidate 1 for the open seat but 'they’re not willing to give me anything except appreciation. {Expletive} them.'" Not the craziest lie Andy's ever told, but worth noting before the Obama article starts asking if he's going to get a cut. Godspeed 16:03, 9 December 2008 (EST)

Don't be surprised if he tries to make this his next Lenski case, by claiming the other side is willfully suppressing information on the matter. --SpinyNorman 17:23, 9 December 2008 (EST)

Well, I was close. He's added a new footnote to his American History lecture to talk about this, and to tie in an implied Vast Democratic Conspiracy to also put a new Kennedy in the Senate to replace Hilary. True to form, this innuendo rates far more time in his lecture than Bush's handling of the economy, the Iraq war, or the controversy over the Patriot Act. Hell, Katrina doesn't even rate a mention. --SpinyNorman 18:18, 9 December 2008 (EST)

That's because those things might require him to admit that a Republican had, in some way, failed. Therefore they did not happen. --Gulik 19:12, 9 December 2008 (EST)

OK, wait. Lecture 13 is the last lecture? I sort of got the feeling they were speeding through history, but only 13 lectures? For the whole course? Reality check: Kids in AP classes get, roughly speaking, 160+ lectures, over 30+ weeks (9 months). Plus all those essays and DBQ's. I know homeschool classes often make up for the lack of class time with more outside reading, but trying to do all of US history in only 4 months? WTF? --Too tired to log in 21:59, 9 December 2008 (EST)

And although "Lecture 13" claims just to run through 9/11, he adds a big ole chunk of poop about a D-party scandal in late 2008. Arguably making his skipping of all the Bush scandals and disasters in between even more teh stupid. ħuman 00:03, 10 December 2008 (EST)

"Hsmom, you ..."

Would someone mind rephrasing that wigo? It doesn't really reflect what was going on, and it just seems rude to be calling a fairly decent and sensible seeming person (parodist or not) names. ħuman 20:41, 9 December 2008 (EST)

It's also really just an update/repeat of the earlier Yale Daily News wigo item... ħuman 20:45, 9 December 2008 (EST)

I can see how it would lose some of its comedy value when you're not picturing Chevy Chase saying it. Corry^{I've made a huge mistake.} 21:01, 9 December 2008 (EST)

You would be amazed how many times a day I don't think of Chevy Chase. - User $\pi$ 21:41, 9 December 2008 (EST)

Especially since it was Dan Aykroyd, wasn't it? --Arcan ¡ollǝɥ 21:55, 9 December 2008 (EST)

ħuman, is there a way to combine the items without messing up the voting thingy? I agree that they should be combined, as it makes more sense that way. And WTF is up with all that anyway? Hsmom: "By the way, there's an article on the front page that makes CP look stupid.", Andy: "No it doesn't, we like that article, it's praising us." Hsmom, DinsdaleP, et. al.: "Um, no it's not." Andy: <covers ears> "La la la, I can't hear you!"

Well, you can copy the text to the other wigo and comment out the defunct wigo poll number, but I don't know of a way for us lowly users to actually add the two sets of numbers up. And, yes, it was Dan Aykroyd. ħuman 22:42, 9 December 2008 (EST)

Was it Aykroyd? Randomly, Spies Like Us is one of my absolute favorite movies. Corry^{I've made a huge mistake.} 23:13, 9 December 2008 (EST)

Absolutely it was Mr. Dan. Also, I am going to comment out the offensive wigo now. Calling Hsmom names has no justification, and only reflects badly on us, as far as I can tell. Aykroyd and Curtin aren't playing this game with us to make it funny. ħuman 00:00, 10 December 2008 (EST)

You took out a Dan Ackroyd (who makes awesome wine, BTW) reference, with an edit comment from Jerry Lewis? Have you no shame?--Kels 00:29, 10 December 2008 (EST)

I don't remember my comment (that was like, minutes ago!) but I commented it out because we (RW) should have "some" shame. Calling La Home Skollar Mom an ignorant cunt seemed extreme to me. Even for us. ħuman 01:37, 10 December 2008 (EST)

While I agree with the changing, I just wanted to clarify that it said "ignorant slut" not, um, the other thing human said. --Arcan ¡ollǝɥ 02:47, 10 December 2008 (EST)

In case you haven't notices I changed it from "ignorant SLUT" to "ignoramus" & removed the HTML comment markers. Couldn't someone have done this, or similar, ages ago without all the theatrics? _and marmite 02:53, 10 December 2008 (EST)

If we didn't have minor theatrics, how can we possibly have a base from which to launch Headless Chicken Mode? - User $\pi$ 02:58, 10 December 2008 (EST)

Disputed Biblical Translations edit warring

Article history and talk page. This time, Phil didn't waste any time calling Andy's bullshit (on WIGO). Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 23:32, 9 December 2008 (EST)

Yeah, Andy keeps taking that kernel of truth about the textual criticism of John and running it into the crazy endzone. I'm willing to bet that that's the only bit of textual criticism he pays attention to, except maybe about the bit at the end of Mark that the snake handlers like so much. Corry^{I've made a huge mistake.} 11:15, 10 December 2008 (EST)

Art Cities

What a completely fatuous article. Once again JM shows that he hasn't got a clue. If it weren't so ignorant it would be really insulting. Silver Sloth 04:36, 10 December 2008 (EST)

I wrapped one of my orange trees with duct tape = art. Add Orlando to the list plz. Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 08:49, 10 December 2008 (EST)

<taps Norseman on shoulder> You are Christo and I claim my five guineas. Fretfulporpentine 09:53, 10 December 2008 (EST)

TK suppresses discussion as usual

A number of well established Conservapedia users criticize the Range Block culture. They fear the range block policy will prevent large numbers of people from editing Conservapedia and making it even funnier. Their concerns are reasonable. At least people who imagine Conservapedia is a good site will think they're reasonable. TK’s response. He doesn’t even try to answer the arguments. He just deletes everything and reminds them the discussion is closed. See here - Added by a user who forgets to sign things

User's castle violation! Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 08:49, 10 December 2008 (EST)

He may not get away with things this time. PJR reinstated it and others added their comments. Await developments. TK may win or lose this battle. Unless Teh Assfly gets tired of him TK will win the war. Proxima Centauri 08:53, 10 December 2008 (EST)

Proxima Centauri 08:51, 10 December 2008 (EST)

Yeah, Phil's irritated. He even edited comments on BRichtigen's talk page (see WIGO). Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 08:59, 10 December 2008 (EST)

I'd say that was tantamount to a declaration of war! _and marmite 09:02, 10 December 2008 (EST)

Some priceless advice from TK.--Bayes 13:55, 10 December 2008 (EST)

PJR's deathwish

Not long now, I reckon. Ajkgordon 09:32, 10 December 2008 (EST)

Have to agree. Apart from striking TK's words of wisdom, his Adultress spat with Andy's getting out of hand. _and marmite 09:40, 10 December 2008 (EST)

not sure how this will play out, and I have mixed feelings. I feel bad if PJR is kicked because he is doing his best to make what conservapedia is 'supposed' to be, and so it is a great injustice for him, as one of the few good editors and admins, to be forced out of the project. On the other hand, conservapedia will become even more of a joke without him, which might be better for the world in the long run. dream^ing _{Hail Eris!} 10:15, 10 December 2008 (EST)

Ah, conservapedia. The only place in the world where being a young Earth creationist makes you the reasonable one. I don't get all the love for PJR; he's slightly less stupid and insane than Andy or Ed. I suppose that counts for something...PFoster 10:19, 10 December 2008 (EST)

In my case at least, I don't have to agree with PJR to appreciate that he's a fair-minded guy who's always respectful, and tries to back his points up instead of just saying "because I said so". Those are standout qualities among the elder statesmen of CP. --SpinyNorman 10:23, 10 December 2008 (EST)

Yeah, Because my favorite edition of the bible says so is so much more valid and persuasive. PJR has only got his hackles up now because he has been attacked personally and likely gotten his feelings hurt. y'all can characterize it as a quest for the greater truth if you please, but I know^TM it is simple and petty pissiness on his part that is driving him on. He may be polite and civil but he is still a lying hate-monger and a fascist. Saying something nicely is not the same as saying something nice. That said, let's pop some popcorn. Hi Phillip! Go to Wikipedia! Stop whining and make a difference ^{Exasperate me!}Sheesh!_{Not the most impressive contributor here} 10:33, 10 December 2008 (EST)

Ah, conservapedia. The only place in the world where not being a total fucking bully makes you a stand-up guy, and having a modicum of justification for your completely unreasonable beliefs makes you reasonable. PFoster 10:38, 10 December 2008 (EST)

As far as those who like PJR, I'm pretty much ont he other side of the fence. He knows how this project works. It took him this long to get fed up with Assfly bullshit, so its pretty clear it only matters to him when it affects his views, or when its too obvious for words. I respect that he's standing up to Andy right now, but I don't think it makes him any more reasonable than any other YEC proponent. EternalCritic 10:41, 10 December 2008 (EST)

I can only say Bravo Philip!!!1 Better to die as a brave man than to live as a koward forever. JJ4e^{I christen thee Sir Annoyz Alot} 10:53, 10 December 2008 (EST)

PJR is probably like 90% of the others over there - happy enough enough that Andy has given them a platform to spout their personal beliefs, to ignore his ravings and stomping on anybody who messes with their writings. However, now that Andy has crossed the line into their turf, the daggers are coming out. I'm sure if Andy started deleting all Ken's Hitler piccies, Ken would come out spitting too. That said, he's probably among the best of a bad bunch. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 11:17, 10 December 2008 (EST)

Didn't this start when PJR came back, said that there had been family medical issues (which I hope are going well, if you're looking in the sock drawer, Philip) , and Andy pretty much said "meh?" He got a nicer response from RW than he did from Andy. There might have been bullshit happening before this, but I wasn't paying much attention then. Corry^{I've made a huge mistake.} 11:27, 10 December 2008 (EST)

He's willing to take the support for his lunacy as long as his Christian beliefs (biblical infallibility) and Aussie sense of fair play (Obama & BRictigen) aren't being called in to question. So really we shouldn't applaud him when he selfishly fights for them. Anyhow, it all adds to the entertainment. Again "Pass the popcorn". _and marmite 11:29, 10 December 2008 (EST)

If I had a quid for every time someone predicted the "end" of PJR, I'd have enough money to buy a few pints of beer at 1997 prices. Bondurant 11:30, 10 December 2008 (EST)

I'm sorry for Philip He said somewhere that he was raised indoctrinated and brainwashed by a Baptist family. He can't see how irrational he is. Perhaps it will be better for him if he is away from the cantancerous atmosphere at Constipedia. Proxima Centauri 11:38, 10 December 2008 (EST)

Ideally, PJR wouldn't be on our radar. I disagree with him and I know there is some heavily resistant snark from people who think liking him is only a reaction to the company he keeps, but I personally like what he has shown of himself as a person, and would enjoy hanging with him at some point. We could even talk about religion, since he can keep his cool and isn't a dick. I want him to go to Wikipedia, where he can have his fair say (even if it is against the prevailing atmosphere). I'm actually surprised he hasn't... it must be a heady sense of power knowing you personally are one of the bastions of the Trustworthy Encyclopedia.--Tom Moore^{fiat justitia ruat coelum} 18:41, 10 December 2008 (EST)

I"m surprised he doesn't start his own. Hosting's cheap, and Wikis aren't hard to set up. --Gulik 18:43, 10 December 2008 (EST)

Personally I like the guy too. He's probably one of these people who is difficult to dislike whatever his views. His apparent reasonableness, his politeness, his thoroughness, his sense of fairplay.... all these are endearing qualities.

But, and this is a big but, his theology is dangerous. Not so much his YEC on its own - that's an intellectual position at odds with the secular world and the overwhelming majority of mainstream Christian theology - but how his theology would impact on politics and power.

PJR fundamentally absolutely believes that his religion, nay, his take on religion, is the only one that is true. All others are deviants or opposites of this. He knows that everyone who is not aligned pretty closely with his faith will perish. If you don't believe the Bible to be literally 100% true, then you don't really believe in anything at all and will spend an eternity regretting it.

I imagine he sees it as his God-given duty to evangelise his beliefs. And, if he had the power to do so, his evangelism would be forceful. He has admitted as much.

He would install a theocracy based on his brand of Christianity. He would support the expansion of that theocracy across the world.

It would mean the end of all science that contradicts YEC. It would mean an end to religious freedom. It would mean the total outlawing of things like homosexuality, abortion, divorce, pornography, blasphemy, inappropriate dress, sex outside wedlock, and a host of other things. (And, for those used to Aschlafly's brand of Christianity, there would probably be no capital punishment, guns or water-boarding either.) And there would be a lot of war.

This wouldn't be a power trip. This is not about social control as it is for the likes of Aschlafly.

This is about saving eternal souls. And our petty worldly differences and suffering pale into insignificance.

PJR, if you're reading this, I apologise if I've got this wrong. But that's the way it comes across to me. Ajkgordon 05:29, 11 December 2008 (EST)

Perhaps PJR knows or imagines he's strong enough to survive this.Perhaps he's fed up and wants out. We'll find out in time. Proxima Centauri 14:09, 11 December 2008 (EST)

American History "Cleanup"

Something tells me the original text in the first changed paragraph of this revision is what really happened. --SpinyNorman 10:21, 10 December 2008 (EST)

...Your teacher = Andy? O_o Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 14:39, 10 December 2008 (EST)

Yeah... and wait, I missed the funniest part! He's about my and Obama's age... so he was but a wee lad in 1968. In fact, "27 April 1961" - making him just over seven at the time. ħuman 14:44, 10 December 2008 (EST)

Exxxxxactly. So Mama Schlafly took little Andy to the convention, and he showed his good conservative upbringing in manners and chivalry by laughing at the Reagan supporters. Oh, for a tape of 7-year-old Andy acting like a snotty little brat. --SpinyNorman 15:04, 10 December 2008 (EST)

It's not enough we have a whole wiki of a (nominally) adult Andy acting like one? --Kels 15:58, 10 December 2008 (EST)

I am staggered the number of time he mentions himself this lecture, I know he was alive then but still, it is not like he was a part of any of this. - User $\pi$ 19:10, 10 December 2008 (EST)

Also doesn't "pinned on" imply the allegations are false? - User $\pi$ 19:14, 10 December 2008 (EST)

!! "Reagan is credited with ending communism in Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union" !! _and marmite 19:20, 10 December 2008 (EST)

I remember a Gorba-something, but I doubt he really did very much. --Kels 19:34, 10 December 2008 (EST)

Some communist, no doubt. Had glass nuts...or something. --Yossie^{Spring in Fialta} 21:51, 11 December 2008 (EST)

Ed 'n' Pi

Ed thinks "... mathematicians have struggled for centuries to provide an exact value" of pi. What a silly fellow. _and marmite 11:45, 10 December 2008 (EST)

I'm not sure which way this should be taken: are irrational numbers an absurdity, as they impugn the majesty and perfection of god's creation, or are they a sign of the unknowable complexity of his creation? Publius 12:01, 10 December 2008 (EST)

Someone point this at Ed: "Being an irrational number, π cannot be written as the ratio of two integers. This was proven in 1761 by Johann Heinrich Lambert. In the 20th century, proofs were found that require no prerequisite knowledge beyond integral calculus. One of those, due to Ivan Niven, is widely known.] A somewhat earlier similar proof is by Mary Cartwright." Don't tell him it's from WP though. _and marmite 12:34, 10 December 2008 (EST)

But did those proofs use complex numbers? The axiom of choice? Proof by contradiction? Buncha commies!

By the way, this, by Uncle Ed himself, contains the classic case of proof by contradiction. Don't tell Andy! Gauss 14:21, 10 December 2008 (EST)

It will be a proof by contradiction. I feel dirty that Ed is thinking about me. - User $\pi$ 18:39, 10 December 2008 (EST)

There's a surprise

Even Special Ed thinks the parody's getting a bit out of hand. --Kels 12:06, 10 December 2008 (EST)

He's become quite conciliatory on WP too - he's probably working up a good history so that he'll be able to get sysopship next time he tries there. Using this to demonstrate his fairness etc. _and marmite 12:39, 10 December 2008 (EST)

Naw. He's subtly trying to say he is trying his best not to punish them and sooner or later (much later) he'll have to actually do something about it. 'Cause hey, how many times can you warn someone over a single month period before you actually have to up the ante? Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 14:37, 10 December 2008 (EST)

Deutschland has an Anti-English Bias

Apparently, Ed doesn't want historical foreign countries having non-English names. [1] Publius 12:42, 10 December 2008 (EST)

If English was good enought for Jesus, it's good enough for me. SirChuckB^{Call the FBI} 16:07, 10 December 2008 (EST)

If English was good enough for God, it's good enough for me. --Yossie^{Spring in Fialta} 22:05, 11 December 2008 (EST)

Aschafly would like to marginalize Phyllis Schlafly

Apparently, Ed loves Mommy much more than her own son. Ed: http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Phyllis_Schlafly&curid=8822&diff=583137&oldid=574794 Andy: http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Phyllis_Schlafly&diff=prev&oldid=455594 Patrickr 13:29, 10 December 2008 (EST)

I think they saw the same event in different ways - Ed didn't like any reference to students disrespecting the Conservative Madonna, while Andy liked it because of her put-down of the protesters. --SpinyNorman 15:08, 10 December 2008 (EST)

Final Replies

Halfway through a discussion, A. Schlafly tends to give final replies - sometimes two in a row.

Has anyone taken a closer look at this amusing phenomenon? --LArron 14:48, 10 December 2008 (EST)

That's the chivalrous way of saying "Now STFU"... --SpinyNorman 15:06, 10 December 2008 (EST)

I think it's the delusion that his marvelous insights will settle the debate, once and for all... --LArron 15:09, 10 December 2008 (EST)

I would like to offer my opinion that the Assfly knows that he's losing badly, and thinks that by making a subtle threat he can cause everyone else to back off so he can come back screaming a triumphant I WIN, I AM A MASTER DEBATER!!!!! SirChuckB^{Call the FBI} 17:23, 10 December 2008 (EST)

I don't think Andy even thinks of it as a debate. He's just frustrated that people won't open their minds and see the truth as he so clearly does. ħuman 18:17, 10 December 2008 (EST)

I don't know if he thinks of it as debate, more like open warfare. The idea here is to bludgeon your opponent into submission and open-mindedness. SirChuckB^{Call the FBI} 18:38, 10 December 2008 (EST)

Under the Bus you Go!

What is with Conservatives and throwing their own people under the bus when it suits their needs? I mean, here were see ASchlafly claim that Bush, GEORGE W. FUCKING BUSH often takes liberal issues. He also claims that those positions led to his defeat. The only liberal position Bush has ever really endorsed is the whole let Mexicans in, but even that has more to do with his business interests than his personal regard of illegals..... I'm glad I'm a liberal, those bus wheels must hurt a lot. SirChuckB^{Call the FBI} 17:32, 10 December 2008 (EST)

This is rich, too: "You seem to think that conservatives deify people the way liberals do. We don't." Right...--WJThomas 17:55, 10 December 2008 (EST)

What gets under Andy's skin is that he hasn't been deified for his brave truth-telling on CP. ħuman 18:29, 10 December 2008 (EST)

I love the whole "Republicans lost because they weren't conservative enough." Right. People wanting the party further to the right were the ones that nominated McCain and elected Obama? Corry^{I've made a huge mistake.} 18:01, 10 December 2008 (EST)

This seems to be the 28-percenters' new mantra. It allows them to maintain that their beliefs are 100% true and accurate without having to acknowledge that they were just rejected en masse by the "Silent Majority" they claim to represent. --Gulik 18:26, 10 December 2008 (EST)

Conservatives do NOT "deify" Ronald Reagan. They're just very fond of the soil on which he walked. --Gulik 18:26, 10 December 2008 (EST)

And feel compelled to invoke His Blessed Name at least once during every presidential debate. Corry^{I've made a huge mistake.} 18:59, 10 December 2008 (EST)

Well, George W. Bush is probably more Liberal than Andy. But then, so was Richard Nixon. --Gulik 18:26, 10 December 2008 (EST)

RJJensen and Citizendium/Wikipedia

Are RJJensen and D. Matt Innis the same person? Looking at RJJensen's writing on Wikipedia, it's doubtful he is the same author as the version that now appears on CP, unless he had an editor tweak everything and give him credit for everything. To go from "At Smith College he published his dissertation The American Peace Crusade, 1815-—1860, and books on William Jennings Bryan and world peace, and on Austria and the United States" to "Curti taught at Smith College (1925-31), where he introduced the first course on the history of American thought. He taught at Teachers College, Columbia University (1931-1942), where he was influenced by John Dewey and in turn influenced numerous promising graduate students, including Richard Hofstadter" have the writing styles of two completely different authors. Anyone buying his "I wrote the article!" statement?

A quick look at another of Jensen's articles shows Jensen as the author, and Innis nowhere to be found. It's doubtful they're socks of each other, so it looks like this one's a straight ripoff. Wonder if there's any others? --Kels 00:01, 11 December 2008 (EST)

Homework

Oh the stupid - its spreading. I wish I could dig up my old history teacher and sic her on Aschlafly and his students . Since when is one sentance a DEBATE ! Perhaps a paragraph or two rather than Freaking "Evil" arghhh ... I fells ill .. repeat after me class "paper or plastic maam ? Hamster 18:01, 10 December 2008 (EST)

Are you kidding? I Want to go after Andy. He may think he's the world's greatest educator^TM but he is just hurting these kids in the long to line his own pockets and, frankly, that makes me sick! Nobody, in any fashion, could realistically look at this tripe and think that it comes close to preparing these kids for an AP exam. But, 5'll get you 20 that around April or so he'll start bragging about how his kids all got perfect scores on the AP exam. Hey, when he does that we should demand that he scan and release certified copies of their score sheets.... You know, like a birth certificate. SirChuckB^{Call the FBI} 18:42, 10 December 2008 (EST)

Yeah, or e. coli bacteria. I've been tempted to go through his "American History" lectures and do an analysis here. They're long on test taking hints (which merely make the same points you find on the test administrators' sites) and right-wing political commentary, and very short on, you know, actual U.S. History. Godspeed 19:17, 10 December 2008 (EST)

Andy's response to student0 question 6 - "There was an exception for religion. But you're thinking for yourself, which is good." And I thought teh assfly was against students thinking for themselves.....^{— Unsigned, by: 121.91.28.111 / talk / contribs}

This bit's interesting. "The relatively scarcity of questions before 1776 imitates the weighting used by the college boards." This sounds fishy, but as a Canadian I don't know from college boards. Can anyone verify this? Aside from whether Andy's making this stuff up or not, it's another indication that yes, he is intending this "course" to be used as college prep. Which is delusional or scary, I can't decide. --Kels 23:38, 10 December 2008 (EST)

I find it BOTH delusional and Scary . I wonder if the French in VietNam even got a mention or the Chinese involvment in Korea Hamster 23:47, 10 December 2008 (EST)

and another OMG or WTF , I cant decide Student Four answers "I disagree with those who are fine with Korea being separate, nearly two different countries in belief and government" , NEARLY !!! *hamster runs shrieking out the door *

From my memory of the AP test, the 80 multiple choice questions cover evertything from 1492 to about 1995

(There were a few Bush related questions on mine) and Andy would have to pay off a lot of people to get his kids decent scores. The DBQs and essays may be about anything from the long time period... I would kill to be a scoring and read an answer to something like "Explain what problems occurred during the Reagan administration?" - None, he was sent by God to save the soul of America and everybody loved him. SirChuckB^{Call the FBI} 00:52, 11 December 2008 (EST)

LowKey

My prediction: Bugler answers with something rude and dismissive. TK or Dean or someone memory-holes it (get a screencap fast, folks), and LowKey gets banned for eternity and then some. Maybe another editor or two comments, maybe not. If Andy answers at all, it'll be something that ignores all points, calls LowKey a liberal, and supports Bugler as a "trusted editor in good standing" or some such. Other sysops, regardless of personal feelings, avert their gaze and pretend not to notice. Policy doesn't change, general pretense continues. --Kels 00:13, 11 December 2008 (EST)

LowKey thinks Bugler is not a parodist?! Remarkable. What then IS a parodist? Publius 00:29, 11 December 2008 (EST)

Andy won't read it as he loses interest in everything more than a few sentences long and dismisses it as a "rant" (which in his dictionary is defined as 'a paragraph'). If he does respond, he will just dismiss it as such, perhaps with an adjective or two sprinkled on for variety. Kallium^talk 00:59, 11 December 2008 (EST)

That strikes me as the basis for a very good article: Conservapedia:Rant according to Andrew or some such - please feel free to edit the red link to suit yourself, if you create the article. ħuman 01:29, 11 December 2008 (EST)

Actually, at this rate, policy might change. Just not for the better. Instead, I almost expect Jallen/DeanS/Ed to whip up some fancy new rule that forbids things such as discussing blocks (about time that "MYOB" becomes official), discussing with those in authority (as 90/10, this will be covered in "endlessly discussing", which will translate to "one post I don't like, and you're gone"), and placing fact tags (which already was sort-of pushed by Ed somewhere). In other words, the sysops will bow to the trolls once again, just like they did with the Grandfather Clause (re: block rights only to stop open vandals). --Sid 07:15, 11 December 2008 (EST)

Andy's reply is pure... Andy: ""Lowkey", your rant above on my talk page is silly. I looked at your edits over the past two months and they have been mostly talk with almost no substance." *sigh*

and then he goes on: A good coach cuts the talkers and plays the people who contribute the most value to the team. He doesn't care if the best contributers are thought to be rude or impolite by those who stand around talking all the time. So more... la la la I can't hear you, even if they are pulling my blog down around my ears. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 09:17, 11 December 2008 (EST)

Personally, I'm interested in Ed's undermining of Andy's authority. He wants users to bring problems to him, rather than Andy, making him the de facto leader. TK's tried it before, so it's a familiar ruse, but I doubt anyone would take their problems to TK at this point. Ed's problem is, the users don't trust him any more than TK, and know he plainly favours Bugler. --Kels 09:30, 11 December 2008 (EST)

That one made me laugh. Especially when you see how he handled the Abuse Helpdesk: "Oh, look, a lengthy complaint about Foxtrot's behavior on the AC article! *deletes AC article* *deletes section from Abuse Helpdesk* Problem solved!" And this guy now effectively tells people to go to him to do something about abuse? Haaaa haaaaaaa! --Sid 13:28, 11 December 2008 (EST)

No, no. You go to Ed for abuse, not about it. --Kels 21:53, 11 December 2008 (EST)

Called it! Although I should have predicted the you-talk-too-much-so-you-don't-matter part too... Kallium^talk 11:05, 11 December 2008 (EST)

I want to know what sports Andy played and where he gets the idea that coaches tolerate rude and impolite teammates. Model UN and Chess Club don't count as sports. Jrssr5 11:38, 11 December 2008 (EST)

Andy takes a pretty dim view of team sports, anyhow. Probably he never made the team. --Kels 12:18, 11 December 2008 (EST)

Load test

Hey guys, since you all hang out here I am going to post this here. Everyone should go here, poke around and let me know if 1)they see anything "weird" but more importantly 2) how it runs speed/load wise. Thanks! tmtoulouse 00:39, 11 December 2008 (EST)

Seems okay to me. Pages load nice and quick. --Kels 00:42, 11 December 2008 (EST)

ok for me , a bit slow but same as RW , I am on dialup :( Hamster 00:51, 11 December 2008 (EST)

It loads OK. I've got sysop buttons there. When I added it to my fovourites the computer said I already had that site although recent changes is a bit dfifferent and the URL is different. Proxima Centauri 05:28, 11 December 2008 (EST)

Hey why does the intercom show up here? - User $\pi$ 07:54, 11 December 2008 (EST)

What's this all about anyway? Totnesmartin 08:36, 11 December 2008 (EST)

He's probably testing moving to his own server? Fortinbrass 08:39, 11 December 2008 (EST)

Looks fine to me. Anything else fancy being added or are you just going to switch over to a different server? ArmondikoV^narchist 09:12, 11 December 2008 (EST)

Liberapediapedia vanished from cyberspace when ScribbleWiki went down. All the good or bad stuff that was on Liberapediapedia vanished. Having Rationalwiki at two different websites should prevent that happening here. Proxima Centauri 09:52, 11 December 2008 (EST)

More details will be coming shortly, but essentially we are moving to a dedicated server. Rationalbeta points to a snap to that new server. I am just making sure it is accessible, and seems to be functioning. More info to follow when the time to move comes closer. tmtoulouse 12:10, 11 December 2008 (EST)

Sounds like a good idea. Feel free to tap me up for the odd tenner if you need to. Totnesmartin 16:47, 11 December 2008 (EST)

Do Ed and Bugler see that TK is a threat?

A few times Rationalwikians have reported that others have supported PJR against TK. Other times they fight PJR as usual. It must be hard for those 2 to decide. Which is a greater threat to the way they want Conservapedia to be? Is it TK or is it PJR? Proxima Centauri 05:37, 11 December 2008 (EST)

Who cares, it's nice to see that on the Trustworthy Encyclopedia, they really don't trust one another! Totnesmartin 07:37, 11 December 2008 (EST)

Well, I am egging to PJR's side because he's the nice guy with a mountain to climb. Compared to the rest of the administration, Phil's one of us... he creates discussions where lulz flow like pixelated water, and if he leaves, there's no telling how far the rest of them will go to whitewash everything and end our enjoyment. See, with Phil there, we have WIGO entries with emotions like "HA, they're at it again!" and with him gone, it'll be like "oh shit, there they go again..." Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 09:43, 11 December 2008 (EST)

Wait a minute - you need PJR there to make the others look bad? I think you might be sitting too close to the screen... Totnesmartin 16:40, 11 December 2008 (EST)

I like PJR better than the other sysops because at least he seems to think that people who disagree with him have a right to exist. I think he's dead wrong about a lot of things, and I'm sure he feels the same way about me, but at least I can have a civil flamewar with him without being blocked FOREVAR the instant I start making sense. --Gulik 04:09, 12 December 2008 (EST)

CP Awards.

cp:Conservapedia:Awards. WTF? Medals? Ribbons? When did CP become the military? I'd like to think Geoff is taking the piss, but sadly... --PsyGremlin_Whut? 08:42, 11 December 2008 (EST)

Hate to say it, but that page is clearly a vandal magnet.--Kriss Akabusi^{AAAAWOOOOGAAAR!!1} 08:46, 11 December 2008 (EST)

All edits to the article have been by a long-standing sysop. I doubt it's wandalism. --Kels 09:04, 11 December 2008 (EST)

Neocons who have never been near any armed force in their life love to act like they are in the army or big ass hard men because of their mostly defencive weapon of gun that they use as a penis extention. It's not wandalised yet, but I can't tell if it's locked yet either. ArmondikoV^narchist 09:06, 11 December 2008 (EST)

It's not locked. WTF, we already awarded them a round of carefully-considered awards! Where are they??? ħuman 14:45, 11 December 2008 (EST)

Bush & Bible WIGO

Actually Aschlafly is right. Bush didn't say the Bible probably isn't true. He said it probably isn't literally true. As people who deal with this YEC thing all the time, we should surely be able to agree that the Telegraph headline is misleading. And the WIGO entry is doubly misleading because Aschlafly doesn't say that either. I'm gonna strike it if nobody objects. Ajkgordon 09:00, 11 December 2008 (EST)

If the subtitle is part of the headline, and it's hard to miss if you go to the article, then it actually says ""probably not" literally true". Which would make the WIGO accurate. --Kels 09:03, 11 December 2008 (EST)

1. The sub-heading is not the heading. The heading itself is therefore misleading. Intentionally so, I'd wager, as the Telegraph would know full well the big deal of Biblical inerrency in the US.

2. Aschlafly never claimed what the WIGO entry claims. He just claims that the Telegraph heading is inaccurate. Which, as argued above, it is.

Ajkgordon 09:14, 11 December 2008 (EST)

Fine, I'll comment it out, then. --Kels 09:27, 11 December 2008 (EST)

Did I detect a faint whiff of hands-on-hips there, Kels? :) Ajkgordon 09:28, 11 December 2008 (EST)

The edit comment was a Ren & Stimpy reference, since John K got mentioned in class the other day. --Kels 09:32, 11 December 2008 (EST)

LOL, I don't know what that means! Ajkgordon 09:36, 11 December 2008 (EST)

No sir, I don't like it. --Kels 09:50, 11 December 2008 (EST)

Oooooooooooooooooooooookay. Ajkgordon 10:04, 11 December 2008 (EST)

That's the normal response to Ren & Stimpy gags, actually. --Kels 10:07, 11 December 2008 (EST)

I'm down wiv da kids, innit. Ajkgordon 10:19, 11 December 2008 (EST)

WHAT THE FRAK?

Mr. Schlafly is an even stronger proponent of free speech than I am! - Ed Poor.

What?!?! We're talking about the same Andrew "revert and block" Schlafly here? The one who has basically just above this comment threatened someone who spoke out!? Holy shit. Really. ArmondikoV^narchist 09:35, 11 December 2008 (EST)

Ha ha ha!! "We can't bring it up, we get blocked for the 90/10 rule". Oh this one gets more priceless by the millisecond. My day is brightening already! ArmondikoV^narchist 09:37, 11 December 2008 (EST)

LAWL! Andy even admits Bugler's rude and impolite attitude. ROFL! Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 09:45, 11 December 2008 (EST)

But he doesn't want to admit being wrong. He's just dug himself into a hole with the guy that he can easily get out of by getting a little grubby. But he refuses to get dirt under his fingernails so keeps digging, and digging, and digging and each time it's going to be harder for him to back out, causing the coward (Yes, that's what this is, cowardly. He refuses to admit he's in the wrong.) just to dig in deeper. If Bugler doesn't single handedly tear CP apart I'll be very impressed. ArmondikoV^narchist 09:53, 11 December 2008 (EST)

I've copied the entire discussion here. I basically think LowKey deserves to have this aired and no doubt Schlafly will delete it soon enough. Besides, the "free speech" part is priceless. ArmondikoV^narchist 10:04, 11 December 2008 (EST)

TK did this all himself.

Politics of personal destruction. Now how often does Conservapedia smear Liberals and pretent Liberals are worse than they are? What about pretending Obama is a Moslem? Come on little Andy own up. Remember George Washington and the cherry tree. Proxima Centauri 10:02, 11 December 2008 (EST)

Which, ironically, is probably a myth. --Kels 10:06, 11 December 2008 (EST)

Half Conservapedia is as mythical as the cherry tree story. Proxima Centauri 10:23, 11 December 2008 (EST)

More Fun With History Homework

SarahW's answers are full of lulz. The most important person between 1945 - 1980 has just got to be Mummy Schlaffly. Oh, and LBJ started the Vietnam War to enhance his re-election prospects. Such insights! Silver Sloth 10:34, 11 December 2008 (EST)

Yeah, fuck you Martin Luther King, Kennedy, *insert leader of WWII*... Phyllis is where its at. Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 10:38, 11 December 2008 (EST)

I gotta say--you have to be more open-minded than I'll ever be to believe 1. Phyllis Schlafly was the most important person in post-WWII America and 2. Ali was right not to fight in Viet Nam. I can only imagine the amount of cognitive dissonance that must cause. PFoster 10:42, 11 December 2008 (EST)

*Warning - obvious suck-up to teacher in progress. Approach with caution.* --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 10:46, 11 December 2008 (EST)

Yep, the most important thing was that Phyllis stopped people from being treated as human beings. Awesome logic their dude. Hell, I'd put frigging Axl Rose as more influential and important than old crumble-face. ArmondikoV^narchist 11:01, 11 December 2008 (EST)

I can't wait to see Andy's grades for this one. --SpinyNorman 11:02, 11 December 2008 (EST)

In #2) Korea + Vietnam = >50,000 American dead, #4) Vietnam = 58,000 American "lives killed". So Korea was obviously insignificant. Kallium^talk 12:29, 11 December 2008 (EST)

"Without her, I believe the ERA would’ve been ratified, and we would have many problems-women drafts, gay marriage, social security for widows, same sex restrooms, etc." ... same sex restrooms? Barikada 15:10, 11 December 2008 (EST)

Oh yeah, that was one of their big "complaints" against the ERA. They that having seperate male/female bathrooms would be a form of discrimination by Gender. So all restrooms would be Unisex. Some of the crazier ones (::coughPhyliscough::) even said that males would be allowed to go into female restrooms and lurk around waiting for rape victims to attack. SirChuckB^{Call the FBI} 15:29, 11 December 2008 (EST)

She (and the rest of that ilk) have no right to throw in an oar regarding rape since they're the ones who want to ban abortions for rape victims (hell, some of them will probably say that if hte rapist marries the victim afterward it's all well and dandy) and give "automatic" consent so that martial rape doesn't happen. ArmondikoV^narchist 14:23, 12 December 2008 (EST)

That was pretty quick

And here I was planning to go the legitimate route and seeing how far i could take it. Ah well. Apparently they don't want articles on history. Not enough right wing slant I guess EternalCritic 11:24, 11 December 2008 (EST)

TK ain't gonna allow someone to make positive contributions on his watch. --Kels 11:30, 11 December 2008 (EST)

Linky? --SpinyNorman 11:46, 11 December 2008 (EST)

Here you go. It's not special. Certainly not WIGO worthy. EternalCritic 11:58, 11 December 2008 (EST)

Autumn foliage

Anyone fancy socking up and telling Andy "God made autumn pretty in order to impress Man" Schlafly about this --Charles SubLunar ^(mr) 11:51, 11 December 2008 (EST)

Pfft! God doesn't give a shit about aphids. Sheesh! is too lazy to log in

Apart from anything else, Deciduous trees are a phenomenon of temperate seasons, so autumn leaves wouldn't have been beautiful to semitropical early man - they'd have thought the trees were dying. Do the trees in the middle east shed leaves etc? {{SUBST:User:Toast/sig/sig}} 15:54, 11 December 2008 (EST)

Surely tropical trees do lose foliage, much as temperate evergreens do - but not all at once. (White pines, for example, lose about what looks like 1/4-1/3 of their needles in the autumn around here) ħuman 16:40, 11 December 2008 (EST)

They don't change colours, though, which is what makes it so beautiful. Wazza^{Hello? Is there anybody in there? Just nod if you can hear me...} 08:25, 12 December 2008 (EST)

MOAR LOONEY TUNES!!1

Excellent! TK has given his seal of approval to adding that rib-tickling Looney Left graphic to any page that mentions liberals (ie all of them). Let's go, kids!--Kriss Akabusi^{AAAAWOOOOGAAAR!!1} 11:58, 11 December 2008 (EST)

Between that and the Moar Hitler, I've got a long weekend ahead of me. By the way, anyone wanna sock up and explain that is wrong. Lieberman was actually defeated in the primary by the voters in CT, not the Democratic Party. The Democrat's objections were not over his support for Iraq, but his blatant disregard for the will of the primary voters (although one could argue that their objections were misplaced) Not that the glorious TK will ever listen to anybody else, but meh. SirChuckB^{Call the FBI} 12:31, 11 December 2008 (EST)

Stay Classy, Benjamin S

The more I read what this kid writes, the more the adjective "classy" comes to mind. Even more so when you consider he has to put up with this monument to idiocy. Bjones 12:23, 11 December 2008 (EST)

Andy's got a real hard-on about that whole beauty thing, doesn't he? --Kels 12:29, 11 December 2008 (EST)

He's really stroking over the correct capitolization of Hell as well..... apparently, we liberals don't recognize the glorious hell in all it's upper case fury. SirChuckB^{Call the FBI} 12:35, 11 December 2008 (EST)

He's trying his hardest to derail the subject. Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 13:16, 11 December 2008 (EST)

Idk if I'd say classy... I actually lowered myself to vandalize this place once to see if you would really archive it. :) --BenjaminS 23:55, 11 December 2008 (EST)

Cliche attack! GO!

Andy whips out the ol' Schlafly Reversal and follows up immediately with the Schlafly rearguard! EternalCritic 12:36, 11 December 2008 (EST)

Honestly, that bears a verbatim quote. In any other context, I'd've sworn that this was a joke:

Really, Ben? Do you also support gun control? Do you also think that beauty is in the eye of the beholder? Do you also spell Hell with a small "h"? All three are liberal positions, and I doubt you could name a conservative who supports gun control.

I love his progression from the substantial to the trivial. Normally, you want your rhetoric to progress in the opposite direction. I should add that the Democratic Party Platform has six whole pages devoted to the capitalization of theological terms.

[EDIT] Can someone please explain this bizarre "eye of the beholder" thing Andy brings up whenever he takes on pjr? I know he over-polarizes everything, but this one is just confusing. So what's he saying, that God likes ugly people less? Bluefish 12:51, 11 December 2008 (EST)

It comes from his idea that the fact that humans (and that means all humans) find autumn leaves beautiful, that means evolution did not exist, because the trees wouldn't be able to evolve just to make humans happy. Except when he says it, it sounds even more stupid. --Kels 12:57, 11 December 2008 (EST)

In autunm many trees have edible seeds and fruits. When out ancestors liked aubumn leaves that encouraged them to go out to woodlands and gather fruits for themselves, for their relatives who share their genes and for friends who may later repay that favour. Proxima Centauri 13:06, 11 December 2008 (EST)

Autumn leaves are one of his sillier examples, but I suspect what Andy means is that relativity in anything (including beauty) is a marker of liberalism. A good conservative knows that everything is black or white, right or wrong, up or down--there is no squishy in-between. More to the point, God created everything to be either this or that, and if you disagree with His standards ("I'll make some pretty autumn leaves for everybody to admire. And redheads, too."), well, then, you're hell-bound. (oops--I mean, Hell-bound).--WJThomas 15:15, 11 December 2008 (EST)

So, now Andy's trying to re-create Objectivism, only with himself in place of Ayn Rand, and MOAR JESUS? --Gulik 04:23, 12 December 2008 (EST)

This is great - TK left a bread crumb trail so the whole dispute will continue (calling Phil a liberal is a good way of yanking him into the convo) and BenjaminS, an admin, gets a Schlafly Reversal and was just feuding with Bugler over blocks. This means Ben is now another one of "them" who's being pushed out of the circle. Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 13:57, 11 December 2008 (EST)

Good lord. He's BECOME the Schlafly generator. Gentlemen, the accursed device is no longer parody, it is FACT. --Yossie^{Spring in Fialta} 21:21, 11 December 2008 (EST)

That's actually my fault. I kidnapped Andy a while back, and replaced his brain with a very small shell script. I was wondering how long it would take anyone to figure it out, so congratulations! --Gulik 04:23, 12 December 2008 (EST)

You are my hero. --Yossie^{Spring in Fialta} 04:39, 12 December 2008 (EST)

RodWeathers is a parodist, right?

Or is he just stupid? Does he actually think CP has an NPOV policy? DickTurpis 12:41, 11 December 2008 (EST)

Aye. Ajkgordon 12:55, 11 December 2008 (EST)

Weather's Law: It is impossible to tell the difference between parody and naivity. But holy hellfire (origininally not intentional, but now it is), did he just said that hell with a little 'h' is a liberal position!?!!!? ArmondikoV^narchist 13:11, 11 December 2008 (EST)

Oh hHell

Andy will not be amused... --SpinyNorman 13:56, 11 December 2008 (EST)

DinsdaleP, your contributions are lacking and you have been nothing but talk, talk, talk. /troll /troll /troll Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 13:58, 11 December 2008 (EST)

Hey, is it my fault King James was a liberal? --SpinyNorman 14:04, 11 December 2008 (EST)

The "small-h means you are a liberal" makes perfect sense, if you use Andy-logic. Real places are proper nouns. Proper nouns are capitalized. If you don't capitalize Hell, it means you don't think it's a proper noun, or a real place. The only people that don't think Hell is real are atheists. Atheists are liberals, liberals are atheists. Therefore, not capitalizing Hell is the mark of a liberal. Fairly reasonable logic, really, as long as you accept the part where atheists=liberals. Somebody should bring this to Andy's attention.--WJThomas 15:25, 11 December 2008 (EST)

I disagree. I think the glaringly obvious false premise is "The only people that don't think Hell is a real place are atheists". But I do agree that the argument is sound; it's just that the premises are false. This is a radical improvement over Andy's usual arguments, which are thoroughly unsound AND whose premises are false. Bjones 15:48, 11 December 2008 (EST)

I actually find Schlafly's views on this a touch on the liberal side. Personally I always write HELL in all upper case, ideally in massive letters, bright red, with flames and bats and skulls all round it, just in case anyone forgets that HELL is terrifying and scary and anyone that forgets it will go to HELL!!.--Kriss Akabusi^{AAAAWOOOOGAAAR!!1} 16:38, 11 December 2008 (EST)

Another h H

Hehe, I had to fix TK's embarrassing use of the "small-h" "His" referring to God in the California section before he got outed as a closet lib'rul... ħuman 15:40, 11 December 2008 (EST)

Hmmm, it got me a "Well, yes.....and thanks! :D" from TK - and a week long block from RW for "Inserting nonsense or gibberish into pages or edit comments". Great, that block comment will dog me forever. C'est la vie... ħuman 16:32, 11 December 2008 (EST)

Sorry, about that one Human. At least it's only a week. Генгис^{Is the Pope a Catholic?} 17:51, 11 December 2008 (EST)

Arguing with TK and Assfly

“To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead.” [2]

Is there any point in trying to argue with TK or with teh Assfly? Proxima Centauri 14:10, 11 December 2008 (EST)

Kind of like one, big seance when you think of it in those terms. --SpinyNorman 14:15, 11 December 2008 (EST)

It amuses the audience. Fortinbrass 14:18, 11 December 2008 (EST)

The irony is that he meant the quote for the evul liebrulz, not Andy and himself. And the audience = us! <3 Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 14:32, 11 December 2008 (EST)

Maybe we'll get an ironic echo to it later. Barikada 15:40, 11 December 2008 (EST)

Would that be "dramatic irony"? ;-) --Arcan ¡ollǝɥ 15:44, 11 December 2008 (EST)

Blunt knives ahead

We could be heading for another night of the blunt knives. Many American Conservatives mind very much that Democrats won the White House and Congress. I’m old enough to remember British General Elections when the Labour Party lost and I know what the aftermath is like. There’s often infighting. Some want to change and make their party electable. Others want to keep cherished policies that the voters reject. At Conservapedia Teh Assfly will destroy everything that he doesn’t like and everything that would upset his momma. Proxima Centauri 15:41, 11 December 2008 (EST)

I agree. I spent a few minutes today wondering what exactly TK's role in CP lately has been: if he truly is interested in destroying CP, as he intimated to so many of us about a year ago, he could hardly be doing a better job. I firmly believe that's the directly he's steering towards, then, and the blunt knives the next logical step.

Completely random side note. So I was watching Star Trek Deep Space Nine lately, to distract myself from pending exams, and a thought occurred to me. If you're not a Star Trek fan, tune out here. Otherwise, doesn't CP act exactly like The Dominion? Godlike, unquestionable founders (Andy), toadying middlemen (The Vorta: "Founder: you honor us with your presence" - RodWeathers, Ed, Bugler), and ultra-violent footsoldiers (The Jem'Hadar: "VICTORY IS LIFE" - Karajou, etc.). The only one whose place I'm unsure of is TK. He keeps switching sides, but he's always doing something evil. So that makes me think he's Gul Dukat. Hmm, I might be watching too much TV...-caius (tinker) 16:03, 11 December 2008 (EST)

(EC) He's still at it, don't fret:

(9:16:13 PM) Exculpatory1: sorry, i am slow, because i am rounding up volunteers for the Inquisition

...

(9:17:33 PM) Exculpatory1: its been 6 months, ed and i agree its time for another Great Purge ;-)

...

(9:45:17 PM) Exculpatory1: so, do you want to join the Inquisition posse?

(9:45:55 PM) Exculpatory1: ed is fixing things up with karajou right now, and we will then do another purge!~ :-D

He later claims that he was just kidding, but seeing as how it was (a) believable and (b) not funny, I bet he was lying about it being a joke. Just don't think it was Andy's idea, PC. It's TK all the way. JazzMan PS: Ames, in that same conversation TK admitted that he loves doing /8 /16 etc blocks just to annoy people. "(9:08:10 PM) Exculpatory1: took ames months to undo my blocks"

Wow, PPS: In that same conversation he Admits that Andy is totally wrong about Obama. Makes me wonder what he admits to Andy in private emails. JazzMan 16:36, 11 December 2008 (EST)

Pretty striking similarities, if you ask me. It's also worth noting that the founders had a matriarchal authority figure, frequently criticized the "limited thinking" of us mere solids, and when one of them showed sympathy for the views of their opposition (Odo), he was stripped of his abilities and exiled. --SpinyNorman 16:29, 11 December 2008 (EST)

Didn't Gul Dukat go insane? But yeah. Hey does this make us the DS9 crew? Totnesmartin 16:35, 11 December 2008 (EST)

Totnes; Gul Dukat DID go insane, and became the prophet of an evil race of demi-gods. Which I think just proves my point more :). And YES, it does make us the DS9 crew!!! I call Quark. Who wants to be Morn?-caius (tinker) 17:31, 11 December 2008 (EST)

I get to be Garak the Tailor --17:06, 11 December 2008 (EST)

Whoever you are, good pick. I always loved Garak.-caius (tinker) 17:31, 11 December 2008 (EST)

Also, wtf is TK talking about, "took ames months to undo my blocks"?-caius (tinker) 16:40, 11 December 2008 (EST)

Damn, today has been active. CP going into self-isolation mode, Caylee Anthony's body may have been found, and I finally got my shipment of large gemstones and rings. I had always thought TK struck a deal with Andy, something along the lines of reinstate me and I'll do your dirty work for you. Merry Conservapedia! Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 16:45, 11 December 2008 (EST)

I think TK is more like Dr. Smith from Lost in Space. Devious, crafty, always pursuing his own agenda - and you want him on the other guys' ship, not yours. Or something like that. ħuman 16:49, 11 December 2008 (EST)

I vote for TK as Baltar from battlestar galactica - new series.--Bob^{bing up} 16:58, 11 December 2008 (EST)

TK would be Tom Zarek from B.G. new series - back from "jail" and making trouble and alliances in equal measure. --SpinyNorman 17:04, 11 December 2008 (EST)

He always reminded me more of that small guy from Asterix and the Roman Agent who could start a fight anywhere. --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 17:07, 11 December 2008 (EST)

After reading Jazz's post, then immediately seeing this, somebody with more TK experience needs to enlighten me: Is this a game to him? He is obviously way too smart to actually believe any of what he posted and not to see Jazz's obvious point about Bugler. I mean, he's not a deluded true believer like Andy, right? He's just starting shit for the fun of it? (And that, I should add, is no condemnation. Starting shit for the fun of it is one of my favorite hobbies). Bjones 18:01, 11 December 2008 (EST)

Heading for a Night of the Blunt Knives Redux? Hardly. Who's left to purge? Jazz? PJR? Maybe Dinsdale and Tim? HSMom? Who the hell else edits on CP anymore besides "the Nine" and a revolving bunch of RW socks and other trolls who all get blocked pretty quickly. You can't purge an empty room. PFoster 18:06, 11 December 2008 (EST)

Bjones: Yes, and he's admitted as much (privately) to me, and I think Ames, and probably all of the cabal members.

PFoster: He's been trying to get rid of PJR for months now. If there really is a purge, I wouldn't put it past him to try and get Philip included in it. Other than that you are talking BRichitegsnegs (whatev), Dinsdale, Tim, Bohdan (?) and a couple others. Nobody really major; CP now is (in terms of activity) 50% sysops, 30% parodists, 10% wikignomes and 10% minor annoyances. And like 67% vandals.JazzMan 18:21, 11 December 2008 (EST)

What about Ames? And once more, TK thought I undid some range blocks or something? How's that again?-caius (tinker) 18:22, 11 December 2008 (EST)

Clearly Ames is part of the 67%. I thought I answered the range block thing, but I guess I was edit conflicted or something. I have no idea what TK meant by saying you undid the range blocks. I think if TK doesn't say something conspiratorial about you once per hour he goes blind. He probably had like 30 seconds left and had to come up with something really quickly. JazzMan 18:30, 11 December 2008 (EST)

Ah. Yeah, that's the oddest thing. I've never had block rights :(-caius (tinker) 18:55, 11 December 2008 (EST)

He might have meant "getting around the blocks", but then why would that take you months to do? And clearly that can't be true; you're all the vandals, and the vandal attacks didn't cut off for several months in a row. JazzMan 19:08, 11 December 2008 (EST)

Also still wrong, because I haven't had a "permanent sock" since May 2007 :-/. TK did always want to imagine me sneaking in though... I think Holmes needs Moriarty, as much as Moriarty needs Holmes.-caius (tinker) 19:17, 11 December 2008 (EST)

Seriously, I'm thinking Andy might be one of the biggest parodists of the bunch. Anyone remember Sim City? Where you'd spend countless hours building up a thriving city, only to drop Godzilla on it and giggle as it knocks everything down? That's the only explanation I can think of for making this guy a sysop again. --Kels 20:58, 11 December 2008 (EST)

I'm probably the only person in the world who never used the disasters in Sim City. JazzMan 21:23, 11 December 2008 (EST)

I usually made my own map with huge waterfalls for hydroelectric power... *ahem* Andy shows that evolution might be false, simply because nobody can be that stupid/blind/ignorant through normal means. Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 21:27, 11 December 2008 (EST)

That was totally the way to do it. Smart man, Norseman. I think the never-obsoleteness of hydroplants was a bug though: at least they "fixed" it in all future versions :(-caius (tinker) 21:32, 11 December 2008 (EST)

Oh, damn you all. Now I've discovered the original sim city was open sourced a while back. Now, if I ever boot in to Linux again, my productivity will go through the floor in a fit of nostalgia. I wonder if it has the original awful midi music? --JeevesMkII 00:38, 12 December 2008 (EST)

A few moar range blocks. There's 78.148.0.0/16, 67.69.254.0/24, 198.214.232.0/24, 206.51.96.0/20, 24.110.0.0/16. There could be more. Proxima Centauri 04:07, 12 December 2008 (EST)

American History Homework

It's understandable to point out all of CP's ridiculousness, but is there anyway you guys can remove the Criticism of "Student 26's" homework?

The poor kid was probably just writing what she knew Andy wanted to hear. That's no reason to attack her on your website. --BenjaminS 16:53, 11 December 2008 (EST)

I have to agree. I think the kids are the victims here. --Arcan ¡ollǝɥ 16:58, 11 December 2008 (EST)

Will do. Giggling at a schoolkid getting their answers wrong is actually a bit crap. We should stick to giggling at (ostensible) adults. Totnesmartin 17:02, 11 December 2008 (EST)

I strongly disagree with any change.... This is not about giggling at the student, this is about showing exactly what Andy's teaching brings out. I don't think for a second that this student, whoever they may be, isn't capable of much much more. The point is that Andy is accepting this drivel. If a student turned this in to me, I'd make them redo it in front of me right then and there, but Andy gives that top marks. I think it should stay. SirChuckB^{Call the FBI} 17:05, 11 December 2008 (EST)

saying "this homework shows how bad the teacher is" still puts the kid in the firing line. Andy IS a bad teacher yes, but WIGO puts too much of a spotlight on the children. Perhaps this could go in Andy Schlafly (no jokes)? Totnesmartin 17:11, 11 December 2008 (EST)

I think as long as the kid stays anonymous and is left alone personally, then the fact that this is what Andy's idea of a quality education results in is worth examining. The important distinction is not the kid's answers themselves, but whether Andy considers them good or not. --SpinyNorman 17:15, 11 December 2008 (EST)

What age are we talking here? I assumed these were high-school students, given that it's geared for SATs or somesuch, with some online adults joining in. Publius 17:16, 11 December 2008 (EST)

Dinsdale hit right on point, I'm not interested in mocking the kids, Kids worldwide tend to do the minnimum amount of work to get by, and it's up to the teacher to keep that in check. I think it should stay in. SirChuckB^{Call the FBI} 17:50, 11 December 2008 (EST)

The kids should definitely remain fair game as long as they are anonymous.--Tom Moore^{fiat justitia ruat coelum} 21:47, 11 December 2008 (EST)

Also, Andrew Schlafly is the person responsible for these kids putting their sloppy work on the innertubes - and generally instructing them to use their real names! I am still agog that the homework gets posted on an open web site. ħuman 21:49, 11 December 2008 (EST)

That'd be grounds for a law suit in Colorado SirChuckB^{Call the FBI} 23:21, 11 December 2008 (EST)

Why the hell are these kids taking an alleged college prep course when they can't even make their damned nouns agree? Half these kids need remedial writing 101, not Conserva-History 050. It really is a damning indictment of homskolling in general if these kids are typical products. --JeevesMkII 23:52, 11 December 2008 (EST)

9/11

I don't know if anyone pointed this out before but in his lectures Andy says the 9/11 hijackers were all Saudi Arabian, when only 15 were. He is wrong on even recent, easily checkable history. He is just such a bad teacher. - User $\pi$ 05:26, 12 December 2008 (EST)

Andy ♥ Muslims

I am now convinced and Andy has become more fanatical the longer he has spent in his echo chamber he actually had nice things to say about Muslims in 2006. - User $\pi$ 05:35, 12 December 2008 (EST)

You know, there's an interesting thought. We all wonder how someone so outrageously stupid and incompetent could have graduated with honours from Harvard Law, but maybe he was a different person back then. Oh, probably still conservative, given his upbringing, but if he was living in dorms he was probably separated from that a little. So I'm imagining (based on no evidence at all) a younger Schlafly that was pretty much a normal student in most respects. But he gets back out into the Real World^tm, and runs into failure, as his law skills aren't as good in practice as they were in class. Mommy bails him out, and he falls further and further into that sphere of religion and politics. That would be where he got "convinced by the evidence" that evolution is false, and all the rest, eventually popping up on talk.origins with his already crazy brother already fully converted. Heck, we've seen him dramatically increase his crazy in just a couple of years, I can imagine what's gone on before. --Kels 09:23, 12 December 2008 (EST)

Jinx _{hi Jinx!} is still around

I was laughing at CP Cdesign proponentsists article (my favourite bit was when they put the verdict at the bottom in brackets as though it was incidental) when I looked at the history a who do I see Jinx. Looks like he still pops into revert vandalism, I wonder if he still reads us? - User $\pi$ 18:25, 11 December 2008 (EST)

Strangely enough, a user named Cdesign proponentsists made another account and started wandalizing just a couple hours ago. Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 19:31, 11 December 2008 (EST)

Don't look at me my IP address has received a special dedicated block (see TK a 32 works just as well at keeping a pest out) and I am not going to go into that proxy crap PC was advocating. - User $\pi$ 20:56, 11 December 2008 (EST)

Dammit, you made me go look at his blog. Apparently he has spawned. Several times. His number one son looks exactly the kind of slack jawed yokel you'd expect. --JeevesMkII 23:02, 11 December 2008 (EST)

I was under the impression that Jinx was a 12 year old boy. Oh well, you learn something new everyday...Bjones 23:48, 11 December 2008 (EST)

Jesus Christ, Jeeves, WTF? Ajkgordon 09:31, 12 December 2008 (EST)

RightWingAndProud

CP needs another parodist like it needs another hole in the head. --Horace 19:43, 11 December 2008 (EST)

As Rob Wilco once said, the guy's a subtle as a banjo. PFoster 19:49, 11 December 2008 (EST)

Remember that any fanatical and neo-con enough genuine user essentially is the hole in the head... ArmondikoV^narchist 14:28, 12 December 2008 (EST)

Checkuser Rights, I Can Haz Them, Pleez?

BenjaminS now knows your IP, Ames...PFoster 19:46, 11 December 2008 (EST)

I still can't believe they gave TK back HIS checkuser rights. He's so invasive..... ugh, I need to shower just thinking about it.-caius (tinker) 20:23, 11 December 2008 (EST)

Don't worry about me. I still haven't figured out thow to use the thing. :) --BenjaminS 09:24, 12 December 2008 (EST)

Moar Hitler, Moar Range Blocks, Moar Cowbell

Couldn't the man-child just block the word 'MOAR' with the spam filter? Discuss. Bjones 23:36, 11 December 2008 (EST)

It's a slippery slope, yo. They block MOAR, the wandals type MO4R instead. What they need to do is start cracking down on the insanity like having Hitler on the front page. Then the wandals wouldn't have so much inspirational material to work from. --JeevesMkII 23:44, 11 December 2008 (EST)

Yeah, right, and gain credibility?! Pffft, not CP's style. :D Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 23:45, 11 December 2008 (EST)

Damn right! Keep that sort of thing up, and people will think it's some sort of encyclopedia! --Kels 23:48, 11 December 2008 (EST)

I'm actually not sure if the spam filter catches stuff in edit summaries... and it's really not like it would do any more than causing a minor hiccup in wandal traffic. Jeeves' comment went in the right direction, I think: The reason they get this sort of thing is that they openly provoke it by slapping Hitler into every article and by repeatedly blocking 65k IPs just to get a single proxy. Immature (even by CP standards) behavior apparently sparks immature wandalism. --Sid 03:56, 12 December 2008 (EST)

Heaven and Hell (not Vangelis)

Orange phone to LearnTogether (or Phil if he wants to take it up)

Jesus emphasized Hell more than Heaven in the authentic passages, with Jesus as judge. In this phony passage, however, Jesus refuses to judge and the woman never asks for forgiveness. Based on the authentic passages, she's headed for Hell. Based on the phony passage, she's not.--Aschlafly 13:43, 10 December 2008 (EST)

From The Blue Letter Bible (incidently, a wonderful site for translation and Strong's Numbers) [3]... lets poke around a bit. 54 occurances in the Bible[4]. Of the ones in the NT, 12 are geenna and 11 are hades. Twenty three instances of "hell" in the New Testament. Lets compare that to ouranos which is translated to "Heaven" 268 of the 284 times it is used. I'll let one of the more faithful to do the comparison as to if Jesus talks more about Heaven or Hell. I'll also point out that this is a very literal approach, there are other passages such as ἐν τῇ οἰκίᾳ τοῦ πατρός μου (John 14:2) with as "Let not your heart be troubled: ye believe in God, believe also in me. In my Father's house are many mansions: if [it were] not [so], I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you." It would be curious of Andy would consider this an 'authentic verse.' If it isn't, well, he's got to argue that one too (eventually his bible will be whittled down to a few passages in the OT about wearing women's clothing). If it is authentic, then Jesus would have told her "you're going to hell" (I'm using the capitalization found in the KJV here). I would also point to the Lord's Prayer (recorded several times over - Matthew 6:14-15 for example) suggesting forgiveness rather than damnation. If anything, my reading of Mark 11:25-26 is that you are your own judge -- if you condemn, so will you too be condemned; if you forgive so will you too be forgiven. This ultimately sums up the New Testament quite well. In the meantime, could someone add 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 to the disputed passages? --Shagie 01:59, 12 December 2008 (EST)

I noticed today that both the NIV and the ESV use hell. They also don't capitalize Pronouns that refer to Jesus, which is common practice amongst some Christians. Bluefish 12:04, 12 December 2008 (EST)

2c: Whether you are Christian or not, Hell is a place. In modern English, we capitalize fictional places, as well as real. Etc 18:58, 12 December 2008 (EST)

TK overlooks the naming convention when it suits him.

RodWeathers decided to bolock Sweetness. A few minutes later TK actually Welcomed him. Proxima Centauri 02:43, 12 December 2008 (EST)

He just doesn't look before he leaps. Nobody is fully compliant with the naming conventions. JazzMan 03:04, 12 December 2008 (EST)

Well, none of the senior staff are. Technically, even ASchlafly is a misnomer because it should be AndrewS. If you bring that up, how long do you last on average? ArmondikoV^narchist 14:30, 12 December 2008 (EST)

More Ed Poor Maths

You cannot say that infinite sets are "the same size" - time to learn about cardinality, Ed. Silver Sloth 08:13, 12 December 2008 (EST)

And does anyone else think that Ed's response is "I'm too stupid to read through and understand that much text so I'm going to criticise you on wiki technicalities instead." ArmondikoV^narchist 14:33, 12 December 2008 (EST)

Amazing

I didn't even think Ed Moon had any more respect to lose, but he manages. Seriously, why the hell does he think anyone would bring problems to him if this is the treatment they get? --Kels 08:46, 12 December 2008 (EST)

Nevermind that - Tolkiendil makes one edit Ed doesn't like (after creating the the whole Tolkien spiel over there) - BOOM! Banned and deleted. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 09:09, 12 December 2008 (EST)

Seems Ed was upset about the Eskimo/Inuit thing, but Tolkiendil was absolutely right about that. It would have taken Ed seconds to find out the facts, but he bans a productive editor instead. Another Godzilla in Andy's city, I guess. --Kels 09:16, 12 December 2008 (EST)

What Eskimo/Inuit thing? I'm curious. I can't find anything wrong with Tolkiendil's articles either. Even the Eowyn article ed's bitching about seems perfectly correct. EternalCritic 09:59, 12 December 2008 (EST)

You know how Ed's mind works... somebody knows more than me... exterminate! exterminate! --PsyGremlin_Whut? 10:03, 12 December 2008 (EST)

(for EternalCritic) Tolkiendil basically added a category for Inuit/Aluit languages, and Ed were insisting that Inuit covered all Eskimos. He got upset because Tolk disagreed with him, presumably, and banned him for making the category and applying it to the appropriate pages. I'm sure Tolk was more surprised than anyone for the ban. --Kels 10:13, 12 December 2008 (EST)

Its this "At this private school, I have the absolute right to remove any child from my class." that staggers me. Ed's got a class!?!?! What is he teaching for heaven's sake? Remedial Breathing? Frohlich 10:29, 12 December 2008 (EST)

Presumably it's some church school, and it's unlikely he got in on anything like merit. Heck, with him in an educational position, he could single-handedly destroy the entire Moonie church! --Kels 10:31, 12 December 2008 (EST)

Let's all hope his class isn't current events. --Kels 10:35, 12 December 2008 (EST)

I love his way of thinking there. "Egypt has Muslims. An Egyptologist studies Egypt. So logically, an Egyptologist must know all there is to know about Muslims. Writing assignment on the way!" --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 12:13, 12 December 2008 (EST)

PJR calls out Lyin' Uncle Ed

If nothing else, PJR has CPs best interests at heart. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 10:03, 12 December 2008 (EST)

Un-fucking-believable. --Kels 10:19, 12 December 2008 (EST)

Ummm, you could check for the bite-mark, Ed? --SpinyNorman 12:03, 12 December 2008 (EST)

I hope he never joins the police. "Oh sorry your husband is dead, ma'am, but... I just didn't see it happen." JazzMan 13:19, 12 December 2008 (EST)

Phil, you must use Ed's words against him even more. Show diffs. Ed is shown here (defending, mostly), here, here, and there was one point where Ed threatened to email Andy about Bugler but still shows that he was refusing to do any action himself (can't find diff!). Quit rolling over damnit. Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 10:20, 12 December 2008 (EST)

Yeah, I love that first one, where he warns everyone because of Bugler's language. No, he couldn't have been expected to figure out who was doing all the insulting, it could have been anyone! Man, I hope he's the janitor at that school he talks about, and not actually teaching the kids what he thinks he knows. --Kels 10:27, 12 December 2008 (EST)

Oh and I love the last part of your link: "If I see another lapse on his part, I will remind him." LOL he still won't do anything, he'll just ask him to be nice again. Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 10:28, 12 December 2008 (EST)

Its this: "At this private school, I have the absolute right to remove any child from my class." that staggers me. Ed's got a class!?!?! What is he teaching for heaven's sake? Remedial Breathing? Frohlich 10:29, 12 December 2008 (EST)

I can see it now...

Action: student is new to the class, drops his pencil.

Ed: "GTFO! FUCK YOU!"

Action: long-time student reading bible reaches into his pants and throws faeces on the wall.

Ed: "Okay class, settle down."

Accurate transference of behavior. Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 10:39, 12 December 2008 (EST)

Wow, this is just insane. Now he wants it all to be sent to his email, even though he asked for it to be brought to his talk page, and a threat for doing it besides. I guess it's easier to totally ignore when it's not in public, TK has taught him well. --Kels 11:02, 12 December 2008 (EST)

He just admitted that bringing situations to him results in punishment, seeing as how he kicked a student out of class for telling him something another student did. Wow. Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 11:06, 12 December 2008 (EST)

I bumped the WIGO and added info to it. Ed just threw white paint all over it. Bravo, Ed. Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 11:28, 12 December 2008 (EST)

Ed leaps into action - crapping on Jessica for calling herself an idiot. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 11:35, 12 December 2008 (EST)

That might be an attempt at a joke. --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 11:41, 12 December 2008 (EST)

Oh, Ed's a joke all right... --Kels 11:55, 12 December 2008 (EST)

This is all so unbelievable stupid so I won't beleive it. Surely the ability to write sentences(more or less) entails the ability to read sentences? Ed 'n Andy have stopped trying to be coherent. This must be all just a charade put on for our benefit. Mark my words, in the end this will turn out to be the work of Stephen Colbert! ^{Exasperate me!}Sheesh!_{Not the most impressive contributor here} 12:11, 12 December 2008 (EST)

An easy way to get blocked is to quote Bugler *LOL* --LArron 13:14, 12 December 2008 (EST)

Dawn of the Ed

Aargh, I know that I'm in the middle of all this but Ed really just makes my brain explode with his stupidity. We may not agree with Ken and PJR on what they believe but they are models of consistency within their own belief systems. Ed is postively schizoid. He portrays himself as jovial Uncle Ed the great wikipedian, educator and arbiter, expounding fairness and reproving himself if he does something wrong, but all the evidence points in entirely the opposite diection. His articles stink, he doesn't format, categorise, reference or wikilink something, (wikignome? nah he's a wikidolt). He claims to be modest but I can only assume that it was done tongue in (Andy's butt) cheek as he would parade his dross under Andy's nose for some sort of approval. He continually regurgitates the history of his "monumental efforts" at Wikipedia but can't seem implement one single policy of substance with any consistency at CP. He demands that editors contribute rather than criticise but deletes anything he doesn't understand and blithely consigns the works of others to a black hole. He is utterly useless. Of course, that's what makes him so useful to have at CP. I think TK knows this and awaking the zombie was part of his plan to destroy CP from within. Генгис^{Is the Pope a Catholic?} 13:22, 12 December 2008 (EST)

I'm really really really really really glad this thing was whitewashed. Normally people at least, you know, pretend that they have an argument when they know that they don't. Andy at least says "nobody seriously denies". Ed Poor just out right lies, and in an utterly provable manner. Does he really think he's fooling someone? Or is he trying to bring the site down? Lately, I'm thinking the latter. Ed, if you are just working from the inside send me an email. I'll keep your secret, I promise. But otherwise I have no respect for you as a human being. (And I used to, believe me!) JazzMan 13:26, 12 December 2008 (EST) PS: Someone should ask WP Ed Poor if he knows what CP Ed Poor is doing. I still think TK hijacked his account... but maybe Ed was in on it anyway.

Actually, WP Ed is still the same guy, just less obvious. He's still having trouble hiding his POV, while trying to look like the reasonable guy. --Kels 14:18, 12 December 2008 (EST)

Back on Tolkiendil

Please note: Poll number for this particular WIGO was messed up due to bumpage, it's been corrected.

Is this just an outright lie on Ed's part, or was there something off about the guy's articles? I took a look at Eowyn, and didn't see anything particularly wrong, although I remember Ed talking out of his ass about the article a while back and we made fun of him for it. --Kels 10:47, 12 December 2008 (EST)

I seem to remember Ed having a bee in his bonnet a while ago about the Eskimo/Innuit thing, so he probably dug up the Tolkein excuse when questioned. We'll wait and see just how many weeks he spends fixing it. My guess... none. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 10:56, 12 December 2008 (EST)

Well, I expect he'll remove any trace that Eowyn was commendable for her acts, instead of being subsurvient like a woman should. He was basically arguing something like that before, but Tolk managed to defend to an extent. --Kels 10:59, 12 December 2008 (EST)

As I recall, Tolkeindil had written that Eowyn was a disloyal woman because she disobeyed Theoden's command not to ride to Minas Tirith. Stile4aly 11:03, 12 December 2008 (EST)

Was that it? My memory's fuzzy about the whole thing, so maybe I'm off. --Kels 11:09, 12 December 2008 (EST)

Wasn't it that Eowyn was never "in command" according to Ed? & Tolk said that she was? Frohlich 11:17, 12 December 2008 (EST)

Ed seemed to think that Tolk implied that Eowyn was put in perpetual charge of Rohan and wanted it IMPLICIT that it was temporary. AS far as I can see the change was made and never reverted either. EternalCritic 11:26, 12 December 2008 (EST)

Not that Éowyn "was disloyal". It was written that she forsook her post of leading the people while her King was away, in order to ride with the Rohirrim army. That task (the leading) had been given to her in all formality by the King himself, and she had not yet been released from that duty. (cf. Talk:Éowyn) In the article it was simply referred to in the process of stating her waypoints during the War, as a simple indicator that she had not been released by her uncle. Then Ed came to ramble about how the outcome of her technical desertation was good (=killing the Witch-king), and that because of this you were not allowed to state that fact. Or something like that. The other thing about the command issue was Ed complaining that one sentence read "she was given leadership of her people when the King went to war" instead of "she was given temporary leadership while the King went to war". Because a) he seemingly wasn't able to add those clarifying words 'temporary' and 'while' himself, and b) apparently saying 'her people' can never be used to imply her belonging to a group, but instead means all-encompassing possession of the people by only her, and so Ed had to bitch at length and delete the whole paragraph. All in all Ed seemed to give of rather mixed signals; I haven't yet figured out what Ed means/intends by most of his comments and criticisms, and whether Ed wants to bash Éowyn or not. 217.95.250.3 11:51, 12 December 2008 (EST)

Oh, I'd forgotten about this nonsense, which he's just resurrected, about how it's totally impossible that Eowyn could have gone in disguise, despite the fact that the author of the damn book said she did. --Kels 12:01, 12 December 2008 (EST)

The funny thing in that comment is that he points to the Jackson-films in support for his argument, in which Éowyn's disguise in contrast to the book is apparent to the viewer from the get-go. The filmmakers even explicitly said that, unlike in the book, you could not really conceal her identity on-screen from the viewers, so they didn't. And it is of course entirely impossible not to get recognized as an anonymous warrior in a group of six thousand men who are gathered from all over the country, most of whom have never seen you in their live. 217.95.250.3 12:27, 12 December 2008 (EST)

I smell nerds . . . ^{Exasperate me!}Sheesh!_{Not the most impressive contributor here} 12:04, 12 December 2008 (EST)

Would you believe, I've never actually read LotR? I've read The Hobbit a couple of times, and The Silmeryllian (sp?), as well as the BBC radio version, and the Bakshi version of the first book and a half. And, of course, the Jackson films. But the books? Never. --Kels 12:21, 12 December 2008 (EST)

It's Silmarillion. [/nerd] And its not like it's required to read Tolkien if you don't want to. Just don't argument about the book based on your knownlegge of adaptions without keeping in mind that those often derivate quite a bit, in tone, plot or motivation. 217.95.250.3 12:27, 12 December 2008 (EST)

Actually, I'm not saying anything much based on those, although the BBC radio version stuck pretty close to the original text. It's more that I've been following discussions about the trilogy, reading excerpts, etc. for a long time, and it just sort of percolates down. So at this point, reading the books is practically a formality. --Kels 12:32, 12 December 2008 (EST)

sigh . . . ^{Exasperate me!}Sheesh!_{Not the most impressive contributor here} 12:36, 12 December 2008 (EST)

Yeah, that was just a statement in general, and not personally directed at you. It is often a problem with adaptions in general: people judging something based on no knownledge at all or one that derivates from it. But please, don't call it a trilogy. LotR is and was intendend as one book, internally divided up into Books I-VI. The three-volume thing came about because the publishers didn't want to do one big book. (I know, repetitive, but perhaps if stuff like that is repeated often enough someday the public conciousness will have it right ;-) 217.95.217.42 12:45, 12 December 2008 (EST)

Heh, I used to read E.E. "Doc" Smith back in the day, and his stuff was all written as single books, before getting broken into four or five pieces. Happens a lot, I gather. --Kels 12:48, 12 December 2008 (EST)

Never read LOTR? It's over between us! Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 13:29, 12 December 2008 (EST)

I r shame =( --Kels 13:44, 12 December 2008 (EST)

Too cute! Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 18:08, 12 December 2008 (EST)

That was an awesome show, short subjects featuring Michael Dorn as a super-competent weasel. --Kels 19:54, 12 December 2008 (EST)

*Thud*

Sorry, just had to get up and compose myself after Ed complemented DinsdaleP on an "Excellent Analysis" of his Liberal Reasoning article that showed how Sarah Palin supports socialist redistribution of wealth. My day is made. --SpinyNorman 12:09, 12 December 2008 (EST)

The page itself makes no sense, as the quote is about how everyone's politics are linked to their environment, not just liberals (whatever they are). But then again, nothing Ed writes makes sense. Every single edit he makes, almost without exception, makes Conservapedia worse. How did he get to be a sysop?--Kriss Akabusi^{AAAAWOOOOGAAAR!!1} 12:26, 12 December 2008 (EST)

You should be ashamed Norma. Complimented by Ed... how embarrassing. EternalCritic 12:29, 12 December 2008 (EST)

(EC) It's a standard Ed stub, he reads a book (or more likely an excerpt from a book) that looks like it matches his prejudices, so he just drops a blockquote on a page and calls it a day. Hell, I'm surprised he even had a sentence introducing it. It's not really clear whether this is a way of inflating his article count, an attempt to further discredit the place as an encylopedia, or if he's actually that incredibly stupid that he thinks it's a good article. --Kels 12:30, 12 December 2008 (EST)

That was what struck me at first - hHell, everyone is raised to think one way, and then has to decide at some point if they want to stay with that outlook or start going their own way. None of what Ed wrote actually supports any point that liberal reasoning is bad, good or anything in particular, for that matter. --SpinyNorman 13:00, 12 December 2008 (EST)

Another example is that I created a straightforward page for editorial, and asked folks to provide examples other than the NYT because that would be a ticket to speedy deletion. Ed's answer was a rant against liberal journalistic activism, with no actual suggestion for an answer provided, and then starts a tangent about global warming. --SpinyNorman 13:04, 12 December 2008 (EST)

As I've just noticed it very recently, is anyone else really creeped out by the "liberal characteristics and traits" template. McCarthy would be proud... ArmondikoV^narchist 14:41, 12 December 2008 (EST)

Poor Ed Straw Poll

Alright, something Fox said a few days ago got me thinking, and here's my question: Pretend for a minute that all the big dogs at CP fall into one of two catagories: Well-intentioned (construe this very broadly if you must) POV pushers who have found a home for their POV (Andy, PJR, JM, and Karajou) and nefarious shit-starters (Bugler, Rod, TK). The first group may be a lot of things (Bullies, Assholes, Idiots), but they are well-intentioned in the sense that what you see is what you get. While they may have agendas, they don't seem to have hidden agendas. The second group is characterized by, well, having a hidden agenda. I'm not always sure what Bugler. TK, and Rod are up to, but I guarantee you can't take their edits at face value.

So, which category does Ed Poor fall in? Personally, I've always taken him to be a very, very, stupid member of the first group. His alliance with Bugler and TK isn't because he shares one or more of their (hidden) agendas, but because he is so stupid he thinks they're well-meaning. But lately I've come to think that no one (with the possible exception of Andy) can be so blind as to not see that something is not right with Bugler, Rod, and TK. Which means Ed must have some other reason for throwing his support behind Bugler and TK. I think the simplest explanation (after we remove the "Ed is just an idiot" explanation) is Ed is up to something, and his support of TK and Bugler can be explained as part of a strategy towards that hidden something.

Thoughts? Bjones 13:18, 12 December 2008 (EST)

First group, without a doubt. --SpinyNorman 13:26, 12 December 2008 (EST)

Before his mysterious dissapearance and return, I would have definitely said the first group. The more I see, though, the more I lean towards group two. And if he does have an agenda, it's definitely the same as TK's, whatever that may be. JazzMan 13:31, 12 December 2008 (EST)

(EC) Both, I'd say. He's a POV pusher, but he hides his motivations for pushing that POV, and isn't terribly clear on what his POV actually is. For some reason, he helps out the second group while clearly knowing what they're about, and can sling the slang with the first group just fine. --Kels 13:32, 12 December 2008 (EST)

First group. I think part of the reason that Ed & Andy are so easily manipulated, unsurprisingly enough, is that they're so very "Christian" - i.e., willing to turn the other cheek to fellow travelers ONLY - that they're not willing to see deception right in front of their noses, regardless the amount of evidence. For example, it took me forwarding him DOZENS of conservations with TK/E Wig/NightTrain to convince Ed that TK was a parodist/deep-cover mole/subversive. Most others were convinced by e-mail #2. For Ed & Andy, "turn the other cheek" means "turn a blind eye" to those who espouse your point of view, and ruthlessly persecute those who don't. The confluence of that first point with their natural idiocy is why TK/Bugler are so very successful.-caius (tinker) 13:43, 12 December 2008 (EST)

I wonder if that's a fundie thing? Most normal Christians are trusting and turn-the-other-cheekish, but rarely to a fault. JazzMan 13:51, 12 December 2008 (EST)

Wait, is TK NightTrain? Bjones 13:58, 12 December 2008 (EST)

Yup. JazzMan 14:02, 12 December 2008 (EST)

TK is DEFINITELY NightTrain. And I think it is a Fundie thing - trusting to a fault only with other fundies, deeply suspicious of anyone else.-caius (tinker) 14:03, 12 December 2008 (EST)

I'd argue it's a human thing. Most people tend to assume that people who agree with them are 'better' in some way than those....OTHER people. In AndyLand, you just tack on the part about "people who disagree with me are PURE EVIL", and add in a massive persecution complex, and you get Andy's bizarre behavior. --Gulik 14:37, 12 December 2008 (EST)

Makes sense. JazzMan 14:44, 12 December 2008 (EST)

Hey Caius, any chance of seeing these emails? I'll post my email address if you want it private.EternalCritic 13:59, 12 December 2008 (EST)

I deleted them shortly thereafter :(-caius (tinker) 14:03, 12 December 2008 (EST)

I still have some of them but I'd rather not release: privacy of myself & others and such. It was mostly TK saying he'd played Andy for a moron, couldn't believe that Ed was playing along, and was gunning for database access (like Ed), after which he'd permanently delete all of Conservapedia. Ed was incredulous until matched the IPs of one of his e-mails from his hotmail address to his IP on CP's checkuser.-caius (tinker) 14:47, 12 December 2008 (EST)

I'll corroborate what caius said. TK told me that he he didn't worry about being kicked off CP by Andy as I could get back anytime just by telling Andy what he wants to hear. And I think we have seen ample evidence of that since he came back. As for seeing the emails, well ask TK I'm sure he still has copies of everything. Of course, there is a history of forged emails and screen-caps - well that's how TK explained his way out of Hoji's incriminating posts on photobucket and I know that TK has also used his own forged IMs to try and incriminate some editors at CP, so who can you really believe? Has TK come bck to try and help improve CP? No, TK gets his kicks being a manipulator and CP isn't the first locale that he has shat on. I would bet that there is somewhere else on the intertubes where he left his marks while he was away from CP. Генгис^{Is the Pope a Catholic?} 15:56, 12 December 2008 (EST)

Alright, one more question: Does anyone have a copy of what was posted to rationalwiki.info? I never got to see that debacle. Bjones 14:08, 12 December 2008 (EST)

I'll see if I can paraphrase:

• Main page there is a conspiracy! Operation Smoke and Mirrors!
• Operation Smoke and Mirrors: Coming soon!
• Conspiracy: Coming soon!
• Cabal: long list of names
• Random pages: Coming soon!

That's about all you missed. JazzMan 14:11, 12 December 2008 (EST)

It's partly accessible at web.archive.org, but most of the DARING SEEKRIT REVELATIONS (!) were stored as screenshots, so they're gone. --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 14:16, 12 December 2008 (EST)

I see my memory of the place was pretty freaking accurate. JazzMan 14:23, 12 December 2008 (EST)

First group. Bugler, for all his annoying posts, is clearly very well educated and very smart. The way he rants about some horrible trait while doing exactly what he's ranting about takes talent. Same for most of the other parodists - they just can't hide the fact that they're smart. Ed, frankly, makes absolutely no sense to me most of the time. I can't even figure out what he's trying to say. (Though the way he managed to get Conservapedia = Groupthink on the front page was pretty astounding - that whole incident still has me banging my head on the keyboard.) --Too tired to log in 14:31, 12 December 2008 (EST)

Bugler is what Steven Colbert WANTS to be when he grows up. The man truly is a genius. --Gulik 14:37, 12 December 2008 (EST)

Despite the disclaimors, I must quibble with the groups. I think they all, to varying degrees, have hidden agendas (CP is Andy's beard for instance, PJR just wants to tend his ego and sense of righteousness) the differentiator is whether or not their agendas are ironic. Adjust your world view accordingly. I'll wait . . . All done? Swell. I think Ed is in the first group. 14:47, 12 December 2008 (EST)

I don't think Eddie is in either group. I think he's just a lazy suck-up. He hangs around for the pat on the head, wants everybody to like him, hence the Jovial Ed front, and the sucking up to both Andy&Co and TK/Buggy, but he doesn't want to put much effort out, hence the stubshit articles and the "I'll do something next time. I mean the next time. Let me know next time and I'll do something about it, really", and the writing assignments and the delete-instead-of-fix-and/or-discuss, and the take-it-to-email-so-I-can-ignore-you-less-obviously, and why he goes by "Ed" (It's about the shortest common name possible, 'cept maybe for "Al").--WJThomas 14:52, 12 December 2008 (EST)

I agree with WJThomas. Ed really doesn't fit either group, but is a stand-alone type who has a god complex. He bullies, issues writing assignments, blocks on a whim, and plays favorites the whole time. He's the wild card, the black sheep, the red sock among whites, etc. Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 15:21, 12 December 2008 (EST)

I think Ed's the real deal. CP is his garden, he loves being (in his mind) the head gardener, and he sure as eggs won't let anyone he disapproves of let his or her dog roam in it, while affecting to be in charge of those who do dig up the flowerbeds. Hence his patronising attitude towards, but absence of control of, TK, Bugler and Rod.

BTW, where the hell is Kara?

Fretfulporpentine 15:28, 12 December 2008 (EST)

Karajou doesn't like TK. In fact some of Karajous' "retirements" were directly attributable to something that TK did. I think Karajou is an honorable bloke under his own worldview. OK he doesn't like liberals or atheists, but he's a patriotic grunt who will do or die for his country right or wrong. I don't believe he is deliberately deceitful but is probably easily led by those he trusts or looks up to. He has fessed up several times when shown to be wrong. So when TK opened the SDG I think Kara was really upset at the treachery and hasn't forgiven TK. It was remarked earlier (TWIGO passim) that he had been absent recently since TK came back and I think he's just waiting for the smell to go away before he comes back in the room. Генгис^{Is the Pope a Catholic?} 15:42, 12 December 2008 (EST)

TerryH is no fan of his, either. --Robledo 16:07, 12 December 2008 (EST)

Those of us with SDG access will remember Kara's blistering final e-mail to TK, regarding the SDG opening. Kara hates TK almost more than he hates me. -caius (tinker) 16:11, 12 December 2008 (EST)

I guess that was what triggered the recollectionn. Генгис^{Is the Pope a Catholic?} 16:15, 12 December 2008 (EST)

Why doesn't Karajou take a stand? It's not like he's going to be accused of being a liberal. If he truely wants the project to succeed (and I think he does) and he truely thinks that TK is a detriment (and I think he does), why not say something? Maybe (hopefully) it's happening behind the scenes. JazzMan 16:17, 12 December 2008 (EST)

He won't. He said a while back that he'd do something about Bugler, but never did. He's a coward who has no backbone to fulfill his own promises. Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 17:30, 12 December 2008 (EST)

Maybe he feels that other sysops carry more weight. TK has a very domineering personality (which even Andy finds difficult to resist) and with Geo and Ed behind him then Kara possibly feels that he would be marginalised. Генгис^{Is the Pope a Catholic?} 17:01, 12 December 2008 (EST)

Maybe this is the place for this and maybe it isn't. These were posted on WP last May, and I'm sure everyone here's seen them. Are they real? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Bluefish 16:43, 12 December 2008 (EST)

They were real, but TK explained them away with handwaving and reference to lib'rul deceits.-caius (tinker) 16:47, 12 December 2008 (EST)

Ed, Kara; I sorta feel like I've got them figured out. But the real mystery-wrapped-in-an-enigma is LearnTogether. Always there, beavering away in the background, not even close to violating the 90/10 commandment. LT has several times reverted obvious parody, but not fingered the perp. A few weeks ago he undid a half-dozen edits by one of my socks, but never said anything on my talk page, and never banned the sock. What's the story on LT? --Simple 17:35, 12 December 2008 (EST)

I'd say he's about 11 and pretty guileless. I'm guessing he didn't block you because he's overly averse to being the heavy mob, maybe after seeing how dicks like Andy, TK, et al. behave. he actually has a chance to grow into a decent human being, if he doesn't accept the behavior on Conservapedia as normal. Godspeed 18:14, 12 December 2008 (EST)

Learn together hasalways beena bit of an enigma. I put him down as an Andy brown-noser but this edit earned him some respect. Overall I'd put him in on the same side as PJR & CPAdmin1. Генгис^{Is the Pope a Catholic?} 18:23, 12 December 2008 (EST)

I think he's a good guy, but holds very strongly to the idea that Andy, as creator of the site, can do whatever he wants. (As evidences here) I think he's a pretty normal person, but doesn't want to take a stand against Andy. JazzMan 20:09, 12 December 2008 (EST)

2+2=5?

This just has to be the stupidest thing I think I've ever heard. "more people agree that autumn foliage is beautiful than agree that 2+2=4." Does Andy know a number of people that deny that 2+2=4? And since fewer people believe that than that autumn foliage is beautiful, there is a God and PJR is a librul? It really makes my insides hurt to see someone this incredibly stupid. 140.190.254.15 15:37, 12 December 2008 (EST)

Well even blind people probably agree that 2+2=4 but cannot know that autumn foliage is visually beautiful so they must tip the maths/fall balance.

Khant Acre

:BTW this seems like a good time to plug ORBIS, Mrs.Khant and I haven't given each other Christmas presents for many years, we like to help others instead, especially since she survived her cancer (through socialised medicine and it didn't cost us a penny more - apart from the hospital car-parking fees). Also, instead of a tree this year we bought a bit of Caledonian pine forest for the RSPB. Not boasting, just saying you don't have to be religious to do your bit in the world. Генгис^{Is the Pope a Catholic?} 16:12, 12 December 2008 (EST)

Oh, I love your idea about "buying" a tree in a forest instead of cutting one down. This is one of my favorite times of the year, cause i get to buy (and recieve, yes, I'm 5) silly things i wouldn't normally treat myself with. like perfume. course, this year? all our gifts are practice ones, not toys, perfumes, or candles. It's socks, Oil Changes, and new coats. Even the children's abuse recovery center we donate to on the holidays has asked for practice instead of toys. Scary time indeed. (we gave them zoo and the Natural History & Science museum passes this year) Tanks for the tree tip, and happy holidays.--En attendant Godot_{""We are all born mad. Some remain so."} 16:19, 12 December 2008 (EST)

The Royal Society for Protection of Birds is trying to preserve prehistoric pine forest in Scotland so it's not actually buying a tree it's helping to buy land where the trees can grow. I have personally planted over two hundred trees in my garden (mostly as hedging) including one "Christmas tree" that was bought in a pot almost 20 years ago and is now 6 metres high. So we have a lot of wild birds. We love it. Генгис^{Is the Pope a Catholic?} 16:44, 12 December 2008 (EST)

Nice pic. When can I visit? :D Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 17:32, 12 December 2008 (EST)

Ratwikians are always welcome for a drink if they're in the area of Atyrau. Генгис^{Is the Pope a Catholic?} 17:51, 12 December 2008 (EST)

I love Wordle

And Wordle loves Andy, Bugler, Ed and TK. JazzMan 16:14, 12 December 2008 (EST)

Hey, how come Rod isn't there? Doesn't he deserve a mention? Генгис^{Is the Pope a Catholic?} 16:18, 12 December 2008 (EST)

He's not conservative enough. Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 17:34, 12 December 2008 (EST)

Or TOO conservative! Anyway, I love this tool, so I just made one from the last 500 blocks. It likes Rod. Publius 17:54, 12 December 2008 (EST)

Moronic, gibberish, nonsense, inappropriate Good descriptions of Conservapedia admins when you come to think of it. Sounds like psychological projection. Godspeed 18:05, 12 December 2008 (EST)

Rod has had a metric butt ton of (I think) legit sock blocks recently. There were people creating Assfly1 through assfly1235332145, and he was blocking them right away. That's probably why. Granted, he could have been the one making those socks.... JazzMan 19:29, 12 December 2008 (EST)

small a andy

I hesitate to ascribe too much significance to this version of Andy's signature:

http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk:Disputed_Biblical_Translations&diff=prev&oldid=584402

but I take it as a sign of a deep-closet parodist coming out. --Simple 18:34, 12 December 2008 (EST)

Rod Strikes Again

Make an edit that suggests evolution could be accepted by some Christians or Muslims. Vandalism! cries Rod. And the editor is gone forever.