Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Locked thread
Maximum Sexy Pigeon
Jun 5, 2008

We must never speak of this!
Oh god.

it's this on top of so many other things that bang in the nails on the coffin of my faith in the world.

We're not going to a good place...

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

J.theYellow
May 7, 2003
Slippery Tilde

Diogines posted:

Out of the hundreds of games which make religion or the catholic church out to be the bad guy, why did they pick one game where that is not really the issue? The church is pretty tame in MTW/MTW2.

conservative people hate what they do not understand
conservatives do not understand video games

taupoke
Apr 26, 2008

by T. Finninho
I just finished Starcraft 2 and realized yesterday I am now a muslim. If only I had gotten to conservapedia sooner:negative:

Beats Mushrooms
May 2, 2011

i just gave an unfunny man 5 dollars for this avatar.
This wiki has nothing on Badiou.

Sgt. Shaved Balls
Sep 6, 2006

by Lowtax
asalamalakum adun

Patter Song
Mar 26, 2010

Hereby it is manifest that during the time men live without a common power to keep them all in awe, they are in that condition which is called war; and such a war as is of every man against every man.
Fun Shoe

ripped0ff posted:

Even the King James version of the Bible was compiled in 1611. If a 400 year old compilation won't cut mustard for what they consider appropriately conservative, I can't imagine what will.

They could use the Tyndale translation. He was even executed by big government (I'm trying to put it into their parlance) for making it, so there's a point in its favor for the right wing.

http://books.google.com/books?id=4A...20Bible&f=false

See? Here's his New Testament. A good 80 years older than the King James.

Revener
Aug 25, 2007

by angerbeet
Originally I was going to just quote a bunch of conflicting information from here, but then I got depressed so I'll settle for this:

True 'Merikans posted:

In 2007, "Discovery Institute's Center for Science and Culture...announced that over 700 scientists from around the world have now signed a statement expressing their skepticism about the contemporary theory of Darwinian evolution."[5]

A whole 700 huh? More importantly I'd like to lead a study into why the author decided to close quote with an ellipsis. :tinfoil: Liberal Conspiracy?

True 'Merikans posted:

In 2011, the results of a study was published indicating that most United States high school biology teachers are reluctant to endorse the theory of evolution in class

This one had me flabberghasted me. Could it be fact? I decided to check their Source.

The Washington Post :gonk: posted:

* About 28 percent consistently implement National Research Council recommendations calling for introduction of evidence that evolution occurred, and craft lesson plans with evolution as a unifying theme linking disparate topics in biology.

* About 13 percent of biology teachers "explicitly advocate creationism or intelligent design by spending at least one hour of class time presenting it in a positive light." Creationists do not believe in Darwin’s theory of evolution.

* The rest, about 60 percent, “fail to explain the nature of scientific inquiry, undermine the authority of established experts, and legitimize creationist arguments.”

Okay, that sounds about right, we've got 28% teaching Evolution as we know it, 13% eating lead based paint regularly and the remaining ~60%... wait, what? What exactly does that mean? It's kind of important that we know, since the only solid number we have with any certainty so far on the topic of "Teachers who hate Reason" is 13%, hardly "most".

For the answer, I decided to read the study that all these numbers came from.

Penn. State posted:

Berkman and Plutzer dubbed the remaining teachers the "cautious 60 percent," who are neither strong advocates for evolutionary biology nor explicit endorsers of nonscientific alternatives. "Our data show that these teachers understandably want to avoid controversy," they said.

Hold. The. loving. Phone. That's not the 60% of teachers legitimizing creationism I was promised, that's a bunch of teachers who are simply rolling their eyes in this whole fiasco. But that means.... that means that Conservapedia isn't fact-checking their sources! Oh god, I don't want to live in a world where Creationists can be wrong :smithicide:

onemanlan
Oct 4, 2006
I was going to go on a long tirade about how each individual entry by authors contains a tinge of their bias within it. It really shines when you read through an entire different article where there are probably 20-40 authors who each have a bais pulling one way while all trying to get the same general message across(ie. we hate people who aren't us). Furthermore I'm disgusted with the abuse of the words "Science" and "pseudoscience" because I bet you not a single loving person on that website knows what real science is. Hmm, checking out the page on the Scientific method lent itself to a length page discussing it without bias only to come back with this sucker,

quote:

Scientists may be influenced by their world-views to look for certain results that fit a preconception. The test of objectivity and rigor imposed on their work by the need for other scientists to replicate it tends to make the truth-seeking facility of the scientific method prevail in the long run,[5] although this is difficult where the world-view is widespread.

Yes, I wonder what kind of scientist might be most likely to fabricate his or her data? The religions person with the rigid world view crated from the Bible and church or say the atheist who takes the world as it comes?

However that being said I have found my new favorite topic: Atheism and Obesity links. Hmmm lets see if they can put sounds science to the test and.... nope just a lot of coincidences while turning a blind eye to their own.

http://www.conservapedia.com/Atheism_and_obesity

onemanlan fucked around with this message at 09:48 on May 15, 2011

Madfez
May 13, 2011

by Y Kant Ozma Boo
Y'know, after years of reading articles and threads here about conservatives I think I finally, truly, understand what it is to "otherise" people.
I don't think that deep down I still view conservatives as people, just a problem.

ShadowCatboy
Jan 22, 2006

by FactsAreUseless

Revener posted:

Originally I was going to just quote a bunch of conflicting information from here, but then I got depressed so I'll settle for this:


A whole 700 huh? More importantly I'd like to lead a study into why the author decided to close quote with an ellipsis. :tinfoil: Liberal Conspiracy?

This is a very good analysis of the list. (EDIT: Huh may be a different list since this is an analysis of 101 scientists)

ShadowCatboy fucked around with this message at 09:49 on May 15, 2011

Lord Solitare
Feb 9, 2010

by Ozmaugh

Madfez posted:

Y'know, after years of reading articles and threads here about conservatives I think I finally, truly, understand what it is to "otherise" people.
I don't think that deep down I still view conservatives as people, just a problem.

They probably see you that way too.

Dr Christmas
Apr 24, 2010

Berninating the one percent,
Berninating the Wall St.
Berninating all the people
In their high rise penthouses!
🔥😱🔥🔫👴🏻

onemanlan posted:

However that being said... I have found my new favorite topic: Atheism and Obesity links. Hmmm lets see if they can put sounds science to the test and.... nope just a lot of coincidences while turning a blind eye to their own.

http://www.conservapedia.com/Atheism_and_obesity

Given the efforts of Rush Limbaugh, Sarah Palin, and Glenn Beck to paint Michelle Obama's anti-childhood obesity campaign as an attempt to institute tyrannical food communism, I wonder if they'll change it.

onemanlan
Oct 4, 2006
You can see it so easily though through this lovely wiki. They throw in "liberal, atheist, Jew, etc" into the mix when referencing the groups they dont agree with. Not realizing of course that there can be conservative atheists and conservative Jewish individuals. Pretty much they take the side that angle of 'if you're not part of the (conservative) solution then you're part of the (liberal) problem.' where liberal is only defined by what a conservative says hes not at that point and time.

Lord Solitare
Feb 9, 2010

by Ozmaugh
Pretty sure most people in the tea party/conservapedia readers have no idea what a liberal really is. Just like how they don't really understand socialism

Queen_Combat
Jan 15, 2011
I have stumbled upon Conservapedia before, and honestly thought the articles I had seen were parodies, like Urban Dictionary or Encyclopedia Dramatica. Reading this thread, turns out it isn't, and is mostly all serious. Huh.

onemanlan
Oct 4, 2006
However that being said I have found my new favorite topic: Atheism and Obesity links. Hmmm lets see if they can put sounds science to the test and.... nope just a lot of coincidences while turning a blind eye to their own.

http://www.conservapedia.com/Atheism_and_obesity

Continued because this 'article' caught my attention for the vast topics it seems to relate to. Some topics include:

quote:

Pictures of fat people who also happen to be atheists
Irreligion and undisciplined pseudoscientific thinking(UFO talk)
Chuck Norris on the topic of obesity
Overcoming obesity with the aid of Christian faith

O_o What the gently caress? I'm going to go out on a limb and say from living in the deep south that most of the fat people I've seen are the religious mother fuckers who see it as God's choice they're fat. They can't help that they eat 3 big macs... because god made them that way. Granted my data is only exemplary of the sample group that I have seen.

Also they're only picture of a healthy Christian, and conservative, individual is Chuck Norris in a Total Fit Gym ad.

Also conservatives apparently know dick-all about genetics, DNA, RNA, or anything related to biology.

onemanlan fucked around with this message at 10:08 on May 15, 2011

Uncle Wemus
Mar 4, 2004

I thought the video gaming community was overwhelmingly conservative but then maybe thats just the impression I get online in any given FPS game.

A Clever Pun
Mar 27, 2010
Bad news: atheist attempts to counter Conservapedia's online presence have mostly failed.

Lid
Feb 18, 2005

And the mercy seat is awaiting,
And I think my head is burning,
And in a way I'm yearning,
To be done with all this measuring of proof.
An eye for an eye
And a tooth for a tooth,
And anyway I told the truth,
And I'm not afraid to die.

Baraminology posted:

Baraminology is the study of baramins, also known by the Biblical term kinds.

A baramin is a lineage of earthly life which is believed by Young Earth Creationists to be created by God during the creation week, and corresponds in some functional aspects to the secular concept of species. However, unlike species concepts that are based on Darwinian thinking, the baraminic barrier is inviolable, as other baramins do not evolve from earlier baramins.

Jonathan Sarfati writes regarding the Biblical kinds of organisms:

Based on the Biblical criterion for kinds, creationists deduce that as long as two creatures can hybridize with true fertilization, the two creatures are (i.e. descended from) the same kind. Also, if two creatures can hybridize with the same third creature, they are all members of the same kind. The hybridization criterion is a valid operational definition, which could in principle enable researchers to list all the kinds. The implication is one-way—hybridization is evidence that they are the same kind, but it does not necessarily follow that if hybridization cannot occur then they are not members of the same kind (failure to hybridize could be due to degenerative mutations). After all, there are couples who can’t have children, and we don’t classify them as a different species, let alone a different kind.[1]

Baraminology, as a model of origins, complements the Linnaean taxonomic system, which is also based on the Biblical view of origins. Baraminology is seen as an alternative to the evolutionary system of cladistics, which is generally considered incompatible with Linnaean taxonomy since cladistics proposes an unfixed hierarchy.[2]

Baramin Terminology

Holobaramin: A Holobaramin is a grouping that contains all organisms related by descent, not excluding any. For example, Humans are a holobaramin, meaning all members of our species (Homo sapiens) are descended from a singular creation event (i.e. the creation of Adam and Eve) and will always be fully and completely human. Culturally, many racial ideas and myths still stubbornly linger on, but recent research regarding genetic diversity in humans, has convinced a great majority of scientists that "race" is no longer a useful concept in understanding our species) An example would be dogs, which form a holobaramin since wolves, coyotes, domesticated dogs and other canids are all descended from two individuals taken aboard the Ark, and there are no other creatures that are genetically continuous with them. This term is synonymous with the use of "baramin" above and is the primary term in baraminology.

Monobaramin: A monobaramin is an ad hoc group of organisms who share common descent. Any group of specific members of a holobaramin such as wolves, poodles, and terriers or the humans Tom, Dick, and Harry are monobarmins. Holobaramins contain monobaramins; for instance, wolves are a monobaramin of the Dog holobaramin.

Apobaramin: An apobaramin is a group of holobaramins. Humans and Dogs are an apobaramin since both members are holobaramins. A group containing Caucasians and wolves is not an apobaramin since both members are monobaramins.

Polybaramin: A polybaramin is an ad hoc group of organisms where at least one of the members must not be a holobaramin and must be unrelated to any or all of the others. For example: Humans, wolves and a duck are a polybaraminic group. This term is useful for describing such hodgepodge mixtures of creatures.

Three additional terms introduced by Wise:[3]

Archaebaramin: An archaebaramin is the originally-created individual(s) of a given holobaramin. For instance, Adam and Eve form the archaebaramin of the holobaramin of Humanity.

Neobaramin & Paleobaramin: A neobaramin is the living population of a given holobaramin, whereas a paleobaramin represents older forms of a given holobaramin. Neobaramins have undergone genetic degradation from their perfectly created forms (archaebaramin) and so may differ from their paleobaramins in notable ways. For example, the neobaramin of Humanity has a much shorter lifespan and greater prevalence of genetic diseases than the Human paleobaramin (e.g. Adam lived for 930 years[4] and his children could interbreed without fear of deformity[5]).

Baramic Demarcation

In order to determine the baraminicity of a given group of organisms, baraminic demarcation must be evaluated. This process involves four foundational concepts[6]:

Biological Character Space (BCS): A theoretical multidimensional space in which each character (e.g. height or color) of an organism comprises a dimension, and particular states of that character occupy unique positions along the dimension. A single organism is therefore precisely defined by a single point in the multidimensional space.

Potentiality Region: A region of that biological character space within which organismal form is possible. Therefore, any point in the biological character space that is not within a potentiality region describes an organism that cannot exist.

Continuity: describes the relationship between two organisms which are either in the same potentiality region, or linked to each other by a third, such that transmutation between the two is theoretically possible.

Discontinuity: describes the relationship between two organisms which are in disconnected potentiality regions, such that transmutation between the two is impossible.

Thus, organisms that are found to be continuous in a BCS potentiality region form a holobaramin or monobaramin (depending on if all organisms within the potentiality region are considered), whereas those that are discontinuous form a polybaramin or apobaramin (again, depending on completeness of the organisms considered).

Leading to

Evolutionist view posted:

Evolutionary scientists criticize Baraminology, claiming that it lacks rigorous testing and fails to produce any peer reviewed scientific research.[7] It is regarded as pseudoscience by evolutionary scientists. However their claim has been rejected by creation scientists who described it as a young field still in development and stated that criticism can be resolved with further research[8].

No creature has ever been observed changing from one Baramin into another. Evolutionist Richard Lenski claims to have observed a bacteria evolving, but even if the unproven claim[9] is true, the bacteria is still bacteria, it has not left its Baramin.

This. This is creation science. Can you feel the cognitive dissonance?

Wsobchak
Mar 28, 2011

by elpintogrande
:siren:Greatest Conservative Movies:siren:
http://www.conservapedia.com/Essay:Greatest_Conservative_Movies

Conservapedia posted:

5.Spider-Man (2002) - Praises moral virtue (hard-working teenager, devout aunt and well-meaning uncle) and pokes fun at liberals (entertainers and journalist). Hero chooses abstinence. This was one of the most profitable films ever made.

12.Beauty and the Beast (1991) - A powerful and immensely popular antidote to feminism, far better than the liberal movies churned out by Disney since.

13.Titanic (1997) - Every life had value and the most powerful men gave up their seats on lifeboats to women and children first; the media and a young RINO are rightly criticized; broke the record in movie revenues

49.True Lies (1994) - Stars the future Republican governor of California, Arnold Schwarzenegger. Teaches conservative values like marital loyalty, and political incorrect facts such as the fact that most terrorists are Middle Eastern Arabic speakers who don't value human life.

84.The Lion King (1994) - A main message of the movie is honoring thy father, and the power-hungry main antagonist, once he becomes ruler, favors big government, pushes liberal values and destroys their territory.


Another essay:Greatest Conservative Movies of the Last 20 Years
http://www.conservapedia.com/Essay:20_Greatest_Conservative_Movies_of_the_Last_20_Years

Conservapedia posted:

Air Force One (1997): Harrison Ford plays a neoconservative United States President, evident during his speech upon the capture of Kazakhstan dictator Ivan Radek; "we issued economic sections and hid behind the rhetoric of diplomacy. How dare we. Real peace is not just the absence of conflict it's the presence of justice. And tonight I come too you with a pledge to change America's policy. Never again will I allow our political self-interest to deter us from doing what we know to be morally right. Atrocity and terror are not political weapons. And to those who would use them, your day is over. We will no longer negotiate, we will no longer tolerate and we will no longer be afraid. It's your turn to be afraid."

On his flight home, a group of communist terrorists hijack Air Force One. They contact the White House staff in Washington, and pledge to execute one hostage every half-hour, including the first family, unless Radek is released from prison. After all negotiations fail, it's up to Harrison Ford to personally take back the flight.

5. The Dark Knight (2008): A huge box office success, Batman (Christian Bale)'s tactics against the domestic terrorist, Joker (Heath Ledger) is strikingly similar to the Bush Administration’s (or at least what liberals perceived as the Bush Administration's) policy on the war on terrorism. Batman has electric surveillance across New York City and uses torture to stop the Joker from killing public officials and blowing up hospitals. Sends a message to never give in to terrorists.

Gran Torino (2008): Although he remains an active filmmaker, Clint Eastwood directs and produces what will likely be his final face time on the big screen. Aside from another Dirty Harry sequel, I couldn't think of a better way to end his acting career. Gun-toting, Korean war veteran Walt Kowalski is upset that his neighborhood has lost its traditional American values and turned multicultural, overflowed with gangs and violence. He takes down a violent gang terrorizing the community, turns a boy into a man, and strengthens his Christian faith. An excellent guy-cry movie.

18. True Lies (1994): Hollywood movies always downplay Muslim terrorism, while vilify Christians, southerners and capitalists. However, in True Lies Arnold Schwarzenegger plays Harry Tasker, a secret agent pretending to be a computer salesman for his wife Helen (Jamie Lee Curtis) and daughter. When a group of Palestinian terrorists maintain nuclear warheads, Helen accidentally gets involved. She asks "Have you ever killed anyone?" Arnold responds, "Yeah, but they were all bad."



:suicide:

Wsobchak fucked around with this message at 10:34 on May 15, 2011

Lord Solitare
Feb 9, 2010

by Ozmaugh

Wsobchak posted:

Greatest Conservative Movies

http://www.conservapedia.com/Essay:Greatest_Conservative_Movies


Another essay:Greatest Conservative Movies of the Last 20 Years




:suicide:

I don't think Pete chose abstinence in Spider Man.

ZarathustraFollower
Mar 14, 2009



Kind of surprised they didn't try to poo poo on Heath Ledger as the bad guy in that review.

Rugoberta Munchu
Jun 5, 2003

Do you want a hupyrolysege slcorpselong?
I wonder what their thoughts are on the American Revolution if they seem to be pro-state-sponsored Christianity and apparently lion-based monarchy.

Grey_Area
Dec 21, 2006
Grey Area
Aww, their article on the Axiom of Choice used to be totally batshit. And now it's just poo poo. Whenever I hear of conservapedia I wonder what percentage of their articles are written by people taking the piss. A friend and I wrote an article claiming that "new math" was invented by the French to poo poo on good old American traditions. We were very pleased with ourselves until we discovered that there already existed another page on the site making the exact same claim. Either other trolls beat us to it, or the editors of conservapedia are too nuts to be trolled.

Wsobchak
Mar 28, 2011

by elpintogrande
And lest we forget:Best New Conservative Words

http://www.conservapedia.com/Essay:Best_New_Conservative_Words

New Term:charisma Origin date:1930 Comments:literally "a gift from God", charisma is a personal magic of leadership found in conservative public figures (but beware of the liberal tendency to put style before substance!)


New Term:correlate Origin date:1742 Comments: (verb) to show that one thing relates to another, such as atheism or homosexuality and selfishness or lack of charity; liberals falsely rely on anecdotes to deny the general relationship

New Term:Founding Fathers Origin date:1914 Comments:the several dozen Christian men [33] who helped draft the formative documents of the United States

New Term:invisible hand of marriage Origin date:2008 Comments:discovered on Conservapedia, it is the unseen force of productivity that results from marriage (only between a man and woman).

Wsobchak fucked around with this message at 10:59 on May 15, 2011

BluePard
Jan 24, 2009
Beauty and the Beast is anti-feminist? It features a woman who reads avidly, sacrifices herself for her father and falls for a guy only after he stops being an rear end in a top hat to her. I'm confused.

onemanlan
Oct 4, 2006

Wsobchak posted:

And lest we forget:Best New Conservative Words

New Term:correlate Origin date:1742 Comments: (verb) to show that one thing relates to another, such as atheism or homosexuality and selfishness or lack of charity; liberals falsely rely on anecdotes to deny the general relationship


Funny because the whole conservative movement seems to not understand the differences correlation and causality. Atheists and obesity is a great example. There is a correlation between obesity and atheism, just as there is a correlation between Christians and obesity, as well as a correlation between yellow birds and speckled jelly beans. That being said the correlation does not indicate causality, yet nearly every article I've read on that site has some type of fault in logic like that. Atheists tend to cause fat people is how these guys see it, yet for the rest of us *sane* people can see it as a small, albeit pointless, correlation and lack of causality relating the two.

Mr. D Bewildering
Mar 24, 2010

8^y
I actually thought I liked an article on Conservapedia.

http://www.conservapedia.com/Pseudoscience

It checks out until they suggest that string theory is not a falsifiable scientific theory. Oh, and here are a few "examples" of pseudoscience:

quote:

Big Bang Astronomy
Much of the work of Richard Dawkins
Climatology
Darwinism
Environmentalism
Evolutionary Biology
Global Warming
Much of the work of Stephen Hawking
Much of the work of PZ Myers (link included, since the page on PZ Myers is quick to point out that "lol he's fat")
Old earth geology
Relativity, Theory of
Much of the work of Carl Sagan
Trangenderism

Cleretic
Feb 3, 2010


Ignore my posts!
I'm aggressively wrong about everything!
Conservapedia threads never fail to be entertaining, even if it's just talking about the same things. They're just so amazingly thick.

I decided to check a random page. And came up with Doctor Who.

Conservapedia posted:

In a recent episode, the Daleks - Doctor Who's most dangerous enemy, a race of creatures who are physically shriveled and weak, but who are contained within an armored tank-like body - take over Manhattan. They ruthlessly exploit workers engaged in construction and repair on the Empire State Building. This was reported in the British newspaper The Independent as a metaphor for the rampant abuse of capitalism. The lead writer of Dr. Who, Russell T Davies is known for aggressively promoting the gay agenda in his prior show Queer as Folk and continuing to promote it in Doctor Who (despite the fact that the show is supposed to be geared towards a young audience), with many openly gay or bisexual (or as the show jokes "omnisexual" due to relations with aliens) characters, including the lead of the spin-off Torchwood, Captain Jack Harkness. Davies' attitude has been contrasted with that of John Nathan-Turner, the final producer of the original series who, while being publicly known as a homosexual, never allowed this to overtly influence the stories written while he produced the show. The show in short is good, The Doctor, vs evil, his enemies.

I want to be faux-insulted at the BBC's gall to put gay people in a TV show that children watch, but I don't even care, these guys are just hilarious in their stupidity. Please, go on :allears:

Revener
Aug 25, 2007

by angerbeet

Mr. D Bewildering posted:

Transgenderism

That's the only science.

So about how many of these articles are fake?

Zoinker
Jan 18, 2009

House Louse posted:

Is the site down for anyone else? I just tried accessing it and all I'm getting is 403 and 404 messages. I need to see that Atheism and Obesity page!

It was down for me as well, so I did a quick google search and got this:

Rationalwiki posted:

403 errors

In December 2010, Andy decided that the existing levels of censorship weren't enough, and asked his fellow sysops "Is there any easy way for me to internally block ALL foreign IPs, without blocking any American ones?" [59] A couple of days later he had the answer: "In only 90 seconds I internally blocked and confirmed 6 major sources of the vandalism, none of which should affect access from the U.S. In total I've now internally blocked 7 major IP ranges: 77.*, 80.*, 81.*, 82.*, 84.*, 85.*, 86.*".[60] The effect of this is to cause anybody trying to view Conservapedia from an IP address beginning with one of these octets to receive a "403 - Forbidden" error.

When Conservapedia was caught up in several DDoS attacks in March and April 2011, an event which caused the site to go down for a few days, some administrators responded by blocking the incoming IP addresses at server level. However, as most of these blocks were either in the /16 or even /8 range, this has resulted in large swathes of the world, especially countries other than the U.S.A. being unable to view Conservapedia at all.

Classy.

Zoinker fucked around with this message at 11:31 on May 15, 2011

Mr. D Bewildering
Mar 24, 2010

8^y
So basically: if we keep it up, literally nobody will be able to view the site?
I dunno if that would be useful or sad. It's the greatest satire ever.

married but discreet
May 7, 2005


Taco Defender

ShadowCatboy posted:

This is a very good analysis of the list. (EDIT: Huh may be a different list since this is an analysis of 101 scientists)

I think it should be enough to post this http://ncse.com/taking-action/project-steve if anyone really wants to wave around meaningless numbers.

Revener
Aug 25, 2007

by angerbeet

IM_DA_DECIDER posted:

I think it should be enough to post this http://ncse.com/taking-action/project-steve if anyone really wants to wave around meaningless numbers.

Thank you very much for this, I've somehow managed to never read it.

67 and still making love
Oct 7, 2005

Peek
a
BLARGH
I'd probably try and throw my hand in but, since the site is run by people of bottomless intellectual cowardice, it seems a large portion of the planet is blocked from viewing it.

blue squares
Sep 28, 2007

Twanki posted:

I'd probably try and throw my hand in but, since the site is run by people of bottomless intellectual cowardice, it seems a large portion of the planet is blocked from viewing it.


Holy poo poo the entire east coast is blocked? It looks like no one but the midwest can see ti.

mediocre dad okay
Jan 9, 2007

The fascist don't like life then he break other's
BEAT BEAT THE FASCIST
Ha... I wanted to have a look at it for old times' sake, turns out my IP is banned. Still, I remember Hitler being the first thing that came up for their Socialism page. Is that still the case?

Also, the counterexamples to evolution page was pure gold, too.

Drunk & Ugly
Feb 10, 2003

GIMME GIMME GIMME, DON'T ASK WHAT FOR
I just like the fact that Conservapedia exists. They literally cannot cope with reality and have created their own version of it.

It says so much

67 and still making love
Oct 7, 2005

Peek
a
BLARGH
Not to Fear!

http://hidemyass.com/

It's a little slow to navigate with but this should do you right.

Observe

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Orange Sunshine
May 10, 2011

by FactsAreUseless
Conservapedia is hilarious. It's so ridiculously biased and stupid that it would probably be impossible to produce a parody of it.

I've amused myself many times just by going through and reading the introductions to articles, trying to see which is the most biased. Here are a few:

Wikipedia
"Wikipedia is a online encyclopedia written and edited by an ad hoc assemblage of anonymous persons who are mostly, according to the Register (UK), teenagers and unemployed persons".

Liberal
"A liberal (also leftist) is someone who rejects logical and biblical standards, often for self-centered reasons. There are no coherent liberal standards; often a liberal is merely someone who craves attention, and who uses many words to say nothing".

Witch
"A witch is a female practitioner of witchcraft; a male practitioner is a wizard. Witches, in league with Satan practice the black arts through supernatural powers and magic. The Bible gives us clear instructions on how to deal with witches: “Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live.” (Exodus 22:18)".

  • Locked thread