RationalWiki's 2018 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 seeing this today donates $5, we will meet our goal for 2018.

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: $3383Goal: $5000

Talk:Conservapedia

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Conservlogo late april.png

This Conservapedia related article has been awarded BRONZE status for quality. It's getting there, but could be better with improvement. See RationalWiki:Article rating for more information.

Copperbrain.png
Editorial notes

Incoherent, lumpy, jargon-filled and not a good intro to an outsider. We need this article to be really good because we are the go-to site on Conservapedia.[dubious]

This page is automatically archived by Archivist
Archives for this talk page: <1>, <2>, <3>, <4>, <5>

What Conservapedia needs[edit]

... is a good dose of creativity (as distinct from Creationism), regular doses of the 'more interesting, 'Er What?' and lurid' chapters of the Bible, BibleCelebrityGossip (tm), irony traps, and exposure to the inherent contradictions in their arguments, until until they get into a mirror maze and vanish/undergo spontaneous combustion. — Unsigned, by: 212.85.6.26 / talk / contribs

Really PISSED at Conservapedia[edit]

Just look at their article on autism and Asperger's.

They only call autism pervasive, suggest that mercury and obesity cause it, try to link it to Aethisim and just for the icing on the messed-up cake, use it to promote homeschooling.

I don't know about you, but being on the spectrum, I find this incredibly rotten and tasteless even for Conservapedia. The Rational Gamer, WonderKirby577Let's chat! 02:21, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

Welcome to Conservapaedia, I guess? This is American Conservatism, where we aren't thin-skinned and we hate political correctness and we aren't afraid to offend people and the Mexicans are takin' our jobs and eatin' our hamburgers and takin' our jobs... and takin' our jobs. You see, I hate my boss and I hate my job but I love my country so everybody, just clap your hands, if you love our country and you love out land! Thaaats right, and if you aren't clappin' your hands, you're a terrorist, and you eat sand.
Global warming's a hoax if you hadn't already guessed. Atheism and obesity and affirmative action cause autism and birth defects. We have the science to prove it. Yeeeeepp, and that last president was an African. Not even American and we 'elected' him, but we all know it was rigged by the lib-ruls.
<./sarcasm> Fareeha A (talk) 03:47, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

Why did you delete my edits?[edit]

Why did you delete my edits User:Christopher? I said to correct the mistakes that I made ,not delete my Edits. I am trying to contribute to RationalWiki. — Unsigned, by: Coolguy212 / talk / contribs

  1. On talk pages, please sign your comments using four tildes (~~~~) or by clicking on the sign button: SigButt.png on the toolbar above the edit panel. (You can indent successive talk page comments using one more colon (:) for each line.) Thank you.
  2. @Christopher
Reverend Black Percy (talk) 03:08, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
@Coolguy212 I didn't revert your edits, you did, you must've accidentally clicked rollback. Because I was the last person to edit the page before you did, it says "Reverted edits by Coolguy212 (talk) to last revision by Christopher" which is probably what made you think it was me. Christopher (talk) 08:03, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

Where's Conservapedia's true quote that says "sentences should not be facts."?[edit]

Where is the citations of Convervapedia's quote that says "sentences should not be facts? I can't find it in this article because there is no citation for it. Please, cite or give proof that this is Conservapedia's true quote "sentences should not be facts". Cite the proof here:

— Unsigned, by: Coolguy212 / talk / contribs

A day in the life of...[edit]

Conservapedia

  • 9 am (local time) Switch on the tubes to allow editing
  • 9.01 Remove some evil liberal facts
  • 9.02 Badmouth evil evolutionary facts.
  • 9.03 Promote brainwarp on the main page.
  • 9 pm (early to bed...) [1]

Can someone more engaged with CP (not being the centenary) develop the funspace article. Anna Livia (talk) 10:16, 9 October 2017 (UTC)