The Best (Worst) Of Conservapedia

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > The Best (Worst) Of Conservapedia

Pesky Splinter: Feb 16, 2011; A worried pug.

Mind Loving Owl posted:

Is that still going any way?

Christ knows. They appear to still be at it, though, if the talk page is anything to go by.

The hubris and blasphemey is amazing though:

quote:

Liberal bias has become the single biggest distortion in modern Bible translations. There are three sources of errors in conveying biblical meaning are, in increasing amount:

*lack of precision in the original language, such as terms underdeveloped to convey new concepts introduced by Christ

*lack of precision in modern language

*translation bias, mainly of the liberal kind, in converting the original language to the modern one.

Experts in ancient languages are helpful in reducing the first type of error above, which is a vanishing source of error as scholarship advances understanding. English language linguists are helpful in reducing the second type of error, which also decreases due to an increasing vocabulary.
But the third -- and largest -- source of translation error requires conservative principles to reduce and eliminate.

As of 2009, there is no fully conservative translation of the Bible which satisfies the following ten guidelines:

*Framework against Liberal Bias: providing a strong framework that enables a thought-for-thought translation without corruption by liberal bias. For example, the Living Bible translation has liberal evolutionary bias; the widely used NIV translation has a pro-abortion bias.

*Not Emasculated: avoiding unisex, "gender inclusive" language, and other feminist distortions; preserve many references to the unborn child (the NIV deletes these)

*Not Dumbed Down: not dumbing down the reading level, or diluting the intellectual force and logic of Christianity[7]; the NIV is written at only the 7th grade level

*Utilize Terms which better capture original intent: using powerful new conservative terms to capture better the original intent; Defective translations use the word "comrade" three times as often as "volunteer"; similarly, updating words that have a change in meaning, such as "word", "peace", and "miracle".

*Combat Harmful Addiction: combating addiction by using modern terms for it, such as "gamble" rather than "cast lots"; using modern political terms, such as "register" rather than "enroll" for the census

*Accept the Logic of Hell: applying logic with its full force and effect, as in not denying or downplaying the very real existence of Hell or the Devil.

*Express Free Market Parables; explaining the numerous economic parables with their full free-market meaning

*Exclude Later-Inserted Inauthentic Passages: excluding the interpolated passages that liberals commonly put their own spin on, such as the adulteress story

*Credit Open-Mindedness of Disciples: crediting open-mindedness, often found in youngsters like the eyewitnesses Mark and John, the authors of two of the Gospels

*Prefer Conciseness over Liberal Wordiness: preferring conciseness to the liberal style of high word-to-substance ratio; avoid compound negatives and unnecessary ambiguities; prefer concise, consistent use of the word "Lord" rather than "Jehovah" or "Yahweh" or "Lord God."

The best one is to see them quibble and warp the 'eye of the needle' quote.
Compare:

King James Bible - Matthew 19:23 and 24 posted:

Then said Jesus unto his disciples, Verily I say unto you, That a rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven.

And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.

With,

Conservapedia's drivel posted:

Then Jesus told His students, "I tell you truly, that a rich man will enter the Kingdom of heaven only with difficulty.

And I say again to you, that it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for an idle miser to enter into the kingdom of God."

Their reasoning behind this is loving amazing:

quote:

"rich man" had a different connotation then than now. "Idle miser" better captures the original meaning.

No it didn't, Andy. And no it doesn't.

Pesky Splinter fucked around with this message at 13:02 on Oct 22, 2012

# ? Oct 22, 2012 12:59

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Jun 2, 2024 11:37

Parahexavoctal: Oct 10, 2004; I AM NOT BEING PAID TO CORRECT OTHER PEOPLE'S POSTS! DONKEY!!

Here's something interesting: Every page created by Conservative for the past four months or so.

also, I'm looking at the homework pages.

http://www.conservapedia.com/Am_Govt_Homework_5_Answers_-_Student_Eight posted:

8. Is it too easy or too difficult to amend the U.S. Constitution? Explain, while mentioning the example of the ERA.

It is not too easy or too difficult to amend the U.S Constitution, but it is perfectly right.

Extra credit (answer two of the following five questions):

"It is better for 50 guilty men to go free than for one innocent man to be unjustly convicted." Do you agree? Discuss.

I disagree with this quote. I think that the 50 guilty men that are freed can do what they were guilty of again, thinking that they would have the same treatment as the time before. On the other hand, if one innocent man was unjustly convicted, the man will know that he was innocent, and can have peace with himself.

Parahexavoctal fucked around with this message at 13:31 on Oct 22, 2012

# ? Oct 22, 2012 13:21

Spacedad: Sep 11, 2001; We go play orbital catch around the curvature of the earth, son.

I love the fact that they keep trying to retcon Jesus with Atlas Shrugged. :allears:

# ? Oct 22, 2012 13:30

prefect: Sep 11, 2001; No one, Woodhouse.
No one.; Dead Man’s Band

Parahexavoctal posted:

Here's something interesting: Every page created by Conservative for the past four months or so.

also, I'm looking at the homework pages.

Wow. It's okay to convict an innocent man, because he knows he's innocent and that makes it all okay. Holky gently caress. :psyboom:

# ? Oct 22, 2012 13:40

sicarius: Dec 12, 2002; In brightest day,
In blackest night,
My smugface makes,
women wet....

That's how it goes, right?

prefect posted:

Wow. It's okay to convict an innocent man, because he knows he's innocent and that makes it all okay. Holky gently caress.

Someone should tell Andy that he needs to read some Madison. Seeing as how Madison directly addressed this idea. Except Madison said 100 men. Oh, and Madison liked our judicial system (at least as it was going to exist in his mind) because it would set 100 guilty men free to keep an innocent man from suffering a loss of freedoms.

If you're going to indulge in ancestor worship, at least be honest about it. These guys came over on boats to except an oppressive, conservative government. Also, they came to get rich and own slaves and stuff, but still. Rich white dudes sailed over on boats to be, even if it was just them and not their women or people who looked different, a little bit more free. They started a liberal (representative) democracy. We improved it with time by, you know, making it more liberal. We let women vote and extended full citizens rights to minorities.

I know, I know... I'm arguing classic liberal versus American liberal, but so few of these wingnuts know the difference it's fun to scream at them that Washington, Jefferson, Adams, Madison, Hamilton, Hancock, and so on down the loving line were all dirty liberals. Compared to the aristocratic leadership of the country they defected from, they were shockingly liberal. So liberal people were shot.

It's worth noting that when I bring up to these blowhards that I have an advanced degree in political science (specifically political theory) and that I wrote my master's thesis on organic law (which is basically how to write and construct a constitution) which lent me to, you know, committing the Constitution of the United States to memory, they just tell me I have a liberal bias because of our awful universities. Ignore the fact that two of my professors are registered Republicans and my thesis adviser was a libertarian. Setting those facts aside I'm a dirty loving know-it-all liberal.

sicarius fucked around with this message at 13:58 on Oct 22, 2012

# ? Oct 22, 2012 13:54

RagnarokAngel: Oct 5, 2006; Black Magic Extraordinaire

prefect posted:

Wow. It's okay to convict an innocent man, because he knows he's innocent and that makes it all okay. Holky gently caress.

He's going to Heaven so really what happens here doesn't really matter. :v:

# ? Oct 22, 2012 13:55

bobkatt013: Oct 8, 2006; Youâre telling me Peter Parker is ...... Spider-man!?

I always get a feeling that these people think that the Pilgrims had the best government since it oppressed minorities and was all about god.

# ? Oct 22, 2012 13:58

sicarius: Dec 12, 2002; In brightest day,
In blackest night,
My smugface makes,
women wet....

That's how it goes, right?

bobkatt013 posted:

I always get a feeling that these people think that the Pilgrims had the best government since it oppressed minorities and was all about god.

And also possibly burned witches... or stoned them.... or crushed them in between two slabs of rock. All that stuff was grrrrrrrrreaaaaat.

# ? Oct 22, 2012 14:00

Mind Loving Owl: Sep 5, 2012; The regeneration is failing! Hooooo...

Having Andy teach your kid should be grounds for CPS to swoop in, surely it's failing to provide an education. I love how in the marry a conservative thing, it assumes all women want a man who "obeys the ten commandments".

I wonder if they'd stick to the honour and obey perfectly crap if the man was liberal and the woman conservative.

Edit: Witches weren't burned in America, actually literal witch burning was never really common, hangings and beheading was preferred. They did burn the bodies a lot to prevent vampires.

# ? Oct 22, 2012 14:01

RagnarokAngel: Oct 5, 2006; Black Magic Extraordinaire

Or even better, that he somehow doesn't seem to acknowledge that there are liberal atheist women too who probably would think twice about marrying a zealous Christian man.

And yeah on the witch thing I never got why that seems to be a thing planted on America. The Salem Witch trials were an isolated incident that happened for a season or so, not over like several years. While I realize witch suspicion happened in other places Salem is usually considered the biggest and that didn't even go on that long or kill that many people. It went on far longer and a far higher body count in Europe.

# ? Oct 22, 2012 14:05

Mind Loving Owl: Sep 5, 2012; The regeneration is failing! Hooooo...

Plus the witch thing in Salem is probably more of a symptom of class warfare then anything else.

Do remember the awesome story of the guy who refused to plead guilt or innocence during the trials so his family would not have their inheritance revoked if he was found guilty. He was executed by pressing, his last words?

"More Weight!"

Also surprised I haven't seen a bagging on hyphenated surnames yet.

# ? Oct 22, 2012 14:09

sicarius: Dec 12, 2002; In brightest day,
In blackest night,
My smugface makes,
women wet....

That's how it goes, right?

RagnarokAngel posted:

Or even better, that he somehow doesn't seem to acknowledge that there are liberal atheist women too who probably would think twice about marrying a zealous Christian man.

And yeah on the witch thing I never got why that seems to be a thing planted on America. The Salem Witch trials were an isolated incident that happened for a season or so, not over like several years. While I realize witch suspicion happened in other places Salem is usually considered the biggest and that didn't even go on that long or kill that many people. It went on far longer and a far higher body count in Europe.

I wouldn't really say it was planted here. It was something that happened in Salem and other nearby areas for about 5 months. It happened in Europe as well, only like 300 years earlier.

Salem occurred in the 1690s (if my American history is up to snuff) and the European Inquisitions were mostly confined to the 12th- early 15th centuries. I know it happened into the 1800s in a few very isolated incidents, but that seems to be more due to the influence and proximity to the Catholic Church than an entire village of people murdering some folks. It "gets planted" here because it's a really weird occurrence that stands out in American history of people being put to death because of religion.

# ? Oct 22, 2012 14:24

bobkatt013: Oct 8, 2006; Youâre telling me Peter Parker is ...... Spider-man!?

sicarius posted:

I wouldn't really say it was planted here. It was something that happened in Salem and other nearby areas for about 5 months. It happened in Europe as well, only like 300 years earlier.

Salem occurred in the 1690s (if my American history is up to snuff) and the European Inquisitions were mostly confined to the 12th- early 15th centuries. I know it happened into the 1800s in a few very isolated incidents, but that seems to be more due to the influence and proximity to the Catholic Church than an entire village of people murdering some folks. It "gets planted" here because it's a really weird occurrence that stands out in American history of people being put to death because of religion.

Also in Boston Quakers used to get hanged in Boston Commons.

bobkatt013 fucked around with this message at 14:50 on Oct 22, 2012

# ? Oct 22, 2012 14:44

sicarius: Dec 12, 2002; In brightest day,
In blackest night,
My smugface makes,
women wet....

That's how it goes, right?

bobkatt013 posted:

Also in Boston Quakers used to get hung in Boston Commons.

I did not know that. Odd.

# ? Oct 22, 2012 14:45

prefect: Sep 11, 2001; No one, Woodhouse.
No one.; Dead Man’s Band

bobkatt013 posted:

Also in Boston Quakers used to get hung in Boston Commons.

They were hanged; I have no idea how large their penises were. :haw:

# ? Oct 22, 2012 14:47

sexpig by night: Sep 8, 2011; by Azathoth

prefect posted:

They were hanged; I have no idea how large their penises were.

"Ladies, I'd like to assure you my chastity is entirely due to my own choice." :smug:

# ? Oct 22, 2012 14:58

CommieGIR: Aug 22, 2006; The blue glow is a feature, not a bug; Pillbug

Mind Loving Owl posted:

"More Weight!"

Giles Corey, who at the time was already an old man as he died at 81 years of age. Total badass.

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

You have to remember too, there is a theory saying that Ann Putnam was coerced by her parents to accuse people with whom the Putnam's had rivalries or were feuding with so that they might be eliminated.

CommieGIR fucked around with this message at 15:15 on Oct 22, 2012

# ? Oct 22, 2012 15:05

Ferrosol: Nov 8, 2010; Notorious J.A.M

sicarius posted:

Quite wrong, Up until the start of the renaissance and the reformation the idea of witchcraft was considered to be heretical because it was felt that magic of any sort could only come from god and not the minions of Satan. Indeed Saint Augustine questioned the very idea of magic's existence and at least among the (educated) majority witchcraft trials were almost non existent. It's only really with the rise of the reformation that we start to see the growth in the number of witchcraft trials. As the power of the catholic church monopoly over theology crumbles though more beliefs in witchcraft come into being. I don't have my notes handy so I can't go into much more detail but as an interesting factoid for you, Its surprising how large scale outbreaks of witchcraft hysteria track surprisingly well with political instability. The major outbreak of witch burning in Norfolk coincided with the bloodiest battles of the British civil war for example and the major outbreaks in France track fairly well with the upheavals in the French wars of religion.

# ? Oct 22, 2012 15:07

Mind Loving Owl: Sep 5, 2012; The regeneration is failing! Hooooo...

I thought for the most part the idea was Satan couldn't physically alter reality but twist minds and weave illusions.

Like werewolves didn't turn into wolves they were just human cannibals who the Devil made people see them as wolves to scare the poo poo out of people.

# ? Oct 22, 2012 15:11

Lassitude: Oct 21, 2003

The Puritans came to the US because they wanted to persecute people who didn't adhere to their belief systems. They put to death people for such trivial things as slightly resembling a newborn pig and thus being accused of having lain with the animal. The pig in question was even used as a witness during the trial.

The early American colonists were dicks and killed people for dumb things relatively often.

# ? Oct 22, 2012 16:30

CommieGIR: Aug 22, 2006; The blue glow is a feature, not a bug; Pillbug

Lassitude posted:

The Puritans came to the US because they wanted to persecute people who didn't adhere to their belief systems. They put to death people for such trivial things as slightly resembling a newborn pig and thus being accused of having lain with the animal. The pig in question was even used as a witness during the trial.

The early American colonists were dicks and killed people for dumb things relatively often.

Exactly. And the irony was delicious, because they left England for being persecuted for their beliefs.

# ? Oct 22, 2012 16:34

Mind Loving Owl: Sep 5, 2012; The regeneration is failing! Hooooo...

Also they gave their kids stupid names like:

Jesus-Christ-came- into-the-world- to-save

If-Christ-had- not-died-for- thee-thou-hadst- been-damned

The-Lord-is-near

And I thought Jackson with a x was bad.

# ? Oct 22, 2012 16:36

CommieGIR: Aug 22, 2006; The blue glow is a feature, not a bug; Pillbug

Mind Loving Owl posted:

Also they gave their kids stupid names like:

Jesus-Christ-came- into-the-world- to-save

If-Christ-had- not-died-for- thee-thou-hadst- been-damned

The-Lord-is-near

And I thought Jackson with a x was bad.

Israel Putnam (cousin of Ann Putnam, one of the 'witnesses' of the Salem Witch Trials and)

# ? Oct 22, 2012 16:37

Parahexavoctal: Oct 10, 2004; I AM NOT BEING PAID TO CORRECT OTHER PEOPLE'S POSTS! DONKEY!!

prefect posted:

Wow. It's okay to convict an innocent man, because he knows he's innocent and that makes it all okay. Holy gently caress.

"And what if that happened to you?"

"It wouldn't."

"But --"

"I'd be innocent, see? So they wouldn't convict me, because I'm innocent."

"But you said it would be okay for the innocent to be convicted."

"MISTER SCHLAFLY, THERE'S A LIBERAL TRYING TO DECEIVE ME!"

# ? Oct 22, 2012 17:16

Mind Loving Owl: Sep 5, 2012; The regeneration is failing! Hooooo...

Parahexavoctal posted:

"And what if that happened to you?"

"It wouldn't."

"But --"

"I'd be innocent, see? So they wouldn't convict me, because I'm innocent."

"But you said it would be okay for the innocent to be convicted."

"MISTER SCHLAFLY, THERE'S A LIBERAL TRYING TO DECEIVE ME!"

The sad thing is I can see some broken kid saying that. He goes on about how countless Einsteins have been aborted, while he has stunted almost as many.

# ? Oct 22, 2012 17:17

MeLKoR: Dec 23, 2004; by FactsAreUseless

Parahexavoctal posted:

Here's something interesting: Every page created by Conservative for the past four months or so.

also, I'm looking at the homework pages.

Terrible as Freep is at least they don't allow this sort of insane blog pimping. Good god, it's like a turdoboros of Homeric proportions. Is there any "article" left on Conservapedia that doesn't have a link to one of Conservative's pages?

# ? Oct 22, 2012 17:18

Smirr: Jun 28, 2012

Was poking around some of their Debate pages and came across this beautiful gem, on women in the military:

quote:

Women should be in. No straight guy would ever shoot a real hot chick across the battlefield, providing attractive female combatants with a sort of impenetrable armor. --SashaT 17:06, 26 March 2008 (EDT)

I love it because it's simultaneously an argument against gay people in the military! This is actually kind of ingenious (by Conservapedia's standards). And looking at the time stamp, I can, for the first time ever, kind of see Andy's point about people getting dumber and dumber as time goes on. It's certainly true on his site.

# ? Oct 22, 2012 17:40

AtraMorS: Feb 29, 2004; If at the end of a war story you feel that some tiny bit of rectitude has been salvaged from the larger waste, you have been made the victim of a very old and terrible lie

RagnarokAngel posted:

And yeah on the witch thing I never got why that seems to be a thing planted on America. The Salem Witch trials were an isolated incident that happened for a season or so, not over like several years. While I realize witch suspicion happened in other places Salem is usually considered the biggest and that didn't even go on that long or kill that many people. It went on far longer and a far higher body count in Europe.

Keep in mind that the thing that made Salem different was the whole atmosphere of paranoia that accompanied it. While witch burnings in Europe are great examples of people taking rash action based on superstition and nonsense, Salem had the extra process of naming names; indeed, since confession and naming others could get you out of an execution, it's pretty easy to argue that this was the preferred outcome, and it simultaneously placated (bad guy got caught), justified (bad guys are real), and perpetuated (there are more bad guys out there) the witch hunt mentality. Inevitably, it got to the point where those who maintained their innocence had to pay with their lives. You see a similar mentality in the inquisitions, but hell, a lot of the times those confessions weren't even considered valid unless they were given under torture, so there's this element of cruelty in an inquisition that makes the "Salem" mentality sort of unique.

Basically what I'm saying is that there's a slight difference between "burning witches" and a "witch hunt" in terms of idioms. Also, The Crucible is a really well-known play in the US, so it makes sense that it would be a popular metaphor.

# ? Oct 22, 2012 20:48

bobkatt013: Oct 8, 2006; Youâre telling me Peter Parker is ...... Spider-man!?

AtraMorS posted:

Keep in mind that the thing that made Salem different was the whole atmosphere of paranoia that accompanied it. While witch burnings in Europe are great examples of people taking rash action based on superstition and nonsense, Salem had the extra process of naming names; indeed, since confession and naming others could get you out of an execution, it's pretty easy to argue that this was the preferred outcome, and it simultaneously placated (bad guy got caught), justified (bad guys are real), and perpetuated (there are more bad guys out there) the witch hunt mentality. Inevitably, it got to the point where those who maintained their innocence had to pay with their lives. You see a similar mentality in the inquisitions, but hell, a lot of the times those confessions weren't even considered valid unless they were given under torture, so there's this element of cruelty in an inquisition that makes the "Salem" mentality sort of unique.

Basically what I'm saying is that there's a slight difference between "burning witches" and a "witch hunt" in terms of idioms. Also, The Crucible is a really well-known play in the US, so it makes sense that it would be a popular metaphor.

The hate the Crucible since the idea that the communist witch hunt just like the real witch hunts were bullshit and horrible things.

# ? Oct 22, 2012 20:53

Guilty Spork: Feb 26, 2011; Thunder rolled. It rolled a six.

Let's see what Conservapedia has to say about The Crucible:

quote:

The Crucible (1953), written by leftist atheist playwright Arthur Miller, is an attack on American Christianity and the fight against the communism. It is a fictionalized portrayal of the Salem Witch Trials and serves as an allegorical attack to the anti-communist agenda of Republican Senator Joseph McCarthy. [1]. The plot follows the protagonist John Proctor (a devout Christian, though unable to recite the Ten Commandments[2], but this may be due to his previous adulterous affair with Abigail Williams, a hysterical primary accuser) and his wife Elizabeth Proctor, along with several other members of the community, as they are systematically prosecuted for witchcraft.

Although Miller's targets may have been conservative, the kind of behavior he attacks is also exhibited by liberals, especially those quick to condemn people for politically incorrect statements.

They're also really angry that people might have actually taken issue with McCarthy.

# ? Oct 22, 2012 21:46

sexpig by night: Sep 8, 2011; by Azathoth

"a devout Christian, though unable to recite the Ten Commandments[2], but this may be due to his previous adulterous affair with Abigail Williams, a hysterical primary accuser"

So what, loving a lady outside of marriage screws the 10 commandments out of you?

# ? Oct 22, 2012 22:04

CommieGIR: Aug 22, 2006; The blue glow is a feature, not a bug; Pillbug

Guilty Spork posted:

Let's see what Conservapedia has to say about The Crucible:

They're also really angry that people might have actually taken issue with McCarthy.

I think the scary part is that they are basically attempting to play off the Salem Witch trials as fiction.

http://www.conservapedia.com/Salem_Witch_Trials

Holy poo poo, this is sad. Its like they are making excuses!

"Yeah it happened, but nothing really happened, it was all cool."

quote:

The trials are fascinating to ordinary people and to professional historians. Latner (2007) refute Boyer and Nissenbaum (1974) claim that the 1692 witch-hunt was rooted in an economic-based factionalism between Reverend Samuel Parris's agrarian supporters in Salem Village and the capitalistic opponents to witch-hunts in Salem Town. Latner's analysis of multiple tax lists, rather than just the 1695 record used by Boyer and Nissenbaum, shows that the Salem Possessed book exaggerated the degree that Salem Town's residents experienced financial advancement and the extent to which Salem Village inhabitants suffered economic decline. Similarly, the article suggests that economic status does not necessarily reveal someone's feelings about or connection to capitalism.[8]

I....wha...Salem Witch trials....Capitalism? What the hell is going on here?

CommieGIR fucked around with this message at 22:14 on Oct 22, 2012

# ? Oct 22, 2012 22:10

nsaP: May 4, 2004; alright?

So I saw on NPR that Castro released some pictures cause there's been rumors of his death in Cuba

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2012/10/22/163390606/castro-brushes-off-death-rumors-proves-hes-still-alive-with-pictures

I wonder what conservapedia says about him still?

http://www.conservapedia.com/Castro

Nope, still dead since 2009. Musta been another lookalike. I'd copy bits of their article but if you haven't read it yet you should, the section on his death is great.

# ? Oct 22, 2012 22:13

sexpig by night: Sep 8, 2011; by Azathoth

God I love the Castro poo poo, whenever anyone goes 'uh this is insane, you can't present this as fact...' Andy just runs in all 'well PROVE he's alive then, no that's a body double, PROVE it isn't!'

# ? Oct 22, 2012 22:15

Smirr: Jun 28, 2012

drat, looking good there, Fidel. :unsmith:

I love how their article on him links to a Castro Death Watch blog that very much treats him as being alive.

# ? Oct 22, 2012 22:24

Strudel Man: May 19, 2003; ROME DID NOT HAVE ROBOTS, FUCKWIT

nsaP posted:

Nope, still dead since 2009. Musta been another lookalike. I'd copy bits of their article but if you haven't read it yet you should, the section on his death is great.

Christ, look at this, from the talk page.

quote:

I don't really care either way since I don't have a horse in this race. If you'll notice, I'm just asking you questions, not taking a position one way or the other, so I'm not in liberal denial, whatever that is. I'm just concerned that you're not addressing that the president of Argentina met with him earlier this year. Hugo Chavez met with him more recently. Are these men liars? Hectoruribe 16:03, 30 December 2009 (EST)

Well, I guess your statement "I don't really care either way" constitutes the bonafide end of your argument. Karajou 16:07, 30 December 2009 (EST)

I'm sorry I came off as flippant there. I don't care whether he's alive or dead, to be honest, but I do care that the article reflect the truth instead of speculation. Thanks for pointing out my error. Hectoruribe 16:14, 30 December 2009 (EST)

What you need to do is to read the Bible as you said you try to do on your user page, specifically Revelation 3:14-18; it tells of what Jesus will do to a church that "doesn't really care one way or the other":

# ? Oct 22, 2012 22:36

nsaP: May 4, 2004; alright?

The burst of some people seeing this for the first time has been a bit refreshing. I've been following conservapedia for a while now and I guess you just start to get used to it. Reading stuff on there is almost like going to a family function for me. There's a lot of messed up people and you know exactly what they're all going to do.

With a lot of the pages being copied here I find myself thinking "Oh that's just conservative..." like he was my pothead uncle or something.

# ? Oct 22, 2012 22:46

jojoinnit: Dec 13, 2010; Strength and speed, that's why you're a special agent.

Smirr posted:

drat, looking good there, Fidel.

I love how their article on him links to a Castro Death Watch blog that very much treats him as being alive.

The vast majority of sources cited contradict their actual point unless its just an editorial on wnd.com.

# ? Oct 22, 2012 22:53

BioMe: Aug 9, 2012

Smirr posted:

drat, looking good there, Fidel.

I love how their article on him links to a Castro Death Watch blog that very much treats him as being alive.

Haha, Castro Death Watch? Are these people right wing nutters or his fans?

fake-edit:
A bunch of Americans just waiting for Fidel Castro to die of old age and constantly (and gleefully) going "any day now!" for several years. I still call it a tribute.

# ? Oct 22, 2012 23:49

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Jun 2, 2024 11:37

sexpig by night: Sep 8, 2011; by Azathoth

jojoinnit posted:

The vast majority of sources cited contradict their actual point unless its just an editorial on wnd.com.

Seriously my favorite game is 'read Conservapedia sources'. Most of them either link to Conservapedia essays/other articles, Amazon pages for books, or articles that don't have what they claim.

# ? Oct 22, 2012 23:55

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > The Best (Worst) Of Conservapedia

«‹›441 »