Forum:Rationalwiki versus Conservapedia?

< Index | Site-related discussion

Hey all, I only discovered these two websites today, and instantly, I notice that Rwiki seems to dislike conservapedia. Is there some rivalry going on between the two? Personally, I'm on the rwiki side, which is why I made an account; conservapedia seems like the international moron convention of 2010, but I'd be interested to hear the backstory behind rwiki v. conservapedia if there is one. --Futile Crush (talk) 17:09, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Futile Crush, we're here to learn and teach. If you came to talk, talk, talk, then you in the wrong place. You're free to deny that 2+2=4 and that there isn't plenty of exactly what you asked for if you'd only open your mind and actually read RationalWiki rather than ask questions reflecting your lack of interest in learning and teaching. Godspeed. ÑR_{/Señor Admin}^/Talk 17:23, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

^theist 17:25, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

There is a lot of history between us. Start here and follow some links. come back after reading. :-) And welcome.--Bob^{Spring is sprung!} 17:36, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

The Nutty one speaks the truth, Futile Crush. Heed these words. ~ The Undecider (an anarcho-librarian) 20:26, 2 July 2010 (UTC)^{— Unsigned, by: Lumenos / talk / contribs}

So

I'm a total fan of Conservapedia because of its humour value... the shit is hilarious. So is this place serious, or is it a sort of serious but sort of a joke mockery of CP? Readmesoon (talk) 02:21, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

RW is deadly serious. Aceⁱ⁹ 02:57, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

So... everyone dies? I'm outta here. —rms talk 02:58, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

We all die. Aceⁱ⁹ 03:01, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

But seriously, RW grew from disenchanted CP users originally but is now a repository of anti-science documentation, political commentary and all round good times. Aceⁱ⁹ 03:03, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

So... a somewhat relaxed spoof of the greatest humour site of all time (well, maybe second)? Sounds fun. —rms talk 03:06, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

No, the site isn't a spoof. It started as a reaction to CP but now has a life of its own working against all types of irrationality including that found at CP, anti-science in general, authoritarianism ... Now I think about it, the main page says it better.--Bob^{Spring is sprung!} 16:54, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

When you say "anti-science documentation"... dammit, we need to just give up and speak in Lobjan or something. ^theist 23:13, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

I speak a little Lojban. "lo vreji be fi lo xlaki'uske" If I'm not mistaken that means "documentation about pseudoscience". Anti-science is hard to say in Lojban, because it really means "opposition to conclusions drawn based on the scientific method", and there's no established phrase meaning "scientific method" in Lojban (the word for "science" actually just means "body of knowledge"). I should coin one. --Quantheory (talk) 06:05, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Do please beat up the Lojban article - David Gerard (talk) 19:34, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Anything with conservatives attached to it alerts my bullshit meter. ^{— Unsigned, by: Supersmash43 / talk / contribs}