Forum:Conservapedia in bullet points
- Invariably pull the banhammer upon losing a debate
- Groundlessly impugn the honor of scientists
- Conflate liberalism and communism
- Propound every logical fallacy known to man
- Are like unto whited sepulchres
- No gripes. They are mean-spirited idiots, but they are of no real import beyond their marginal website.
- Conservapedia is simply one man's quest to manufacture his own variant of reality — Unsigned, by: 184.108.40.206 / talk / contribs
- The Banhammer - Conservapedia's answer to Godwin's Law
- To disagree with Andy/TK is to embody eb1l librulism.
- TK is an asshole. Discuss.
- TK is a parodist. Discuss.
- TK is both the above. Discuss.
- CP Logic: Banning user = I PWND UR ARGUMENT LOL!
While I do really like the BON's above, I'll go for something of my own.
- Not an actual encyclopaedia.
- Mostly hypocritical with respect to freedom and censorship.
- A good idea marred by the paranoia of its owner and lead author.
- Teaching lies and hate to children and claiming it's 'Education'.
- The bending or ignorance of fact to fit a preconceived story.
- Conservapedia: A celebration of ignorance.
- You can't spell "Conservapedia" without "CON"
- None really. They are of no importance whatsoever and all their traffic comes via RationalWiki - David Gerard (talk) 09:50, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
- Conservapedia: no liberal bias allowed, full of conservative bias
- anything can be disproven with a source or a fake statistic