Conservapedia talk:What is going on at CP?/Archive107

This is an archive page, last updated 1 April 2012. Please do not make edits to this page.

Archives for this talk page:

<1>, <2>, <3>, <4>, <5>, <6>, <7>, <8>, <9>, <10>, <11>, <12>, <13>, <14>, <15>, <16>, <17>, <18>, <19>, <20>, <21>, <22>, <23>, <24>, <25>, <26>, <27>, <28>, <29>, <30>, <31>, <32>, <33>, <34>, <35>, <36>, <37>, <38>, <39>, <40>, <41>, <42>, <43>, <44>, <45>, <46>, <47>, <48>, <49>, <50>, <51>, <52>, <53>, <54>, <55>, <56>, <57>, <58>, <59>, <60>, <61>, <62>, <63>, <64>, <65>, <66>, <67>, <68>, <69>, <70>, <71>, <72>, <73>, <74>, <75>, <76>, <77>, <78>, <79>, <80>, <81>, <82>, <83>, <84>, <85>, <86>, <87>, <88>, <89>, <90>, <91>, <92>, <93>, <94>, <95>, <96>, <97>, <98>, <99>, <100>, <101>, <102>, <103>, <104>, <105>, <106>, <108>, <109>, <110>, <111>, <112>, <113>, <114>, <115>, <116>, <117>, <118>, <119>, <120>, <121>, <122>, <123>, <124>, <125>, <126>, <127>, <128>, <129>, <130>, <131>, <132>, <133>, <134>, <135>, <136>, <137>, <138>, <139>, <140>, <141>, <142>, <143>, <144>, <145>, <146>, <147>, <148>, <149>, <150>, <151>, <152>, <153>, <154>, <155>, <156>, <157>, <158>, <159>, <160>, <161>, <162>, <163>, <164>, <165>, <166>, <167>, <168>, <169>, <170>, <171>, <172>, <173>, <174>, <175>, <176>, <177>, <178>, <179>, <180>, <181>, <182>, <183>, <184>, <185>, <186>, <187>, <188>, <189>, <190>, <191>, <192>, <193>, <194>, <195>, <196>, <197>, <198>, <199>, <200>, <201>, <202>, <203>, <204>, <205>, <206>, <207>, <208>, <209>, <210>, <211>, <212>, <213>, <214>, <215>, <216>, <217>, <218>, <219>, <220>, <221>, <222>, <223>, <224>, <225>, <226>, <227>, <228>, <229>, <230>, <231>, <232>, <233>, <234>, <235>, <236>, <237>, <238>, <239>, <240>, <241>, <242>, <243>, <244>, <245>, <246>, <247>, <248>, <249>, <250>, <251>, <252>, <253>, <254>, <255>, <256>, <257>, <258>, <259>, <260>, <261>, <262>, <263>, <264>, <265>, <266>, <267>, <268>, <269>, <270>, <271>, <272>, <273>, <274>, <275>, <276>, <277>, <278>, <279>, <280>, <281>, <282>, <283>, <284>, <285>, <286>, <287>, <288>, <289>, <290>, <291>, <292>, <293>, <294>, <295>, <296>, <297>, <298>, <299>, <300>, <301>, <302>, <303>, <304>, <305>, <306>, <307>, <308>, <309>, <310>, <311>, <312>, <313>, <314>, <315>, <316>, <317>, <318>, <319>, <320>, <321>, <322>, <323>, <324>, <325>, <326>, <327>, <328>, <329>, <330>, <331>, <332>, <333>, <334>, <335>, <336>, <337>, <338>, <339>, <340>, <341>, <342>, <343>, <344>, <345>, <346>

, (new)(back)

Andy and ADD

Is it just me, or does Andy Schlafly have a strong tendency to start projects, work on them intensely for a week or so, and then move on to something new like a moth heading for a lantern? In the past, what, month or so, he's 1. Started and abandoned a comprehensive list of teenage accomplishments; 2. Started a Bible retranslation project; 3. Begun a new conservative lexicon complete with attempts to coin new words for the English language, and now 4; A discursive analysis of potential 2012 presidential candidates. Any of those would be a big project that would take time, but he just half-asses them until he 1. gets bored or 2. gets pwned. Just an observation...TheoryOfPractice 23:23, 12 January 2009 (EST)

You have a point, though I think the teenage accomplishment thing was actually started by Bugler. Andy wouldn't do such thing, presumably aware that such an undertaking would obviously only bolster the arguments for those who contradicted him, as indeed they have. I do await the new Schlafly Bible with bated breath though. DickTurpis 23:27, 12 January 2009 (EST)

Fortunately for you, Dick, while you hold your breath waiting for the Schlafly Revised Standard Version your body will protect itself by passing out and breathing on its own. The idea that Andy and his acolytes are up to a new, ground up translation of the Bible is laughable. They're about as capable of following through with that as they are of creating a monkey with four asses. Corry^{You can always tell a Milford man.} 00:28, 13 January 2009 (EST)

Of course, but it will be fun in a month's time to taunt them by asking how the new Bible is coming along, and if they found a publisher yet. I expect it could become the new FBI if we keep at it. DickTurpis 00:39, 13 January 2009 (EST)

I'm picturing a teenager's room with an unplayed guitar, some used-once sporting goods, a stack books that are all permanently bookmarked half a chapter in, some barely worn work uniforms from half a dozen jobs that never lasted more than a week... Corry^{You can always tell a Milford man.} 00:46, 13 January 2009 (EST)

Doubtless he hopes that one of the sycophants will continue his good work. He only has insights it's up to others to flesh them out.  ^{(with butter!)} _{talk to Toast} 23:36, 12 January 2009 (EST)

Toast nailed it. Andy is Jesus, the sysops are the disciples. Now get to work on those gospels I assigned you! ħuman 23:44, 12 January 2009 (EST)

And now insightful! (is that even a word?)  ^{(with butter!)} _{talk to Toast} 00:13, 13 January 2009 (EST)

Yup, it is a word. The way he fawns over Jpatt is amusing. He's like desperate for friends. Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 00:18, 13 January 2009 (EST)

proven wrong, a refusal to admit it: mulism That's Andy to a T. Oh wait, it's a conservative word?  ^{(with butter!)} _{talk to Toast} 00:20, 13 January 2009 (EST)

I thought Ed was the token mulism? --Marty 01:43, 13 January 2009 (EST)

Hey, I start projects and then never finish them, too. I just don't tell the Internet about most of them. Andy's just suffering from the same writer's-block-ish problem that all bloggers probably have, but because his blog is a "Conservative wiki encyclopedia", he has to put forward each new blog entry as a conservative collaborative educational project. Experiment: Pick your favorite blog and mentally rewrite each entry as a collaborative project. Notice how dumb the resulting entries sound. --Marty 01:42, 13 January 2009 (EST)

For those with the ADD temperament (like me) open source software has been a gift. I can do the fun parts, like reverse engineering stuff and then leave other people to do the boring bits like writing software that other people can use. I think that's kind of what Andy means when he sticks ADD MOAR! on to the end of all his articles, "now my peons, do the boring parts like writing a decent article." --JeevesMkII 02:00, 13 January 2009 (EST)

It's probably not just ADD sufferers. We probably all do it, see Warm reading. Генгис^{You have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you.} 05:08, 13 January 2009 (EST)

Is that see Warm reading because it is relevant to what I am saying, or see Warm reading I can't be assed finishing to write it myself. - User $\scriptstyle h/2\hbar$ 06:11, 13 January 2009 (EST)

No it's see Warm reading because I wrote it. Start writing a book, taking up calligraphy, learning to play a musical instrument, learning a foreign language - most people don't have the dedication to persevere. Генгис^{You have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you.} 06:31, 13 January 2009 (EST)

So the point is because people start things and then give up warm readers can go "did your dad play an instrument" and because he took a few piano lessons people go "oh yeah he played the piano", however this phenomenon of starting things and the giving up is universal so the reader is almost always right? - User $\scriptstyle h/2\hbar$ 06:45, 13 January 2009 (EST)

The odds are certainly in their favour. If it doesn't work then they move onto something else. It's surprising how many women at some time in their lives have had the desire to write a book. They may even go so far as to make a few notes, dash of a couple of pages and then leave it. Derren Brown amongst others demonstrated it by getting a group of people together asking them for some personal object like a watch or piece of jewelery. Then somewhile later gave them back a character reading which most people described as about 67% accurate {"gosh, how did he know that I once started to write a book?"). He then asked the group to randomly pass round the papers several times so that everyone could read somebody else's reading with the proviso that if you got your own reading back then you should pass it on. It took a while for people to realise that they all had exactly the same reading which had actually been written before he even met them because basically most people share similar traits and if you cover enough different ones then there will be quite a bit with which they can identify. It's really how all these psychics, palmists, tarot readers etc. work. Генгис^{You have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you.} 07:08, 13 January 2009 (EST)

OFF TOPIC THREAD MOVED TO Saloon bar

ORLY? It's not there and it's still here... (I know, things were locked down, but still). Anyway, I think the % people were giving Brown's "reading" were more in the 85%-plus range. ħuman 18:19, 13 January 2009 (EST)

The off-topic was my Astrology project. Генгис^{You have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you.} 08:04, 14 January 2009 (EST)

Kendoll further embarrasses himself

I imagine Andy will eventually get fed up with his talk page being used as the new red telephone, but in the meantime Ken is ranting more about google searches. Of course according to Ken, only a complete idiot would try to do a google search without clearing cookies and using rank checking software. Ken, if you want to recreate the google rankings of your typical web surfer, which I assume is your aim, you should not clear cookies and use search checking software because nobody does that when doing a google search for the French fucking Revolution! DickTurpis 00:48, 13 January 2009 (EST)

Oh, and Ken? Earlier today I was getting CP in the top 10 when a searched it without quotes, even though I didn't clear cookies or install software first (which nobody does!), but now it seems to have dropped off the radar entirely (and remember, radar is a conservative concept). Do I need to install software that filters out any sites not run by retarded man-children to find it? DickTurpis 00:55, 13 January 2009 (EST)

Guys, it's Not That Hard. Go to the public library (or, if you're a Christian conservative, go to the private library), sit down at a random terminal, and do the Google search. No personal cookie biases to worry about then. Alternatively, you could try clearing all your cookies and going through Tor. I just did the latter (using google.ro since that's where the Tor node turned out to be), and got exactly the same (first 10) results through Tor as through my local IP... so the simplest hypothesis is that Google doesn't really care about your IP (unless you're somebody really special, maybe). For the record, they were:

• Wikipedia
• George Mason University
• Victorianweb.org
• Internet Modern History Sourcebook at fordham.edu
• rjgeib.com
• Encarta
• Catholic Encyclopedia at newadvent.org
• userweb.port.ac.uk/~andressd/frlinks.htm
• An article on efluxmedia.com about Assassin's Creed 2
• www.fsmitha.com/h3/h33-fr.html

A YouTube video is at #12. A different Wikipedia article at #13. Britannica at #16. Uncyclopedia at #80. Conservapedia at #124. Wikibooks at #147. --Marty 01:58, 13 January 2009 (EST)

Not clearing you cookies should push up the CP ranking not down. I got 150 something after looking at the Conservapedia article. Ken your article is shit, suck it. - User $\scriptstyle h/2\hbar$ 02:06, 13 January 2009 (EST)

What I don't get is why Kenny thinks most of us get results with CP at #100 or more because we haven't cleared our cookies. The population of RW looks at CP more than a thousand times the rate of the population at large. Wouldn't that mean our results would skew higher for CP, not lower? DickTurpis 02:08, 13 January 2009 (EST)

STOP! You are trying to apply logic to Ken. Cease lest you desire the unraveling of time and space. - Gentleman Publius (V)<,",>(V) 02:13, 13 January 2009 (EST)

Too late....the other half of my bedroom has just dissolved into nothingness......thanks DickTurpis... Jammy 08:28, 13 January 2009 (EST)

• Sigh* The dangers of dividing by zero... Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 09:55, 13 January 2009 (EST)

Abstinence WiGO

Actually, Andy is partially right here. The Guy is using a novel meaning of "abstinence", equating it with "abstinence before marriage" when it really means abstaining from sex, period. So yes it doesn't matter what the husband does if he truly abstains from banging his wife. Of course, Andy subverts his own argument by admitting that there is "virtually" no way to contract HPV except through sex, which means that it is not 100% effective. DickTurpis 01:18, 13 January 2009 (EST)

It is, however, the definition that fundies mean when they talk about abstinence. Sex during marriage is OK, how else would they breed the next generation of fundies? Never having sex provides you with protection against all sorts of VD, but it isn't any kind of solution. Only a fuckwit like Andy would point out that theoretically never having sex provides complete protection, when the percentage of people who keep their virginity their entire life must be in the very low single digits range. --JeevesMkII 01:44, 13 January 2009 (EST)

Curiously, those people were all members of CP's Special Discussion Group :).-caius (soldier) 02:24, 13 January 2009 (EST)

On a related note, this was spammed to a mailing list I subscribe to yesterday:

“”This website is for people living with herpes, hpv or other stds. Many lonely girls join this site and seek hot guys. Are you alone, too? You can join this website for free and search girls living with std in your local city. Then you can contact them via email, IM or webcam and meet them for love thing.

I guess things are looking up for all those girls conned in to not getting vaccinated. --JeevesMkII 02:29, 13 January 2009 (EST)

OH. MY. GOD.-caius (soldier) 02:37, 13 January 2009 (EST)

If anyone notices, TheGuy's been banhammered by TK several days ago, so he can't even respond. Andy responded right after he was banned, too. Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 09:59, 13 January 2009 (EST)

Now here's an open-minded guy. Finally, a happy ending!--Kriss Akabusi^{AAAAWOOOOGAAAR!!1} 11:38, 13 January 2009 (EST)

Andy's moronic comment moments before (talking about 2+2 as usual) was insightful. For children to be protected their parents must be abstinent! I mean, it's too bad that kids have absolutely no control over that, and we can't send pro-abstinence material back in time to protect the present generations. - Gentleman Publius (V)<,",>(V) 11:43, 13 January 2009 (EST)

(undent) Also, I would like to know how these abstinent parents are managing to have kids at all.--Kriss Akabusi^{AAAAWOOOOGAAAR!!1} 11:45, 13 January 2009 (EST)

I hear Andy's a big fan of adoption. Apparently it's easy, and Tom, Dick or Harry can do it. --JeevesMkII 11:48, 13 January 2009 (EST)

Well, not Tom and Dick, or Tom and Harry. Gay people adopting children is clearly evil, and they don't benefit from The Invisible Hand of Marriage^TM. Corry^{You can always tell a Milford man.} 12:04, 13 January 2009 (EST)

I assume that TheGuy is right, mostly because Andy disagrees, but I don't really understand his (TheGuy's) example. Anyone care to explain? Is the point that the woman might possibly get HPV anyway (AFAIK, you can get HPV from just touching, although not as likely) or is the point that even though she stayed abstinent until marriage, that doesn't help her if she marries someone who didn't. Etc 12:14, 13 January 2009 (EST)

What he's describing is a fairly typical route of infection for women where STDs are concerned. While a woman may be monogamous, she may very well be infected by her partner who is not. In Andy's world, a marriage means that two people will only sleep with each other, but in the real world sometimes it doesn't happen like that. --JeevesMkII 12:53, 13 January 2009 (EST)

"but in the real world it doesn't usually happen like that." Corrected. EternalCritic 13:48, 13 January 2009 (EST)

Ah, but if one of them sleeps around, then they're not REALLY married! QED, Andy-style! :-P --Gulik 17:45, 13 January 2009 (EST)

Karajou takes all the fun out of the Internet...

And this kind of thing seems to be happening now: it's not enough to block an IP, they have to announce the IP's location, right down to the street address, to the world in the hopes of getting someone in trouble with their boss...Worried Porcupine 09:56, 13 January 2009 (EST)

If your boss listens to CP, you should look for a new job, anyway :-) BTW, I made visualization of the range blocks, have a look... --LArron 10:20, 13 January 2009 (EST)

Its...it's...it's a bunch of dots. Nice dots. Would a geographical representation be possible--to see what areas are no-go zones for CP? Worried Porcupine 10:25, 13 January 2009 (EST)

That's the sort of spiteful, vindictive un-Christian behaviour that I warned about above. Генгис^{You have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you.} 10:32, 13 January 2009 (EST)

I wonder if this was a response to our discussion above about tracing Conservative's location from his IP address. If it was a TK block with that message, I'd say it definitely was, but I'm not sure how much Karajou reads wigo. Wẽãšẽĩõĩď^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 10:39, 13 January 2009 (EST)

I don't think so. I think we're just seeing a more robust approach to vandals at CP which probably ties in to TK's reinstatement. I think he's one of the very few sysops there who really understand IP addressing. I think it's just more of the 'actions have consequences' bollocks. If the FBI won't take up the case you can always rely on some internet vigilante. StarFish 10:53, 13 January 2009 (EST)

Nice work! There's a lot of blue space for us to get blotted out! Corry^{You can always tell a Milford man.} 10:55, 13 January 2009 (EST)

I'm sure Karajou browses around here, that's what makes him so angry. I see pent-up anger in virtually every comment he makes. However, TK probably spends more time ferreting his way around. Karajou was one of the main supporters of the FBI investigation and as that failed abysmally they have probably decided to embarass people by ratting to their employers. Of course RobNewberry may well be the owner of the consultancy named in the ban reason and not give a shit. Генгис^{You have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you.} 10:58, 13 January 2009 (EST)

I suppose hoping that this is the start of CP's new policy "blocked due to liberal address" would be to optimistic. Then again, all those people who live up in New England or in big cities aren't real Americans anyway. Not like those good god fearing bible belt bunch.--ScottA 12:15, 13 January 2009 (EST)

Hello? The address we're talking about is in Alabama! God, the liberals are everywhere! Czolgolz 13:11, 13 January 2009 (EST)

Yes, we are. We program your computers. We babysit your children. We write your TV shows. DO NOT FUCK WITH US. :D --Gulik 17:49, 13 January 2009 (EST)

Karajou's entire MO for the past year and a half has been to try to throw us in jail for... editing Conservapedia (woooo). If I recall from the SDG back in the day, Karajou was trying to build a civil case against me (LOL), and whenever he brought it up, Andy always ignored it... possibly because Andy knows Karajou's quests against RW IRL are in vain.-caius (soldier) 17:51, 13 January 2009 (EST)

Madoff Suicide

Normally I just find the majority of opinions at CP to be a bit pathetic and laughable. But considering the layoff of staff at a company that gives financial support to pro-abortion groups in a positive way, by considering it to be the 'silver lining' in a suicide case, is beyond even what I thought CP could sink to. The caring and considerate side of religious fundamentalism becomes all too clear. Worm ^{(t | c)} 11:45, 13 January 2009 (EST)

It's the sort of thing I would have expected a parodist to post. Rather like the executive pay at ExxonMobil in the George Bush article. But no, it's our latest Christian sysop, Jpatt. What an unpleasant chracter he is. Генгис^{You have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you.} 13:04, 13 January 2009 (EST)

Charitableness

I'm not expert on this, but don't candians on average pay significantly higher taxes than Americans due to provincial taxes usually being well over the average state tax? EternalCritic 13:41, 13 January 2009 (EST)

Federal taxes are higher, Provincial taxes are higher, there's a 15% across-the-board combined sales tax on virtually every purchase one makes except most groceries. Gas is probably double the price because of consumption taxes. And you know what? I've been in the U.S. for six months now and I would gladly go back in a second. I'm appalled at how little I pay in taxes here. Taxes bring increased equality and social justice. TheoryOfPractice 13:46, 13 January 2009 (EST)

Go figure that they don't throw as much money at charities as Americans. Ah, the Conservapedian tradition of worthless statistics. EternalCritic 13:54, 13 January 2009 (EST)

Not to mention that Canadians are far less churchy than Americans--which matters when you consider how much "charity" in the US is actually church members donating to their own church, in order to keep what are essentially sanctified social clubs up and running.It would be like if my golf club membership dues counted as "charity." TheoryOfPractice 13:59, 13 January 2009 (EST)

Stop selling me Canada. I'm too close to buyinbg it at this point. ;) EternalCritic 14:01, 13 January 2009 (EST)

Once you've gone Canadian, it's but a short step to becoming British. Then you're set for life really. Well, unless you choose that weird francophone bit of Canada. --JeevesMkII 14:11, 13 January 2009 (EST)

If I'm British then women will like me! Oh... wait... already engaged. Ah well. EternalCritic 14:32, 13 January 2009 (EST)

If I'm a woman, then the British will like me... Oh, wait. Already assigned by Gawd. Or maybe just evolutionz... ħuman 23:35, 13 January 2009 (EST)

Deleted and re-created....

Because some jerk-off posted a private individual's name, address and phone number. TheoryOfPractice 15:13, 13 January 2009 (EST)

Do you have any bloody idea how many links across the wiki you've just broken? Phantom Hoover 15:15, 13 January 2009 (EST)

How is this different from the deletion/recreation of the Conservative page you did this morning? TheoryOfPractice 15:19, 13 January 2009 (EST)

I painstakingly restored all edits up to the ones in question, meanwhile you've just broken every single diff link to this page. Phantom Hoover 15:21, 13 January 2009 (EST)

My bad. And my apologies. TheoryOfPractice 15:22, 13 January 2009 (EST)

I think we should restore it. I'm trying to do it but keeps timing me out or something. Wẽãšẽĩõĩď^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 15:28, 13 January 2009 (EST)

In the future you can ask me or another oversight'er to nuke the diff in question. Should I see what I can do to this thing?-caius (soldier) 15:30, 13 January 2009 (EST)

I thought Trent disabled oversight. Phantom Hoover 15:34, 13 January 2009 (EST)

Ahhh fuck, he did. I was wondering where that page went.-caius (soldier)

Hang on I'm going to try something in 2 minutes. Генгис^{You have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you.} 15:38, 13 January 2009 (EST)

Aaaaand restoring it doesn't seem to work either; it breaks halfway through getting to the page. TRENT, HELP! Can we haz oversight back for a day, and T:WIGO?? Good luck Genghis...-caius (soldier) 15:40, 13 January 2009 (EST)

Something is really fucked up. I get script errors for the recent changes and also time out on the resurrect. Генгис^{You have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you.} 15:45, 13 January 2009 (EST)

For whoever cares, this page had 448.341 views as of 6 Jan 2009 05:31:31 GMT. NightFlare 18:46, 13 January 2009 (EST)

How was the view count of the page restored? I thought deleting a page zeroed its view count? Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 22:19, 13 January 2009 (EST)

Maybe it came back with the restoration. - User $\scriptstyle h/2\hbar$ 22:20, 13 January 2009 (EST)

No, zeroing is supposed to be permanent—the only way to "undo" a zeroed view count is with a click bot. Maybe Trent copied the data from the old server? Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 22:24, 13 January 2009 (EST)

Somebody tell Ken and hope that when (not if, when) he brings it up to Andy, he does so on his talk page. NightFlare 00:29, 14 January 2009 (EST)

Look, I'm Really Sorry.

Discussion moved to RationalWiki:Saloon bar

Andy baiting

MylesP (who he?) is having a nice attack on Andy re: "past" still.  ^{(with butter!)} _{talk to Toast} 20:48, 13 January 2009 (EST)

Bye bye MylesP...he had so much promise :( Jammy 20:59, 13 January 2009 (EST)

He's hung in there an hour so far. Let's see how long Dinsdale stays unblocked after coming off yesterday's debate-related block TKO by Andy. My first two edits off the mat were on his pet who-needs-vaccines-when-you-have-wishful-thinking Gardasil talk page. --SpinyNorman 21:22, 13 January 2009 (EST)

The Gardasil thing really pisses me off. While I agree that there are valid concerns with making this vaccine mandatory at this point, Andy's reservations are completely based on a moral objection to protection from HPV. No matter what evidence he is shown, like with anything else, he will not change his mind. This is no different than when people opposed vaccines because they thought it would interfere with God's decisions regarding when people die. Corry^{You can always tell a Milford man.} 22:55, 13 January 2009 (EST)

No what really pisses me off is that Andy might not even believe it, the people who pay his wages do. This is an issue Andy should not edit on as he has a conflict of interest. He is touting his pay masters' line on this one. Some trustworthy encyclopaedia when the facts will be obscured due to his personal financial considerations. - User $\scriptstyle h/2\hbar$ 23:02, 13 January 2009 (EST)

I imagine his beliefs are congruent with those of the AAPS. Seriously, the man thinks that liberals invented black holes in order to sell magazines! Corry^{You can always tell a Milford man.} 23:06, 13 January 2009 (EST)

What strikes me about Andy and Gardasil is his insistence that the chances of someone contracting HPV without having consensual sex is small, so getting vaccinated is pointless. This from a guy who thinks its important to have a largely defensive weapon of gun for when that guy breaks into his house in the middle of the night in an effort to murder his entire family. Because, you know, that happens so often. DickTurpis 23:07, 13 January 2009 (EST)

Come hear Schlafly's Kermit the Frog impression

I though I would post this as we don't use this extension enough. - User $\scriptstyle h/2\hbar$ 23:13, 13 January 2009 (EST)

Well, there's another issue that pisses me off. Abstinence is, in fact, an iron-clad way of not getting an STD (except from the toilet seat at the airport. I swear that's what happened!) but teaching kids about abstinence is NOT 100% effective for preventing STDs. This is a matter of accepting reality or sticking your head in the sand. Shit in one hand, wish in the other, and see which fills up first. Not all, but many kids will have sex no matter what you tell them. Corry^{You can always tell a Milford man.} 23:15, 13 January 2009 (EST)

(and more!) Andy makes a valid point in that Gardasil is a new drug that has not been used by very many people, and having huge numbers of kids start taking it all of the sudden might be unwise. Rare side effects not seen when fifteen hundred people take the drug in clinical trials might become much more pronounced when millions of people start taking it all of the sudden. Many new drugs are approached cautiously by doctors, and precipitously mandating this drug might be a bad idea. This is a reasonable discussion to have with somebody that is purely interested in the science, epidemiology, and implications for cancer prevention. However, this argument doesn't work well coming from Andy in that everything else he says in the interview is the most stupid shit I have ever heard come out of anybody's face. It is all based on a ridiculous moral argument that is far-fetched, even by fundamentalist standards. Holy shit! Where's the Tylenol? Corry^{You can always tell a Milford man.} 23:29, 13 January 2009 (EST)

Andy has a lot of valid points, but the problem is how he can't see the difference between his own valid concerns, and his own denial of facts, such as how effective "abstinence education" is. His last comment, that getting an STD from being raped is less likely than being hit by lightning, really pisses me off. Etc 00:25, 14 January 2009 (EST)

Damn it, I just watched the video I hate to agree with that man but I have to, in this case. One reassuring thing about the clip though, is that the closest he gets to typical Andy behaviour is insisting on saying "public schools" instead of just "schools" - he is apparently a lot more normal person in real life than on CP. Etc 00:49, 14 January 2009 (EST)

Again, it's where he's coming from. Take his assault on all things evolution- it's all because it runs crossways to his dogma. It's the same here. His idea that this vaccine gives girls a false sense of security about having sex is ludicrous. Here is a good argument for caution with the vaccine. Note a complete lack of argument based on the idea that fear of HPV and cervical cancer is the only thing keeping "our young girls" from having sex. Corry^{You can always tell a Milford man.} 01:04, 14 January 2009 (EST)

I don't really have any evidence to back this assertion, but I rather have the feeling Andy is a giant hypocrite about more or less everything he claims to believe in. He has never answered the question about whether he actually has a defensive weapon of gun. I strongly suspect he doesn't. Am I also correct in remembering that he didn't homeschool his own kids, but rather sent them to a private school? What's the Conservative equivalent of term "Champagne Socialist"? I think Andy is one of whatever that is. --JeevesMkII 01:05, 14 January 2009 (EST)

On the Gardasil thing: he's just trimmed 8000+words, including many from the only medical doctor (PalMD) they've ever had on the site.  ^{(with butter!)} _{talk to Toast} 02:54, 14 January 2009 (EST)

Button

Good points above, all - I'm actually in agreement with Andy that new vaccines should not be made mandatory when there's little data on their long-term safety. He just picks the wrong reasons to be against this and takes credibility away from that position as he does it. Now I'm going to have to take him up on the "3% of males being raped is absurd" line - "males" includes "boys", Andy, and prison's not a nice place for men, either. Of course, I'll get shot down for using stats from "one-sided" source like a victims network. Sigh. --SpinyNorman 05:19, 14 January 2009 (EST)

Well, yeah, in my response to his claim (I'm KevinS) I should have also cited statistics from the American Association of Rapists to be fair. Commodore Guff (blocked for five years) 09:03, 14 January 2009 (EST)

Here in the UK we're starting with a measles 'epidemic' because of the furore kicked up by the autism is caused by the 3 in 1 jab scare. fröhlich ^{"gay" and "happy"} 09:16, 14 January 2009 (EST)

• Spiny, if Andy feels your statistics are one-sided, maybe you could ask him if they are more or less so than those used for the 64% coerced women bit.
• Frolich, I believe that vaccine scares in the past have generally ended when people started dying of diseases that could have been avoided. Corry^{You can always tell a Milford man.} 12:29, 14 January 2009 (EST)

From a medical standpoint, massive vaccination here is completely different than massive vaccination for MMR. STDs are bad, and all, but the ease of transmission is much lower, and there are other methods that may be effective (condoms, for example are correlated with lower rates of infection). I would probably want my kids to get it, even with the unproven nature, but I don't think there's a strong public health case for mandating it. dream^ing _{Hail Eris!} 12:56, 14 January 2009 (EST)

Love the new block reasons

"Aussie fixation on pasta" Jammy 21:04, 13 January 2009 (EST)

It is a mixture of TK trying to intimidate them by saying where they live (as discussed early this isn't hard to find out so it is not like he running a sophisticated tracking network to find out) and his own poor literacy. - User $\scriptstyle h/2\hbar$ 22:23, 13 January 2009 (EST)

Seriously we should get a new motto "The source of all of TK's count-intelligence". - User $\scriptstyle h/2\hbar$ 22:36, 13 January 2009 (EST)

AHAHAHAHAHAHA

[1] AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA THE BLOG LINK IS NSFW --Ryan 00:25, 14 January 2009 (EST)

Um, that was disturbing. More immature and slanderous than funny. Etc 00:32, 14 January 2009 (EST)

True, true, but I guess it's something worth noting here --Ryan 00:35, 14 January 2009 (EST)

Thanks for putting that in my head. Really. I am going to go vomit now. Corry^{You can always tell a Milford man.} 00:38, 14 January 2009 (EST)

OH GOD NO. Actually that does come close to defamatory I think; at least, it's not too cool.-caius (soldier) 00:39, 14 January 2009 (EST)

Oh man. Now I need to scour my brain out again. That's pretty damn disturbing, and this is coming from someone who has seen carebear porn. --JeevesMkII 00:49, 14 January 2009 (EST)

Lame actually. Really lame. "Oh, I'm so cool, I made an embarrassing link from some pron and Ed's face in photoshop! Now I posted it on RW! Please, get over yourself. ħuman 00:50, 14 January 2009 (EST)

But the blog post is months old, whoever made the blog is not necessarily the same user who posted it on CP. And whether or not User:Ryan and CP:User:JohnsonP is the same person, I won't speculate. Etc 00:58, 14 January 2009 (EST)

I'm not calling anyone here lame. Just the silly photo, that's all. ħuman 01:02, 14 January 2009 (EST)

Oversighted away. By sysop activity over there, I suspect Dean has discovered his new toy.-caius (soldier) 01:44, 14 January 2009 (EST)

Just to confirm, I am not JohnsonP, nor did I create the blogspot thing. --Ryan 02:06, 14 January 2009 (EST)

Good. Better to oversight away just that diff, than kill the entire page history. Etc 02:14, 14 January 2009 (EST)

Apparently JohnsonP posted that from CALIFORNIA STATE POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY - POMONA (according to CP's block log) and I think Ryan has admitted to being Australian so there is no reason to think they are the same. However, I do wish that post had not beem made. The linked blog/image was pretty poor in my estimation. Генгис^{You have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you.} 04:47, 14 January 2009 (EST)

Ryan is Australian? I would've sworn he told me he was Canadian. Unless my memories are mixing him with Barikada... Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 03:56, 17 January 2009 (EST)

Andy vs. Income Tax

Not in any way lulzful, but apparently Andy doesn't like the income tax much. You've got to wonder how he proposes to pay for things like a standing army, which he does support without the only possible fair tax a government can levy on its citizens. Perhaps he want the feudal system back or something. I can picture it so clearly, Lord Andy of Conservapedia leading the first battalion of defensive weapon of arblasters in to glorious battle against the evil forces of liberalism. --JeevesMkII 01:25, 14 January 2009 (EST)

He probably wants a large sales tax instead, and the elimination of the income tax. I don't doubt that any impulse towards progressive taxation strikes him as socialist and punishing the successful. That's just the nature of a lover of deceit like Andy (a "dolophile").--Tom Moore^{fiat justitia ruat coelum} 01:46, 14 January 2009 (EST)

If everybody had a weapon of gun, we wouldn't need an army at all! Etc 02:09, 14 January 2009 (EST)

Oh, plus the tried and tested Republican route of deficit spending I suppose. Who needs tax revenue when you can just spend fantasy money? That's never, ever going to come back and haunt the country, right? --JeevesMkII 02:24, 14 January 2009 (EST)

Or tithing of course which, in essence, is income tax. If he gave to the church & let them decide what to do with the money, I wonder if that'd satisfy him? On those lines. I wonder if he is involved with his church's governance. I don't know how the Cats use lay people.  ^{(with butter!)} _{talk to Toast} 02:28, 14 January 2009 (EST)

I read that last sentence as "Cats lay and use people"... --PsyGremlin_Whut? 03:11, 14 January 2009 (EST)

Well, that is their only function' 03:20, 14 January 2009 (EST)

The right much prefer the flat rate of tax so the rich get to keep a bigger share of the money that they have already exploited from the poor. Генгис^{You have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you.} 04:08, 14 January 2009 (EST)

What is the ultimate neo-con tax system anyway? It's a toss up between take all the poor people's money and shoot them and no taxes at all. Which would be interesting, "if you want us to invade Iraq, then YOU pay for it!" or "You want a brain scan for your cancer, that'll be $500,000 dollars for the scanner and $10,000 for a week's operation of it lease." Yeah, I can see them loving that one. ArmondikoV^{d hominem} 04:24, 14 January 2009 (EST)

I suppose we're getting to the point where a Conservative wet dream road system isn't so totally laughable any more. Imagine back in the day when near field cards were the best you could do, where every road is a toll road built by private industry. You'd have a carpet sample book of swipe cards, and you've have to employ half a dozen of them just to get to work. These days, I guess they'd just use number plate recognition and send you angry letters if you didn't pay. Just like the London congestion charge. --JeevesMkII 04:56, 14 January 2009 (EST)

TK and Gaza

"What genocide?" I guess all TK sees is pest control. --ScottA 02:13, 14 January 2009 (EST)

Actually he's right in this case, although I disagree with the conflict it is hardly genocide. RyanC 04:34, 14 January 2009 (EST)

Yet. --Gulik 05:44, 14 January

I think you've misinterpreted TK's 'what?' He simply wants to know what genocide is --Jammy 08:21, 14 January 2009 (EST)

Maybe genocide isn't correct in the strictest possible sense, but the crime being committed by Israel is no better than genocide. Maybe indescriminate massacre would be a better term? However, TK is obviously not questioning the semantecs, rather the crime, as in his diseased mind the victims are only Muslims. When 40% of the casualties in Gaza have been women and children, I think any attempt to justify what Israel is doing is inexcusible. Bondurant 11:56, 14 January 2009 (EST)

Eh, I've seen some impressive attempts at justification. And I generally like this blogger, too. --Gulik 01:41, 16 January 2009 (EST)

PJR

Edits of PJR

Nice to see Philip back online. Hi Phil, hope you enjoyed your break! Генгис^{You have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you.} 05:11, 14 January 2009 (EST)

Well, PJR took some breaks, earlier - I don't know whether he was on vacation or just disgruntled... LArron 05:43, 14 January 2009 (EST)

PJR tends to take time out when his wife is unwell - I sincerely hope this hasn't been the case this time. Silver Sloth 06:57, 14 January 2009 (EST)

Likewise, Philip, hope all is well on the domestic front. I think he might have taken a breather after all the abuse he received recently, but has to feed the need to make sure CP is still YEC-compliant. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 07:03, 14 January 2009 (EST)

Nice entry, PJR, how long will Aschlafly ignore it? LArron 07:45, 14 January 2009 (EST)

Oh, yes. I'd forgotten about his wife. Hope everything's OK Phil. Генгис^{You have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you.} 08:20, 14 January 2009 (EST)

I wonder how long it will be before one of PJR's rants replies to Andy becomes an unintentional parthian shot. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 08:30, 14 January 2009 (EST)

→LArron: I don't think Phil's been particularly gruntled with Andy for a while. Hope his Missus is OK though. Not nice when someone you care for is unwell. fröhlich ^{"gay" and "happy"} 08:41, 14 January 2009 (EST)

Assfly is doing the 'however much you may stress your conservative views you disagree so you must be a liberal, and, because you're a liberal your views don't count' tactic.[2]. Philip, it's not worth it, you're a better man than he is, just walk away. Silver Sloth 10:02, 14 January 2009 (EST)

(unindent) WTF? "You say you're against abortion, but so do many liberals who favor taxpayer-funded abortion." So, they're against abortion but they really want the government to pay for people to have abortions? How does that even make any sense in Assfly world? He's insane. Completely insane. --JeevesMkII 10:26, 14 January 2009 (EST)

I took it to mean that they wouldn't have an abortion themselves, or condone an abortion for a friend or family member, but they still think that safe, legal abortions should be available for those who do want them. Seems a valid position to me. Plus I wouldn't be that surprised if it was in fact PJR's view.--Kriss Akabusi^{AAAAWOOOOGAAAR!!1} 11:17, 14 January 2009 (EST)

My favorite but is how Andy asks (to paraphrase): Do you believe in a smaller government and that government should ban things we don't approve of? DickTurpis 11:15, 14 January 2009 (EST)

I love how black-and white Andy's worldview is. The notion that all conservatives and liberals are monolithic in view is absurd at best. I'm a democrat, but agree with a few Republican positions. My Dad, who does all but worship Billo the Clown and Sean Hannity, doesn't agree with a few Republican issues. To say that he's a liberal or that I am a conservative due to not toeing the party line is to be frank, retarded.

So if you're reading this Phil, ignore the close-minded hateball and stick to your guns. Even if your guns exist on a 6000-year old Earth :) ENorman 11:26, 14 January 2009 (EST)

Isn't this whole argument because PJR isn't stuck on guns? Stick to your guns about not having any guns. Er. Yeah. --JeevesMkII 11:38, 14 January 2009 (EST)

Yeah, bad analogy in hindsight. Boomerangs? ENorman 22:17, 14 January 2009 (EST)

Haha, PJR got 2+2ed: "You have free will to deny it, but it's as indisputable as 2+2=4." [3] ħuman 15:05, 14 January 2009 (EST)

It's absolutist thinking at its dumbest: "Conservativism is The Truth(tm). Therefore, anyone who disagrees with me about ANYTHING is an EVUL LIBRUL." PJR, why do you keep enabling Andy's insanity, when you could start a blog and enable your own? --Gulik 15:23, 14 January 2009 (EST)

'Modern era terms'

Is it just me or is this CP article one of the most absurd there is. They seem to be trying to list every single word that can in anyway have anything whatsoever to do with the time since 1900 (and even sometimes before) Jammy 08:37, 14 January 2009 (EST)

Not only is it hilariously stupid, it doesn't include either "transistor" or "information" which if you were asked to come up with a word to describe the modern era, one of the two would almost certainly have to be your pick.. --JeevesMkII 09:10, 14 January 2009 (EST)

Or "conservatwats", which should be a word & describes them purfickly. fröhlich ^{"gay" and "happy"} 09:21, 14 January 2009 (EST)

Automobile? Air(o)plane? the list is long! fröhlich ^{"gay" and "happy"} 09:23, 14 January 2009 (EST)

dowry death!!!!!! fröhlich ^{"gay" and "happy"} 09:25, 14 January 2009 (EST)

Is it just me or is it hilarious that the very first entry on the "A" page is "Abd al-Aziz Ibn Saud "? 147.238.8.16 16:52, 14 January 2009 (EST)

Can someone check the OED and see when "Christopath" was coined? --Kels 19:30, 14 January 2009 (EST)

Goats

Non-CP discussion, moved to the Saloon bar Wẽãšẽĩõĩď^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 11:17, 14 January 2009 (EST)

"Ban atheists" debate now deleted

The legendary "should atheists be barred from Conservapedia?" debate from back in August recently got deleted, presumably as part of a move to try & erase all traces of Buglerism. A Google cache version (from 10 minutes before deletion) is currently available here, so we should probably take a copy while we can, since the debate was linked in a few of our articles (e.g. Bugler). As far as I know, we probably only have bits & pieces of the debate grabbed by capturebot. Can somebody who knows how please either take a full screencapture of the cached debate, or extract the text from it & save it as an article? Wẽãšẽĩõĩď^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 11:52, 14 January 2009 (EST)

I've got screenshots of the whole debate saved now. I probably haven't done it in the most efficient manner, so i'll try and upload it later if no one else has done it by then. --Jammy 12:26, 14 January 2009 (EST)

Oh, I really had fun on that one. Corry^{You can always tell a Milford man.} 12:34, 14 January 2009 (EST)

Can we do a re-enactment?! I'll play the part of Bugler, Weasel you can be Sideways, Corry, you can be...well, Corry and I've got a tub of lard to play Ed Poor. --Jammy 12:48, 14 January 2009 (EST)

I'm sure Bugler himself could reprise the role. Wẽãšẽĩõĩď^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 13:03, 14 January 2009 (EST)

Ah, HIGNFY! Генгис^{You have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you.} 12:58, 14 January 2009 (EST)

A person with good taste I see :-) --Jammy 13:02, 14 January 2009 (EST)

It's been saved in plain text here, but would take some work to sort out all the formatting to make it clearer to read. Is there no way to extract formatting from the cached version, or see a cahed version of the source code to copy? Failing that, I know some people have been able to do single screenshots covering a massive page like this, but I don't know how to do it myself. Wẽãšẽĩõĩď^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 13:17, 14 January 2009 (EST)

I've got the page as 1 shot (= 1.4MB). I'll upload it if no-one can recreate the original. fröhlich ^{"gay" and "happy"} 13:34, 14 January 2009 (EST)

(fretful: you were a right bastard, weren't you?) fröhlich ^{"gay" and "happy"} 13:41, 14 January 2009 (EST)

I posted the raw text just in case it got lost. I also have it as an html archive. The only problem is that it is all in html and still doesn't format correctly. I'll have a go at it in Textpad should be able to sort out the formatting (depending on the wine intake b4). With a bit of luck I can record the reformatting as a macro and use it on future salvage operations. Генгис^{You have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you.} 13:46, 14 January 2009 (EST)

It's here sorry about the awful name - I didn't think to changeit) fröhlich ^{"gay" and "happy"} 14:03, 14 January 2009 (EST)

It's now formatted as it was but the links are screwy. I also had to zap most of Deborah's signature. I've finished if anyone wants to clean it up further. Генгис^{You have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you.} 15:27, 14 January 2009 (EST)

Thanks. The links are a bit of a problem - there's about 140 of them & no easy way to search&replace them into working links. One alternative, now that we have a full screengrab, would be to use the article space to do a short article about the debate - e.g. who was involved, some of the best posts, etc. & link to the screenshot rather than repeat the whole debate in text. Wẽãšẽĩõĩď^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 16:07, 14 January 2009 (EST)

You're welcome. Just copypaste it out of my sandbox to whatever article you wish once you're done (or before you start) prettying it up. --Sid 17:44, 14 January 2009 (EST)

Ah, n/m. Looks like you guys reconstructed it to the same level already. That's what I get for checking in late... --Sid 17:49, 14 January 2009 (EST)

I've pasted your copy instead. It sorts out any odd formatting problems. Thanks for grabbing it. Wẽãšẽĩõĩď^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 18:01, 14 January 2009 (EST)

How many states

I'm enjoying this. It takes them 20 months to name 4 US states, and AddisonDM has been reading RW by the looks of it, as he's now rocketed ahead to 49...I wonder how long it will be until he discovers the missing one :-) --Jammy 13:06, 14 January 2009 (EST)

How much you wanna bet he's pulling his dates off wikipedia? EternalCritic 13:07, 14 January 2009 (EST)

I think we can be pretty sure that's where most of the information on CP comes from. When they're not copying and pasting they're just using this 'wholly unreliable and liberally biased website' to fill up their 'wholly reliable and conservatively biased website' --Jammy 13:10, 14 January 2009 (EST)

He's got it! That pesky Pennsylvania! :p I wonder if RW will get any credit for pointing it out to him...... --Jammy 13:15, 14 January 2009 (EST)

I know I don't ever use anything else for my socks... Unless I'm specifically refuting some sysop nonsense (usually Ed Poor) I just copy paste something from Wikipedia and reword it... It's blatant plagerism, I know... But I'm subverting Conservapedia, so I accept it. SirChuckB^{This country needs more Rutabegas} 14:10, 14 January 2009 (EST)

Maybe they got the dates from our quarter collection? ħuman 15:10, 14 January 2009 (EST)

Mmmm... a stupid list found tons o' other places on the internet... what a reference! Sterile^rationalize 16:11, 14 January 2009 (EST)

And yet they still managed to make a right mess of it. --Jammy 17:05, 14 January 2009 (EST)

Christian Identity WiGO

The quote, attributed to Andy, is actually by parodist RickDees. DickTurpis 15:37, 14 January 2009 (EST)

An Old Friend

Hi Jinx! you fuck bag! Ace McWicked^{The Liquid Room} 15:49, 14 January 2009 (EST)

It seems like everyone's returning all of a sudden. It there a lot of sunspot activity or something? --Gulik 16:39, 14 January 2009 (EST)

I love Andy's reply to Jinx on WIGO. He's finally got it in to his head that everyone sane disagrees with him about more or less anything, and most people are sane. He's just reflexively telling everyone to "open their mind" to his point of view. He must just have forgotten Jinx is as crazy as he is. --JeevesMkII 16:52, 14 January 2009 (EST)

Hmm, I like how Jinx completely misses that the edits expressing doubts about Cameron's former atheism were, in fact, removed for not being NPOV. Zmidponk 17:33, 14 January 2009 (EST)

Ho ho ho thats our Jinx! A fuck-knuckle to the end! How I have missed him. Ace McWicked^{The Liquid Room} 17:50, 14 January 2009 (EST)

PJR and sugar in space

From PJR [4]

But we are talking here about the origin of life, so if the materials that he uses are ones that only occur as the result of living things, then they do not occur "naturally", in the sense of being in existence before life started. Glucose is the product of living things (which I would argue requires a designer). Similarly, I believe that both RNA and RNA replicase do not occur "naturally" (without the existence of living things). Is this correct?

Nope, its not. If I may point you to Scientists Discover Sugar in Space from June 15, 2000: The prospects for life in the Universe just got sweeter, with the first discovery of a simple sugar molecule in space. The discovery of the sugar molecule glycolaldehyde in a giant cloud of gas and dust near the center of our own Milky Way Galaxy was made by scientists using the National Science Foundation's 12 Meter Telescope, a radio telescope on Kitt Peak, Arizona

Now, this is not glucose, but it is just a step or two away from it. Thus one of:

• There is life out there
• Sugars can form without life

I will also point to [5] where sugars have been found in carbonaceous meteorites. [6] also lists some compounds:

• dihydroxyacetone
• glycerol
• "evidence of glucose"
• "numerous amino acids"

PJR, you need to rethink that argument. Either sugars are not indications of life, or there is life out there.

--Shagie 19:54, 14 January 2009 (EST)

Obamaspeak

TK and Andy are just completely lost. Obama does something he intended to do and because they can't actually find anything wrong with it they're throwing even more nonsensical criticisms at him than usual. --Jammy 20:42, 14 January 2009 (EST)

Less "lost", more "lost it". The hatred of Obama knows no bounds. At least Andy. We all know TK's a troll, so he's just playing along. ENorman 22:17, 14 January 2009 (EST)

History Lesson

I am not sure if it is accurate. But,it is my assumption that RJJensen is a retired professor of some sort who just likes to write and see his (Relatively well written) works spread throughout the internet. He doesn't seem especially left or right leaning. So, to me, it will be interesting to see how this debate turns out. He'll probably just move on to another article that doesn't involve the scary prospect of debating a real life teacher of home schooled students. Patrickr 23:04, 14 January 2009 (EST)

No, RJJ is pretty wingnutty, even if he is marginally more sensible than the rest of them. He buys into the whole "Obama is an affirmative action president" bullshit, too. Among other things. UPDATE: see below. --Yossie^{Spring in Fialta} 02:25, 15 January 2009 (EST)

Well, he is probably the third most knowledgeable historian at CP:

1. Aschlafly, self proclaimed leader of the biggest history class in the multiverse
2. TK, as he could teach Aschlfly's class...
3. RJJensen, who is useful sometimes.

LArron 02:55, 15 January 2009 (EST)

I agree, he could mop the floor with Andy and the like, hehe. And he doesn't seem to be one of the YEC crazies, so there you go. But that Obama thing (there's a link somewhere deep in the archives) was just...ugh... --Yossie^{Spring in Fialta} 05:01, 15 January 2009 (EST)

RJJ is an EXTREMELY conservative, old-school historian who seems to have bumped around from one adjunct job to another and never really published much of note. He seems to have come around just when the discipline was moving from military/diplomatic/presidential approaches to much broader social history--and he got on the wrong boat. He's conservative, but no wingnut. I get the sense that he doesn't care for a lot of the YEC-and-other-extreme-Christian stuff on CP, but since they mostly leave him alone and let him do his thing, it's all okay...TheoryOfPractice 10:09, 15 January 2009 (EST)

I finally found that link I was talking about, and I seem to have completely misinterpreted what he was saying, i.e., he was saying that Obama being the first African American president wasn't debatable, rather than the affirmative action lunacy. :| If you're out there RJJ, I apologise for lotting you in with Andy the psychos! --Yossie^{Spring in Fialta} 14:42, 15 January 2009 (EST)

Not really WIGOable

Just slightly silly- TK reverts back to a misspelling. While the rest of the edit could be considered (maybe) minor wandalism, there was one definite improvement made in that article by even Andy's (alleged) standards. - Hactar, too lazy to sign in.

Are you even going to thank us TK?--BoredCPer 00:28, 15 January 2009 (EST)

(Pedantry corner) Isn't "reverts back" a tautology? fröhlich ^{"gay" and "happy"} 00:41, 15 January 2009 (EST)

Nah, it's just redundant. --Barikada, too lazy to sign in.

Not even newsworthy

TK blocks /20 of BT (that's The UK's biggest telco, folks (I think)). How many's that - I don't do IPcount speak. fröhlich ^{"gay" and "happy"}

It's easy, the number after the slash is the number of invariant bits in the address, so the number of hosts described by variant bits (and hence the number of IPs) is 2 ^{(32 - invariant_bits)}. In this case, 2¹² = 4096 addresses. --JeevesMkII 00:37, 15 January 2009 (EST)

Shorter TK: "THIS IS SPARTA (Wisconsin)!". --JeevesMkII 04:04, 15 January 2009 (EST)

Hang on...

...isn't Andy's sudden insistence on abstinence for everybody sort of flying in the face of his "have babies or have breast cancer" stance? --PsyGremlin_Whut? 05:10, 15 January 2009 (EST)

<rather unPC comment> Pre-emptive mastectomy: probably takes care of both. </rather> (sorry) fröhlich ^{"gay" and "happy"} 05:21, 15 January 2009 (EST)

I think he--or one of his lackeys--has been clear that there's a difference between "abstinence" (no nookie before marriage) and "celibacy" (no nookie, period). He's arguing for the former, not the latter...TheoryOfPractice 10:05, 15 January 2009 (EST)

If only we could incite a celibacy-movement in fundamentalist Christianity. - Gentleman Publius (V)<,",>(V) 12:33, 15 January 2009 (EST)

There is one: it's called the Catholic Priesthood, and look what's been going on with them!  ^{(with butter!)} _{talk to Toast} 12:39, 15 January 2009 (EST)

"Fundamentalist"? --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 14:58, 15 January 2009 (EST)

Was "joke", AK; remember them? We're not all Barbara Shack.  ^{(with butter!)} _{talk to Toast} 15:01, 15 January 2009 (EST)

Right, right. It's just so hard to tell when you guys are being serious and when you're joking. --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 15:03, 15 January 2009 (EST)

I know what you mean.  ^{(with butter!)} _{talk to Toast} 15:06, 15 January 2009 (EST)

(Unindent)I seem to remember someone pointing out that, following the same reasoning as Assfly's 'abortions cause breast cancer' crap, the best way to reduce breast cancer is to be as promiscuous as possible. Strangely enough, he didn't get any reply. Zmidponk 16:43, 15 January 2009 (EST)

Edits, Editors and Blocks at CP

Date: Jan 12th, 2009 LArron 05:24, 15 January 2009 (EST)

The closet

Looking at the diffs for the WIGO about Ed Poop's article, I saw this edit by Aziraphale (which Ed reverted). Генгис^{You have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you.} 09:15, 15 January 2009 (EST)

lol! It's rare CP makes me laugh out loud, but that did. Thanks! --PsyGremlin_Whut? 09:23, 15 January 2009 (EST)

When I absolutely couldn't think of a way to categorize one of his idiocies, I'd just tag his name to it, figuring it would call his attention so he'd deal with it. This was the fallout of my own version of the oft-repeated "Do your own work, Ed" argument. Aziraphale 11:47, 15 January 2009 (EST)

Double chuckle, by accident:

"Login successful

You are now logged in to Conservapedia as "Human".

Return to The closet."

Hehe... ħuman 15:38, 15 January 2009 (EST)

Joaquin and Gaza...

First, Joaquin posted the bit about a UN wonk calling the Gaza operation "genocide," which TK added one word to ('What?") in order to totally change the meaning of the headline. Now Joaquin has posted another story about questionable Israeli actions in Gaza (I'm trying to be level-headed here...). 1. How will TK spin this one? and 2. did nobody tell Joaquin that in CP-land the Israelis are ALWAYS right and the Palestinians are ALWAYS wrong? How can he be so stupid as to think that bringing attention to Israeli atrocities is an appropriate thing to do on the CP main page? TheoryOfPractice 10:03, 15 January 2009 (EST)

DeanS pre-spun this one. --Arcan ¡ollǝɥ 10:50, 15 January 2009 (EST)

Joaquin also posted the flattering item on the British Museum, and edited most of that article too. Conservapedia would clearly be against such an institution, being as it is funded by taxes and open to the public at no cost, and containing exhibits that openly promote evolution. Can't wait for the assfly to notice that article and "trim" it. I wonder what Joaquin's angle is. - Kyuiks 10:55, 15 January 2009 (EST)

I think CP would be okay with the British Museum as a monument to the "civilising" and Christianising influence of imperialism--as opposed to what it it really is, the world's largest collection of stolen goods. TheoryOfPractice 10:59, 15 January 2009 (EST)

ToP - it is vital that these important artefacts are preserved properly in a place where all have access and not left to the whims of mere foreigners ;-). Surely you understand that we are much better fitted to look after the Elgin Marbles than those Greek fellows, After all, if they weren't supposed to be in Britain they wouldn't be called the Elgin marbles in the first place. (BTW, did you see 'The Man Who Lost His Head' on the telly this Christmas?) Silver Sloth 11:07, 15 January 2009 (EST)

Joaquin's second post was about Israelii fire hitting a UN building. I think the handful of non-parodists at CP would see this as a good thing, given how they feel about the UN.--Simple 11:10, 15 January 2009 (EST)

Andy's revert on 'Hand'

[7] Huh? He refers to the edit has enforcing a liberal POV. If anything, I'd consider the guy's edit to be reinforcing Andy's POV. -Lardashe

I love the opening para: no other animal has anything like the human hand - except those that do! Cantabrigian 13:43, 15 January 2009 (EST)

I like how he calls the hand a 'limb'. It's hard to think of ways you could get the opening to that article more clumsy! StarFish 13:59, 15 January 2009 (EST)

I don't want to labour the point but the opening para is genius. I'm copying it here. I can't get over how beautiful it is...

"The human hand is one of God's most amazing creations. No other creature has a limb quite like it, apart from a number of other primates and also kangaroos and squirrels and chameleons and a number of other animals."

StarFish 14:00, 15 January 2009 (EST)

Ahh. Lulz. That is funny. There goes some anthrocentricism over at CP! --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistor^{is overworked and overbearing} 14:11, 15 January 2009 (EST)

I'd almost consider that to be the work of a parodist, if it wasn't from The Fuhrer. - "The human elbow is amazing! No other animal has one like it, apart from the aardvark, the beaver, the cat, the dog, the eagle, the fox, the giraffe, the hyena, the iguana, the jaguar, the koala, the llama, the mongoose, the nightjar, the owl, the pig, the quail, the raccoon, the snail, the trilobite, the unicorn, the velociraptor, the weasel, the Xenopus toad (bit of a stretch that one), the yak and the zebra. and a couple of others I haven't mentioned" - Worm ^{(t | c)} 14:40, 15 January 2009 (EST)

That's always the way it goes. The stuff which seems most obviously parody is invariably Andy's handiwork. Handywork. - Gentleman Publius (V)<,",>(V) 15:41, 15 January 2009 (EST)

No animals have a limb quite like it!

Apart from all the OTHER primates (lemurs, the Aye-aye, lorids, galagos, tarsiers, monkeys and apes)

..and the kangaroos

..and the squirrels

..and the chameleons

..and all the other animals that have them

..point I'm making is, humans are unique and evolution sucks hands down, k??

(You got to HAND it to him though, it's quite a point) --GTac 17:22, 15 January 2009 (EST)

Also, I like this sentence from the article too: "when a person turns his or her hand to a task he or she can build enormous skyscrapers or tiny electronic circuits.". They build those by hand?! That's quite a handsome feat! --GTac 17:23, 15 January 2009 (EST)

Admit that electronic circuits are made by hand or lose all credibility. It's as obvious as 2+2=4. - Gentleman Publius (V)<,",>(V) 17:39, 15 January 2009 (EST)

Worker producing microchips by hand at Intel's bleeding-edge 22nm facility

(unindent) To be fair, whilst obviously all the stuff inside your computer is mass-produced, the interesting chips that people do research on can be hand-made, and the way they make them is closer to that "Microchipping by hand" image than you might think. alt 18:56, 15 January 2009 (EST)

For being an in-psych-low-peed-ee-ah "article", strange that it doesn't actually define what a hand is. Right now it just says the hand is a thing that things have and do things with that has a thing on it and is built of smaller things. Kallium^talk 18:09, 15 January 2009 (EST)

Silly, everyone knows that a "hand" is a bunch of playing cards held by one player. Or an aspect of fabric. Or a unit of measurement applied to horsies. Or applause. ħuman 18:51, 15 January 2009 (EST)

I've got to hand it to you, that's a pretty hand-some list of hand-y uses of the word. I'll be sure to hand-le it with care. Kallium^talk 20:00, 15 January 2009 (EST)

Give up the immoral gay lifestyle....

Never mind the gay lifestyle, it looks like we have to give up the immoral black lifestyle as well....What an ass. TheoryOfPractice 18:20, 15 January 2009 (EST)

The implied racism in that 'news story' is quite astounding. --Jammy 18:26, 15 January 2009 (EST)

"Implied"? ħuman 18:56, 15 January 2009 (EST)

Well he has at the very least not written the conclusion to whatever he was thinking when he added the second set of stats...even still the racism is obvious and that has to be one of the most appalling CP headlines i've ever seen --Jammy 19:00, 15 January 2009 (EST)

Wouldn't a better conclusion be that african americans are more likely to be homosexual? --CPAdmin1 19:59, 15 January 2009 (EST)

Even if that's true, it is not well-known enough to go on a headline without an explanation. FernoKlump^{Mr. Assfly! Don't forget about this petition!} 20:23, 15 January 2009 (EST)

(Edit conflict) Ah, but for CP, nothing is not well-known enough to not need an explanation, as long as it's obvious. You're just feigning confusion. Kallium^talk 20:47, 15 January 2009 (EST)

There are many different conclusions that would pan out better than more African Americans being gay. Perhaps more in an impoverished socioeconomic status, more in prison, more using IV drugs, etc. Without specific epidemiological probing as to why, it's all just conjecture. Corry^{You can always tell a Milford man.} 20:51, 15 January 2009 (EST)

They also seem to be realying heavily on the CDC info, depsite the fact that the CDC is apparently a terrible place, rife with error, conflict of interest and general librulness. Worm ^{(t | c)} 10:17, 16 January 2009 (EST)

"Anonymous User" (sounds like another self-centered liberal, like Obama), what time is now from where you edit? I've responded to your concerns and answered your questions and I think several of your postings are an example of liberal deceit, so it's painfully obvious that you're against Conservapedia. You also clearly deny that translating the Bible prevents skateboarding. It's simple logic: polls demonstrated that something like 30% of young evangelical Christians, and even higher percentages of other Christian denominations, voted for Obama. Many of them are YECs. So there is nothing startling or remarkable about the possibility that a YEC is liberal. Quakers did not even fight in the American Revolution, and tended to support abortion! Read your bible and pray!--Aschlafly 06:55, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

I'm sorry Mr Schlafly :( Please forgive my closed mindedness, my non-sequiturs and illogical points. I now understand that 2 + 2 is indeed 4, unlike what all the liberal deceivers I hang out with have tried to tell me. Your brilliant insights have opened my mind to the wonders of bigotry, intolerance and just general stupidity. --Jammy 07:38, 16 January 2009 (EST)

I, too have seen the light. 2+2=4=liberalism causes and is caused by mental illness. Corry^{You can always tell a Milford man.} 08:28, 16 January 2009 (EST)

Do I detect some hostility?

This is starting to get fun! I don't expect it to last too long, though. Kallium^talk 23:27, 15 January 2009 (EST)

Clasic Sclafhead illiteracy: "It's poorly kept secret that radiometric yields often widely different estimates of age. The statements that you've repeated deleted are well supported. Let the reader decide.--Andy Schlafly" This reader decided to ignore the person who failed twice in a row to construct grammatically correct sentences. And I've been drinking... Maybe he was in his cups as well, but surely he also has "preview"? When my typing skills fall off, I spend more time correcting obvious errors... ħuman 23:56, 15 January 2009 (EST)

Hermaphrodites

I boggled a bit at "Doctors can often perform operations shortly after birth to correct the child to the intended gender and most hermaphrodites will then lead perfectly normal lives in Christ." Fact is, from what I've read most children who have such surgeries end up very unhappy and conflicted later in life, and there's a movement to try to convince doctors not to perform these surgeries and let the kids decide for themselves when they're old enough what to do. David Reimer's story is, unfortunately, not an isolated case. --Kels 23:29, 15 January 2009 (EST)

What struck me was the word "intended". Intended by who? God? The parents? The surgeon? WTF.... Note the article explains nothing about critters (especially plants) that have both huge erect penises and wet inviting vaginas male and female organs, and how it all works, in a fucking encyclopedic way... ħuman 23:48, 15 January 2009 (EST)

If you're reading this, Foxtrot, fuck you. Take your vile "opinion" and shove it up your ass, where it may prove useful in dislodging your head. Assuming you're a real person, and not a parodist. --Yossie^{Spring in Fialta} 00:03, 16 January 2009 (EST)

If you're reading this, Foxtrot, I'll be a bit nicer than Yossarian, and just ask 'which part of "random mutation" did you not understand?' A lot of random mutations are going to be bad, and the unlucky owners of them will not have as many offspring as the baseline for their species. The occasional lucky mutant (like, for example, an e. coli bacteria that can metabolize citrate,) will have more offspring than the average for their species. This is how evolution works. But, given that CP doesn't think evolution works at all, I can forgive your abysmal ignorance and attempt, futiley, to correct it. --Gulik 02:06, 16 January 2009 (EST)

Aren't these guys all suspected of being parodists? Of course, I suspect that whenever anybody agrees with Andy. I wonder if these guys know that there's much more to the expression of gender than the naughty bits? Corry^{You can always tell a Milford man.} 08:35, 16 January 2009 (EST)

I'd be really surprised if they did. Conservatives of that ilk tend to view anything deviating from the "norm" in terms of gender or sex as the lowest of the low. Even gay people are viewed in higher esteem (which isn't saying much). I mean, these are the disciples of Andy "Girls 'n' Boys Shouldn't Compete" Schlafly. As to parodists, well, Poe's law and what not. I get the feeling that most of the major players are genuine at the moment, aside from RW--though, he got his banhammer confiscated, last time I checked. But, you never know. The extremists could ALL be parodists, except for Ed, Ken, and Karajou (I have my doubts about Andy ;). That's half the fun of Conservapedia. Anyway, even if Foxtrot is a parodist, what he's posted isn't especially detrimental to CP, which is why it irks me anyway. It's HORRIBLE, but its basically party line, and not much different from what many non-wingnuts think (putting aside the fundie tripe). People in general are very misinformed about intersex people, and for that little kids get mutilated and psychologically fucked up. :( So, if he is a parodist, he's really just perpetuating a really awful view that just leads to more of the afformentioned fuck-uppedness..."Ban Athiests from Conservapedia" is all well and good, but to me this crosses a line. But that's just me. </soapbox> --Yossie^{Spring in Fialta} 17:55, 16 January 2009 (EST)

Weakly featured article

I have just noticed their "Weekly featured article". It's "Sculpture". Just for fun & to save you the labour of actually going to look at it, here's the excerpt in full:

"Sculpture is a form of art. It also means a three-dimensional work of plastic art. Sculpture as an art form goes back to Prehistoric times. A sculptor is one who creates sculptures.

Sculpture, painting, architecture, music, literature, poetry, drama, dance, and cinema are some of the forms of Fine Arts.

([[:Image:Maya3.jpg|right|thumb|Jaina figurine]])

Sculptures are made of stone, marble, wood, glass, bronze, iron, clay, or any other hard or plastic material that could be transformed into a three-dimensional object. The shaping figures could be in the round or in relief. For this reason Sculpture is considered also one of the plastic arts.

That this could be seen as passable as the lead for an encyclopaedia entry is bad enough, but to actually brag about it and put it on the main page is astounding. This shows why Andy's original intention to create a resource for children is dooomed to failure.  ^{(with butter!)} _{talk to Toast} 01:12, 16 January 2009 (EST)

It's doomed to failure for multiple reasons, but, yeah. Their near-total lack of quality control on any grounds other than "how much does this villify The EVIL Liberals?" is one of the big ones. --Gulik 02:09, 16 January 2009 (EST)

Well it's a Joaquin article and Joaquin gets to choose the article of the weak, but there's probably no conflict of interest in that. Генгис^{You have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you.} 03:31, 16 January 2009 (EST)

Just like Ken and the Article of the Year. He made it up so he get to uses it to pimp his articles without anyone else's input. Cue gentlemen in 5,4,3,.... - User $\scriptstyle h/2\hbar$ 03:36, 16 January 2009 (EST)

We haven't had a gentlemen in ages. I think someone might have told Ken they make him and CP look like a bunch of idiots, and to stop it. Hence what amounts to a poorly disguised gentlemen on the Assfly's talk page. For the same reason kendoll thinks nobody can penetrate his masterly disguises on various internet forums, and that he can use various different psuedonyms in email to his fellow CPers and they won't notice, he thinks nobody'll notice his monologue isn't really for the assfly's benefit. Long story short, ken's a moron. --JeevesMkII 07:29, 16 January 2009 (EST)

It is interesting looking at the proposed Featured articles other than Global warming the only ones Joaquin has agreed to are ones he edits, the other that are just sitting there were written by other peoples. Also why are the committee memebers;

• DeanS
• Geo.plrd
• Joaquín Martínez‎
• Learn together
• Philip J. Rayment
• TK

Yet Kotomi, Y23 and Foxtrot are voting? (At least Kotomi, unlike someone, doesn't vote for her own). - User $\scriptstyle h/2\hbar$ 08:53, 16 January 2009 (EST)

Thank you

I've lurked here for some time and enjoyed WIGO more than I can say. Thanks to everyone who contributes to it (soon to be me!)-Diadochus 01:53, 16 January 2009 (EST)

Welcome it can be fun can't it? I'll look forward to your WIGOs! StarFish 05:58, 16 January 2009 (EST)

The current state of mathematics at conservapedia

It's dead. Amusingly, my critique on this site ( lead to immediate action on conservapedia, lead Ed Poor to remove drivel from the articles on Center and Decimal - without improving the articles much. Now Foxtrot reinserted the drivel on the article on Center again. He states on his user site

I have a background in mathematics, because I find that its ubiquity in the world is evidence of God's marvelous design of the world.

I can't imagine what this background is - but it seems that generations of visiting mathematicians have chastised him for formulations like

The center of a geometric shape is a point that, on average, the points of the shape are equidistant from.

BRichtigen 03:19, 16 January 2009 (EST)

Another candidate for "Weekly featured article"?  ^{(with butter!)} _{talk to Toast} 03:35, 16 January 2009 (EST)

Ed finally seems to have succeeded in driving away anybody interested in improving those articles. Wonder what he'll turn his attention to next. Just a thought - I wonder if he sees CP as a threat to his Moonie NWE and is planning (along with TK) to destroy it from the inside? --PsyGremlin_Whut? 03:38, 16 January 2009 (EST)

Hahee! ... Oh! ... Ha! ... Hee! ... Conservapedia ... Hahee! ... a threat ... !!!!  ^{(with butter!)} _{talk to Toast} 05:56, 16 January 2009 (EST)

Thank you very much, I'm here all week --PsyGremlin_Whut? 06:17, 16 January 2009 (EST)

AndyJM - of AoC's faim - tries to make some improvements. But removing Andy's idiotic statements about elementary proofs - where he conflates Sherlock Holmes's just elementary with the mathematical meaning of this word (elementary doesn't mead simple) - gets a reversion. OTOH this beautiful post - perhaps an attempt to show the mathematical background of Foxtrot - should earn him at least a working assignment, if not a block. LArron 02:45, 17 January 2009 (EST)

Fat jokes

So, the Assfly says, regarding Michael Moore...

"When someone makes millions based on idiotic comments about others, he and his supporters can hardly complain when someone else references his obesity."

Now, Rush Limbaugh used to make short jokes about Robert Reich and Donna Shalala (at least one of whom had a congenital defect that made them so small, though I can't remember which one.)

So, by Assfly logic, are fat jokes about Limbaugh okay? MDB 07:44, 16 January 2009 (EST)

Oh please, somebody sock up and work the words "morbidly obese" into the Limbaugh article. Corry^{You can always tell a Milford man.} 08:41, 16 January 2009 (EST)

Joaquin's Next Article of the Weak

cp:Smith. Oh dear. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 08:32, 16 January 2009 (EST)

BruceDLimber

ha ha. Not WIGOworthy, but Karajou's shoot-then-ask policy strikes again. Blocks BruceDLimber for "Nonsense name"... except... a 3 second Google search reveals BruceDLimber @ Christian forums, BruceDLimber @ Interfaith forums, and several more. Maybe, just maybe he works for the IRS, you idiot. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 10:11, 16 January 2009 (EST)

Eggsellent! He might get a bit annoyed with Kajagoogoo for blabbing his employer over t'interweb. <shouts> We can tell you his name & location, Mr IRS </shouts> (although I suppose that you lot can find that out anyhow.  ^(Crumpets) _and butter 10:31, 16 January 2009 (EST)

I think they don't know how to use whois properly. I know that I checked my own work IP with one popular online site and it said it was an anonymous proxy. What the dorks don't realise is that most large companies/government departments route their traffic through a fast broad-band pipe and a proxy server to check for malicious code/viruses or inapproriate content. Thinking that someone has hacked into the IRS to act as an aonymous proxy, ROFL! They just see anonymous proxy come up in their tame IP address checker and immediately think SOCKALERT, it's something evil. Their level of computer knowhow probably can't see past a small business with an 8MB ADSL connection sharing a connection with a handful of users. That's probably one of the reasons they blocked the whole of Oxford Uni which probably also uses a proxy server. Really, their real-world IT quotient is laughable. I think TK is just encouraging them in all this with overuse of checkuser so that they choke off all external access. Great work Terry! Генгис^{You have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you.} 10:44, 16 January 2009 (EST)

Bruce is back, and he's not a happy chappy. Worm ^{(t | c)} 21:04, 17 January 2009 (EST)

American Indian WIGO

This is wonderful. I love it when Andy unilaterally deletes science. Corry^{You can always tell a Milford man.} 11:10, 16 January 2009 (EST)

Imaginary numbers, Relativity, Black Holes, Bering Strait theory. Taking all bets on the next casualty! Best is how he never has any actual reason other than "it's crazy and doesn't make sense." - Gentleman Publius (V)<,",>(V) 12:37, 16 January 2009 (EST)

His 'logic' astounds me. How similar are Chinese and Japanese and Asian Indians? are they any less similar than American Indians and Asians?

As an Anthropology major, I raged hard. Though he won't like this any better than the Bering Migration theory, recent evidence shows that there was a possibility that people arrived in North America by coastal migration along the Pacific in boats even before that. There is even evidence that people migrated across the Atlantic via boat back then, and the not-as-popular theory that some came from Australia to South America.

Additionally, I kick Andy's "logic" in the nuts by pointing out the difference between the Chinese and the Ainu (original residents of Japan). Both are Asian, but astoundingly different. ENorman 13:29, 16 January 2009 (EST)

You have free will to defy logic, but if open your mind to conservative principles you'll find you will be much happier. Of course, your argument doesn't hold up under simple logic. Did you read the point about different blood types? Chinks, Japs and Gooks have the blood types A, B, AB, and O. Redskins and injuns have G, X, L, XL, and W. It's as simple as 2+2=4, but I suppose you'd deny that if the New York Times said it wasn't true! -Assfly 13:41, 16 January 2009 (EST)

This is really strange. I would think Andy would want the two groups to be related, since it would provide him with "evidence" that everybody's ancestry traces back to Noah 4-5k years ago. What's he advocating? That God created Native Americans independently after the flood?--Bayes 15:08, 16 January 2009 (EST)

Two thoughts: Will anyone post about the genetic similarities in the mtDNA and other similarities like dysfunctional alcohol dehydrogenase, and will anyone post about the Mormon beliefs about native Americans? Stile4aly 15:23, 16 January 2009 (EST)

Publius, you left a lot out of your Assfly history lesson. Don't forget that Vikings never landed in America, Christians were responsible for everything good that ever happened in the world, all the founding fathers were fundie baptists and only pretended to be deists to win over the liberal media, Christians never did anything bad, Christopher Columbus found America because jesus personally pushed his boat that way, Joe McCarthy was a true American Hero, and Ronald Reagan destroyed the Berlin Wall with one speech. Did I miss anything? SirChuckB^{This country needs more Rutabegas} 15:53, 16 January 2009 (EST)

Don't forget that Pinochet was a Chilean Gandhi. DickTurpis 16:11, 16 January 2009 (EST)

Implied racism, what now?

Maybe I misunderstood the WIGO entry, but what exactly is racist about citing a CDC report? I'm not from the US, but I always thought the CDC is a government agency?

The racism is in the implied link that the item in question makes between "race"and "immoral behaviour." The CDC may be saying that a particular part of the American population is dealing with a particular health problem, and that is something that is happening for a variety of social and economic reasons. CP's headline implies that somehow African Americans, as well as homosexuals, are somehow responsible for a public health crisis because of their moral conduct...TheoryOfPractice 12:26, 16 January 2009 (EST)

Ah, that completely went over my head. Sounded to me like someone didn't like the report and therefore considered it racist, should have known better! - Chris

I never used to understand Squash courts

Now I do! [8] - Gentleman Publius (V)<,",>(V) 15:48, 16 January 2009 (EST)

Edit comment: "(A start-I'll add some stiff on advacned rules - lets etc. - later and maybe some history)" *snigger* Cantabrigian 07:35, 17 January 2009 (EST)

Latest Meritocratic Promotion!

MikeSalter[9], after 8 days and staggeringly few contributions [10] - Gentleman Publius (V)<,",>(V) 15:49, 16 January 2009 (EST)

Homskollar? EternalCritic 15:54, 16 January 2009 (EST)

Never heard of the guy (but then again, I barely follow CP/WIGO these days), but just by looking at the contribs list, my guess would be parodist:

08:56, 13 January 2009 (hist) (diff) Essay:Who are Smarter, Conservatives or Liberals?‎ (I advocate deleting this rubbish, though it could stand as an example of Liberal stupidity!) (top)

Plus contribs (part talk) on Gardasil, Best New Conservative Words, Barack Obama, Pseudoscience, Bible Retranslation Project‎... do I even have to tell you what those contribs contain? Congrats, Andy, it only took you two weeks to completely forget that it's maybe not the smartest idea to promote whoever parrots your views. --Sid 16:01, 16 January 2009 (EST)

Got to be a parodist. Probably one to watch, though- Bugler was a right larf while he lasted.--symuun^Words! 16:03, 16 January 2009 (EST)

Sock, says I. His first edit was a vandalism revert, so he'd obviously been looking round the site for something to revert to make him seem trustworthy. It's textbook Parodists Guide to Villainy stuff. He's been following Andy round the pages, so he clearly knows who holds the power at CP and he's obviously been seeking block rights. EddyP 16:04, 16 January 2009 (EST)

Well, I hope he's a reader of our parodist's guide. Some of us put some real effort into it, and we'd like to think it's getting some use. My last try was foiled by a tainted ip address. DickTurpis 16:09, 16 January 2009 (EST)

He's done well. I don't think anyone has managed blocking rights so incredibly quickly or with so little work. But he's followed the same route that enabled some others of us to gain rights: follow Andy, revert the most obvious vandalism. - Gentleman Publius (V)<,",>(V) 16:16, 16 January 2009 (EST)

My first thought was of course he was a parodist. It's right out of the parodist guide! I mean come on, I thought they read this site over there. He reverts a couple of articles, block away!Z3ro 16:55, 16 January 2009 (EST)

What do parodists do after they're promoted?-Diadochus 18:44, 16 January 2009 (EST)

Depends. I block quality editors and put absurd information in articles, while inciting distrust in other editors and admins via email. - Gentleman Publius (V)<,",>(V) 19:01, 16 January 2009 (EST)

Popular MO is to block every new user who does not strictly adhere to first name last initial "rule", and for those that do, block them for some other reason. DickTurpis 20:27, 16 January 2009 (EST)

They might want to consider mentioning that 'rule' on the create-an-account page, then. But that would require common sense and/or a desire not to ban people. --Gulik 03:04, 17 January 2009 (EST)

And in typical Andy style, looking at WesleyS's promotion. He's slaved away sorting out their categories - which new privilege might suit him best? Editing? Uploading? No... teh banhammer! --PsyGremlin_Whut? 03:43, 17 January 2009 (EST)

A subtle change to BrianCo's user page flagged up the other side of Andy's meritocracy in action. Wow, Andy! Talk about leadership. --  Lily ^{Ta, wack!} 10:50, 17 January 2009 (EST)

Ken Plugs Book, Self

Wow - I was just reading through the Wikipedia page, and I found this line (comma added by me): "Ken Myers, a recent graduate of Harvard Law School and author of Wikimmunity: Fitting the Communications Decency Act to Wikipedia[,][139] presented at the August 2006 Wikimania conference in Cambridge, Massachusetts[140] is known in the community as Ksm10."--Iduan 17:33, 16 January 2009 (EST)

Woops - my mistake - Myers, not DeMyers - sorry--Iduan 17:40, 16 January 2009 (EST)

Conservative being a Harvard law graduate would be as shocking as... well, as Andy being a Harvard law graduate, I suppose.--symuun^Words! 18:14, 16 January 2009 (EST)

More racism?

TK has finally had his say on the STD statistics....concluding that black people need "to re-think their lifestyle and moral choices." Their relative impoverishment compared to white people of course being their fault!? --Jammy 19:20, 16 January 2009 (EST)

Sweet Jesus--that's pretty harsh, even for TK. I'm pretty appalled here. No, wait, I'm completely appalled, here. TheoryOfPractice 20:32, 16 January 2009 (EST)

TK takes his job of destroying websites seriously. Ironically, he doesn't even know it. ħuman 22:56, 16 January 2009 (EST)

Any statement that must be buffered with "this isn't racist" probably is. Corry^{You can always tell a Milford man.} 23:01, 16 January 2009 (EST)

Freddie Mercury

With CP making a fuss over the 'hollywood values' of Boy George, a man with virtually nothing to do with hollywood, I had a look at their article on the 'issue' and was appalled to see this statement that has apparently been there for some time:

"Freddie Mercury of the rock group Queen, notorious for his flamboyant onstage presence, also contracted AIDS through his wildly promiscuous homosexual lifestyle, and subsequently perished of the self-inflicted condition."

How on earth can they call it self-inflicted???!!! --Jammy 22:07, 16 January 2009 (EST)

I'm sure the paleoconservative talking point is that, assuming homosexuality is a choice, anything that results from pursuing that lifestyle is self-inflicted.-Diadochus 22:31, 16 January 2009 (EST)

Freddie Mercury RULZORED!!! Until he got sick. Sorry Freddie, we miss you badly. ħuman 00:29, 17 January 2009 (EST)

Freddy Mercury at Live Aid STILL gives me goosebumps 25 years later....TheoryOfPractice 00:36, 17 January 2009 (EST)