RationalWiki's 2019 Fundraiser

There is no RationalWiki without you. We are a small non-profit with no staff – we are hundreds of volunteers who document pseudoscience and crankery around the world every day. We will never allow ads because we must remain independent. We cannot rely on big donors with corresponding big agendas. We are not the largest website around, but we believe we play an important role in defending truth and objectivity.

If everyone who saw this today donated $5, we would meet our goal for 2019.

Fighting pseudoscience isn't free.
We are 100% user-supported! Help and donate $5, $20 or whatever you can today with PayPal Logo.png!

Donations so far: $3900Goal: $6000

RationalWiki talk:How I found RationalWiki

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Seriously, if anyone remembers, I really can't recall how I started up over here...--PalMD-If it looks like a donut, eat it 20:00, 25 November 2007 (EST)

hehe. was it before or after your row with andy over your qualifications? airdish 03:09, 26 November 2007 (EST)
We Shanghai'd you! Totnesmartin 05:12, 26 November 2007 (EST)
I remember I was "resigned" by TK after I had a fit about the way they dealt with the college campus shooting.--PalMD-If it looks like a donut, eat it 06:46, 26 November 2007 (EST)
Palmd001 last edit at CP = 4/21. It took TK til the night of the blunt knives to completely vanish you, but it looks like he probably blocked you on that date judging by your user page history. Your first edit "here" (RW 2.0) was 5/22, which was of course day one for 2.0. So, did Tmt (or another cabalist) write you while you were still active on CP, or did some of us already know about your blog and mention RW 1.0 there? (PS, researching stuff on CP right now is a real pain! Can someone get Andy to feed the hamster so CP loads as fast as, say, RW?) humanUser talk:Human 14:11, 26 November 2007 (EST)
Yeah, I was on RW 1.0 very early, but im not sure when...anyway...--PalMD-If it looks like a donut, eat it 14:18, 26 November 2007 (EST)

Apologies to Adny for a lost night[edit]

I was the friend... --Brianetta 20:07, 23 February 2008 (EST)


Just casually glancing through these, it is interesting to see how many editors still come from CP.--Bobbing up 11:58, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

Date Sorting[edit]

Is this now supposed to be sorted by when you joined, or when you signed the page? Jrssr5 13:15, 8 July 2008 (EDT)

Yes, that confused me too - what was the intention of the month separators? Hardly seems to make much sense as 'when you made the entry', rather than 'when you joined'? DogP 13:30, 8 July 2008 (EDT)
When I sorted it, people had been signing all over the place, and I wanted to latest additions to kind of show where people were coming from. Feel free to move your comments to "when you joined". Most people nowadays add themselves soon after joining, but of course many older members did so at random times after it was created in Nov 07. ħumanUser talk:Human 16:43, 8 July 2008 (EDT)

adding them up[edit]

Just added up all the origin stories... people found us via:

  1. Wikipedia - 37
  2. Google - 22 (mostly googling Conservapedia)
  3. RW 1.0 - 14
  4. Conservapedia - 10
  5. Offline recommendation - 5
  6. Lenski - 5
  7. Pharyngula - 4
  8. Uncyclopedia - 4
  9. Liberapedia - 3
  10. Dawkins.net forums - 2
  11. Fundies say the darndest things - 2
  12. AKjeldsen's Conservapedia column - 2
  13. Everybody else - 27

Not included: joke answers, can't remember, etc. Data accurate to within, ooh, that much. Totnesmartin (talk) 10:07, 3 April 2010 (UTC)


Wow, scrolling through this list brings back some memories. Memories indeed, so many old friends, so many new ones. I'm glad we set this page up. ħumanUser talk:Human 02:01, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

Pffffft, they are all just socks of one or two people. Acei9 04:32, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
Please to not spoil my fantasy. ħumanUser talk:Human 05:48, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
I want not to comment on it. I think polite post. Acei9 06:11, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
What the fuck is that meme, and where did it come from? ħumanUser talk:Human 08:54, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
Spambot Engrish, as garbled by multiple trips through a translator. See comments for e.g. - David Gerard (talk) 09:01, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

Hi there everybody. I just want to share my story about how I discovered RationalWiki. Actually, I just kind of stumbled on it while I was on line looking for new ways to bait right-wing types, a hobby of mine. I started with Nazis, but soon grew bored because it was too easy, and Nazis tend to be very uneducated and inarticulate. Go figure. Anyway, back in June I found this terrific website called Conservapedia. This was just the outlet I was looking for for my feelings of frustration towards these kinds of people. They were perfect; really conservative and they could string a full sentence together and they knew some things, sort of. I quickly tried to join the fun. Sadly, the guy who reviewed my request for an account saw from my IP address that I reside in Quebec, Canada. Apparently that was enough for him to label me a "Troll", whatever that means. He also said that I was a potential troublemaker and banned me from the site until 2020. A little harsh I should say! But in his defense, he did exchange a couple of messages with me, and that was fun. But this whole experience made me so angry. I can respect anyone's opinion as long as they have the testicular fortitude to engage others in some form of discourse. The folks at Conservapedia don't even want to hear another voice. That's no fun. This kind of intolerance is intolerable. So here I am again, looking for playmates. And as much as I appreciate you fine rational people, I must admit, you're not really what I'm looking for. I need someone who is at my level of intelligence and education (which is by no means off the charts) who can engage me in stimulating conversation about a myriad of topics, and whose arguments I can systematically pick apart and dispatch to the waste bin of archaic and nonsensical thinking. Are you out there secret other? The ying to my yang? Maybe this would be a good Idea for a new introduction service. That's my story.

KurtthinkingmanKurtthinkingman (talk) 14:46, 18 August 2010 (UTC)


I was thinking of archiving this - it's 57K long - but I like the way you can follow the history without having to branch off into subpages. Maybe we can archive it when it gets ridiculously long, like twice as big as now. Totnesmartin (talk) 19:05, 12 October 2010 (UTC)


What qualifies as root? B/c I joined in July '07, before the earliest listed month, but I don't think I'd consider myself a founding member. So should I just add in a July 2007 header? ThunderkatzHo! 05:00, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Me too - I just became Rooted because that was the only relevant slot offered at the time. Want to join me in a July 2007 box? DogP (talk) 06:43, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
Consider yourself joined. ThunderkatzHo! 06:59, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
You guys can add those months if you want, since it makes the most sense. I love this page. ħumanUser talk:Human 06:43, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
I still love this page. It's such a core part of our history, and I love how new people still add new months and "sign in". ħumanUser talk:Human 02:18, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Trent? Hello? HAARP lights are...?[edit]

DocWDocW (talk) 19:33, 31 May 2011 (UTC)I'm a Class of...old pal of Rob Secrest, Trent's pater, who put me on to this site. WHY are there no photos of Beethoven on the Home Page? Can someone sane, educated and rational tell me why I keep coming across references to HAARP? WTF does H.A.A.R.P. stand for, does Bill O'Reilly believe in them/it, and does it involve my receiving chocolate? And Australians don't know who this Schlafley (sp?) family are. Quein est? signed, DocW DocW (talk) 19:33, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Hello. HAARP stands for "High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program". Wikipedia's article is here, our puny stub article is HAARP.
About the Schlafly-s see Andrew Schlafly.
If you want to say "Hi!" to Trent, his talk page is here: User talk:Tmtoulouse--ZooGuard (talk) 19:47, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

What was the point[edit]

Of creating yet another far left Science denying Wiki?

-- (talk) 16:09, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

This page answers[edit]

Exactly why I'm not concerned with random snippings of rabidly anti-rationalwiki sentiment from the internet. (aside from the fact that those snippings are like 45% cranks and 45% rabid bigots, and maybe 10% legitimate concerns). People still appreciate the snarky deconstructions when they find it. People still come here, learn new things, and like the way we present about crankery. ikanreed 🐐Bleat at me 14:06, 5 September 2018 (UTC)