Difference between pages "RationalWiki:Saloon bar" and "Conservapedia talk:What is going on at CP?"
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
− | + | '''As a point of decorum, please use the <big>[+]</big> tab above when adding a new section, and the appropriate <big>[edit]</big> tab when commenting within an existing section. This will minimise the incidence of edit conflicts. New sections must be added at the bottom of the page. Thank you for your attention.''' | |
+ | '''For non CP related talk, go to the [[Rationalwiki:Saloon bar|saloon]].''' | ||
+ | {{talkpage}} | ||
+ | {{RationalWiki:Community Chalkboard}} | ||
− | == | + | == Rome... == |
− | + | How do you even do a history of Rome without mentioning the Catilinean conspiracy? | |
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | :::: | + | I know... just the tip of the iceburg, but wtf? [[User:EternalCritic|EternalCritic]] 10:36, 19 February 2009 (EST) |
− | ::::: | + | :quo usque tandem abutere patienta nostra, aschlafly? {{User:LArron/sig}} 10:53, 19 February 2009 (EST) |
− | :: | + | :EternalCritic (I notice how you hide behind an alias). First admit that Catiline was a Roman hero and Cicero a dirty liberal whose speeches were full of deceit. Deny this and lose credibility. {{User:Publius/sig0}} 10:57, 19 February 2009 (EST) |
− | ::: | + | :: Publius (what an absurd name) Unless you open your mind and admit that Catiline was a depraved revolutionary (and probably a socialist), and Cicero a hero of Conservative democracy I have more rational people to debate. [[User:EternalCritic|EternalCritic]] 14:24, 19 February 2009 (EST) |
+ | :He also says that Rome was born from the Hellenistic civilization, despite it having been a separate and distinct civilization long before Alexander's conquests created the Hellenistic civilization. On top of that, he says that praetors were "Roman general" under Augustus. While the office was often partly military in nature during the Republic, under Augustus and thereafter, the position of praetor was really purely administrative. It is pretty clear he has done almost no study for this. | ||
+ | ::''In 700 B.C. the Etruscans conquered Rome, and King Etruscan ruled it like the city-states in Greece. '' - King Etruscan? {{User:Genghis Khant/sigpic}} [[User:Genghis Khant|<font color=Blue>Генгис</font>]]<small>{{User:Genghis Khant/sigtalk}}</small> 14:28, 19 February 2009 (EST) | ||
+ | :::Now now... Tarquinius is a big word for Andy. [[User:EternalCritic|EternalCritic]] 14:38, 19 February 2009 (EST) | ||
+ | ::::King Etruscan, Etruscan King, all the same, these bloody French :-) {{User:LArron/sig}} 14:50, 19 February 2009 (EST) | ||
+ | <- <font face="comic sans ms">1. Who is your favorite Roman emperor, and why? </font> Caligula, he was so nice to horses. Other opinions? {{User:LArron/sig}} 15:02, 19 February 2009 (EST) | ||
+ | :Elagabulus of course. [[User:EternalCritic|EternalCritic]] 15:06, 19 February 2009 (EST) | ||
+ | ::Cicero! [[User:EddyP|EddyP]] 15:09, 19 February 2009 (EST) | ||
+ | ::Julian the Apostate! [[User:Kaalis|Kaalis]] 15:34, 19 February 2009 (EST) | ||
+ | <-''of course'' should give you full marks, EternalCritic (if this is your name), but sorry, EddyP, you stated no reason at all. One point of... Next question: <font face="comic sans ms">6. Current events question: What about the decline of the Roman empire reminds you of the United States today?</font> The Roman empire was build under the protection of the gods. When the Roman lost their faith and started to flock to some oriental religion, their fate was sealed. {{User:LArron/sig}} 15:16, 19 February 2009 (EST) | ||
+ | :Rampant pushing of the homosexual agenda by the liberal equites and plebes caused societal decay until the society collapsed under the weight of its own immorality. [[User:EternalCritic|EternalCritic]] 15:22, 19 February 2009 (EST) | ||
+ | ::: they were too big for their britches, didn't have a good communication system, relied on outsurced materials for most of their supply routes, and had supply issues. wait, i forgot, Andy, you the teacher don't want history. -- They were morally bankrupt!--{{User:WaitingforGodot/sig1}} 16:03, 19 February 2009 (EST) | ||
+ | ::::Andy also omitted to mention AQUEDUCTS! | ||
+ | <center>{{#ev:youtube|ExWfh6sGyso}}</center> | ||
+ | ::::Just couldn't resist the excuse to post this. {{User:Genghis Khant/sigpic}} [[User:Genghis Khant|<font color=Blue>Генгис</font>]]<small>{{User:Genghis Khant/sigtalk}}</small> 16:14, 19 February 2009 (EST) | ||
+ | :::::And thank you for doing so! ''romanos eunt domo'' {{User:LArron/sig}} 16:29, 19 February 2009 (EST) | ||
+ | :To be fair on Andy, he's not THAT bad. I go to a very good grammar school in England, and the history teachers there sometimes make mistakes on the same level as calling a Praetor a general. They don't have all the loony language theories and politics interfering with lessons, and the frequency of mistakes is not so great, but they do make errors that, when made by Andy, seem to be considered a mark of idiocy. [[User:Bil08|Bil08]] 19:22, 19 February 2009 (EST) | ||
+ | ::All sorts of teachers make stupid mistakes and believe erroneous things to be true, but Andy's are constant and horrifying, and he stonewalls when presented with them. Here's the game I've tried: choose a topic in history you know a little something about, go to Andy's paragraph/section on it, read it. How long does it take you to find a gross error? With ancient philosophy, it was something like the second sentence. [[cp:World_History_Lecture_Six#Church_Philosophers_and_Architecture|Church Philosophers and Architecture]]: the ''first line'' is nonsense: Nation-states in Europe in the 1100s?! [[cp:World_History_Lecture_Eight#The_Scientific_Revolution|Scientific Revolution]]: Galileo was a dim scholar, and a good party guest. [[cp:World_History_Lecture_Eight#The Enlightenment|Enlightenment]]: it's one big clusterfuck. The bit on Voltaire is gibberish, and apparently very few good English philosophers have existed, so Hume is best. And so on. {{User:Publius/sig0}} 21:11, 19 February 2009 (EST) | ||
+ | :Haha EternalCritic and Publius, you two schlafly well! [[User:Tealish|Tealish]] 20:19, 19 February 2009 (EST) | ||
+ | ::I think the term for two people Schlaflying eachother should be a ''Schlafloff.'' {{User:Publius/sig0}} 21:11, 19 February 2009 (EST) | ||
+ | :::I'm afraid Andy is ''that'' bad Bil08. He's not simply making mistakes, he's engaged in historical revisionism, and this is only considering his lecture material, wait until you get onto the main site.... [[User:Jammy|Jammy]] 21:14, 19 February 2009 (EST) | ||
+ | ::::Actually Publius, having read through those links I have to agree with you. The paragraph on Hume alone has a half dozen errors. His chief claim to fame is that Darwin liked him? This man is allowed ''near'' children? --[[User:Bil08|Bil08]] 05:23, 20 February 2009 (EST) | ||
+ | :::::<font face="comic sans ms">Frenchman Voltaire (1694-1778) was a leading philosopher in the Enlightenment, advocating freedom everywhere and emphasizing his form of reason. He wrote "The Candide," in which Voltaire described many bad things that happen to Candide in order to make the point that the world could be a better place. Increased freedom was Voltaire's way of improving things.</font> Aschlafly is a true Pangloss... {{User:LArron/sig}} 06:21, 20 February 2009 (EST) | ||
− | + | === Andy just hates Rome === | |
− | + | Of course, they didn't understand truth![http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Essay:Greatest_Mysteries_of_World_History&diff=prev&oldid=627861] Sorry Cicero, I guess veritas wasn't a word or a concept in Latin philosophy. {{User:Publius/sig0}} 23:42, 19 February 2009 (EST) | |
− | + | :Just don't try telling Andy that Philosophy is a search for truth... "god" forbid that conversation ever start. [[User:EternalCritic|EternalCritic]] 09:00, 20 February 2009 (EST) | |
− | : | ||
− | |||
− | |||
− | + | == Palin's tax liabilities == | |
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | + | Since it's a huge news item and scandal that Obama's cabinet picks and chief of staff have tax-payment issues, why hasn't CP jumped on the bandwagon and posted the scandal of Governor Palin? Of course I'm being sarcastic and just showing that CP is extremely biased (isn't that what Wikipedia is?), but it's still funny that on CP, IOKIYAR. --[[User:Irrationalatheist|Irrational Atheist]] 11:38, 19 February 2009 (EST) | |
− | + | == Non-profit == | |
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | == | + | Interesting to see JoshuaZ come out of hibernation, when you'd expect they'd have taken the chance to ban him months ago for inactivity, but [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk%3AMain_Page&diff=627315&oldid=627263 this comment] makes me wonder about something. Is CP considered a non-profit organization in the first place? In Canada, non-profit designation means some very specific things, and there are requirements for the designation as well. It's not easy to get, as I recently watched my roommate fight her way through over a year of the application process for the local ferret rescue outfit. Does the same apply in the States? If so, what are the odds that Andy would have been able, let alone willing, to go through the process at all? --[[User:Kels|Kels]] 15:23, 19 February 2009 (EST) |
+ | :In a very short sense, no, Conservapedia is not a non-profit.... There are very specific rules regarding the use of the term non profit. Basically, in the eyes of the law, Andy just runs another vanity website and non-certified tutoring program. '''[[user:SirChuckB|<font color="#000066" >SirChuckB</font>]]'''{{User:SirChuckB/signature}} 15:28, 19 February 2009 (EST) | ||
+ | ::That's what I thought. In that case, JoshuaZ's comment is totally inapplicable, since CP wouldn't have any special leeway, and I'd be very surprised if anyone but Andy honestly thought the place was really educational. --[[User:Kels|Kels]] 15:36, 19 February 2009 (EST) | ||
+ | :::It reminds of one of those stupid office signs - <br>'''<big>This is a non-profit organization.</big><br><small>It wasn't meant to be, but that's how it turned out.</small>'''<br> In some countries the term is "not for profit" rather than "non-profit" as it describes a statement of intent rather than an outcome. Didn't someone (probably Ames) once badger Andy about the commercial status of CP as the domain is a dot com rather than a dot org? {{User:Genghis Khant/sigpic}} [[User:Genghis Khant|<font color=Blue>Генгис</font>]]<small>{{User:Genghis Khant/sigtalk}}</small> 15:51, 19 February 2009 (EST) | ||
+ | ::::Could we call RW a [http://www.instantrimshot.com/ non-prophet organization]? [[User:Hactar|Hactar]] 20:10, 19 February 2009 (EST) | ||
− | [http:// | + | Regarding blocking for inactivity, did anyone else notice [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=MediaWiki%3AIpbreason-dropdown&diff=626556&oldid=621483 this]? On the np thing, I did once ask Andy what the business model or plan or something was for CP, but he archived his talk page right after I did so. '''[[user:human|<font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms"><big>ħ</big>uman</font>]]'''{{User:Human/sigtalk}} 22:43, 19 February 2009 (EST) |
− | |||
− | == | + | == TK and citations == |
− | [http://www. | + | Not to be picky. But, TK's actual words are "In the real, non-wiki/academic world, "citations" are never demanded, and politicians rely on that." He's saying that the academic and wiki world people demand citations - in the real world they do not. And, he's right. Check FactCheck.org and you will see plenty of times where politicians (from both sides of the aisle) make unfounded claims knowing that the general public won't check too closely. [[User:Patrickr|Patrickr]] 16:05, 19 February 2009 (EST) |
− | : | + | :On that same TK note, [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk:Main_Page&curid=67467&diff=627639&oldid=627612 help help. He's being opressed] '''[[user:SirChuckB|<font color="#000066" >SirChuckB</font>]]'''{{User:SirChuckB/signature}} 17:27, 19 February 2009 (EST) |
+ | ::I removed the academic thing. It's a bit ambiguous the way TK wrote it but I think it is obvious that he means non-wiki & non-academic. {{User:Genghis Khant/sigpic}} [[User:Genghis Khant|<font color=Blue>Генгис</font>]]<small>{{User:Genghis Khant/sigtalk}}</small> 17:40, 19 February 2009 (EST) | ||
+ | :::Haha, Chuck's oppression link reminds me of the time he was screaming about his human rights being restricted because someone here blocked him for three days. Hilarious. --[[User:Kels|Kels]] 17:57, 19 February 2009 (EST) | ||
+ | ::::Yeah, TK is quite a piece of work isn't he..... It's so sad that the man (in the basest sense of the term) that gains Andy's trust is the same one who quite loudly and openly declared his intent to bring down the site. '''[[user:SirChuckB|<font color="#000066" >SirChuckB</font>]]'''{{User:SirChuckB/signature}} 18:08, 19 February 2009 (EST) | ||
+ | :::::TK and Andy were <s>intelligently designed</s> made for each other. [[User:Zaku|Zaku]] 18:56, 19 February 2009 (EST) | ||
+ | :::::Where has TK actually talked about wanting to bring down the site? I thought that had been inferred from his actions, not his words. [[User:Hactar|Hactar]] 20:12, 19 February 2009 (EST) | ||
+ | ::::::TK's actions have included composing e-mails and IMs in which he describes his plans to take down CP. Some people on this site have inferred from those actions that TK means to take down CP. --[[User:Marty|Marty]] 22:50, 19 February 2009 (EST) | ||
+ | :::::::Are some instances of this cataloged somewhere on RW? I'd be interested in reading them. {{User:Publius/sig0}} 23:46, 19 February 2009 (EST) | ||
+ | [[Image:TKsGodSpeedBoard1.jpg|thumb|200px]] | ||
+ | ::::::::See [[Conservapedia_Talk:What_is_going_on_at_CP%3F#Who is TK and is he a mole ?|above]] for a couple of random quotes. Noobs might not know that [[Conservapedia:Sysops/TK|TK]] (or [[User:TK|TK]]) also socked up here with the names [[User:E.Wig|EWig]] and [[User:NightTrain|NightTrain]]. I don't think anyone was fooled for more than 10 minutes and that without the benefit of checkuser. To add an element of denial he used his E.Wig IM whenever he was plotting against CP or abusing one of his fellow sysops. If you read any of these transcripts you can see that it is TK who is doing all the talking so his claim that he was just trying to get information are a bit thin. While a CP sysop he founded a bulletin board forum called "Godspeed" (see right). Some other conversations with TK can be found [http://rationalwiki.com/wiki/index.php?title=User:Jazzman831&direction=prev&oldid=275971 here] and at the Hoji files [http://i221.photobucket.com/albums/dd110/Hojimachong/Sep231.jpg 1], [http://i221.photobucket.com/albums/dd110/Hojimachong/Sep232.jpg 2], [http://i221.photobucket.com/albums/dd110/Hojimachong/Sep233.jpg 3], [http://i221.photobucket.com/albums/dd110/Hojimachong/Sep234.jpg 4], [http://i221.photobucket.com/albums/dd110/Hojimachong/Sep235.jpg 5], [http://i221.photobucket.com/albums/dd110/Hojimachong/Sep236.jpg 6], [http://i221.photobucket.com/albums/dd110/Hojimachong/Sep237.jpg 7], [http://i221.photobucket.com/albums/dd110/Hojimachong/Sep238.jpg 8], [http://i221.photobucket.com/albums/dd110/Hojimachong/Sep239.jpg 9], [http://i221.photobucket.com/albums/dd110/Hojimachong/Sep2310.jpg 10], [http://i221.photobucket.com/albums/dd110/Hojimachong/Sep2311.jpg 11] and [http://i221.photobucket.com/albums/dd110/Hojimachong/Sep2312.jpg 12]. Excuplatory1 is TK's "front of house" AIM name which <s>is</s> was posted on [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=User:TK&oldid=322051 his CP user page]. {{User:Genghis Khant/sigpic}} [[User:Genghis Khant|<font color=Blue>Генгис</font>]]<small>{{User:Genghis Khant/sigtalk}}</small> 02:55, 20 February 2009 (EST) | ||
− | == | + | == TK porn == |
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | + | So, what's going on with you guys lately? Since TK likes to read here often and try to find us out on CP, I think we should try to make as many things reference him, without really referencing him. So if you can, somewhere include TK in any combination in your posting, socks names, etc., and let him know how much we appreciate his lulz. --[[User:Irrationalatheist|Irrational Atheist]] 21:08, 19 February 2009 (EST) | |
− | + | == Conservapedia Article == | |
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | == " | + | I really love [[cp:Conservapedia]]. Addison couldn't do a better job of belittling CP if s/he was a parodist! Let's see how far the have to go to get ''influential users.'' Conservative created two articles which <s>he declared</s> were selected article of the year! Ed <s>liveblogs about teen movies</s> <s>destroys math articles he can't comprehend</s> <s>is damned creepy</s> has primarily aimed at accuracy, rationality, and user cooperation. DeanS works as a technologically challenged RSS aggregator! BethanyS made articles on ships (and hasn't added content in months)! JM has made disorganized messes on painting, literature, and sculpture! "TK has made many substantive contributions". Name some! And the wonderful hubris: "AddisonDM ... has created several 'high profile' articles such as Examples of Moronic Vandalism by the "tolerant", Obama-isms as a mirror of Bushisms, and the Conservapedia article itself." In what way are these "high profile"? The term is ''silly''. I'd never even ''heard'' of SharonS. Note the absence of PJR, as well as ''any non-sysop.'' Next up, CollegeRepublican, who entertains the teeming millions of editors daily with his witty quips and humorous anecdotes. {{User:Publius/sig0}} 21:48, 19 February 2009 (EST) |
+ | :As I recall, it also claims that people can be promoted to bureaucrat. Which has never happened, Schlafly keeps ''those'' reins tightly in his grip, right? I think there is a "generic" auto-created MW 'crat, but that's just to jumpstart the wiki. '''[[user:human|<font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms"><big>ħ</big>uman</font>]]'''{{User:Human/sigtalk}} 22:48, 19 February 2009 (EST) | ||
+ | ::Addison is a hero - my favourite CP character by a long way. Reminds me a bit of NateG in some ways.--[[User:KrissAkabusiAwoogar|Kriss Akabusi]][[User_Talk:KrissAkabusiAwoogar|<sup>'''AAAAWOOOOGAAAR!!1'''</sup>]] 05:54, 20 February 2009 (EST) | ||
+ | :::The mythical SharonS (all 14/15 years of her) is the mythical "other" 'crat on CP, besides Andy and Webmaster. Not even Jallen has reached those heights, although $10 says I know what TK's hoping for next promotion... | ||
+ | :::aw! and look - we have another [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Conservapedia&curid=85796&diff=628057&oldid=627832 fan]. --[[User:Psygremlin|PsyGremlin]]<sub>[[User talk:Psygremlin|''Whut?'']]</sub> 07:45, 20 February 2009 (EST) | ||
+ | ::::I think Sharon's a couple of years older now maybe 16/17. {{User:Genghis Khant/sigpic}} [[User:Genghis Khant|<font color=Blue>Генгис</font>]]<small>{{User:Genghis Khant/sigtalk}}</small> 12:54, 20 February 2009 (EST) | ||
− | + | == "Worse than Hitler" == | |
− | + | I still can't tell - is Jpatt [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk:ACLU&curid=6346&diff=627840&oldid=627835 remarkably stupid or an incredible parodist?] The whole exchange is fantastic. I have to wonder how Jpatt manages to not drown in rainstorm. On the other hand, if he's a parodist, I'm not sure I would applaud that level of dedication. --[[User:Arcan|<font color="#99CCFF">'''Arcan'''</font>]] [[User_talk:Arcan|<small><font color=silver>¡ollǝɥ</font></small>]] 22:40, 19 February 2009 (EST) | |
+ | :I just read that exchange and had the same thought - TK's just being an ass as usual, but JPatt's acting ''just'' like I would in his position. He has to be a parodist, or my world just got a little darker. {{User:Publius/sig0}} 23:26, 19 February 2009 (EST) | ||
+ | ::It's long, but I had to wigo it. How do these people find each other? Together, they're better than any sitcom on TV these days. [[User:Tealish|Tealish]] 01:33, 20 February 2009 (EST) | ||
+ | :::JP's abuse of a senior admin (in terms of service anyway) is classic Bugler. PJR is on the outs with Andy and TK, so he can stick the boot in too. I should imagine PJR will have a fit at being compared to Hitler! Also I love "Joe the Plumber did not make concern enough to pursue." - JPatt's mangling of the English language is so cute. Wonder if he's one of Andy's homskollars. If only I had Tk's X-Ray powahs so I could see where he edits from... --[[User:Psygremlin|PsyGremlin]]<sub>[[User talk:Psygremlin|''Whut?'']]</sub> 04:09, 20 February 2009 (EST) | ||
+ | ::::IIRC, he's not a homeschooler, at least not one of Andy's. I thought he had a papertrail (or a digitrail) before CP, but I can't remember it now. My memory is failing on all fronts, but I'm also pretty sure he and PJR butt heads previously sometime before Jpatt was a sysop. His English though... if you listen closely, you can hear your neurons screaming. That's why I thought I might almost admire (in a twisted way) his dedication to parody. Imagine writing like that consistently for almost a year. Wow. It does, however, make it difficult to argue with him, since it's so hard to understand what he's saying in the first place. --[[User:Arcan|<font color="#99CCFF">'''Arcan'''</font>]] [[User_talk:Arcan|<small><font color=silver>¡ollǝɥ</font></small>]] 04:24, 20 February 2009 (EST) | ||
+ | :::::It's a simpsons quote, but whatever. [[Mei]] 07:29, 20 February 2009 (EST) | ||
+ | ::::::I realize it was supposed to be funny (he says it's from a [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Eye_w/_Greg_Gutfeld Fox News comedy/talk show]) but considering that none of the rest of the post was humorous, that PJR is still tarred by the others as a liberal, and that PJR made a [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk:Main_Page&diff=627837&oldid=627833 mainpage talk post] about Hitler just 14 minutes earlier combine in a perfect storm of extreme stupidity, bad timing, and pure dumb luck. Or, he's brilliant and he couldn't have timed it better. He may have meant it to be funny, but his communication skills in general are so poor that it's tough to recognize intent. Personally, I'm betting he's real, but that he resents PJR's eloquence and made the "joke" in a "half-in-fun-whole-in-earnest" kinda way. --[[User:Arcan|<font color="#99CCFF">'''Arcan'''</font>]] [[User_talk:Arcan|<small><font color=silver>¡ollǝɥ</font></small>]] 08:04, 20 February 2009 (EST) | ||
− | + | == all you people who think PJR is "reasonable"... == | |
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | == A little | + | ...read [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk:Main_Page&curid=67467&diff=627837&oldid=627833 this.] He's a first-class moron, and an asshole to boot. [[User:TheoryOfPractice|TheoryOfPractice]] 22:48, 19 February 2009 (EST) |
+ | :Obviously, {{ken}} hacked his account... or jellied his brains. '''[[user:human|<font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms"><big>ħ</big>uman</font>]]'''{{User:Human/sigtalk}} 22:58, 19 February 2009 (EST) | ||
+ | ::PJR's always been like that. He's perfectly reasonable about stuff like free speech, gun ownership and such, but the moment the Bible comes up, it's Darwin was an atheist, no new information and bring on the theocracy! So long as it's his denomination, of course. --[[User:Kels|Kels]] 23:13, 19 February 2009 (EST) | ||
+ | :::This isn't just about religion, it's about taking a giant dump on the graves of millions of dead Jews, Poles, Slavs, Roma, Russians, etc. etc. in order to score a cheap political point. I've never understood those voices on this site who tolerate PJR like he's some sort of "gentleman" or "honourable opponent." He's not. He's a hatemonger and a profoundly stupid man. [[User:TheoryOfPractice|TheoryOfPractice]] 23:23, 19 February 2009 (EST) | ||
+ | ::::Totally agree. The only reason he comes off so well is that he's standing next to vile cretins like Andy, TK and {{Ken}}. If we'd run into him anywhere else, we'd be raking him over the coals for his insane ideas about evolution and general stubbornness. --[[User:Kels|Kels]] 23:32, 19 February 2009 (EST) | ||
+ | PJR, if you're reading this, here's a thought experiment for you. You say the theory of Evolution, and Darwin's writings in particular, inspired the holocaust. Let's think about what Hitler did. He took a group of people who were different than him, and based on nothing other than their otherness, he decided to slaughter them ''en masse''. Now, does that sound like anything in ''The Origin of Species'', or does that sound a bit more like something out of the Old Testament? If you say the former, then I'm quite certain you know little about either book. [[User:DickTurpis|DickTurpis]] 23:46, 19 February 2009 (EST) | ||
+ | :It's been a lotta years since history class, but didn't Hitler's anti-semetism and the reason it was such an easy sell come more from Martin Luther than anywhere else? --[[User:Kels|Kels]] 23:51, 19 February 2009 (EST) | ||
+ | ::I'm pretty sure that while Luther was an anti-semite, it was in a more religious than racial way. I believe that Luther wanted them to convert so Jesus could get back here faster. I don't think conversion saved anyone from the gas chambers, so I'm not convinced that Luther was Hitler's prime inspiration, but I could be wrong. It certainly wasn't Darwin, anyway. [[User:DickTurpis|DickTurpis]] 23:58, 19 February 2009 (EST) | ||
+ | :::Luther didn't invent Jew-hatin'. It has a long and ingominious history almost as old as the Catholic Church., which was for a long time one of its main promoters. --[[User:Gulik|Gulik]] 00:21, 20 February 2009 (EST) | ||
+ | ::::I often wonder what it would be like to run into CP editors in the street... do they spew out their hate at anyone who will listen, or do they keep their values to themselves and simply use them to guide how they conduct themselves in day to day life? That's one of the interesting things about these wikis... it encourages people to present themselves on the basis of their values and beliefs, not something we do in "real life". I'm sure there are people I work with every day, people I've known for years, that I would punch in the face if I knew what they were actually thinking in their private lives.... [[User:Sightblinder|Sightblinder]] 01:20, 20 February 2009 (EST) | ||
+ | :::::You have to remember that when people say PJR is okay, they are talking relatively, and only in certain circumstances. [[User:Armondikov|<font color=red face="Tahoma">'''''<font size=4>A</font>'''rmondiko'''<font size=4>V</font>'''''</font>]][[User_Talk:Armondikov|{{user:Armondikov/sigtalk}}]] 09:22, 20 February 2009 (EST) | ||
+ | ::::::::I'm going to be a little reductionist here, but: People who abuse the memory of Auschwitz as a means by which to, in an intellectually dishonest manner, score political points in the name of fundamentalist dogma are never okay, relative to anything, under any circumstances, full stop. The man should be treated here with the same disdain we give Ken, or Andy, or anyone else from CP. [[User:TheoryOfPractice|TheoryOfPractice]] 09:30, 20 February 2009 (EST) | ||
+ | :::::::::Have you considered the alternative, TOP? That PJR actually believes this stuff. [[User:Ajkgordon|Ajkgordon]] 12:37, 20 February 2009 (EST) | ||
+ | ::::::::::PJR is an enigma. He '''''is''''' very reasonable when discussing a lot of the topics which teh Assfly deems important (like gun control) and he is one of the few (the only?) one of the non-parodist oldschool CP'rs who has the balls to talk sense to teh Assfly when he goes off the loop again. PJR's responses are well thought out, articulate and sensible... until someone mention YEC, than he becomes like the hulk (but instead of transforming into an awesome green monster, he becomes a creationist retard). --[[User:GTac|GTac]] 12:52, 20 February 2009 (EST) | ||
+ | :::::::::::I know people just like him. Perfectly friendly, reasonable, even eloquent and intelligent; but mention evolution and it all goes out the window. Why? They're pseudo-fundies who have been brainwashed their entire life, running in circles which promote stuff like the whole Darwin-Hitler thesis. {{User:Publius/sig0}} 13:03, 20 February 2009 (EST) | ||
+ | PJR's slime is all the more noxious because it is coated with sweet frosting. He only takes the high road with Andy when he is personally offended for whatever reason. He get's his dander up to defend his pride, not any sort of high minded ideal. His shout outs to this site are all the more ridiculous because of it. <sup><small><font color="#ff0000">[[User_talk:Sheesh! |Me!]]</font></small></sup>[[User:Sheesh!|'''<font color="#649CD6">Sheesh!</font>''']]<sub><small><font color="#6ff6633">[[Special:Contributions/Sheesh!|Mine!]]</font></small></sub> 13:17, 20 February 2009 (EST) | ||
− | + | == The truth shall set you free == | |
− | |||
− | |||
− | == | + | Who's taking bets on whether [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Essay:Greatest_Mysteries_of_World_History&curid=83020&diff=627861&oldid=622105 this] turns into "did truth exist before Christianity"? |
+ | :OK, Andrew Schlafly is a parody. A deep, deep cover parodist. Seems unlikely I know.... but it has to be true. The is the most idiotic statement I have ever seen. OMG, FUCK! [[User:Icewedge|Icewedge]] 01:54, 20 February 2009 (EST) | ||
− | + | :: I've wondered if Andy was a parodist, and I've concluded he's not, for one reason. Conservapedia isn't just a blog; he at least claims to be teaching students. If there really are kids taking his class, and he's actually letting them believe he's providing them with a quality education, all while knowingly running a parody, that's just evil. Parodying rabid conservatism is one thing, knowingly fooling with kids' education would be just evil. [[User:MDB|MDB]] 07:35, 20 February 2009 (EST) | |
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | == | + | ::Makes perfect sense, actually. Andy's ''insight'' here is perhaps best summarized as: "The Romans, who were [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=World_History_Lecture_Four&diff=next&oldid=627246 not known for their intellectual achievement], and were [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Essay:Greatest_Mysteries_of_World_History&curid=83020&diff=627861&oldid=622105 unable to discern truth], accepted Christianity as their religion..." [[User:Hydrogen|Hydrogen]] 06:25, 20 February 2009 (EST) |
+ | ::::And add ''developed a language which enabled powerful concepts that require sentences to be described in English but can be expressed in just a few words in Latin''. {{User:Genghis Khant/sigpic}} [[User:Genghis Khant|<font color=Blue>Генгис</font>]]<small>{{User:Genghis Khant/sigtalk}}</small> 07:24, 20 February 2009 (EST) | ||
+ | ::: As far as I can seen, his entire evidence for the statement that "the Romans had no concept of absolute truth" is Pontius Pilate's reported question in John 18:38. Oh, wait: St John was homeskooled by Jesus, so it must be true! [[User:Cantabrigian|Cantabrigian]] 06:50, 20 February 2009 (EST) | ||
+ | :Dear God, I caught this on [[cp:Talk:World History Lecture Four]] and was already about to bash my head against the keyboard, and now I see that this made Greatest World History Mystery status already? MAKE THE PAIN STOP! --[[User:Sid|Sid]] 07:15, 20 February 2009 (EST) | ||
+ | ::World Mystery: Is Andrew Schlafly a parodist or just suffering from Narcissist Personality Disorder? [[User:Armondikov|<font color=red face="Tahoma">'''''<font size=4>A</font>'''rmondiko'''<font size=4>V</font>'''''</font>]][[User_Talk:Armondikov|{{user:Armondikov/sigtalk}}]] 08:18, 20 February 2009 (EST) | ||
+ | :::I'm tired, so I'll say briefly: neither - he's just a prize twat. There, I feel better now. [[User:Totnesmartin|Totnesmartin]] 13:19, 20 February 2009 (EST) | ||
− | + | == Linking to CP == | |
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | + | Hi all, | |
− | I | + | When linking to CP could you please use diff links as much as possible. I just had to upload 3 identical pictures of the World History Lecture 4 and none point to the place of interest. Due to the file size this is time consuming even for a bot. [[User:Capturebot|Capturebot]] 02:25, 20 February 2009 (EST) |
− | : | + | :^^ This bot needs a hug. [[Mei]] 07:30, 20 February 2009 (EST) |
− | == | + | == oh for fuck's sake... == |
− | + | I just want to be banned. I asked for it, I was even told I would receive it, and nothing. So fine, I start being a regular dick instead of my own extra-special flavor of one, and I can only scrape up two weeks? Do I really have to go in there and start swearing? )# #(YH@#Uh [[User:68.178.98.82|68.178.98.82]] 02:43, 20 February 2009 (EST) Aziraphale, who's visiting Portland. Go ahead CP, BAN PORTLAND. | |
− | : | + | ::You may say that in jest, but they just might do it. Entire universities have been blocked before; it seems about time to move onto city and state wide bans. Sorry, Portland.. but at least you guys have your tax-free shopping to console you in the wake of this epic tragedy. [[User:Tealish|<font color="#008080">'''tealish'''</font>]][[User_talk:Tealish|<font color="#FFFF00"><sup>''???!!!''</sup></font>]] 03:22, 20 February 2009 (EST) |
+ | :::Aziraphale is an ex-CP editor who tried to inject a bit of commonsense and left with an extended Parthian shot. One could say that he was rational but not in a way that he woud be one us other than in a just passing by capacity. Blocking Portland would be of no consequence for Azi as he's just in transit. {{User:Genghis Khant/sigpic}} [[User:Genghis Khant|<font color=Blue>Генгис</font>]]<small>{{User:Genghis Khant/sigtalk}}</small> 03:44, 20 February 2009 (EST) | ||
+ | ::::Whoa! Dean has just dished out a /16 range block and an ip [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=block&user=DeanS&page=&year=&month=-1 block] as per Aziraphale. Strangely neither one matched the BON above. Dance for us Dean! Dance! --[[User:Psygremlin|PsyGremlin]]<sub>[[User talk:Psygremlin|''Whut?'']]</sub> 03:47, 20 February 2009 (EST) | ||
+ | :::::Threatening e-mail, though? Really? That doesn't seem in character for Aziraphale. --[[User:Arcan|<font color="#99CCFF">'''Arcan'''</font>]] [[User_talk:Arcan|<small><font color=silver>¡ollǝɥ</font></small>]] 04:12, 20 February 2009 (EST) | ||
+ | :::::Wow, they even suck at censorship. --[[User:Gulik|Gulik]] 04:16, 20 February 2009 (EST) | ||
+ | :::::::Somehow I doubt that Azi is bothered about having his block extended. I'd be interested about know what the "threatening email" was about. Releasing details about Dean and the sheep? {{User:Genghis Khant/sigpic}} [[User:Genghis Khant|<font color=Blue>Генгис</font>]]<small>{{User:Genghis Khant/sigtalk}}</small> 05:16, 20 February 2009 (EST) | ||
+ | ::::::::Shit. If they took out Portland, there goes my help to set up another sock. They've already gotten Charleston, and most proxies get axed quickly. Curse you Teacake. [[User:ENorman|ENorman]] 08:23, 20 February 2009 (EST) | ||
− | == | + | == The Times of London on pre-Christian humour. == |
− | [ | + | So maybe someone can post [http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/the_tls/article5759723.ece this] for Andy to chew on? [[User:TheoryOfPractice|TheoryOfPractice]] 10:18, 20 February 2009 (EST) |
− | + | :Generating Assfly response.... "TheoryOfPractice, what a stupid name that is, your liberal deceit knows no bounds. The so called "humor" discussed in that liberal screed are nothing more than obscenities and not True Humor®. You probably also deny that 2+2=4 and that prayer in school makes Autumn leaves a thing of absolute beauty. Godspeed. Andy Schlafly".... [[User:HumanisticJones|HumanisticJones]] 10:58, 20 February 2009 (EST) | |
− | : | + | ::The term is ''Genuine Humor®'', otherwise well done and you get an "A" for effort. [[User:Tealish|<font color="#008080">'''tealish'''</font>]][[User_talk:Tealish|<font color="#FFFF00"><sup>''???!!!''</sup></font>]] 15:42, 20 February 2009 (EST) |
− | :: | ||
− | |||
− | == | + | == This might expalin a lot......... == |
− | + | Just pottering around and I came across this: | |
− | + | http://www.bay-of-fundie.com | |
− | + | The 'Child Training' post of 18 Feb reminded me of my favourite 'educator' and might explain a lot if he's based his History Lectures on this! | |
− | : | ||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | + | [[User:Mick McT|Mick McT]] 11:54, 20 February 2009 (EST) | |
− | + | == THAT'S gonna be a huge job... == | |
− | + | So AddisonDM appears to be [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=delete&user=AddisonDM&page=&year=&month=-1 going through the list of perma-banned users and deleting their user pages]--freeing up server space? Making those names available again for new users? Toadying up to TK? All of the above? [[User:TheoryOfPractice|TheoryOfPractice]] 12:01, 20 February 2009 (EST) | |
− | + | :It doesn't delete accounts, just userpages, so the names aren't freed up. I think he's just following Andy's advice. [[User:DickTurpis|DickTurpis]] 12:04, 20 February 2009 (EST) | |
− | : | + | ::Dude, you're already an admin. Stop sucking up and start abusing your powarz! [[User:Z3ro|<font color="black" face="georgia"><b>Z3ro</b></font color>]][[User_talk:Z3ro|<font color="red"><sup>talk</sup></font>]] 12:13, 20 February 2009 (EST) |
− | + | ::: Wow, at 200 to 1000 bytes each, if they delete enough of them they may save a whole megabyte! Deleting the user page doesn't delete the user, so I can't imagine what they're trying to achieve. --[[User:JeevesMkII|JeevesMkII]] 13:57, 20 February 2009 (EST) | |
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | :: | ||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | : | ||
− | + | == Sorry Publius == | |
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | + | I had to [[Schlafloff|do it]]. Anyone should feel free to add to it and have fun with it though. [[User:EternalCritic|EternalCritic]] 12:32, 20 February 2009 (EST) | |
− | + | == CP - RW Boxing Tournament == | |
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | + | What do you think? I think we should arrange an All CP-RW boxing match, with all money generated being donated to the winner's choice of charity..... If CP wins, all the money goes straight to the EF for Andy's mum, and if RW wins, we fight about where exactly it goes..... I'm no Tyson, but I do still have an undefeated record in amatuer boxing and I think I can take any of their top people.... Who wants to sock up and ask Andy about it.... Anybody? '''[[user:SirChuckB|<font color="#000066" >SirChuckB</font>]]'''{{User:SirChuckB/signature}} 13:32, 20 February 2009 (EST) | |
− | I've | + | :Sounds like if you took them all on at once the smart money would still be on you. [[User:DickTurpis|DickTurpis]] 13:41, 20 February 2009 (EST) |
− | : | + | ::I don't know about boxing, but I've spent some time in the amatuer MMA circuit, and I'd gladly show up and ground-and-pound the crap out of any of them. {{User:Z3ro/sig2}} 13:42, 20 February 2009 (EST) |
− | :: | + | ::::You can take on the cat-ing freak JY23! He loves the MMA. Sounds like a good match to me. [[User:Neveruse513|<font color=#CC2200>Neveruse513</font color>]] 15:12, 20 February 2009 (EST) |
+ | :::I'll join in too, one question though, do I at least get to punch TK? {{User:Ttony21/sig2}} 13:51, 20 February 2009 (EST) | ||
+ | :::: Careful going near TK, you might get rabies. --[[User:JeevesMkII|JeevesMkII]] 13:54, 20 February 2009 (EST) | ||
+ | :::::That's the spirit Zero, just leave out the ground part of it and you're in... Tony, TK is going to go via lottery system. I think everybody wants to take him down.... '''[[user:SirChuckB|<font color="#000066" >SirChuckB</font>]]'''{{User:SirChuckB/signature}} 13:56, 20 February 2009 (EST) | ||
+ | ::::::No worries; I'll supply the evil liberal vaccines. Maybe we can take turns, like a meat market system. {{User:Ttony21/sig2}} 13:56, 20 February 2009 (EST) | ||
+ | :::::::Yeah! Rationalise this! [[User:Ajkgordon|Ajkgordon]] 14:10, 20 February 2009 (EST) | ||
+ | ::::::::I'm in. Just call me Ken Masters--[[User:Nate River|Nate River]] 15:10, 20 February 2009 (EST) | ||
+ | ::::::::If we win, we can go on a massive drinking, drug/vaccination taking and gambling spree, and we can use the leftover money to hire the best lawyers to defend us for all the babies we'll have murdered. [[User:EddyP|EddyP]] 15:12, 20 February 2009 (EST) | ||
+ | :::::::::Or we can use that money to petition in NJ the certification of homeschool teachers (while I steal a few dollars to get Street Fighter 4)--[[User:Nate River|Nate River]] 15:21, 20 February 2009 (EST) | ||
− | == | + | == On miscarriages == |
− | + | So, CP's latest argument is that we should [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk:Main_Page&diff=627880&oldid=627871 focus on eliminating miscarriages rather than AIDS]. | |
− | |||
− | + | Well, I'm certainly not going to argue with the idea in general -- that it would be good if there were less miscarriages. | |
− | + | However... from my admittedly limited knowledge of embryology, it's my understanding that a miscarriage often is, as I've heard it said, "nature's way of saying 'something is wrong here'." In other words, a miscarriage is the mother's body realizing that the fetus could not survive if it carried to term. | |
− | |||
− | + | So, basically, reducing miscarriages would require some incredible leaps in our knowledge of the earliest stages of human development. | |
− | + | And then my snarkier side asks a legitimate question: wouldn't embryonic stem cell research help a lot towards preventing miscarriages? I mean, you're dealing with embryonic tissue, right? Wouldn't that be the most logical place to due your research? | |
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | + | Yeah, I know, I'm thinking like a rational human being, not a conservapedian.... [[User:MDB|MDB]] 14:41, 20 February 2009 (EST) | |
− | + | :What you are saying, is basically that embryos that are sick or there is something wrong with are going to die by themself, like some sort of natural selection of the fittest! That sounds like filthy evilutionist thinking to me! Admit that you are a stinkin liberal or lose credibility. Godspeed. [[User:Etc|<font weight="normal" color="red">Etc</font>]] 14:44, 20 February 2009 (EST) | |
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | + | :: This line summed up just how unbelievably out of touch with reality Andy is: "embryo loss, which is probably the leading cause of human suffering." Abortion and miscarriage. The leading cause of human suffering. Not war, famine, disease, poverty, racism, drug abuse, and general violence. Way to demean the suffering of everyone who wasn't born into a rich New England family. {{User:Publius/sig0}} 14:50, 20 February 2009 (EST) | |
− | |||
− | |||
− | + | Once again, as with everything that is "Life" oriented, the intent is not about the poor little baby that is 20 cells big, but control of women. Why? Cause life causes miscarriages. The litany of activities a pregnant woman is cautioned against (usually in her first month) include 1) aspirin, 2) caffeine, 3) Tobacco, 4) stress of really any kind, 5) vitamins (lack of for some, too many, for others, 5) being too big, 6) being too little, 7) eating too much, 8) not eating enough, 9) eating fish, 10) eating red meat, 11) eating broccoli, parsley, and several other leafy green vegies, which have historically even been used as abortificients, 12) exercise, 13) lack of exercise, 14) living in harsh conditions, 15) flying, 16) swimming, 17) diving/scuba diving, 18) working in particular environments (office buildings for one) due to pollutants, 19)travel to foreign countries... shall I go on? | |
− | |||
− | + | When you say that we need to reduce miscarriages, and you are a guy running around without the repercussions of the pregnancy anyhow, it's quite easy to think "oh how wonderful. Miscarriages are sad". But we know, in a vast majority of cases, things that cause/can cause miscarriages. But to prevent them means a woman needs to be at home, safe and sound, not doing anything the State thinks is bad. | |
− | + | Under Bush, a document (an appallingly misogynist document) was released by the CDC to all doctors saying "assume every woman is pregnant when you meet with her, administer drugs as if she were pregnant, council her to live her life as if she were pregnant, because the first month of a pregnancy is the critical month". All and find if you want to have a baby. ridiculous and patrinistic if you are having your doctor tell you to give up this or that, or not take this or that medication (not life saving meds, but "convenience" meds like, you know, aspirin or antibiotics...). Women are only walking wombs to Andy. and cute little girls that need to be protected by the big macho men, of course. they do not have destiny of their choosing, nor life styles that suit them... --{{User:WaitingforGodot/sig1}} 15:03, 20 February 2009 (EST) | |
− | + | :So... Women ''want'' to have miscarriages, but are advised against it by a misogynist state? {{User:Phantom Hoover/sig0}} 15:15, 20 February 2009 (EST) | |
− | : | + | ::A large number of foetuses (> 25%) are miscarried within the first 6 weeks of gestation and the woman may not even realise she has been pregnant, maybe just thinks she has a late or missed period. Miscarriage is often nature's way of saying that this isn't a viable pregnancy, better get rid of it and make room for another. This makes God the biggest abortionist of them all. This information was fist imparted to me by a strongly Catholic Irish nurse who supported a woman's right to choose, and I have since seen the data corroborated elsewhere. So talk about preventing miscarriages largely focuses on when a woman has become noticeably pregnant. I would guess that the psychological trauma of miscarriage increases with the duration of the pregnancy (the term miscarriage being applicable only up to the 20th week) but surely losing a child after the delivery is much more distressing. I don't wish to sound too cynical but miscarriages are probably more important to wealthy westerners who have difficulty with conception when millions of young kids in the developing world die because of the lack of basic amenities like clean water and sanitation. The Asian Boxing-Day tsunami a couple of years ago was a tragedy but if only a fraction of the money that is being spent on an early-warning network was to be spent on providing clean water many more lives would, be saved. {{User:Genghis Khant/sigpic}} [[User:Genghis Khant|<font color=Blue>Генгис</font>]]<small>{{User:Genghis Khant/sigtalk}}</small> 15:34, 20 February 2009 (EST) |
− | :: | + | :::If you're aiming that at me, I was merely criticising Godot's accusation that all the advice against miscarriages was an attempt to control women's bodies, which is rather silly and somewhat conspiracy theoryish. {{User:Phantom Hoover/sig0}} 15:38, 20 February 2009 (EST) |
− | ::: | + | ::::It wasn't aimed at anyone I was just tossing my own views into the pot. {{User:Genghis Khant/sigpic}} [[User:Genghis Khant|<font color=Blue>Генгис</font>]]<small>{{User:Genghis Khant/sigtalk}}</small> 15:42, 20 February 2009 (EST) |
− | |||
− | ::: | + | :::Are you kidding me Phantom??? To walk into a doctor and have him *assume* I am pregnant, when he examins me, to have his advice related to my *possible* pregnancy (whether I want to be pregnant or not), and to assume that if i *am* pregnant, i will want to be pregnant is to make a woman a walking womb. |
− | |||
− | |||
− | + | ::::The restrictions necessary in the advice given to doctors from the CDC include basically a lifetime of abstinence from alcohol, cigarettes, eating poorly, doing any drug, being overly stressed, working too hard, and not getting enough sleep -- not simply because some of those things might be good for you, but because those things will harm your unborn (unconsidered, unknown-of) baby and could cause you to experience a miscarriage of a baby (you don't know you are carrying). That presupposition is belittling from it's start. Do you expect to walk into a doctor and have them act *as if* you were pregnant? Prescribe drugs *as if* you were pregnant? This was not for women who say "gosh, I want to start actively working on conceiving", but on every and all women of child bearing years.--{{User:WaitingforGodot/sig1}} 15:45, 20 February 2009 (EST) (edit conflict) | |
+ | :::::I agree that the CDC went too far, but I was criticising your attacks on the medical ''advice''. {{User:Phantom Hoover/sig0}} 15:48, 20 February 2009 (EST) | ||
+ | ::::::So you really think that both pregnant and non pregnant women should not "live" their lives as they see fit, simply because it could result in a miscarriage? That is the effect of saying "It's important to monitor miscarriages". 1/4 to 1/2 of all pregnancies end in miscarriage, and it is known by doctors that aspirin is one of the causes. So, I should put the life of my baby before my headache? That is ludicriss for the medical establishment to assert. If a pregnant woman (or a woman trying to get pregnant) says "give me a list of all the things that could harm my baby", she should be given this list. If she says "ok, I'll do this one, and that one but not these or those" that is also her choice. The doctor should not be administering (or not administering) to her based on her pregnancy, unless she says "do not do anything that could harm my as-of-yet unconfirmed pregnancy. The mindset that allows someone like the CDC to say "assume she is pregnant when treating her" is the same mindset that says "spontaneous miscarriages are the worst human suffering". And for what it's worth, I don't know if you are female or not, or if you've been pregnant or not, but very very few women "address" their pregnancy emotionally until they are 2 months along. It's far to easy to miscarry, and you can't have the kind of emotional truma you would have after carrying for 4 months, or 6 months, or losing your baby in child birth. (by the way, this is teh way God set it up, who are we to change it...)--{{User:WaitingforGodot/sig1}} 15:57, 20 February 2009 (EST) | ||
+ | ::::::::Did you even read my above post? I think the CDC shouldn't have said that, but I also think that if you don't want a miscarriage doctors shouldn't be criticised for saying what increases the risk of it. If you think that the risk is small, or your headache outweighs it, then you can do these things, but it's not doctors trying to control you. I have made it clear that the CDC's approach was wrong, so don't keep acting as if I didn't. {{User:Phantom Hoover/sig0}} 16:02, 20 February 2009 (EST) | ||
+ | :::::::::I think what we have here is a failure to communicate. Godot is saying is that women have a right to do as they wish in regards to their pregnancy, and that doctors should respect that, regardless of the consequences to the fetus. She ''isn't'' saying it's wrong to recommend that a woman not do certain things while pregnant because it may harm the fetus...per se. But, she ''is'' saying it's wrong to be given as unsolicited advice, i.e., treating the woman only as a walking oven for baby, rather than as a person first. --{{User:Yossarian/sigh}} 16:23, 20 February 2009 (EST) | ||
+ | : (EC) I do understand that you say the CDC went to far, but the main issue you (from my biased perspective) had in my post was that i feel the focus on miscarriages is once again about controlling women. And I base that on the fact that we know what causes large numbers of abortions (miscarriages), and the answer to stop them, is "soft" (guidance) or "hard" (laws) regulations to a woman's behaviors. Issues there, and in the medical community in general focus on the baby, but not the woman as human. Health guidelines in general are couched in things to do, not just to be a healthy human, but to keep you healthy for a time when you may be pregnant. Call it conspiracy-seeing on my part, I just call it general experience, but my 4 male doctors have instructed me that being on the pill long term hinders my chance at having a healthy baby. My three female doctors have asked if i forsee myself wanting a baby, then when I say no, don't even bring up the issue. But I am sorry I took it this far here. I live in this issue, work around this issue, see women routinely turned to "wombs" in the medical field, so i do react "out of range". my bad.--{{User:WaitingforGodot/sig1}} 16:26, 20 February 2009 (EST) | ||
+ | ::I think that doctors should ask you to consider if you are currently making a decision that you will later regret, so it isn't surprising that they would mention that using the pill long term reduces your chance of having a healthy baby; patients should be fully informed about what they are doing. If they keep asking you, that is a little silly, but you haven't made that clear. {{User:Phantom Hoover/sig0}} 16:31, 20 February 2009 (EST) | ||
− | + | == [http://www.conservapedia.com/User:WesleyS WesleyS] == | |
− | : | + | |
− | + | Is this guy tilting at windmills or what? One would get the impression that he actually thinks he can make CP better one category at a time. {{User:Edgerunner76/sig}} 14:53, 20 February 2009 (EST) | |
− | + | :The enormous effort that goes into streamlining categorization amuses me. Categories' purpose is to make finding information simpler, but no one actually looks for information on CP, so it's entirely a waste of time. However, after countless thousands of edits, Wesley did manage to get Blocking rights! (at the same time as Bugler Mk. II, who had been there a week. Meritocracyrobo, hasshin seyo!){{User:Publius/sig0}} 14:58, 20 February 2009 (EST) | |
− | :::: | + | |
− | ::: | + | == Bit and Bytes WIGO == |
− | :::: | + | |
− | + | Please to replace difflink with one from CP and not HideMyAss.Com. Thanks. [[User:TheoryOfPractice|TheoryOfPractice]] 16:09, 20 February 2009 (EST) | |
− | ::: | + | |
+ | :Yossarian (thanks!) corrected my mistake {{User:LArron/sig}} 16:12, 20 February 2009 (EST) | ||
+ | ::No! I'm Spartacus! {{User:Genghis Khant/sigpic}} [[User:Genghis Khant|<font color=Blue>Генгис</font>]]<small>{{User:Genghis Khant/sigtalk}}</small> 16:18, 20 February 2009 (EST) | ||
+ | :::Et tu? Gratias ago, Spartace! {{User:LArron/sig}} 16:23, 20 February 2009 (EST) | ||
+ | ::::Yossie actually posted a link to the Main Page rather than the UTF-8 page. However, the diffs pointed it to the correct version. Weird. {{User:Genghis Khant/sigpic}} [[User:Genghis Khant|<font color=Blue>Генгис</font>]]<small>{{User:Genghis Khant/sigtalk}}</small> 16:26, 20 February 2009 (EST) | ||
+ | |||
+ | == Alan/Andy Wigo == | ||
+ | |||
+ | Sadly only one of those listed died BC. Although none except Aurelius likely ever heard of Christianity. [[User:EternalCritic|EternalCritic]] 16:21, 20 February 2009 (EST) | ||
+ | ::I know noting about Rome--did they die AD, or before Constantine made Christianity the legit religion? [[User:TheoryOfPractice|TheoryOfPractice]] 16:23, 20 February 2009 (EST) | ||
+ | :::They all died well before Constantine, but how much would you bet he'll spin ANY of them dying after Jebus as having been influenced by xianity? THen again, I might be overestimating his brainpower. [[User:EternalCritic|EternalCritic]] 16:33, 20 February 2009 (EST) |
Revision as of 21:35, 20 February 2009
As a point of decorum, please use the [+] tab above when adding a new section, and the appropriate [edit] tab when commenting within an existing section. This will minimise the incidence of edit conflicts. New sections must be added at the bottom of the page. Thank you for your attention.
For non CP related talk, go to the saloon.
RationalWiki:Community Chalkboard
Rome...
How do you even do a history of Rome without mentioning the Catilinean conspiracy?
I know... just the tip of the iceburg, but wtf? EternalCritic 10:36, 19 February 2009 (EST)
- quo usque tandem abutere patienta nostra, aschlafly? larronsicut fur in nocte 10:53, 19 February 2009 (EST)
- EternalCritic (I notice how you hide behind an alias). First admit that Catiline was a Roman hero and Cicero a dirty liberal whose speeches were full of deceit. Deny this and lose credibility. 10:57, 19 February 2009 (EST)
- Publius (what an absurd name) Unless you open your mind and admit that Catiline was a depraved revolutionary (and probably a socialist), and Cicero a hero of Conservative democracy I have more rational people to debate. EternalCritic 14:24, 19 February 2009 (EST)
- He also says that Rome was born from the Hellenistic civilization, despite it having been a separate and distinct civilization long before Alexander's conquests created the Hellenistic civilization. On top of that, he says that praetors were "Roman general" under Augustus. While the office was often partly military in nature during the Republic, under Augustus and thereafter, the position of praetor was really purely administrative. It is pretty clear he has done almost no study for this.
- In 700 B.C. the Etruscans conquered Rome, and King Etruscan ruled it like the city-states in Greece. - King Etruscan? ГенгисIs the Pope a Catholic? 14:28, 19 February 2009 (EST)
- Now now... Tarquinius is a big word for Andy. EternalCritic 14:38, 19 February 2009 (EST)
- King Etruscan, Etruscan King, all the same, these bloody French :-) larronsicut fur in nocte 14:50, 19 February 2009 (EST)
- Now now... Tarquinius is a big word for Andy. EternalCritic 14:38, 19 February 2009 (EST)
- In 700 B.C. the Etruscans conquered Rome, and King Etruscan ruled it like the city-states in Greece. - King Etruscan? ГенгисIs the Pope a Catholic? 14:28, 19 February 2009 (EST)
<- 1. Who is your favorite Roman emperor, and why? Caligula, he was so nice to horses. Other opinions? larronsicut fur in nocte 15:02, 19 February 2009 (EST)
- Elagabulus of course. EternalCritic 15:06, 19 February 2009 (EST)
<-of course should give you full marks, EternalCritic (if this is your name), but sorry, EddyP, you stated no reason at all. One point of... Next question: 6. Current events question: What about the decline of the Roman empire reminds you of the United States today? The Roman empire was build under the protection of the gods. When the Roman lost their faith and started to flock to some oriental religion, their fate was sealed. larronsicut fur in nocte 15:16, 19 February 2009 (EST)
- Rampant pushing of the homosexual agenda by the liberal equites and plebes caused societal decay until the society collapsed under the weight of its own immorality. EternalCritic 15:22, 19 February 2009 (EST)
- they were too big for their britches, didn't have a good communication system, relied on outsurced materials for most of their supply routes, and had supply issues. wait, i forgot, Andy, you the teacher don't want history. -- They were morally bankrupt!--En attendant Godot"«Nous naissons tous fous. Quelques-uns le demeurent.» 16:03, 19 February 2009 (EST)
- Andy also omitted to mention AQUEDUCTS!
- they were too big for their britches, didn't have a good communication system, relied on outsurced materials for most of their supply routes, and had supply issues. wait, i forgot, Andy, you the teacher don't want history. -- They were morally bankrupt!--En attendant Godot"«Nous naissons tous fous. Quelques-uns le demeurent.» 16:03, 19 February 2009 (EST)
- Just couldn't resist the excuse to post this. ГенгисIs the Pope a Catholic? 16:14, 19 February 2009 (EST)
- And thank you for doing so! romanos eunt domo larronsicut fur in nocte 16:29, 19 February 2009 (EST)
- Just couldn't resist the excuse to post this. ГенгисIs the Pope a Catholic? 16:14, 19 February 2009 (EST)
- To be fair on Andy, he's not THAT bad. I go to a very good grammar school in England, and the history teachers there sometimes make mistakes on the same level as calling a Praetor a general. They don't have all the loony language theories and politics interfering with lessons, and the frequency of mistakes is not so great, but they do make errors that, when made by Andy, seem to be considered a mark of idiocy. Bil08 19:22, 19 February 2009 (EST)
- All sorts of teachers make stupid mistakes and believe erroneous things to be true, but Andy's are constant and horrifying, and he stonewalls when presented with them. Here's the game I've tried: choose a topic in history you know a little something about, go to Andy's paragraph/section on it, read it. How long does it take you to find a gross error? With ancient philosophy, it was something like the second sentence. Church Philosophers and Architecture: the first line is nonsense: Nation-states in Europe in the 1100s?! Scientific Revolution: Galileo was a dim scholar, and a good party guest. Enlightenment: it's one big clusterfuck. The bit on Voltaire is gibberish, and apparently very few good English philosophers have existed, so Hume is best. And so on. 21:11, 19 February 2009 (EST)
- Haha EternalCritic and Publius, you two schlafly well! Tealish 20:19, 19 February 2009 (EST)
- I think the term for two people Schlaflying eachother should be a Schlafloff. 21:11, 19 February 2009 (EST)
- I'm afraid Andy is that bad Bil08. He's not simply making mistakes, he's engaged in historical revisionism, and this is only considering his lecture material, wait until you get onto the main site.... Jammy 21:14, 19 February 2009 (EST)
- Actually Publius, having read through those links I have to agree with you. The paragraph on Hume alone has a half dozen errors. His chief claim to fame is that Darwin liked him? This man is allowed near children? --Bil08 05:23, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- Frenchman Voltaire (1694-1778) was a leading philosopher in the Enlightenment, advocating freedom everywhere and emphasizing his form of reason. He wrote "The Candide," in which Voltaire described many bad things that happen to Candide in order to make the point that the world could be a better place. Increased freedom was Voltaire's way of improving things. Aschlafly is a true Pangloss... larronsicut fur in nocte 06:21, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- Actually Publius, having read through those links I have to agree with you. The paragraph on Hume alone has a half dozen errors. His chief claim to fame is that Darwin liked him? This man is allowed near children? --Bil08 05:23, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- I'm afraid Andy is that bad Bil08. He's not simply making mistakes, he's engaged in historical revisionism, and this is only considering his lecture material, wait until you get onto the main site.... Jammy 21:14, 19 February 2009 (EST)
- I think the term for two people Schlaflying eachother should be a Schlafloff. 21:11, 19 February 2009 (EST)
Andy just hates Rome
Of course, they didn't understand truth![1] Sorry Cicero, I guess veritas wasn't a word or a concept in Latin philosophy. 23:42, 19 February 2009 (EST)
- Just don't try telling Andy that Philosophy is a search for truth... "god" forbid that conversation ever start. EternalCritic 09:00, 20 February 2009 (EST)
Palin's tax liabilities
Since it's a huge news item and scandal that Obama's cabinet picks and chief of staff have tax-payment issues, why hasn't CP jumped on the bandwagon and posted the scandal of Governor Palin? Of course I'm being sarcastic and just showing that CP is extremely biased (isn't that what Wikipedia is?), but it's still funny that on CP, IOKIYAR. --Irrational Atheist 11:38, 19 February 2009 (EST)
Non-profit
Interesting to see JoshuaZ come out of hibernation, when you'd expect they'd have taken the chance to ban him months ago for inactivity, but this comment makes me wonder about something. Is CP considered a non-profit organization in the first place? In Canada, non-profit designation means some very specific things, and there are requirements for the designation as well. It's not easy to get, as I recently watched my roommate fight her way through over a year of the application process for the local ferret rescue outfit. Does the same apply in the States? If so, what are the odds that Andy would have been able, let alone willing, to go through the process at all? --Kels 15:23, 19 February 2009 (EST)
- In a very short sense, no, Conservapedia is not a non-profit.... There are very specific rules regarding the use of the term non profit. Basically, in the eyes of the law, Andy just runs another vanity website and non-certified tutoring program. SirChuckBA product of Affirmative Action 15:28, 19 February 2009 (EST)
- That's what I thought. In that case, JoshuaZ's comment is totally inapplicable, since CP wouldn't have any special leeway, and I'd be very surprised if anyone but Andy honestly thought the place was really educational. --Kels 15:36, 19 February 2009 (EST)
- It reminds of one of those stupid office signs -
This is a non-profit organization.
It wasn't meant to be, but that's how it turned out.
In some countries the term is "not for profit" rather than "non-profit" as it describes a statement of intent rather than an outcome. Didn't someone (probably Ames) once badger Andy about the commercial status of CP as the domain is a dot com rather than a dot org? ГенгисIs the Pope a Catholic? 15:51, 19 February 2009 (EST)- Could we call RW a non-prophet organization? Hactar 20:10, 19 February 2009 (EST)
- It reminds of one of those stupid office signs -
- That's what I thought. In that case, JoshuaZ's comment is totally inapplicable, since CP wouldn't have any special leeway, and I'd be very surprised if anyone but Andy honestly thought the place was really educational. --Kels 15:36, 19 February 2009 (EST)
Regarding blocking for inactivity, did anyone else notice this? On the np thing, I did once ask Andy what the business model or plan or something was for CP, but he archived his talk page right after I did so. ħuman 22:43, 19 February 2009 (EST)
TK and citations
Not to be picky. But, TK's actual words are "In the real, non-wiki/academic world, "citations" are never demanded, and politicians rely on that." He's saying that the academic and wiki world people demand citations - in the real world they do not. And, he's right. Check FactCheck.org and you will see plenty of times where politicians (from both sides of the aisle) make unfounded claims knowing that the general public won't check too closely. Patrickr 16:05, 19 February 2009 (EST)
- On that same TK note, help help. He's being opressed SirChuckBA product of Affirmative Action 17:27, 19 February 2009 (EST)
- I removed the academic thing. It's a bit ambiguous the way TK wrote it but I think it is obvious that he means non-wiki & non-academic. ГенгисIs the Pope a Catholic? 17:40, 19 February 2009 (EST)
- Haha, Chuck's oppression link reminds me of the time he was screaming about his human rights being restricted because someone here blocked him for three days. Hilarious. --Kels 17:57, 19 February 2009 (EST)
- Yeah, TK is quite a piece of work isn't he..... It's so sad that the man (in the basest sense of the term) that gains Andy's trust is the same one who quite loudly and openly declared his intent to bring down the site. SirChuckBA product of Affirmative Action 18:08, 19 February 2009 (EST)
- TK and Andy were
intelligently designedmade for each other. Zaku 18:56, 19 February 2009 (EST) - Where has TK actually talked about wanting to bring down the site? I thought that had been inferred from his actions, not his words. Hactar 20:12, 19 February 2009 (EST)
- TK's actions have included composing e-mails and IMs in which he describes his plans to take down CP. Some people on this site have inferred from those actions that TK means to take down CP. --Marty 22:50, 19 February 2009 (EST)
- TK and Andy were
- Yeah, TK is quite a piece of work isn't he..... It's so sad that the man (in the basest sense of the term) that gains Andy's trust is the same one who quite loudly and openly declared his intent to bring down the site. SirChuckBA product of Affirmative Action 18:08, 19 February 2009 (EST)
- Haha, Chuck's oppression link reminds me of the time he was screaming about his human rights being restricted because someone here blocked him for three days. Hilarious. --Kels 17:57, 19 February 2009 (EST)
- I removed the academic thing. It's a bit ambiguous the way TK wrote it but I think it is obvious that he means non-wiki & non-academic. ГенгисIs the Pope a Catholic? 17:40, 19 February 2009 (EST)
- See above for a couple of random quotes. Noobs might not know that TK (or TK) also socked up here with the names EWig and NightTrain. I don't think anyone was fooled for more than 10 minutes and that without the benefit of checkuser. To add an element of denial he used his E.Wig IM whenever he was plotting against CP or abusing one of his fellow sysops. If you read any of these transcripts you can see that it is TK who is doing all the talking so his claim that he was just trying to get information are a bit thin. While a CP sysop he founded a bulletin board forum called "Godspeed" (see right). Some other conversations with TK can be found here and at the Hoji files 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12. Excuplatory1 is TK's "front of house" AIM name which
iswas posted on his CP user page. ГенгисIs the Pope a Catholic? 02:55, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- See above for a couple of random quotes. Noobs might not know that TK (or TK) also socked up here with the names EWig and NightTrain. I don't think anyone was fooled for more than 10 minutes and that without the benefit of checkuser. To add an element of denial he used his E.Wig IM whenever he was plotting against CP or abusing one of his fellow sysops. If you read any of these transcripts you can see that it is TK who is doing all the talking so his claim that he was just trying to get information are a bit thin. While a CP sysop he founded a bulletin board forum called "Godspeed" (see right). Some other conversations with TK can be found here and at the Hoji files 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12. Excuplatory1 is TK's "front of house" AIM name which
TK porn
So, what's going on with you guys lately? Since TK likes to read here often and try to find us out on CP, I think we should try to make as many things reference him, without really referencing him. So if you can, somewhere include TK in any combination in your posting, socks names, etc., and let him know how much we appreciate his lulz. --Irrational Atheist 21:08, 19 February 2009 (EST)
Conservapedia Article
I really love cp:Conservapedia. Addison couldn't do a better job of belittling CP if s/he was a parodist! Let's see how far the have to go to get influential users. Conservative created two articles which he declared were selected article of the year! Ed liveblogs about teen movies destroys math articles he can't comprehend is damned creepy has primarily aimed at accuracy, rationality, and user cooperation. DeanS works as a technologically challenged RSS aggregator! BethanyS made articles on ships (and hasn't added content in months)! JM has made disorganized messes on painting, literature, and sculpture! "TK has made many substantive contributions". Name some! And the wonderful hubris: "AddisonDM ... has created several 'high profile' articles such as Examples of Moronic Vandalism by the "tolerant", Obama-isms as a mirror of Bushisms, and the Conservapedia article itself." In what way are these "high profile"? The term is silly. I'd never even heard of SharonS. Note the absence of PJR, as well as any non-sysop. Next up, CollegeRepublican, who entertains the teeming millions of editors daily with his witty quips and humorous anecdotes. 21:48, 19 February 2009 (EST)
- As I recall, it also claims that people can be promoted to bureaucrat. Which has never happened, Schlafly keeps those reins tightly in his grip, right? I think there is a "generic" auto-created MW 'crat, but that's just to jumpstart the wiki. ħuman 22:48, 19 February 2009 (EST)
- Addison is a hero - my favourite CP character by a long way. Reminds me a bit of NateG in some ways.--Kriss AkabusiAAAAWOOOOGAAAR!!1 05:54, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- The mythical SharonS (all 14/15 years of her) is the mythical "other" 'crat on CP, besides Andy and Webmaster. Not even Jallen has reached those heights, although $10 says I know what TK's hoping for next promotion...
- aw! and look - we have another fan. --PsyGremlinWhut? 07:45, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- I think Sharon's a couple of years older now maybe 16/17. ГенгисIs the Pope a Catholic? 12:54, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- Addison is a hero - my favourite CP character by a long way. Reminds me a bit of NateG in some ways.--Kriss AkabusiAAAAWOOOOGAAAR!!1 05:54, 20 February 2009 (EST)
"Worse than Hitler"
I still can't tell - is Jpatt remarkably stupid or an incredible parodist? The whole exchange is fantastic. I have to wonder how Jpatt manages to not drown in rainstorm. On the other hand, if he's a parodist, I'm not sure I would applaud that level of dedication. --Arcan ¡ollǝɥ 22:40, 19 February 2009 (EST)
- I just read that exchange and had the same thought - TK's just being an ass as usual, but JPatt's acting just like I would in his position. He has to be a parodist, or my world just got a little darker. 23:26, 19 February 2009 (EST)
- It's long, but I had to wigo it. How do these people find each other? Together, they're better than any sitcom on TV these days. Tealish 01:33, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- JP's abuse of a senior admin (in terms of service anyway) is classic Bugler. PJR is on the outs with Andy and TK, so he can stick the boot in too. I should imagine PJR will have a fit at being compared to Hitler! Also I love "Joe the Plumber did not make concern enough to pursue." - JPatt's mangling of the English language is so cute. Wonder if he's one of Andy's homskollars. If only I had Tk's X-Ray powahs so I could see where he edits from... --PsyGremlinWhut? 04:09, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- IIRC, he's not a homeschooler, at least not one of Andy's. I thought he had a papertrail (or a digitrail) before CP, but I can't remember it now. My memory is failing on all fronts, but I'm also pretty sure he and PJR butt heads previously sometime before Jpatt was a sysop. His English though... if you listen closely, you can hear your neurons screaming. That's why I thought I might almost admire (in a twisted way) his dedication to parody. Imagine writing like that consistently for almost a year. Wow. It does, however, make it difficult to argue with him, since it's so hard to understand what he's saying in the first place. --Arcan ¡ollǝɥ 04:24, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- It's a simpsons quote, but whatever. Mei 07:29, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- I realize it was supposed to be funny (he says it's from a Fox News comedy/talk show) but considering that none of the rest of the post was humorous, that PJR is still tarred by the others as a liberal, and that PJR made a mainpage talk post about Hitler just 14 minutes earlier combine in a perfect storm of extreme stupidity, bad timing, and pure dumb luck. Or, he's brilliant and he couldn't have timed it better. He may have meant it to be funny, but his communication skills in general are so poor that it's tough to recognize intent. Personally, I'm betting he's real, but that he resents PJR's eloquence and made the "joke" in a "half-in-fun-whole-in-earnest" kinda way. --Arcan ¡ollǝɥ 08:04, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- It's a simpsons quote, but whatever. Mei 07:29, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- IIRC, he's not a homeschooler, at least not one of Andy's. I thought he had a papertrail (or a digitrail) before CP, but I can't remember it now. My memory is failing on all fronts, but I'm also pretty sure he and PJR butt heads previously sometime before Jpatt was a sysop. His English though... if you listen closely, you can hear your neurons screaming. That's why I thought I might almost admire (in a twisted way) his dedication to parody. Imagine writing like that consistently for almost a year. Wow. It does, however, make it difficult to argue with him, since it's so hard to understand what he's saying in the first place. --Arcan ¡ollǝɥ 04:24, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- JP's abuse of a senior admin (in terms of service anyway) is classic Bugler. PJR is on the outs with Andy and TK, so he can stick the boot in too. I should imagine PJR will have a fit at being compared to Hitler! Also I love "Joe the Plumber did not make concern enough to pursue." - JPatt's mangling of the English language is so cute. Wonder if he's one of Andy's homskollars. If only I had Tk's X-Ray powahs so I could see where he edits from... --PsyGremlinWhut? 04:09, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- It's long, but I had to wigo it. How do these people find each other? Together, they're better than any sitcom on TV these days. Tealish 01:33, 20 February 2009 (EST)
all you people who think PJR is "reasonable"...
...read this. He's a first-class moron, and an asshole to boot. TheoryOfPractice 22:48, 19 February 2009 (EST)
- Obviously, Ken hacked his account... or jellied his brains. ħuman 22:58, 19 February 2009 (EST)
- PJR's always been like that. He's perfectly reasonable about stuff like free speech, gun ownership and such, but the moment the Bible comes up, it's Darwin was an atheist, no new information and bring on the theocracy! So long as it's his denomination, of course. --Kels 23:13, 19 February 2009 (EST)
- This isn't just about religion, it's about taking a giant dump on the graves of millions of dead Jews, Poles, Slavs, Roma, Russians, etc. etc. in order to score a cheap political point. I've never understood those voices on this site who tolerate PJR like he's some sort of "gentleman" or "honourable opponent." He's not. He's a hatemonger and a profoundly stupid man. TheoryOfPractice 23:23, 19 February 2009 (EST)
- PJR's always been like that. He's perfectly reasonable about stuff like free speech, gun ownership and such, but the moment the Bible comes up, it's Darwin was an atheist, no new information and bring on the theocracy! So long as it's his denomination, of course. --Kels 23:13, 19 February 2009 (EST)
PJR, if you're reading this, here's a thought experiment for you. You say the theory of Evolution, and Darwin's writings in particular, inspired the holocaust. Let's think about what Hitler did. He took a group of people who were different than him, and based on nothing other than their otherness, he decided to slaughter them en masse. Now, does that sound like anything in The Origin of Species, or does that sound a bit more like something out of the Old Testament? If you say the former, then I'm quite certain you know little about either book. DickTurpis 23:46, 19 February 2009 (EST)
- It's been a lotta years since history class, but didn't Hitler's anti-semetism and the reason it was such an easy sell come more from Martin Luther than anywhere else? --Kels 23:51, 19 February 2009 (EST)
- I'm pretty sure that while Luther was an anti-semite, it was in a more religious than racial way. I believe that Luther wanted them to convert so Jesus could get back here faster. I don't think conversion saved anyone from the gas chambers, so I'm not convinced that Luther was Hitler's prime inspiration, but I could be wrong. It certainly wasn't Darwin, anyway. DickTurpis 23:58, 19 February 2009 (EST)
- Luther didn't invent Jew-hatin'. It has a long and ingominious history almost as old as the Catholic Church., which was for a long time one of its main promoters. --Gulik 00:21, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- I often wonder what it would be like to run into CP editors in the street... do they spew out their hate at anyone who will listen, or do they keep their values to themselves and simply use them to guide how they conduct themselves in day to day life? That's one of the interesting things about these wikis... it encourages people to present themselves on the basis of their values and beliefs, not something we do in "real life". I'm sure there are people I work with every day, people I've known for years, that I would punch in the face if I knew what they were actually thinking in their private lives.... Sightblinder 01:20, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- You have to remember that when people say PJR is okay, they are talking relatively, and only in certain circumstances. ArmondikoVbomination 09:22, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- I'm going to be a little reductionist here, but: People who abuse the memory of Auschwitz as a means by which to, in an intellectually dishonest manner, score political points in the name of fundamentalist dogma are never okay, relative to anything, under any circumstances, full stop. The man should be treated here with the same disdain we give Ken, or Andy, or anyone else from CP. TheoryOfPractice 09:30, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- Have you considered the alternative, TOP? That PJR actually believes this stuff. Ajkgordon 12:37, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- PJR is an enigma. He is very reasonable when discussing a lot of the topics which teh Assfly deems important (like gun control) and he is one of the few (the only?) one of the non-parodist oldschool CP'rs who has the balls to talk sense to teh Assfly when he goes off the loop again. PJR's responses are well thought out, articulate and sensible... until someone mention YEC, than he becomes like the hulk (but instead of transforming into an awesome green monster, he becomes a creationist retard). --GTac 12:52, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- I know people just like him. Perfectly friendly, reasonable, even eloquent and intelligent; but mention evolution and it all goes out the window. Why? They're pseudo-fundies who have been brainwashed their entire life, running in circles which promote stuff like the whole Darwin-Hitler thesis. 13:03, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- PJR is an enigma. He is very reasonable when discussing a lot of the topics which teh Assfly deems important (like gun control) and he is one of the few (the only?) one of the non-parodist oldschool CP'rs who has the balls to talk sense to teh Assfly when he goes off the loop again. PJR's responses are well thought out, articulate and sensible... until someone mention YEC, than he becomes like the hulk (but instead of transforming into an awesome green monster, he becomes a creationist retard). --GTac 12:52, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- Have you considered the alternative, TOP? That PJR actually believes this stuff. Ajkgordon 12:37, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- I'm going to be a little reductionist here, but: People who abuse the memory of Auschwitz as a means by which to, in an intellectually dishonest manner, score political points in the name of fundamentalist dogma are never okay, relative to anything, under any circumstances, full stop. The man should be treated here with the same disdain we give Ken, or Andy, or anyone else from CP. TheoryOfPractice 09:30, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- You have to remember that when people say PJR is okay, they are talking relatively, and only in certain circumstances. ArmondikoVbomination 09:22, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- I often wonder what it would be like to run into CP editors in the street... do they spew out their hate at anyone who will listen, or do they keep their values to themselves and simply use them to guide how they conduct themselves in day to day life? That's one of the interesting things about these wikis... it encourages people to present themselves on the basis of their values and beliefs, not something we do in "real life". I'm sure there are people I work with every day, people I've known for years, that I would punch in the face if I knew what they were actually thinking in their private lives.... Sightblinder 01:20, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- Luther didn't invent Jew-hatin'. It has a long and ingominious history almost as old as the Catholic Church., which was for a long time one of its main promoters. --Gulik 00:21, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- I'm pretty sure that while Luther was an anti-semite, it was in a more religious than racial way. I believe that Luther wanted them to convert so Jesus could get back here faster. I don't think conversion saved anyone from the gas chambers, so I'm not convinced that Luther was Hitler's prime inspiration, but I could be wrong. It certainly wasn't Darwin, anyway. DickTurpis 23:58, 19 February 2009 (EST)
PJR's slime is all the more noxious because it is coated with sweet frosting. He only takes the high road with Andy when he is personally offended for whatever reason. He get's his dander up to defend his pride, not any sort of high minded ideal. His shout outs to this site are all the more ridiculous because of it. Me!Sheesh!Mine! 13:17, 20 February 2009 (EST)
The truth shall set you free
Who's taking bets on whether this turns into "did truth exist before Christianity"?
- OK, Andrew Schlafly is a parody. A deep, deep cover parodist. Seems unlikely I know.... but it has to be true. The is the most idiotic statement I have ever seen. OMG, FUCK! Icewedge 01:54, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- I've wondered if Andy was a parodist, and I've concluded he's not, for one reason. Conservapedia isn't just a blog; he at least claims to be teaching students. If there really are kids taking his class, and he's actually letting them believe he's providing them with a quality education, all while knowingly running a parody, that's just evil. Parodying rabid conservatism is one thing, knowingly fooling with kids' education would be just evil. MDB 07:35, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- Makes perfect sense, actually. Andy's insight here is perhaps best summarized as: "The Romans, who were not known for their intellectual achievement, and were unable to discern truth, accepted Christianity as their religion..." Hydrogen 06:25, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- And add developed a language which enabled powerful concepts that require sentences to be described in English but can be expressed in just a few words in Latin. ГенгисIs the Pope a Catholic? 07:24, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- As far as I can seen, his entire evidence for the statement that "the Romans had no concept of absolute truth" is Pontius Pilate's reported question in John 18:38. Oh, wait: St John was homeskooled by Jesus, so it must be true! Cantabrigian 06:50, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- Makes perfect sense, actually. Andy's insight here is perhaps best summarized as: "The Romans, who were not known for their intellectual achievement, and were unable to discern truth, accepted Christianity as their religion..." Hydrogen 06:25, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- Dear God, I caught this on cp:Talk:World History Lecture Four and was already about to bash my head against the keyboard, and now I see that this made Greatest World History Mystery status already? MAKE THE PAIN STOP! --Sid 07:15, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- World Mystery: Is Andrew Schlafly a parodist or just suffering from Narcissist Personality Disorder? ArmondikoVbomination 08:18, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- I'm tired, so I'll say briefly: neither - he's just a prize twat. There, I feel better now. Totnesmartin 13:19, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- World Mystery: Is Andrew Schlafly a parodist or just suffering from Narcissist Personality Disorder? ArmondikoVbomination 08:18, 20 February 2009 (EST)
Linking to CP
Hi all,
When linking to CP could you please use diff links as much as possible. I just had to upload 3 identical pictures of the World History Lecture 4 and none point to the place of interest. Due to the file size this is time consuming even for a bot. Capturebot 02:25, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- ^^ This bot needs a hug. Mei 07:30, 20 February 2009 (EST)
oh for fuck's sake...
I just want to be banned. I asked for it, I was even told I would receive it, and nothing. So fine, I start being a regular dick instead of my own extra-special flavor of one, and I can only scrape up two weeks? Do I really have to go in there and start swearing? )# #(YH@#Uh 68.178.98.82 02:43, 20 February 2009 (EST) Aziraphale, who's visiting Portland. Go ahead CP, BAN PORTLAND.
- You may say that in jest, but they just might do it. Entire universities have been blocked before; it seems about time to move onto city and state wide bans. Sorry, Portland.. but at least you guys have your tax-free shopping to console you in the wake of this epic tragedy. tealish???!!! 03:22, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- Aziraphale is an ex-CP editor who tried to inject a bit of commonsense and left with an extended Parthian shot. One could say that he was rational but not in a way that he woud be one us other than in a just passing by capacity. Blocking Portland would be of no consequence for Azi as he's just in transit. ГенгисIs the Pope a Catholic? 03:44, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- Whoa! Dean has just dished out a /16 range block and an ip block as per Aziraphale. Strangely neither one matched the BON above. Dance for us Dean! Dance! --PsyGremlinWhut? 03:47, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- Threatening e-mail, though? Really? That doesn't seem in character for Aziraphale. --Arcan ¡ollǝɥ 04:12, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- Wow, they even suck at censorship. --Gulik 04:16, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- Somehow I doubt that Azi is bothered about having his block extended. I'd be interested about know what the "threatening email" was about. Releasing details about Dean and the sheep? ГенгисIs the Pope a Catholic? 05:16, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- Shit. If they took out Portland, there goes my help to set up another sock. They've already gotten Charleston, and most proxies get axed quickly. Curse you Teacake. ENorman 08:23, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- Somehow I doubt that Azi is bothered about having his block extended. I'd be interested about know what the "threatening email" was about. Releasing details about Dean and the sheep? ГенгисIs the Pope a Catholic? 05:16, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- Whoa! Dean has just dished out a /16 range block and an ip block as per Aziraphale. Strangely neither one matched the BON above. Dance for us Dean! Dance! --PsyGremlinWhut? 03:47, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- Aziraphale is an ex-CP editor who tried to inject a bit of commonsense and left with an extended Parthian shot. One could say that he was rational but not in a way that he woud be one us other than in a just passing by capacity. Blocking Portland would be of no consequence for Azi as he's just in transit. ГенгисIs the Pope a Catholic? 03:44, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- You may say that in jest, but they just might do it. Entire universities have been blocked before; it seems about time to move onto city and state wide bans. Sorry, Portland.. but at least you guys have your tax-free shopping to console you in the wake of this epic tragedy. tealish???!!! 03:22, 20 February 2009 (EST)
The Times of London on pre-Christian humour.
So maybe someone can post this for Andy to chew on? TheoryOfPractice 10:18, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- Generating Assfly response.... "TheoryOfPractice, what a stupid name that is, your liberal deceit knows no bounds. The so called "humor" discussed in that liberal screed are nothing more than obscenities and not True Humor®. You probably also deny that 2+2=4 and that prayer in school makes Autumn leaves a thing of absolute beauty. Godspeed. Andy Schlafly".... HumanisticJones 10:58, 20 February 2009 (EST)
This might expalin a lot.........
Just pottering around and I came across this: http://www.bay-of-fundie.com The 'Child Training' post of 18 Feb reminded me of my favourite 'educator' and might explain a lot if he's based his History Lectures on this!
Mick McT 11:54, 20 February 2009 (EST)
THAT'S gonna be a huge job...
So AddisonDM appears to be going through the list of perma-banned users and deleting their user pages--freeing up server space? Making those names available again for new users? Toadying up to TK? All of the above? TheoryOfPractice 12:01, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- It doesn't delete accounts, just userpages, so the names aren't freed up. I think he's just following Andy's advice. DickTurpis 12:04, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- Dude, you're already an admin. Stop sucking up and start abusing your powarz! Z3rotalk 12:13, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- Wow, at 200 to 1000 bytes each, if they delete enough of them they may save a whole megabyte! Deleting the user page doesn't delete the user, so I can't imagine what they're trying to achieve. --JeevesMkII 13:57, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- Dude, you're already an admin. Stop sucking up and start abusing your powarz! Z3rotalk 12:13, 20 February 2009 (EST)
Sorry Publius
I had to do it. Anyone should feel free to add to it and have fun with it though. EternalCritic 12:32, 20 February 2009 (EST)
CP - RW Boxing Tournament
What do you think? I think we should arrange an All CP-RW boxing match, with all money generated being donated to the winner's choice of charity..... If CP wins, all the money goes straight to the EF for Andy's mum, and if RW wins, we fight about where exactly it goes..... I'm no Tyson, but I do still have an undefeated record in amatuer boxing and I think I can take any of their top people.... Who wants to sock up and ask Andy about it.... Anybody? SirChuckBA product of Affirmative Action 13:32, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- Sounds like if you took them all on at once the smart money would still be on you. DickTurpis 13:41, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- I don't know about boxing, but I've spent some time in the amatuer MMA circuit, and I'd gladly show up and ground-and-pound the crap out of any of them. Z3rotalk 13:42, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- You can take on the cat-ing freak JY23! He loves the MMA. Sounds like a good match to me. Neveruse513 15:12, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- I'll join in too, one question though, do I at least get to punch TK? User:Ttony21/sig2 13:51, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- Careful going near TK, you might get rabies. --JeevesMkII 13:54, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- That's the spirit Zero, just leave out the ground part of it and you're in... Tony, TK is going to go via lottery system. I think everybody wants to take him down.... SirChuckBA product of Affirmative Action 13:56, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- No worries; I'll supply the evil liberal vaccines. Maybe we can take turns, like a meat market system. User:Ttony21/sig2 13:56, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- Yeah! Rationalise this! Ajkgordon 14:10, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- I'm in. Just call me Ken Masters--Nate River 15:10, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- If we win, we can go on a massive drinking, drug/vaccination taking and gambling spree, and we can use the leftover money to hire the best lawyers to defend us for all the babies we'll have murdered. EddyP 15:12, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- Or we can use that money to petition in NJ the certification of homeschool teachers (while I steal a few dollars to get Street Fighter 4)--Nate River 15:21, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- Yeah! Rationalise this! Ajkgordon 14:10, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- No worries; I'll supply the evil liberal vaccines. Maybe we can take turns, like a meat market system. User:Ttony21/sig2 13:56, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- That's the spirit Zero, just leave out the ground part of it and you're in... Tony, TK is going to go via lottery system. I think everybody wants to take him down.... SirChuckBA product of Affirmative Action 13:56, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- Careful going near TK, you might get rabies. --JeevesMkII 13:54, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- I don't know about boxing, but I've spent some time in the amatuer MMA circuit, and I'd gladly show up and ground-and-pound the crap out of any of them. Z3rotalk 13:42, 20 February 2009 (EST)
On miscarriages
So, CP's latest argument is that we should focus on eliminating miscarriages rather than AIDS.
Well, I'm certainly not going to argue with the idea in general -- that it would be good if there were less miscarriages.
However... from my admittedly limited knowledge of embryology, it's my understanding that a miscarriage often is, as I've heard it said, "nature's way of saying 'something is wrong here'." In other words, a miscarriage is the mother's body realizing that the fetus could not survive if it carried to term.
So, basically, reducing miscarriages would require some incredible leaps in our knowledge of the earliest stages of human development.
And then my snarkier side asks a legitimate question: wouldn't embryonic stem cell research help a lot towards preventing miscarriages? I mean, you're dealing with embryonic tissue, right? Wouldn't that be the most logical place to due your research?
Yeah, I know, I'm thinking like a rational human being, not a conservapedian.... MDB 14:41, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- What you are saying, is basically that embryos that are sick or there is something wrong with are going to die by themself, like some sort of natural selection of the fittest! That sounds like filthy evilutionist thinking to me! Admit that you are a stinkin liberal or lose credibility. Godspeed. Etc 14:44, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- This line summed up just how unbelievably out of touch with reality Andy is: "embryo loss, which is probably the leading cause of human suffering." Abortion and miscarriage. The leading cause of human suffering. Not war, famine, disease, poverty, racism, drug abuse, and general violence. Way to demean the suffering of everyone who wasn't born into a rich New England family. 14:50, 20 February 2009 (EST)
Once again, as with everything that is "Life" oriented, the intent is not about the poor little baby that is 20 cells big, but control of women. Why? Cause life causes miscarriages. The litany of activities a pregnant woman is cautioned against (usually in her first month) include 1) aspirin, 2) caffeine, 3) Tobacco, 4) stress of really any kind, 5) vitamins (lack of for some, too many, for others, 5) being too big, 6) being too little, 7) eating too much, 8) not eating enough, 9) eating fish, 10) eating red meat, 11) eating broccoli, parsley, and several other leafy green vegies, which have historically even been used as abortificients, 12) exercise, 13) lack of exercise, 14) living in harsh conditions, 15) flying, 16) swimming, 17) diving/scuba diving, 18) working in particular environments (office buildings for one) due to pollutants, 19)travel to foreign countries... shall I go on?
When you say that we need to reduce miscarriages, and you are a guy running around without the repercussions of the pregnancy anyhow, it's quite easy to think "oh how wonderful. Miscarriages are sad". But we know, in a vast majority of cases, things that cause/can cause miscarriages. But to prevent them means a woman needs to be at home, safe and sound, not doing anything the State thinks is bad.
Under Bush, a document (an appallingly misogynist document) was released by the CDC to all doctors saying "assume every woman is pregnant when you meet with her, administer drugs as if she were pregnant, council her to live her life as if she were pregnant, because the first month of a pregnancy is the critical month". All and find if you want to have a baby. ridiculous and patrinistic if you are having your doctor tell you to give up this or that, or not take this or that medication (not life saving meds, but "convenience" meds like, you know, aspirin or antibiotics...). Women are only walking wombs to Andy. and cute little girls that need to be protected by the big macho men, of course. they do not have destiny of their choosing, nor life styles that suit them... --En attendant Godot"«Nous naissons tous fous. Quelques-uns le demeurent.» 15:03, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- So... Women want to have miscarriages, but are advised against it by a misogynist state? Stupid evil Hoover! 15:15, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- A large number of foetuses (> 25%) are miscarried within the first 6 weeks of gestation and the woman may not even realise she has been pregnant, maybe just thinks she has a late or missed period. Miscarriage is often nature's way of saying that this isn't a viable pregnancy, better get rid of it and make room for another. This makes God the biggest abortionist of them all. This information was fist imparted to me by a strongly Catholic Irish nurse who supported a woman's right to choose, and I have since seen the data corroborated elsewhere. So talk about preventing miscarriages largely focuses on when a woman has become noticeably pregnant. I would guess that the psychological trauma of miscarriage increases with the duration of the pregnancy (the term miscarriage being applicable only up to the 20th week) but surely losing a child after the delivery is much more distressing. I don't wish to sound too cynical but miscarriages are probably more important to wealthy westerners who have difficulty with conception when millions of young kids in the developing world die because of the lack of basic amenities like clean water and sanitation. The Asian Boxing-Day tsunami a couple of years ago was a tragedy but if only a fraction of the money that is being spent on an early-warning network was to be spent on providing clean water many more lives would, be saved. ГенгисIs the Pope a Catholic? 15:34, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- If you're aiming that at me, I was merely criticising Godot's accusation that all the advice against miscarriages was an attempt to control women's bodies, which is rather silly and somewhat conspiracy theoryish. Stupid evil Hoover! 15:38, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- It wasn't aimed at anyone I was just tossing my own views into the pot. ГенгисIs the Pope a Catholic? 15:42, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- If you're aiming that at me, I was merely criticising Godot's accusation that all the advice against miscarriages was an attempt to control women's bodies, which is rather silly and somewhat conspiracy theoryish. Stupid evil Hoover! 15:38, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- A large number of foetuses (> 25%) are miscarried within the first 6 weeks of gestation and the woman may not even realise she has been pregnant, maybe just thinks she has a late or missed period. Miscarriage is often nature's way of saying that this isn't a viable pregnancy, better get rid of it and make room for another. This makes God the biggest abortionist of them all. This information was fist imparted to me by a strongly Catholic Irish nurse who supported a woman's right to choose, and I have since seen the data corroborated elsewhere. So talk about preventing miscarriages largely focuses on when a woman has become noticeably pregnant. I would guess that the psychological trauma of miscarriage increases with the duration of the pregnancy (the term miscarriage being applicable only up to the 20th week) but surely losing a child after the delivery is much more distressing. I don't wish to sound too cynical but miscarriages are probably more important to wealthy westerners who have difficulty with conception when millions of young kids in the developing world die because of the lack of basic amenities like clean water and sanitation. The Asian Boxing-Day tsunami a couple of years ago was a tragedy but if only a fraction of the money that is being spent on an early-warning network was to be spent on providing clean water many more lives would, be saved. ГенгисIs the Pope a Catholic? 15:34, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- Are you kidding me Phantom??? To walk into a doctor and have him *assume* I am pregnant, when he examins me, to have his advice related to my *possible* pregnancy (whether I want to be pregnant or not), and to assume that if i *am* pregnant, i will want to be pregnant is to make a woman a walking womb.
- The restrictions necessary in the advice given to doctors from the CDC include basically a lifetime of abstinence from alcohol, cigarettes, eating poorly, doing any drug, being overly stressed, working too hard, and not getting enough sleep -- not simply because some of those things might be good for you, but because those things will harm your unborn (unconsidered, unknown-of) baby and could cause you to experience a miscarriage of a baby (you don't know you are carrying). That presupposition is belittling from it's start. Do you expect to walk into a doctor and have them act *as if* you were pregnant? Prescribe drugs *as if* you were pregnant? This was not for women who say "gosh, I want to start actively working on conceiving", but on every and all women of child bearing years.--En attendant Godot"«Nous naissons tous fous. Quelques-uns le demeurent.» 15:45, 20 February 2009 (EST) (edit conflict)
- I agree that the CDC went too far, but I was criticising your attacks on the medical advice. Stupid evil Hoover! 15:48, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- So you really think that both pregnant and non pregnant women should not "live" their lives as they see fit, simply because it could result in a miscarriage? That is the effect of saying "It's important to monitor miscarriages". 1/4 to 1/2 of all pregnancies end in miscarriage, and it is known by doctors that aspirin is one of the causes. So, I should put the life of my baby before my headache? That is ludicriss for the medical establishment to assert. If a pregnant woman (or a woman trying to get pregnant) says "give me a list of all the things that could harm my baby", she should be given this list. If she says "ok, I'll do this one, and that one but not these or those" that is also her choice. The doctor should not be administering (or not administering) to her based on her pregnancy, unless she says "do not do anything that could harm my as-of-yet unconfirmed pregnancy. The mindset that allows someone like the CDC to say "assume she is pregnant when treating her" is the same mindset that says "spontaneous miscarriages are the worst human suffering". And for what it's worth, I don't know if you are female or not, or if you've been pregnant or not, but very very few women "address" their pregnancy emotionally until they are 2 months along. It's far to easy to miscarry, and you can't have the kind of emotional truma you would have after carrying for 4 months, or 6 months, or losing your baby in child birth. (by the way, this is teh way God set it up, who are we to change it...)--En attendant Godot"«Nous naissons tous fous. Quelques-uns le demeurent.» 15:57, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- Did you even read my above post? I think the CDC shouldn't have said that, but I also think that if you don't want a miscarriage doctors shouldn't be criticised for saying what increases the risk of it. If you think that the risk is small, or your headache outweighs it, then you can do these things, but it's not doctors trying to control you. I have made it clear that the CDC's approach was wrong, so don't keep acting as if I didn't. Stupid evil Hoover! 16:02, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- I think what we have here is a failure to communicate. Godot is saying is that women have a right to do as they wish in regards to their pregnancy, and that doctors should respect that, regardless of the consequences to the fetus. She isn't saying it's wrong to recommend that a woman not do certain things while pregnant because it may harm the fetus...per se. But, she is saying it's wrong to be given as unsolicited advice, i.e., treating the woman only as a walking oven for baby, rather than as a person first. --YossieSpring in Fialta 16:23, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- Did you even read my above post? I think the CDC shouldn't have said that, but I also think that if you don't want a miscarriage doctors shouldn't be criticised for saying what increases the risk of it. If you think that the risk is small, or your headache outweighs it, then you can do these things, but it's not doctors trying to control you. I have made it clear that the CDC's approach was wrong, so don't keep acting as if I didn't. Stupid evil Hoover! 16:02, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- So you really think that both pregnant and non pregnant women should not "live" their lives as they see fit, simply because it could result in a miscarriage? That is the effect of saying "It's important to monitor miscarriages". 1/4 to 1/2 of all pregnancies end in miscarriage, and it is known by doctors that aspirin is one of the causes. So, I should put the life of my baby before my headache? That is ludicriss for the medical establishment to assert. If a pregnant woman (or a woman trying to get pregnant) says "give me a list of all the things that could harm my baby", she should be given this list. If she says "ok, I'll do this one, and that one but not these or those" that is also her choice. The doctor should not be administering (or not administering) to her based on her pregnancy, unless she says "do not do anything that could harm my as-of-yet unconfirmed pregnancy. The mindset that allows someone like the CDC to say "assume she is pregnant when treating her" is the same mindset that says "spontaneous miscarriages are the worst human suffering". And for what it's worth, I don't know if you are female or not, or if you've been pregnant or not, but very very few women "address" their pregnancy emotionally until they are 2 months along. It's far to easy to miscarry, and you can't have the kind of emotional truma you would have after carrying for 4 months, or 6 months, or losing your baby in child birth. (by the way, this is teh way God set it up, who are we to change it...)--En attendant Godot"«Nous naissons tous fous. Quelques-uns le demeurent.» 15:57, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- I agree that the CDC went too far, but I was criticising your attacks on the medical advice. Stupid evil Hoover! 15:48, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- The restrictions necessary in the advice given to doctors from the CDC include basically a lifetime of abstinence from alcohol, cigarettes, eating poorly, doing any drug, being overly stressed, working too hard, and not getting enough sleep -- not simply because some of those things might be good for you, but because those things will harm your unborn (unconsidered, unknown-of) baby and could cause you to experience a miscarriage of a baby (you don't know you are carrying). That presupposition is belittling from it's start. Do you expect to walk into a doctor and have them act *as if* you were pregnant? Prescribe drugs *as if* you were pregnant? This was not for women who say "gosh, I want to start actively working on conceiving", but on every and all women of child bearing years.--En attendant Godot"«Nous naissons tous fous. Quelques-uns le demeurent.» 15:45, 20 February 2009 (EST) (edit conflict)
- (EC) I do understand that you say the CDC went to far, but the main issue you (from my biased perspective) had in my post was that i feel the focus on miscarriages is once again about controlling women. And I base that on the fact that we know what causes large numbers of abortions (miscarriages), and the answer to stop them, is "soft" (guidance) or "hard" (laws) regulations to a woman's behaviors. Issues there, and in the medical community in general focus on the baby, but not the woman as human. Health guidelines in general are couched in things to do, not just to be a healthy human, but to keep you healthy for a time when you may be pregnant. Call it conspiracy-seeing on my part, I just call it general experience, but my 4 male doctors have instructed me that being on the pill long term hinders my chance at having a healthy baby. My three female doctors have asked if i forsee myself wanting a baby, then when I say no, don't even bring up the issue. But I am sorry I took it this far here. I live in this issue, work around this issue, see women routinely turned to "wombs" in the medical field, so i do react "out of range". my bad.--En attendant Godot"«Nous naissons tous fous. Quelques-uns le demeurent.» 16:26, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- I think that doctors should ask you to consider if you are currently making a decision that you will later regret, so it isn't surprising that they would mention that using the pill long term reduces your chance of having a healthy baby; patients should be fully informed about what they are doing. If they keep asking you, that is a little silly, but you haven't made that clear. Stupid evil Hoover! 16:31, 20 February 2009 (EST)
WesleyS
Is this guy tilting at windmills or what? One would get the impression that he actually thinks he can make CP better one category at a time. --Edgerunner76Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? 14:53, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- The enormous effort that goes into streamlining categorization amuses me. Categories' purpose is to make finding information simpler, but no one actually looks for information on CP, so it's entirely a waste of time. However, after countless thousands of edits, Wesley did manage to get Blocking rights! (at the same time as Bugler Mk. II, who had been there a week. Meritocracyrobo, hasshin seyo!) 14:58, 20 February 2009 (EST)
Bit and Bytes WIGO
Please to replace difflink with one from CP and not HideMyAss.Com. Thanks. TheoryOfPractice 16:09, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- Yossarian (thanks!) corrected my mistake larronsicut fur in nocte 16:12, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- No! I'm Spartacus! ГенгисIs the Pope a Catholic? 16:18, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- Et tu? Gratias ago, Spartace! larronsicut fur in nocte 16:23, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- Yossie actually posted a link to the Main Page rather than the UTF-8 page. However, the diffs pointed it to the correct version. Weird. ГенгисIs the Pope a Catholic? 16:26, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- Et tu? Gratias ago, Spartace! larronsicut fur in nocte 16:23, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- No! I'm Spartacus! ГенгисIs the Pope a Catholic? 16:18, 20 February 2009 (EST)
Alan/Andy Wigo
Sadly only one of those listed died BC. Although none except Aurelius likely ever heard of Christianity. EternalCritic 16:21, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- I know noting about Rome--did they die AD, or before Constantine made Christianity the legit religion? TheoryOfPractice 16:23, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- They all died well before Constantine, but how much would you bet he'll spin ANY of them dying after Jebus as having been influenced by xianity? THen again, I might be overestimating his brainpower. EternalCritic 16:33, 20 February 2009 (EST)
- I know noting about Rome--did they die AD, or before Constantine made Christianity the legit religion? TheoryOfPractice 16:23, 20 February 2009 (EST)