Conservapedia

[Lord Krunk]

Yeah but I thought he died at the end of season four though.

Gee, thanks. I'm Australian, so I haven't seen any episodes after "Midnight".

But, it proves my point even more.

 

[dalek sec]

Yeah but I thought he died at the end of season four though.

Gee, thanks. I'm Australian, so I haven't seen any episodes after "Midnight".

But, it proves my point even more.

*Bangs his head against his desk* Damnit, I'm sorry about that Krunk.

 

[Lord Krunk]

Meh, it's okay.

I saw a dalek-related finale coming from a mile off.

 

[dalek sec]

I'm just glad I didn't put anymore details and spolier's into my question.

 

[smallharmlesskitten]

De railed

 

[dalek sec]

Sorry about that, I'll try not to derail the thread again.

So, any idea on how we can remove people like those on conservapedia from power?

 

[smallharmlesskitten]

Kill them?

 

[Alleged_Alec]

(warning, mildly expletive)
http://uploads.ungrounded.net/356000/356393_thisthread.swf

So, any idea on how we can remove people like those on conservapedia from power?

I think that nuking america is our best option.

 

[dalek sec]

(warning, mildly expletive)
http://uploads.ungrounded.net/356000/356393_thisthread.swf

So, any idea on how we can remove people like those on conservapedia from power?

I think that nuking america is our best option.

I would be thumbs up for this but sadly I am from America.

 

[poleboy]

lesbian women were 2.69 times more likely to be overweight and 2.47 times more likely to be obese than all other female sexual orientation groups.[3] The abstract for this study indicated that "lesbians are at greater risk for morbidity and mortality linked to overweight and obesity.

seriously.... wtf

Attention women of the world! Don't be gay! It will make you fat and unattractive! That's your biggest fear as a woman, right? RIGHT!?

Wow. That's fucked up.

 

[Alleged_Alec]

I would be thumbs up for this but sadly I am from America.

Don't be egocentric. This is a sacrifice you have to make. Do it for the rest of the world!

 

[Zeke109]

hmmm.....an online encyclopedia for paranoid christians. okay. just don't rip on wikipedia for being anti-american. I go there all of the time and not once have I seen anything REMOTELY anti-american.

 

[Mathew952]

Wikipedia is not allowed to be used in Academic study. Should you list wikipedia as one of your sources in an essay you will be marked down heavily in most if not all Universities.

There are plenty of legitimate sources of information in libraries and other websites.

I mean, really, how much does a subscription to encarta cost? Wikipedia is good for obscure things like, Say, who was the boom operator in the movie spy hard. But other wise, the internet has so many more reliable sources.

 

[Mathew952]

As a Straussian neoconservative, I find everything a site like Conservapedia stands for to be alternatively appalling, terrifying, and depressing.

The whole Idea of having this specialized media seems very backward. So what, all the liberals will got to liberpedia, and the conservatives will have conservapedia, and the Conservatives will have fox, and the liberals will have CNN?

Doesn't it make much more sense to, say, provide opinion-free information, let people *gasp* READ THE FACTS, AND THINK, AND CREATE THEIR O W N OPINION?
No, this is america, I forgot.....

 

[Mathew952]

(warning, mildly expletive)
http://uploads.ungrounded.net/356000/356393_thisthread.swf

So, any idea on how we can remove people like those on conservapedia from power?

I think that nuking america is our best option.

I would be thumbs up for this but sadly I am from America.

Me too. Let's do a real life re-enactment of Executive orders.

 

[Mathew952]

Well let?s see which one better explains a topic?

The one that gives in depth information on many, if not most of the aspects of evolution?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution

Or the one that speaks of evolution only in some crude attempt to associate it with evil, and incorrectness?

http://www.conservapedia.com/Evolution

That can't be real. That can't be real. Are people really that stupid? How is this possible? HOW DID THIS HAPPEN?

 

[Grampy_bone]

The nature of Wikipedia allows users to edit articles. If the people who created Conservipedia felt that Wikipedia had inaccurate information on it, all they had to do was edit the pages and provide sources. The editing community sorts it out eventually. There are lots of classes and things where people do this all the time, submitting and researching new wikipedia articles.

But nooooo... they had to create their *own* site with their *own* rules where all of their lies are free from scrutiny. It should serve as a giant red flag to anyone that their 'History' was so skewed and biased they needed to create their own rip-off site just to post it.

 

[BigKingBob]

As an editor at conservapedia (I mainly joined for the lulz) I feel obliged to tell you that it's even worse than it looks. The sysops and admins are so paranoid as to make McCarthy look rational, you get banned for asking questions such as "wasn't there a study out last year that proves both macro and microevolution," "hey, why is this obama article so crap" and "so dont conservatives lie aswell?"

The bloke that runs it is a nutjob of the worst kind, most of the sysops are bullies and idiots and the entire site seems to be based on the idea that YEC is scientifically sound.
Please, all of you, make accounts and go vandal crazy, they love the attention. No really do, as the sysops tend to just start banning people completely randomly when theres some vandalism, it hilarious.

For a good overview of the site go to www.rationalwiki.com and look at their "What's going on at Conservapedia?" section and the "Beginners guide to Conservapedia" both of them are funny as fuck

 

[Limasol]

Wait, did that guy from the vid claim the wikipedia was biased in an attempt to promote his own website...wait, he can't have, omg he did

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Sure, because taking the bible as the exact word of truth, including the frankly implausible beginning and the wacky, fire and brimstone revelations ending, not to mention the a-moral bullshit in between, then twisting everything else o be evil, of course that's not biased at all.

It's like battling a monster makes you become one (can't remember who said that). These people thought they were but it turned out they were the monsters all along.

 

[Rolling Thunder]

Well, since everyone else is busy shredding this site for it's advocation of destroying civil liberties, I have decieded to shred it myself:

Just under half of Britons accept the theory of evolution as the best description for the development of life, according to an opinion poll.

Because we are awesome. Learn from us, stupid people.

Grasse then points that bacteria are considered to have "stabilized a billion years ago

.

Okay, now I'm just fucking depressed. Good god, I'm sure all those people dying of MRSA are very happy to know that they are dying from a condition that does not exist.

believe that there are no inherent differences between men and women and that all inequality is the result of men oppressing women[4]
oppose chivalry and even feign insult at harmless displays of it
view traditional marriage as unacceptably patriarchal
shirk traditional gender activities, like baking[5]
support affirmative action for women
detest women who are happy in traditional roles, such as housewife,[6] and especially dislike those who defend such roles
prefer that women wear pants rather than dresses, presumably because men do[7][8]
seek women in combat in the military just like men, and coed submarines
refuse to take her husband's last name when marrying[9]
refuse ever to admit that any part of feminist ideology is wrong

Oh dear god, I wish to cry. I really do: 'coed submarines'- WTF? What is wrong with you people!? WHat the fuck is a coed submarine!!?

""I claim that rape exists any time sexual intercourse occurs when it has not been initiated by the woman, out of her own genuine affection and desire."

Well, apart from the first part (initiated by the woman) I wholeheartedly, as a vicious, chauvinistic pig (which is what I am- and I like it) agree. Woman not want sex=Not having sex. T'be you're job, boyo, to make her want it.

And the rest is franly horseshit. Most of their quotes are rather like taking quotations from Mein Kampf and arguing that anyone of a right-wing bent is an insiduous threat to society-The facts support it, but only because I've picked the evidence.


And if anyone agrees with these scum. Please. Come. Forward.

You and I shall have words. Loud Words.