Nominations and Campaigning for the 2022 RationalWiki Moderator Election are now closed. The election booth is now open!

Difference between revisions of "Conservapedia talk:What is going on at CP?"

Template:AOTW Navigation As a point of etiquette, please use the [add section] tab above, or the "Add new section" link below, when adding a new topic, and the appropriate  tab when commenting on existing topics. This will lessen the incidence of edit conflicts. Thank you.

For non CP-related talk, please mosey on over to the saloon bar.

Archives for this talk page: Archive list

Economics Final Exam

What's your favorite question/answer combo? --Irrational Atheist (talk) 04:03, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

3. What is one cause of unemployment?

(a) an increase in the minimum wage. (b) a decrease in the minimum wage. (c) an undersupply of labor. (d) Gresham’s Law. (e) school.

Answer is most certainly minimum wage. These people don't understand anything about economics outside of a very very narrow, extremely unregulated version. Assfly is like J.P Morgan trading stocks in 1929..ugh JeffD (talk) 04:10, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Increase in the minimum wage is the only thing on that list that would, despite the factors being many and varied. I like the graph the best. - π 04:19, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
9. Why does Economics predict that someone with a college degree, with a major in a useful field, will earn more money than someone who lacks that degree?
(a) Because what is taught in school is always helpful.
(b) Because college professors make more money than anyone else.
(c) Because all schools know best how the free market works.
(d) Because college teachers understand the truth better than anyone else.
(e) Because “long run” planning – like completing college – is usually more profitable than “short run” planning.
Well let's see! Is it liberal strawman, liberal strawman, liberal strawman, baked beans and liberal strawman, or mildly sensible answer? Using Andy's test-taking tips I'm guessing the answer is e.
I love that so many of the questions (1, 5, 12, 21, etc) are like that. I guess it's easier to make the exam easy than to curve it... WodewickWelease Wodewick! 05:07, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
I'm actually shocked that he uses the standard "signaling" scenario and dosen't give the signaling answer. Economics predicts that someone with a college degree with a major in a useful field will earn more money because they have signaled to employers that they are smart by wasting their time getting that degree. Hipocrite (talk) 17:32, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
• "16. What is the marginal cost for the 4rd unit?" Icewedge (talk) 05:52, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
• Maybe he meant a 4rd F-150? Barikada (talk) 06:08, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
Groan. Keegscee (talk) 06:37, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
Come on, chaps & chappesses, surely the extra credit (girls) is the absolute tops for an economics exam! I have just eaten & stiltontalk 07:05, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
An effin' hand drawn graph for Q35/36. Gods is the man really trying to demonstrate his incompetence, or wot? [Q21]: caveat emptor: if Facebook is available, then it must be good non sequitur or what. Q12 ... and on and on ... the stupid, it burns! I have just eaten & stiltontalk 07:15, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
I'm confused on what's he looking for out of number 8. a link for the lazy. Now, I can see several of those answers being correct, but it's Andy, so I have no idea. SirChuckBObama/Biden? 2012 07:28, 8 January 2010 (UTC) PS, I love how Andy managed to fit his own hatred of working women into question number 9.
I love that graph. Not only is it hand-drawn rather than done on a computer, he obviously also doesn't own a ruler. And the lines at point D are so crappily done that it's not totally clear from the lines alone which is which. It's a masterpiece. MaxAlex (talk) 13:58, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
EC) Q8: prolly b)? (Bit of anti-anti-climate change legislation sneaking in?) I have just eaten & stiltontalk 07:34, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
The extra credit questions are amazing. Are they parodist detectors? Only a parodist would dare to get either of them wrong. "How does the concept of opportunity cost apply to this situation?" a: it doesn't, b: it doesn't, c: it does, d: it doesn't, e: it doesn't! "Is prayer good?" 4 answers no, one answer yes. WodewickWelease Wodewick! 07:33, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
What is wrong with the coaches decision? He is obviously setting up a wildcat play. The QB drop back (actually now I think about a naked bootleg would work better if the oline run blocks the other way) and hands off to the WR on an end around and the WR throws it up field to the running-back when the safeties cheat up. - π 08:41, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
For some reason, probably related to the above post, I now have a short movie replaying over and over in my head that goes something like this:
Schlafly on the sidelines, yelling at the ref: "What do you mean that was encroachment? Five yards? You reject biblical and logical reasoning. Your expertise in this field has converted you to an elitist gatekeeper, or do you reject 2+2=4 as well? Liberals often reject reasoning, tell me, do you oppose classroom prayer as well?"
At around this point, the ref opens his mouth to reply and Andy lunges at the ref with a hammer while screaming "Last wordism! Ban! Ban! Ban!'

Deciding which one of these examples is the most moronic is an impossible task. Although, the first question did a great job of showing us just how illegitimate this "exam" is. I know it's been said again and again, but those poor kids, when they grow up and have to sit out a proper exam, they're going to be in over their heads. Unless the exam they take is about girls baking cookies, the value of prayer and what type of baseball bat works best on homosexuals, they're going to be supremely unprepared. -RedbackG'day 09:47, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

(unindent) When I go gay bashing, I carry a good Northern White Ash, but my friends swear by the Canadian Rock Maple.... Personally, I think a hockey stick is better anyway, but that's just liberal multiculturalism. SirChuckBObama/Biden? 2012 09:59, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

An umpire is a perfect example of an elitist gatekeeper! If a batter hits a ball foul, or soccer player is offside, that objective truth should be obvious to all the spectators, and if there is any disagreement the best of the public in the crowd can decide. WodewickWelease Wodewick! 10:20, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

I am speechless, utterly speechless. Usually I just "meh" these exams but this one is truly extraordinary. I'd have to say my favorite is #12, it's not really a question, it's basically just a four-pronged rant about government funded health care. Etc 10:23, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
Oh, not even close. Number 22 puts every other question to shame. In full: "Public schools were better when there was classroom prayer and students often discussed the Bible. But now that prayer and the Bible are excluded from public school, our friend Jenna tells us that there is much profanity and foul language even by the teachers themselves and nobody feels comfortable talking about Jesus anymore." What does this illustrate in Economics? He must have had to work for hours to make that rant into a question.... I mean, I had to read it twice just to find out what he was talking about.... Is there any way we can report him? I mean, even with the free homeschooling laws, the states usually have some kind of law regulating what kind of education kids need to obtain before they're considered high school grads. This trash wouldn't even allow them to pass a GED test. SirChuckBObama/Biden? 2012 10:32, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
To be fair to Andy, I took his economics class about 3-4 years ago and It was actually pretty good. Taking only his class, and not studying anything else, I took the CLEP exam and score 73. (the CLEP is graded on a scale from 20 to 80 with 50 being a passing grade.) He does actually teach the material involved, and well enough for me to get three real college credits for it. (depending on the school) --T1mS (talk) 20:26, 9 January 2010 (UTC) (TimS/CPAdmin1 I can't seem to log in my account. I even had it email me a new password and it still wouldn't let me in.)
True ... I can't really answer this one actually. I guess I need to study some more Economics. Etc 10:44, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
I'm pretty sure he's looking for Gresham's Law, although it's not a very sane application of it. "People stop exchanging prayer/Jesus because it's artificially devalued by The Government, and instead exchange Government-endorsed profanity."
On another note, answers 8-C and 33-E seem strangely anti-democracy, although I guess it's not too unusual for him. ~ Kupochama[1][2] 12:17, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
Nah, I think its just an acknowledgment pretty much anyone would make: we shouldn't determine everything democratically, and democracy isn't perfect. MDB (talk) 12:32, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
Fair enough. It just seemed that way when combined with his style of making every answer a shot at "liberal" things. ~ Kupochama[1][2] 12:47, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Andy, of course, is fond of ranting about liberal bias everywhere in education, but just a quick skim of his exam shows roughly seven questions that are clearly pushing a conservative agenda, and there are probably more, if I knew much about economics myself. What was that thing in the Bible, Andy, about criticizing "the mote in your brother's eye when you have a beam in your own"? Or is that one of those darned liberal additions to the Scriptures? MDB (talk) 12:29, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Question 1 was great, but missing a key answer: "Did your economics test have questions on prayer?"

1. No
2. No
3. No
4. No
5. Yes, because it was taught by Andy Schlafly

DickTurpis (talk) 15:24, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Lol, Andy's economics is innovative, he changes the "supply and demand" paradigm , and replaces it with "Prayer and Scare" paradigm. Example : People in the USA are getting poorer,but access to goods is increasing,a)no b)no Americcaa , fuck yeahh, c) um yeah, surfeit!, d) nobody is poor, pray to god and tell our children the evils of librul sin and the invisible hand of conservatism will straighten things out. JeffD (talk) 15:44, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
What do you think the answer he's looking for on 4 is? Is Home Depot especially liberal? Hipocrite (talk) 17:29, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Is there a convenient place for us to post our well-researched answers to the Econ final to help any Conservapedians who want to cheat?--Martin Arrowsmith (talk) 21:02, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Do it using Sidewiki. They won't be able to delete it. CrundyTalk nerdy to me 12:00, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Regulation of Homeschooling

Regulation of home schooling, not surprisingly, depends on the state. Texas, for instance, has almost no regulations at all. (Basically, they boil down to "you have ta teach yer younguns readin', writin', 'rithmetic, grammar, and civics, but we ain't gonna butt in and tell ya how ta teach that stuff".) In general, the trend has been to ease requirements. MDB (talk) 12:18, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

haha, well it's deregulated because that's the whole point of homeskulin,you disagree with the gov curriculum and enviroment, so you teach ur kidz teh biblikal wahy. Althought o be fair, coming from my background, I knew lots of homskollar's and they had a fairly awesome quality of education. It all depends on the parents, if they are well-ff and responsible they hire tonnes of private tutors, and having dipped into this field myself, they tend to have pre-grad honors or grad degrees, it's not bobby-joe bible skollar from church.Also, since they set their own hours of schooling and focus , they tend to get higher concentration (if the parents are good) in essential areas like mathematics,mechanics of writing, civics... etc. Although of course , any parent that willingly gives their kid to the Assfly, after reading his discriminatory and bird course curriculum, is not on this list.. JeffD (talk) 15:44, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
"Bird course curriculum"?
I have no doubt that it is quite possible to get a very good education via homeschooling. However, to paraphrase Chancellor Palpatine, "not from an Assfly." MDB (talk) 16:47, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
Bird course, Canadian student lingo for impossible to fail.. JeffD (talk) 16:58, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

The Weakly T00N - Liberals can't drive boats?

Karajou thinks that liberals can't drive a boat. Or maybe whalers are all conservatives? Or... what? The biggest whaling countries aren't Christian, so... I'm lost. --Irrational Atheist (talk) 05:30, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Don't you sail boats? - π 10:57, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
Or steer? - π 10:58, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
No, he means, um, well, oh shit, I'm as confused as you. Do-gooders phail because they're liberal? ħuman 05:51, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
See thisimg for context. TheoryOfPractice (talk) 06:09, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
I saw that, I still don't get the 'toon. And his whales are not as good as his polar bears. ħuman 07:11, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
Ah, another Karajou attempt at topical humor. Seriously K, you're killing me. Go swab a deck or something. I think his main point is that liberals are so stupid they destroy themselves trying to protect whales.... But it's hard to say, it could just be that he's a fucking moron. SirChuckBBATHE THE WHALES!!!! 08:45, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
I am just pissed we still have armed Japanese ships in our waters. - π 08:52, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
"Our" waters? ħuman 09:01, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
Anything in the yellow area belongs to Australia. - π 12:19, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
(EC)I hear you on that one. Labor just sits there saying "we're working on it... still", and it seems that the Liberals (Australian definition of Liberal) actually don't seem to care at all. Their leader's been on the news trying to convince us that if the current government tries to stop the whalers, Japan will cease importing from us and we'll all die a horrible inflation-related death. So far as I'm concerned (and I believe I speak for a large portion of Australians as well), the whalers can go fornicate themselves sideways with the sharp end of their harpoons - but not before they get the fuck out of our territory (we don't want blood on the clean carpets after all). -RedbackG'day 09:03, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
The bullshit of it the navy will piss away millions chasing a few Argentinean fishermen all the way to South Africa over some fish, but the fucking large harpoon ships get a free pass. They are in our sovereign territory with guns, at what point does the navy do its actual job? - π 10:52, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Lemme just say, I think the whalers are bad peoples and hurt pretty kitties. I also think the activists trying to fight the bad kitteh killers present a lousy face. Then again, that's all based on some crappy History Channel show. Save teh sea kittehs! ħuman 09:09, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

But F**K Land Fish! SirChuckBDMorris for new Jinx! 09:12, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
I liek dirt kittehs and water kittehs!!!! Theys bothe prettie! ħuman 09:21, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

THE JOKE IS LIBERALS SUCK. It's the joke everytime, and all you need to know.--GTac (talk) 10:28, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

This is the first cartoon that didn't even try to have a punchline (well, maybe the Kippy The Liberal Clown one counted). It also looks like they're getting sketchier and sketchier. WodewickWelease Wodewick! 12:15, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
Pity. An okay build-up in the first four panels... and then Karajou apparently remembered that he somehow has to insert "LIBERALS SUCK". The result is... oddly broken. --Sid (talk) 13:03, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
Even though I worship the water Carl Giles walked on, there's something to be said for a multi-panel cartoon... if the person drawing it actually knows something about cartooning, instead of combining a poor drawing skill with a non-functioning sense of humour. Now, Karajou, sweetheart, I know you read this, so take note. In a 4-panel cartoon (don't use 6, it's stupid and verbose and you aren't getting your point across. Only the Sunday Garfield uses 6 panels) each panel serves a purpose. panel 1 = setting the scene; panel 2 = development; panel 3 = climax (no Uncle Ed, not that kind); panel 4 = conclusion. Easy enough. Now run along and try that out. Look, here's an example. --PsygremlinFale! 13:18, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
*yawn* Another week few days, another awful 'toon that has no comedic value unless you think "'liberals suck" is inherently funny every time. Tetronian you're clueless 13:52, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
Except for the bad artwork this time, the first 3 panels are fine, good use of the word "intentions". The fourth (and last) panel could have had a real punchline, the set-up was there. Internetmoniker (talk) 14:11, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

I"ll give him this much, he's finally made a cartoon about something other than global warming. Of all the things wrong with his cartoons, using 6 panels is the least of his concerns (This Modern World uses 6). He really should be giving a high priority to attempts to make them funny. I figured he'd never be able to write one a week, as it actually takes some skill to do so, but I forgot it's easy to write cartoons if they are devoid of humor, and if you use the same jokes (if I may even call them that) over and over. He drew some decent bears. I'll give him that much. his whales are serviceable, I suppose. DickTurpis (talk) 15:05, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

But Karajou was In The Navy (you can sail the seven seas) and he thinks that boats or ships are driven? What a dork!  Lily Inspirate me. 18:31, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Not recent, but still interesting

I was just looking at CP's information article (written mostly by PJR), and I think some of it is bullshit of the very best kind. For example, is information really the "third fundamental quality of the universe"? Tetronian you're clueless 14:48, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Well, it's fundamental quantity and not quality, but it's still kinda "...wha?". This claim is so vague and random that I'd like PJR to provide a source just so we can get some context. In it's current form, it's far beyond right or wrong. I had to look up "fundamental quantity" through Google (and found this page), but I still can't decide if this is a misunderstanding, a CMI claim or simply Philip's version of an Andy Insight. --Sid (talk) 20:09, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
Anything to promote the (negative) equivalence of information and entropy. Information cannot increase especially in evolutionary terms. That's PJR. I have just eaten & stiltontalk 22:26, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
We should get him to debate larron. Now that would be fun to watch. Tetronian you're clueless 14:16, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Muscle Cars

"placing a powerful engine in a classic two-door car for highly efficient performance" - this must be some new conservative meaning of the word efficient. I'm not sure that single figure mpg figures counts as efficient anywhere else. Bob Soles (talk) 18:12, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

8 mpg for the new Ford Mustang isn't it? Even Top Gear mocked that one as a bit wasteful. theist 18:17, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
Oh yeh, Clarkson got one and on a full tank he couldn't get from his house to work! Seriously, that isn't the concept of a muscle car at all. --GTac (talk) 18:26, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
(EC) Most of the muscle cars of the 60's and 70's ran between 8 and 15 MPG, but that is not the point. How the hell is "Muscle Car" a conservative word in the first place? Aboriginal Noise Oh, what a lovely tea party! 18:28, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
Because it's very American and libruls hate America. I added the "highly efficient performance" to the WIGO, if I was mistaken about this remove it. --GTac (talk) 18:33, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
Well, the low mpg means you fill up a lot, which is good for the oil companies, good for business, profit, yadayadayada... obvious really. theist 18:41, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
This is such a wonderful example of "That's not right - it's not even wrong!". Muscle cars aren't "efficient". Efficiency is not "conservative". Etc 18:43, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Beg to differ. Muscle cars were efficient devices for trolling for babes in the 1970s. I know, because I didn't have one, and couldn't get any girls to go on bike rides with me.--Simple (talk) 20:15, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Well it is hard to ride a bike in a mini-skirt. SirChuckBEl...ipses are Cool... 20:36, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

I'm gonna go out on a limb here and suggest that "muscle car" is a conservative term because Andy loves muscle cars. How old is Andy anyway? Is he ripe for a midlife crisis? Like buying a new car and cruisin' with the top down and his shirt open, displaying a medallion with the CP logo on it? X Stickman (talk) 20:58, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Stickman, i think you hit the nail right on the head. TheoryOfPractice (talk) 21:15, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
I think rather: Andy thinks that real men like "muscle cars". He's gotta show himself to be a real man so he's gotta approve of muscle cars. I have just eaten & stiltontalk 22:05, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
Masculinity eroded by females? I bet those bitches 'n' hoes are clamouring for Andy. SJ Debaser 22:08, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
Andy has previously given me impressions such as that he's stupid, sexist, paranoid, mentally disabled, deceitful and much much more, but this is the first time I have the impression that he has a really small penis. Etc 22:10, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
As the great Peter Griffin once said: "Every guy you see with a big house or a fancy car or a shiny gold tooth is really just saying "Don't look at my penis." SJ Debaser 22:12, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
I wonder if his wife makes him drive a minivan? Also, do we now have further insight into those really big buses he's chartering? ħuman 22:44, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
Along these lines, but totally off subject, my favoirte bumper sticker is "Nice Hummer, Sorry about your penis." SirChuckBLeave Death Threats Here 22:47, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
I suspect that Andy's reasoning is that liberals are the ones who emphasise efficiency and restraint in the name of global warming. So driving a fuel waster is cocking a snook at them. However, I would have thought restraint and carfeulness with money were very much conservative values. It's just another case of Andy's thoughtless librul-bashing. Private Eye readers will probably recognise a bit of the Dave Spart in Andy's arguments. ГенгисIs the Pope a Catholic? 11:34, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

The Economics Midterm Exam for girls

Hey all, new here so sorry if I get formatting and so on wrong, but since I see Mr. Schlafly ain't too keen on the idea that women have brains, I had a quick glance through the exam that can be found here ( http://www.conservapedia.com/Economics_Midterm_Exam_-_Girls ). Questions 1 and 4 are absolute gold, but I don't know if it's worthy of a new thing on this page. Again, I be new, so I do apologise if I'm getting anything wrong. — Unsigned, by: Webbtje / talk / contribs

That is indeed classic stuff. I can imagine Andy desperately wanting to make all these questions about weights and measures for baking cupcakes and coffee morning attendance estimation. I love 19(c) as well. DogPMarmite Patrol 18:46, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
Why does he even let girls sign up for his classes at all? Clearly he thinks there are dangers to educating females. --Kels (talk) 19:26, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
Especially ironic, since, if memory serves, his wife is an MD, and his daughter is studying engineering (?) at Princeton. I guess Schlafly women lack the "female inferiority" genes. (And yeah, I know, his wife wouldn't have the genes. Unless he married a cousin or something, and considering he apparently fancies himself some kind of blue-blood, would that be surprising?) MDB (talk) 22:27, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
It's likely that Andy is pussywhipped (see the muscle car wigo) and his wife protects their daughter from his sexism. He can probably only vent in his class because even his wife doesn't take it seriously enough to intervene.99.225.14.16 (talk) 22:01, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
So does she pay the bills? How much does andy take the students parents for? --Opcn (talk) 08:56, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
About \$250 a student IIRC. A quick flick through the family's history, the Schlaflys have a tendency to marry women better than them. Great-granddad Schlafly was a store clerk that married the daughter of a wealthy businessman, which is where the family's money comes from. Daddy married Phyllis McAlpin Stewart, who despite all the preaching about a woman's place being in the kitchen, has the sort of take no prisoner personality that made her a powerful political pundit and I doubt would be submissive to her husband. - π 09:48, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

He's only done it again

TK's uploaded That knicked piccy again. I have just eaten & stiltontalk 01:35, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Why the hell would he delete it and then re-upload it a day later? The Goonie 1 What's this button do? Uh oh.... 01:40, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
Prolly 'cause he was laughed at on WP about deleting it? I have just eaten & stiltontalk 01:45, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
He resized it, I think. It's now a bit larger (and blurrier) than the one he copypasted. Likely so he can troll on Wikipedia how it's either TOTALLY ABSOLUTELY DIFFERENT or (the more extreme version) that that site stole his image. Prepare for WP wikilawyering in 3, 2, 1... --Sid (talk) 02:29, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
For shits and giggles, I wanted to see how the original image can be 'shopped into TK's version. Turns out it's really not so hard: Resize, fiddle with the levels/gamma, blur, and you're pretty much done. Note that my quick attempt is not pixel perfect. I didn't take the time to "reverse engineer" the exact steps and parameters (not to mention JPG compression settings and whatever differences there are between TK's application and my GIMP), but the image at least makes a very strong case that this is the result of some pretty basic manipulation of the existing image and not TK's original work/photo/sign. ...now someone just has to tell me why I bothered to take the time for this. Jeez, I should be in bed. --Sid (talk) 03:27, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
The original upload had "own work" as the comment. Now it's just blank. You ain't fooling anyone TK. ГенгисIs the Pope a Catholic? 11:26, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
I'm curious. His original delete reason was "duplicate file". Now they suddenly need a duplicate file again. Terrykins, sweetcheeks, if you're going to lie, at least try to remember them. --PsygremlinHable! 17:43, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Who uses autocomplete anyway?

Seriously. I use autocomplete all the time when Google correctly guesses what I was going to search for anyway, but have you ever changed the topic of what you were going to search for because Google suggested something different? "Proper attire to wear to a baptis-... oh, what's that Google? Baptism is a devil pagan ritual? Yes, please tell me moar!" WodewickWelease Wodewick! 03:05, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Never underestimate the Wikipedia effect (or a variation of it in this case). If the suggestions sound more interesting than whatever idle query you wanted to search for... (Disclaimer: Hasn't actually happened to me (yet), but I could imagine that some people might fall victim to this.) --Sid (talk) 03:34, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
I get that with paper encyclopedias. look up Cervidae (the deer family) and go on to Cervantes, etc. Totnesmartin (talk) 10:38, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
• coughTVTropescough* --Kels (talk) 19:24, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
Just to torpedo any chance of getting things done today, did you know TvTropes has a page on Conservapedia? --Gulik (talk) 20:20, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
And us. Wisest educated Phantom! 20:48, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
Um ... Lots of people are concerned about this on the rationalist/atheist/bright side of things. --Opcn (talk) 09:19, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks Ken!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

the flare is up!img THAR SHE BLOWS!!!!!!!! Acei9 06:32, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Now what did you do to Ken? --Irrational Atheist (talk) 06:53, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
ewwwwww TK is a fag creepy. Acei9 07:46, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
TK stole my joke. Mei strongly disapproved. -- =w= 07:49, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
Ahahahahaha!! Ace, lock your doors! Tetronian you're clueless 13:48, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
Ken makes no sense. Ace, is that you flailing about in the ocean with a flare? SJ Debaser 17:03, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

JacobB intrigue! (actually it has nothing to do with Shakleton)

JacobB blocks Dan1212 as a "suspected parodist," a move I don't really understand as Dan hasn't made a substantive or controversial edit in weeks. His under-the-radar ban attempt is noticed, reverted and now TK is on the warpath. Is this the end of JacobB? WodewickWelease Wodewick! 10:58, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Eh, even if this isn't a show TK and Jacob planned in advance, and even if Jacob is blocked later on, it'll be too little, too late. Jacob has had half a year to insert potential parody into articles and he contributed to the general tone of CP spinning out of control. As with Bugler, it would take a lot of work to undo any potential damage, and also as with Bugler, nobody will do shit because they don't give a damn about articles that are not their pet projects. --Sid (talk) 12:06, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
If I recall, all that happened after Bugler left was that TK took his "essays" on the 70s and 60s and made them mainspace articles. --PsygremlinSiarad! 12:31, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
I forget, is Daniel1212 is the one obsessed with the word "homosex"? Tetronian you're clueless 14:15, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
Yes, that's the one. And TK's the person who keeps telling him to stop using the term. --Irrational Atheist (talk) 17:38, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
JacobB is supposed to submit a writing plan too, refusal to do that is kickable. Question is whether or not Andy wants the calculus course enough - I would side with TK and Mr Ed and suspect that Andy doesn't care. So either Jacob kisses the TK ring or he's gone. MaxAlex (talk) 16:32, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
lol why the hell did JacobB block that guy, his cred is fairly clear,and the rest of the admin's all over his talk page endorse him..wtf ...are we calling parodist on JB? JeffD (talk) 17:05, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
People have been calling parodist on JacobB for a while. But they do the same with Andy. Similar styles and all. --Irrational Atheist (talk) 17:38, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

JacobB is a parodist and a dick. I mentioned to TK last night that JacobB blocked Daniel1212 for being a "suspected parodist." That's when he intervened. There's nothing in Daniel's editing history to suggest anything but that he's a very earnest evangelical Christian. I can't say I personally like or admire him because he's an abrasive and smug fundie bigot, but I do know from editing with him at ASK and observing him at CP that I don't believe there's even a remote possibility he's a parodist. I'd stand up for the guy when someone like JacobB uses him as a pawn even if I didn't think it would offend him to be treated so shabbily by JacobB, a newer editor at CP. It looked to me that JacobB was throwing one of the few legit editors CP has under the bus as part of a low level power grab. Why anyone thinks it's necessary to emulate the style of CP admin is beyond me. I'm glad I wasn't around for Bugler; it wouldn't have made sense. To me, someone engaged in a project like JacobB's distracts from Andy's own hateful and logically unsupportable autocratic bent and those toadies who blindly follow him in the name of his brand of "conservativism." Such a project destroys the purity of the CP experience itself. It's like watching a guy in a monkey suit run around the monkey house at the zoo jerking off and throwing shit. The monkeys do it tons better and I'll oppose anyone trying to take their jobs. I don't object to writing parody on CP in theory, but I absolutely will not abide watching a dick like JacobB create needless suffering for so many people around him in the name of emulating the style of regular CP admins when they simply don't need anyone's help to continue doing what they do best. 18:36, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

To play devil's advocate: CP has never been a "pure" experience. Parodists have always run rampant, and much of the hilarity results from the way the genuine CP editors react to them. JacobB's objectives seem to be similar to Bugler's, which were to undermine the site and drive productive editors away. He's a dick, yes, but how is he any different from parodists in the past? Bugler, who probably initiated more hilarity than anybody else, was just as much of a bully as Jacob. Tetronian you're clueless 19:28, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
At the risk of sounding like Andy: what a rant, NuttyRoux! I'm not sure if Jacob stole your best girl, but creating needless suffering? A Bugler style parodist does nothing but accelerate the natural course of affairs at CP. Sane, conservative editors invariably deal with utter jackassery, whether it be from TK, Ed, Rob, Karajou, Jpatt, or Andy. They all end up disillusioned and leave. The difference with accelerating it is that they end up investing less time and energy in an inevitable failure, which I dare say is a positive thing. When banning left and right, I often told people this straight out when they challenged the bans via email: "You were toast within weeks. Don't waste your time." 20:18, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
I agree, and I should add that over the past few months the hilarity has come directly from Andy and the things that he has said without provocation by parodists. People like JacobB only creates temporary "suffering" for the poor souls who want to productively edit CP. Tetronian you're clueless 20:21, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
While I agree that most of the hilarity has been from Andy, I think the parodists are an important part of the CP ecosystem. Look at the CBP -- most of the actual work to get it going was done by parodists: formatting by JacobB, early translation by DouglasA et al., spirited defenses of the project by these and others (e.g. MarkGall). Without the parodists, I don't think the CBP would have ever gotten off the ground, and Andy never would've been arguing about bimbos or interviewed by Colbert. Much the same could be said of cp:Best of the Public. --Retwa (talk) 21:13, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
For me much of the fun of parody comes from watching TK squirm. He may be psycho but he's not stupid: TK's fully aware that Jacob, Douglas, etc are parodists, but he can't do anything. Even here where JacobB comes close to outing himself, TK has to accept his fake apology. Parodists stymie TK's quest for total control of CP, and I love that. WodewickWelease Wodewick! 04:24, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
Actually, TK has had convincing evidence that JacobB is a parodist for months. He could have easily used it to get rid of Jacob but obviously he doesn't want to. — Unsigned, by: CChristian / talk / contribs
Yes, of course! Curse you for telling everyone! And don't forget I knew in advance about 9/11 and did nothing. I also kill kitties. --TK/MyTalkEditor 22:26, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
....and steal images! Don't forget stealing images! — Sincerely, Neveruse / Talk / Block 22:30, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
And haz licency to block with extreme prejudice! SJ Debaser 22:33, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

I do, Josh! Please make an account now so I can block you extremely. Again. --TK/MyTalkEditor 22:45, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

And is using my name! Kix, they're not just for kids~ 22:41, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

TK whines some more on WP

Whine some more! He's the saddest person I've seen. Where he has no power, he whines. Where he has power, he's a total dick with it. --Irrational Atheist (talk) 18:58, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

It reminded me of the 'Don't tase me bro!" scene. Guy just asks for it, then squeals when he gets shot down. lol NorsemanCyser Melomel 19:35, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
In his defense, the page is covered with comments by RW editors. He's just pissed that there aren't the same number of CP editors to keep them down. And of course that he doesn't have a banhammer over there. Tetronian you're clueless 19:40, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
Even creepy 'Uncle' Ed hasn't rushed to help him.  Lily Inspirate me. 22:45, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
Ed's sulking. I have just eaten & stiltontalk 23:29, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
For a moment or two, TK forgot he wasn't at Conservapedia, where he can make inconvenient comments disappear. Junggai (talk) 12:21, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

SpockAndy

nudge nudge: Say no moreimg I have just eaten & stiltontalk 23:25, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Muckety muck?!?!

Really?img Was the expression "grasping at straws"?

WTF?? "Muckety muck" is from the Chinook "mukamuk" which originally meant "to eat". The word was picked up by fur trappers, loggers and so on and somehow came to mean its present meaning, usually referring to visiting bigwigs from out of town. It goes back way before 1912. More like the early 1800s. Secret Squirrel (talk) 00:46, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
The Algonquians also had a word: "Mugwump", which originally meant somebody who acted as if they occupied a position of authority that they didn't, and then came to mean sanctimonious or holy-than-thou. "Muckety muck" is more than likely a conflation of both the Chinook and Algonquian words, with the meaning of mugwump being maintained and the meaning of mukamuk being discarded.-- Spirit of the Cherry Blossom 01:21, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
In Australia a mugwump is a fence-sitter (someone with their mug on one side and wump on the other)
(EC) I notice that Andy said that the list is now "far ahead of geometric growth"...I'm sensing that Conservapedia's Law is going to undergo a rewrite: conservative insights increase hyperbolically. The results of this insight are amazing! Tetronian you're clueless 03:31, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
"Mugwump" would be an interesting term for Andy's list, if Andy had any effing clue about American political history before 1950. The Conservapedia article on Mugwumps is copied more or less word for word from WP. WodewickWelease Wodewick! 04:38, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
Wow, Conservapedia's take on Republican Party history is a poor copy of WP too. WodewickWelease Wodewick! 04:41, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
Mugwumps have no liver and nourish themselves exclusively on sweets. Thin, purple-blue lips cover a razor sharp beak of black bone with which they frequently tear each other to shreds in fights over clients. These creatures secrete an addictive fluid though their erect penises which prolongs life by slowing metabolism. (In fact all longevity agents have proved addicting in exact ratio to their effectiveness in prolonging life.)99.225.14.16 (talk) 05:16, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
Bug powder dust and mugwump jism! --Robledo (talk) 23:26, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Benp

So I was bored and had a few spare moments so I cruised through CP's recent changes and saw Andy welcoming back Benp. When I read his user page, I thought "wow, this guy must have a huge ego and be really full of himself", then I noticed that Ed Poor re-wrote Benp's user page: with the comment "(better description + move talk to user talk page)" - since when do Admin's re-write user's personal pages, and what a stupid thing to write. Refugeetalk page 02:16, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

That endorsement from Uncle Ed is even funnier when you check out Ben's essays. WodewickWelease Wodewick! 04:35, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
Once again, all the good, defining moments are conservative. Really, Martin Luther King was a conservative, in current sense of the word?--Thanatos (talk) 04:51, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
I hear that one a lot. A lot of conservatives still think that all liberals are atheists. Therefore, anyone who publicy professes their Christian beliefs is automatically a conservative. SirChuckBCall the FBI 04:56, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
(EC)He was a radical in his time. What is the old saying? You can go from being a radical to a conservative in 20 years by never changing a single position. - π 04:57, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
It's more the fact that he created "Greatest Conservative Television Moments"... on the same evening Colbert interviewed Conservapedia Andy. WodewickWelease Wodewick! 05:15, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
By his assassination, King was a flat-out communist. Most people seem to want to forget that these days. --Gulik (talk) 20:36, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
I honestly thought when Ed put that up that Benp was on the chopping block. Being outed as a public school teacher? How was that NOT the kiss of death? (While we're on the subject, how did Ed even know that? Has it been stated elsewhere in the past, or is there some kind of creepy master-apprentice relationship I'd rather not think about?) --Phentari (talk) 22:54, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Somehow, I don't know if the Banach-Tarski Paradox http://www.conservapedia.com/Banach-Tarski_Paradoximg can be explained properly without the technical jargon behind it. Nick Heer 06:52, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

This got better. From Ed: "I expect an 8th grader to understand this. Please state what part of it is too hard for an 8th grader to understand. --Ed Poor Talk 00:07, 8 January 2010 (EST)". An 8th grade student? Understanding college-level math? Smooth. Nick Heer 01:05, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Economics Final Exam bragging WIGO

I have no idea what this wigo is trying to say. ħuman 05:18, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

I have no idea what Andy is trying to say. Well, I know what he's trying to say, but as usual he makes no sense. "College-level scores"? What does that mean? Considering his test is not something any college would ever ask, the comparison is ridiculous. If an "A" is a "college-level score" then I got college level scores in the 5th grade. What a fucking idiot. DickTurpis (talk) 05:21, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
It should say, "Astoundingly, every single homeschooler manages to miss a question on Andy's exam." Have you looked at the thing? It's a fucking joke. 05:28, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
Nice, cheese. At everyone else, "Welcome to Conservapedia A record 28 teenagers achieved college-level scores on our Economics Final Exam, attaining the equivalent of a passing grade on the CLEP exam that would be worth 3 units of college credit. The world's largest advanced Economics class for teenagers is now complete. Congratulations to all who participated. This conservative approach to education is far more efficient and effective than the common liberal approach. " Andy, you're a moron. Now I see what the wigo was about. ħuman 05:31, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
Sorry 'bout that, Hyoomun. Sometimes Andy's stupidity is funnier than any joke one can write about it. --Irrational Atheist (talk) 05:34, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
Ought this WIGO and its update to be separate WIGOs? ListenerXTalkerX 05:37, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

I'm not sure how well I'd do on his test, not having taken an economics class in well over a decade, and not having taken one taught by a certifiable moron ever. Too many terms I'm unfamiliar with. The only economics class I ever took was much different (surprisingly). Of course, his test did have plenty of very easy questions, to be sure. I do wonder how well Andy's students would do on a real economics test. Oh, and Andy, as long as we're making ridiculous test comparisons, I took a facebook test on punk rock bands and got 100% correct. A similar score on the MCATs would probably get me into med school. DickTurpis (talk) 05:44, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

I do wonder how well Andy's students would do on a real economics test. I posted this to another thread way too late to be noticed by anyone, so I'll post it here. "To be fair to Andy, I took his economics class about 3-4 years ago and It was actually pretty good. Taking only his class, and not studying anything else, I took the CLEP exam and score 73. (the CLEP is graded on a scale from 20 to 80 with 50 being a passing grade.) He does actually teach the material involved, and well enough for me to get three real college credits for it. (depending on the school)" --T1mS (talk) 21:49, 11 January 2010 (UTC) (TimS/CPAdmin1 I can't seem to log in my account. I even had it email me a new password and it still wouldn't let me in.)
Interesting. I suspect your score is partially the result of you being one of the smarter ones, or so it appears from here. And to be fair to Andy, I'm sure he does at some point teach some of the basics of economics that are covered in any course (I admit I haven't read his lectures), so anyone who studies will clearly pick up some useful information (I fail to see how that is a "conservative" approach, and how it's any better than a "liberal" one). Most of Andy's biggest problems are grasping onto some of his favorite tidbits (ie the Coast theorem, to my knowledge not one of the major principles of economics) and making them essential learning, while glossing over significant aspects. For example, I did not notice one question on fiscal or monetary policy on his test, though I suppose that's too liberal for him. And of course when someone comes along unfamiliar with the Coase theorem, Andy acts all high and mighty because his students know what it is so they're obviously the most intelligent people imaginable, and he's the world's greatest teacher. Then he fills his test with crap about prayer and political dogma disguised as questions and pretends it's basically the same as a general aptitude test. (Honestly, he should have skipped question #43 and just written at the bottom of the test "There are still seats available for the March for Life. Sign up early and save money!") I'm curious as to how difficult the CLEP test is, but doing a quick search I couldn't find a sample online. I know Andy's classes certainly do not prepare students for AP exams, but I imagine the CLEP is substantially less strenuous. DickTurpis (talk) 22:33, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
What do you mean by fiscal or monetary policy? If you are talking about government policies that would fall under macroeconomics not micro, and would not be on the test. Microeconomics primarily focuses on individual decisions. CLEP tests are no joke. They are probably easier than AP, but not extremely so. I think I would have passed an AP microeconomics test if I had taken it. You can have practice CLEP questions for ten dollars if you want them... It is possible (even probable) that Andy's class has gotten easier since I took it. His grading practices definitely are less stringent. He used to actually take a good amount of points off for a wrong answer, not just -1 = (99/100 GREAT JOB!!!) So the class might not be the same, but I'm sure it is still comparable. --T1mS (talk) 00:14, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
Yes, fiscal and monetary policy would certainly fall under the realm of macroeconomics. Now, did Andy bill his course as strictly a microeconomics class? I noticed it dealt largely (but not exclusively) with microeconomics (as opposed to my high school class, which I believe was tilted towards the macro end), and I considered that a weakness of his class, but if it was exclusively micro then I guess I guess it makes sense, though it does make me wonder why he included topics such as the Lorenz curve and Congressional actions on health care (clearly macro). As for the AP, I'm basing my analysis of his class on examining his history class versus the AP history exam, which is light years beyond Andy's test. For econ I'd have to look at both, which I'll do later. DickTurpis (talk) 03:32, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
By the way, what is the right answer to the girls extra credit? The only answer that makes any sense is D, but I can't see "Lack of prayer is no different from saying prayers" ever being a correct answer for Andy. DickTurpis (talk) 05:53, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
It's A. He's claiming prayers gain interest.
I'm going to repeat that. He's claiming prayers gain interest. 05:57, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
(EC) The answer is clearly (A); all the others are straw-man lib-burr-rul points. But at any rate, I think he is trying to say that if you say a prayer it accrues some sort of "spiritual interest," so that the earlier one says a prayer, the more benefits there are. ListenerXTalkerX 05:58, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
I thought for a second that might be what he was looking for, but it makes no sense, even by Andy standards. He's talking about “time value of money”, and he even states in question #1 that "prayer is free and the subject of Economics focuses on goods and services..." The time at which one says a prayer cannot have an economic impact, particularly when "earlier" and "later" are relative terms that have no context here (especially since you're supposed to pray every day). DickTurpis (talk) 06:05, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
i probably am not understanding this . Isn't 29 out of 50 a reason to cry rather than applaud ? Hamster (talk) 06:07, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
Looking at the page of results, some students were getting quite low scores - 30s upwards. Given the "college level" appears to be 32 or higher (or maybe a bit less), that means that "normal level" is 20-30 or something and <20 is a fail. I would have thought the maxim "prayer==good" would get you 20 marks alone. Sad. MaxAlex (talk) 08:38, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Andy's test is Andy's concoction. There is no basis for him to claim that passing his test would mean that you stand a significantly higher statistical chance to pass the CLEP exam, especially for a test with no security protocols and a test that has separate boys and girls versions. I will give Andy some credit for introducing a couple of quaint economic theories, like the Coase theorem and Gresham's law, but I think there would be a much greater benefit if he would evaluate understanding of the material without any political bias. ConservapediaEditor (talk) 06:14, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Mr. Schlafly has fallen hook, line, and sinker for the distinctly non-conservative line about all issues being political. For him, there is no keeping out political bias. ListenerXTalkerX 06:18, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
ListenerX has a point. Isn't the concept that everything is political a Marxist idea? Maybe Ashlafly has moved so far to the right, he has wrapped around and turned into a Commie. --Fawlty (talk) 12:41, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
It was originally a Marxist idea, but it is unfortunately very widespread now, thanks to pundits and flame-fanners of all political hues because it gets more votes/sells more papers. - π 12:52, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

The world's largest economic class for teenagers? Really? My college micro class was at least 30 people and I went to a tiny LAC. WodewickWelease Wodewick! 08:04, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Oh, heck, when I took college micro economics, my class was at least one hundred. Though to be fair, it was a sophomore level class, so many of the students might not have been teenagers. Though his "largest class for teenagers" is utter crap. MDB (talk) 14:00, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Make Karajou Funny (sticky)

moved to Forum:Making Karajou funny

Haha, that's funny, the forums were created to take the load off the SB, but it's perfectly applicable here too. Should there be a "conservapedia" category added to the fora now? ħuman 21:10, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

I think I just did exactly that. Fairly easy, nice work tech guys! ħuman 21:14, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Mini-plea

Could I ask that WIGO writers think of us furriners when using acronyms: NPR & CPB mean little to me and require "work"[anathema] to decipher. Thanx. I have just eaten & stiltontalk 10:14, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

CPB isn't even common over here; poor wording, to be sure.--Tom Moorefiat justitia 10:23, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
Mini-seconded. CPB looks like the (to us) more familiar CBP at that. Internetmoniker (talk) 10:26, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
It's all y'alls stoopids fault for not being Merrrikan. This here's God's country and if these acronyms were good enough for Jesus Christ, then we ain't not gonna go changin' things so you darned limeys and other furrners can't do no proper readin' DeltaStarSenior SysopSpeciationspeed! 10:41, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
• NPR: National Public Radio (or, to some of its liberal critics, Nice Polite Republicans). Slightly government funded radio, home of things like the news shows Morning Edition and All Things Considered, the "slice of life" show This American Life, the automotive show Car Talk (or, based on the Boston accent of the brothers who host it, Cah Tahk) and the comedy news quiz show Wait Wait Don't Tell Me
• CPB: Corporation for Public Broadcasting. Provides funding to NPR and PBS.
• PBS: Public Broadcasting Service. The television equivalent of NPR. Home of series like Sesame Street, Mr. Rogers, Masterpiece Theatre, and lots of imports from Great Britain. MDB (talk) 11:55, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
Wow, for a second I thought it did say CBP, haha! Tetronian you're clueless 12:55, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
I did take particular pains to wikilink the acronym. ListenerXTalkerX 17:12, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
I know, and I know what the CPB is, I'm just used to reading CBP around here so that's what my mind automatically jumped to. Tetronian you're clueless 17:47, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
While the CPB is moderately well-known 'round here, the acronym is uncommon. What's the CBP? Oh, yeah .... ħuman 21:07, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Schlafly's Records*

* Not his collection of albums by one-hit-wonders.

28 students getting a "college-level grade" is a new record. The 2 pro-life buses are also a new record. Does this record-breaking go further back? Maybe we could add a page about all records broken by Aschlafl Y./Conservapedia. Internetmoniker (talk) 12:23, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Don't forget the world's largest [subject] courses for [whatever] level students, promoted two times or so by now on the main page. --Sid (talk) 13:09, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
Oh, plus "one of the largest homeschool classes in the country, including 58 in-class students in World History in fall 2006" --Sid (talk) 13:11, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
That might make a nice little article, especially including the asterisked comment. ħuman 21:26, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
The world's largest homeschool class reminds me of the world's tallest midget. When does it cease to be a homeschool class? --Horace (talk) 22:13, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
Do his "powerful new conservative concepts first identified on Conservapedia" count as "records?" --Phentari (talk) 22:56, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Grammar

Alright so I may not have the best grasp of the English language, but looking at Assfly's creepy 3rd person profile I noted the following:
"In spring 2007 Andrew Schlafly teaches Economics"
Does that sound right? If it was a listed timeline then I guess it could pass (but still looks odd), but in this context it seems wrong. As far as I can make out it should have started (future tense) with "In spring 2007 Andrew Schlafly will teach Economics", and from then on "In spring 2007 Andrew Schlafly began teaching Economics". CrundyTalk nerdy to me 13:35, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

I'm no grammar expert, but it does seem wrong. I'd only write in that way if describing a future event, and normally one that is recurring. i.e. Each summer, Crundy teaches Shiv 101 at the state penitentiary. --Ask me about your mother 13:38, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
Dammit, you got me thinking about famous syntax-manglers, and now I'm envisioning Andy as Yoda. "Out of the Bible, edit liberalism we will, hhhrrrhmmm. Speedgod."
Shame it wasn't "In spring 2007 Andrew Schlafly teaches English". CrundyTalk nerdy to me 13:44, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
I favor "In the spring of 2007, Andy taught economics" or ".... Andy will teach a course in Economics" but I are grammatically challenged. Hamster (talk) 14:40, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
Grammatically, it's fine. Or, at least, it was fine when it was written many years ago--it just has never been updated since. Clearly, nobody there at CP cares enough about Andy to keep the article about him current. Such a fine suck-up opportunity wasted. And the reason it's written in 3rd-person is 'cuz all the bio articles are written in third person. That'd only be "creepy" if Andy had written it himself (which he didn't).--WJThomas (talk) 00:03, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
Andy protected back in March 2007, nobody but the sysops have been able to edit it since. - π 02:21, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
Mind you, TK knows how to kiss arse. - π 02:24, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Orthodox Christmas

I think I Like AlexWD. As the WIGO says, Eddie baby tells him to create an 'Orthodox Christmas' article before asking recognition of it - so he goes off and does an Ed Poor style stubimg. 92.10.171.244 (talk) 13:46, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

He actually removed information to make it stubbier [2]. Pietrow (talk) 13:50, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
He has gone above and beyond the call of duty by thinking ahead.img Internetmoniker (talk) 13:58, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
Is the new punchline to the WIGO actually better? I thought the "dead to us" line captured Ed's "not worth the recognition" attitude better than just repeating his instruction, and funnier as well. If I were to change anything it would be to simplify the first line. I just wanted to emphasize that this is a major group of Christians we're talking about. --SpinyNorman (talk) 14:49, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
But not big in America, so it doesn't exist. WodewickWelease Wodewick! 15:07, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
IMO that wigo has tremendous potential - ironically, here at RW we have automated both major Orthodox celebrations, and at CP they ignored them, and worse yet, tell a user alerting them to it to go screw? ħuman 21:35, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
I thought it was one of the better moments of mean-spirited arrogance, especially since the slam at non-notoriety came from their resident Moonie. --SpinyNorman (talk) 00:46, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Double standards

(Delete if this has been discussed) I note that thisimg news story makes a good "what if". Imagine if it was a democrat who decided to reduce the state defecit by "steep reductions in education, healthcare and social services as well as cuts in transportation projects, state worker pay and environmental programs". CrundyTalk nerdy to me 13:49, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

I love the whole "on the verge of bankruptcy" thing. Do these people have the memories of goldfish(figure of speech)? TK honey, let's not forget that it was a republican president who decided to keep spending money on a phoney war while his country was losing over \$500 billion/year. Actually, it's quite interesting to look at the fiscal charts during the Bush/Clinton/Bush period - there's a bit of a trend that certainly doesn't support your claim that Liberals are the ones who keep spending in the face of bankruptcy. -RedbackG'day 14:07, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

I'm not a yank, but even so, that's some mighty interesting (and surprising) stats! What do the republican supporters make of that over there? DeltaStarSenior SysopSpeciationspeed! 00:31, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

There is a Democratic governor who did much the same thing. His name is David Patterson. His approval rating is somewhere around 20%. DickTurpis (talk) 20:19, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
Oh God, don't even mention Patterson. I cannot think of a more universally hated man where I live. Tetronian you're clueless 21:07, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Bye bye Joseph

JosephMac takes the plunge. Here's the text in case of burning:

You've now got three news stories on the Main Page about climate change, all saying that just because there's currently a cold snap in the USA, global warming is a myth. That's absolute nonsense. Complete and utter tosh. Deceit is not a conservative virtue, so please delete this total rubbish from the Main Page.

(1) The issue is global warming. It's about the average temperature over the whole world. The Southern hemisphere is having one of its hottest summers ever: 38°C in Melbourne, 41°C in Cape Town are unusually high temperatures. You can't say anything about the average global temperature from what's happening in one little bit of the Earth's surface like the United States.

(2) Just as one snowy winter in Georgia isn't evidence against global warming, one heatwave in Cape Town isn't evidence for it. You have to look at the trend in global temperatures. There are little bumps and wobbles in the graph but the trend in average global temperatures is clearly and rapidly UP.

(3) I love my children and I hope I will have grandchildren to love too. And I hope they'll have a world to live in which hasn't been irrevocably destroyed by the stupid, greedy, lying, fascist scum in the oil industry who are paying US Senators huge bribes to block reductions in CO2 outputs and paying Faux News to brainwash the US public.

I realise that A.S. or one of his minions will now block me and that this will be my last ever post to CP. Being moderate and reasonable, bringing facts and accuracy into discussions, clearly cuts no ice with him, whatever the subject. I don't know if he's just been brainwashed by the pro-oil, anti-grandchildren lobby but please wake up, Andy! Stop peddling this nonsense, stop cutting-and-pasting the utter drivel spouted by the oil companies' PR departments into CP, stop repeating their lies to home-schooled children. I will now say this as clearly as I can to conservatives who do think about their place in the world, who do love their grandchildren, who do value conservative virtues of honesty, truth and respect for others:

Global climate change is real and dangerous
Put a sweater on and turn down the heating
Remove your jacket and turn off the air-conditioning
Use public transport where you can
Drive a small, economical vehicle where there's no public transport
Vote for politicians who value your family's future more than their Exxon-Mobil share options

Deceit is not a conservative virtue!

JosephMac 19:18, 11 January 2010 (EST)

EddyP (talk) 00:21, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Not a bad parthian shot. I guess he wasn't a parodist, then? Tetronian you're clueless 00:25, 12 January 2010 (UTC)]
for posterityimg. 00:28, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
TK makes fun of Andy in responseimg Wow! Tetronian you're clueless 00:38, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
Wow TK. You suck.img Tetronian you're clueless 00:39, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
(EC)Is it bad skills to use the word 'cunt' on the WIGO page? I hope not, because I can't think of any other way to describe TK for saying this. DeltaStarSenior SysopSpeciationspeed! 00:42, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
Is there a good way to describe TK? - Ravenhull (talk) 00:45, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
Ah, the usual 'if that is your name' and 'people with learning disability' drivel... Ravenhull (talk) 00:43, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
(ECx3)Wow, that's quite an insult coming from someone who took three edits to fix his mistakes while posting that. Junggai (talk) 00:44, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Ho-hum...I don't get the fuss. TK's response there isn't terribly terrible for CP, and nowhere near TK's cuntiest.--WJThomas (talk) 00:53, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

You reckon so? Even for TK, that stuff about learning disabilities seems utterly vile. H. Randolph Twist (talk) 01:00, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
I think it's more that he sounded like Andy, then tacked on "btw ur retarded ;P". ~ Kupochama[1][2] 01:07, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
Eh. TK's an expert asshole, and that's just junior-high assholery. He can do far better.--WJThomas (talk) 01:12, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
I wonder how Andy will feel about this. He has already made it clear than he does not appreciate people making fun of the disabled. Keegscee (talk) 01:19, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

"it is hardly necessary for you to use special fonts and colors to make people notice your posts" - yeah that is right Terry Koeckritz/admin/Talk. - π 00:58, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Haha, I hadn't thought of that. I guess that's some bonus irony. Tetronian you're clueless 01:04, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
Is that a sneaky way to work in yet another "Irony Meter" use, Tetronian? Shame! --TK/MyTalkEditor 01:18, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
Nah, we overuse the term in WIGOs already. But for you I might make an exception.... Tetronian you're clueless 01:21, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
Thats really sweet of you...but I ask for no special consideration! --TK/MyTalkEditor 01:27, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
Oh, it's my pleasure. You've certainly earned it with this one. Tetronian you're clueless 01:28, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
@TK - do you still want to be a sysop here so you can see all the stuff you say we've "oversighted" with the hide revisions extension? 01:30, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
Wouldn't he then have to change his signature... and disclaim it on WP? ħuman 01:34, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
I bet what TK is really interested in is who has been creating these fake screenshots on WIGOCP. Acei9 01:38, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
Nah, RobS and TK probably split the account so he can see our cabalistic seekrit plans. --User:Theautocrat/Sig 01:39, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
RobS already has an account. Besides, he would never share one - that reeks of communism! Tetronian you're clueless 01:43, 12 January 2010( (UTC)

(undent) Thanks to whoever pointed out my query. After I saw that WIGO I decided to just give up trying on that website and commit account suicide. It disgusts me how anyone can get away with making a comment like that, in any setting (especially a family friendly setting), is incredible.Senator Harrison (talk) 03:33, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Hey TK, what is this bullshit about not blocking users who disagree with you? Are you getting soft? You can't expect to complete your takeover of Andyland with that attitude. WodewickWelease Wodewick! 03:37, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
It's exactly that: bullshit. TK did block JosephMac and his socks. Tetronian you're clueless 03:44, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Karajou blocking DoozexMockina

http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:Log&type=block&page=User:DoozexMockina - votable? It seems in contract with the "use real name policy..." --69.196.128.211 (talk) 17:47, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

How odd - he unblocked the account because it's a play on Deus Ex Machina. I would've expected that to be the ban reason (in line with the real-name policy). --Sid (talk) 18:55, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Entire country block at CP

This discussion was moved here from RationalWiki:Saloon bar.

It would seem that the user TK at Conservapedia has blocked most (if not all) IP's coming from my country because I can no longer register. I tried with multiple ISP's and they're all blocked. The country is Croatia. Mr.Orange (talk) 17:15, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

TK is famous for his ridiculous range blocks. He's blocked large swaths of Europe and Asia just for kicks. Tetronian you're clueless 17:23, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
Which makes me wonder why we're apparently making User:TK so welcome here. Whilst we should have room for all points of view it seems that Terry Koeckritz's history is fast being forgotten. Bob Soles (talk) 17:59, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
While I wasn't personally involved in welcoming him and thus don't know deeper details, I'd guess people simply accept TK as CP's most successful parodist and saboteur. Besides, people love bantering as long as it's all in good fun, so they'd "welcome" Andy, Ed, Kara, TerryH, Ken, etc. as well. TK blocks entire ISPs for the same reason many people here banter and debate with him and people like TerryH, Ken and PJR: Mostly for the lulz. Just don't mistake these discussions for approval, endorsement or memory-fail. Many people here can hold deep grudges while still exchanging witty messages. --Sid (talk) 19:32, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
Conservapedia are hoping to block the entire world. Of course a liberal stinking communist anti-american country like Croatia will be blocked! (PS. I visited Dubrovnik on holiday last year and it was fucking brilliant!) DeltaStarSenior SysopSpeciationspeed! 18:10, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
think Sid nailed it really. Conservapedia takes the attitude of you disagree with me - therefore I will ban you, whilst RationalWiki takes the attitude of you disagree with me - therefore we will talk about it (this may involve mockery). Obviously I prefer the RW approach (since I'm here), but it's interesting (in a pokey-stick kind of way) to see if people such as TK can live with both without imploding. My suspicion is that he's too used to getting his own way to live outside CP for any length of time (regardless of his motives) but that remains to be seen - I have no experience to draw on (others do ahve his experience) Worm(t | c) 20:15, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
The pokey stick thing sounds similar to my view of him. CP is an Internet curio, and TK is a major factor in maintaining the general atmosphere. He's a total arse to people, but aside from the homeschoolers, I don't see the average CP editor as being a person - more a character who will sooner or later provide great comedy when they end-up the radar of TK. Perhaps RW is a kind of green room for TK? It's only a shame when CP wastes the time of real people, as they did with the Lenski saga. So long as they keep it within CP, I'm quite frankly happy to see them caged and bludgeoning each other with animal bones. I suppose CP is just too surreal from my perspective, and that's why I struggle to believe that any of those people actually exist. --Ask me about your mother 22:33, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
This conversation has really given me pause to consider my actions. I certainly never once thought about the single, tens, hundreds, thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands of nice Croatians clamoring to edit a Christian, American conservative encyclopedia! Thanks to everyone for pointing out how my IP blocking is damaging CP by keeping those good conservatives in Croatia from editing. --TK/MyTalkEditor 22:45, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
Here you go TK, I wrote this for you a while ago. - π 22:58, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
This is true. But then again, I await the time when there are tens of Americans clamouring to edit a Christian, American conservative encyclopedia. How many non-parodists do you guys have over there, 20? 30? Half being sysops? By this logic, ban all nations. 23:11, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
I certainly never once thought about the single, tens, hundreds, thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands of nice Croatians clamoring to edit a Christian, American conservative encyclopedia! How would you know? By denying people the opportunity to contribute, you're losing the possibility of great insight. Maybe you wouldn't get any, but maybe you would. You'll never know now. Very 'open-minded' of you. ;) Worm(t | c) 23:58, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

TK, you also blocked the entire range at Creighton University. Not exactly a country, but there are more than a few Conservative Christians there. Dumbass. δij${\displaystyle ^{i.broke.it.}}$ 01:33, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Not Wigo worthy

But again Andy would rather have his own concise but wrong explanation than a longer and more accurate one about a simple subject that he cannot figure out. [1]img just like the Moore's law explanation, simple and wrong wins out. --Opcn (talk) 20:04, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

1837? Come on conservapedia, citation needed. I think it is not unlikely the term "Trojan Horse" was already used, even in it's proverbial sense, in antiquity. (The Odyssey being written around 800 BCEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE) Internetmoniker (talk) 20:52, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
I tend to work under the TK assumption that everyone new is either a parodist oractually believes this stuff and there for is crazy. So assuming the former and that Thomas is perhaps watching here he would do well not to go after the date. --Opcn (talk) 21:01, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
It's a shame that the definition "Presenting something as a gift that secretly bears grave consequences." is a bit long-winded. Otherwise it'd be a great replacement for the slogan "The Trustworthy Encyclopedia". --Ask me about your mother 21:23, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
I'm glad that in Andyland a Trojan horse is distinctly liberal; the Achaeans won. 22:56, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
Something I was wondering about this, although it goes deeper into Andy's "True Christians never deceive. What about those stupid conversion tools made to look like 20 and 50 dollar bills? You guys know what I'm talking about? They look like money, but when you open them it says something along the lines of "Disappointed? Well you'll be really disappointed if you don't convert." Christians leave them places under the thought that some godless heathen will pick it up and immediately run to the nearest baptismal font? That's a great example of a Trojan Horse and Christian Deceit. SirChuckBPlease Excuse me, I have to go out and hunt giraffes 23:05, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
You're right. Actually, Campus Crusade for Christ's whole MO for a while was this kind of deceit, sending pretty girls in bikinis to a crowd of guys inviting them to a "beach party" which turned out to be a big worship service/scarefest. Junggai (talk) 23:11, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
TK blocked me! --Opcn (talk) 23:21, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
Since deceit is inherently liberal, as explained by Andy, I wonder how he would expect the intelligence services to operate? Perhaps have the CIA wearing name badges as they wander around Tehran? Ditch the camo gear. Have solders wearing brightly coloured jackets. War shall be conducted by marching at the opposing army and seeing who's the first to run out of men? Andy has become one of those caricature officers from the Sharpe series. --Thor's Mighty Phallus (talk) 23:53, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Conservative deceit

Just before TK cast him into outer darkness, JosephMac added this link to a BBC page debunking the "world isn't warming" mythsimg. TK deleted it almost immediately - obviously scared that CP readers might be exposed to facts and logic. The Real James Brown (talk) 21:14, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Who needs facts when you have a banhammer? Tetronian you're clueless 21:24, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
CP's efficiency is almost inspiring. They're *really good* at being terrible. They're some of the most talented terrible people I've seen on the internet. X Stickman (talk) 01:43, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Hey TK!

ThomasRidgefield didn't retire, YOU banhammered him. Why so deceitful? Does it make you feel better, or do you think Andy is to stupid to notice? TheoryOfPractice (talk) 23:29, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Is there a difference between trolling and liberal trolling? That ban reason seems kind of odd. Oh, and yes, he is too stupid to notice. --Thor's Mighty Phallus (talk) 23:39, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
RW allows socks, CP doesn't. Andy came up with the "Retired" deal years ago....perhaps you are fairly new. --TK/MyTalkEditor 23:40, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
Which, of course, explains Karajou's block of TK's sock MattM after he opened the SDG for public viewing.  Lily Inspirate me. 23:53, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
But...he didn't really retire. That's lying. When you lie, it makes Baby Jesus CRY, TK! Why would Christians lie? TheoryOfPractice (talk) 23:45, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
Do you have a pay-pal account, Theory? I can send you some money to rent a sense of humor. The block reason doesn't say retired, does it? Quit being so picky, it seems petty, not humorous. Really. --TK/MyTalkEditor 23:51, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
MY plan will remain a secret until I can get another sock up. I should mention that the article about Sydnee Waggoner is mostly made up, in case you care to remove it (unfinished and all it isn't very good as parody) I still can't believe how badly andy fails at understanding a concept as simple as a trojan horse --Opcn (talk) 23:54, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
@TK: I wish I could mail you some honesty. But the amount I would need to send probably wouldn't fit in a package. Seriously, how can you possibly defend your (dare I say it) liberal use of the banhammer? Tetronian you're clueless 00:01, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
TK, you're going to make Jinxie so jealous that you come over here and play after you told him not to. Corry (talk) 00:07, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Susan, it is a comfort that you never, ever change. I trust you are having a happy new year! --TK/MyTalkEditor 00:14, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Psst, TK! Susan is no where in this conversation. - π 00:19, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
TK knows Susan is here somewhere. TK knows. Oh TK is also a faggot. Acei9 00:32, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
Sorry, I thought Lily was a sock of Susan....they seem so alike. In a good way, of course. --TK/MyTalkEditor 00:37, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
You mean like the way she called you out on your bullshit? - π 00:56, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
Yes, everyone is alike to TK. He banhammers everyone equally. Tetronian you're clueless 00:42, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
TK how do you decide when banhammering people if they "Retired" or if it is time to burn the evidence? --BoredCPer (talk) 00:49, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Heh. I love this entire conversation. X Stickman (talk) 01:49, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Good faith editors still stumble across Conservapedia

This whole exchange is adorable. Extremely confused new good-faith user: "But Andy how can you make a mathematical law based on opinion?" Parodist: "Your teachers are lying to you! Open your miiiind!" Andy: "Yes good work parodist. Newuser, you're clueless." Dunno how we missed this. WodewickWelease Wodewick! 01:46, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

It is worrying that Andy views liberalism, not as a political philosophy, but as a conspiracy. How can an educated person think like that? - π 01:52, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
It's not a matter of logic but evangelism. The evangelist and apologist isn't interested in debating you on his fatih, but converting you. CP's ideology isn't open to debate either. You either agree or you don't, in which case you're not welcome. I think this is the inspiration for Andy's "open mind" meme; it doesn't really depend on being receptive to an idea because it's more logical or attractive than another, but because Andy's believes it. 01:56, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
(ec) I think some of the weirder claims come from him getting backed into a corner, pulling something out of his ass, and instead of realizing that it is a turd, having an epiphany and parading it around as an insight. Then it becomes canon. Some of his weird conspiracy views about education seemed to come out when he was arguing that larger classes are better. Corry (talk) 01:58, 13 January 2010 (UTC)