Trifoil posted:How about children? Most people probably consider them socially inferior, but I don´t think that most people necessarily hates them. but we also acknowledge that children grow up and change and become social equals, whereas Females and Lesser Races never do. [do I really need to specify that I don't actually hold the views implicit in the phrase "Females and Lesser Races"? ... yeah, I probably do.]
|
|
# ? Mar 17, 2014 19:21 |
|
|
# ? Jun 11, 2024 12:44 |
|
I'm comfortable with describing someone who opposes the education of children, considers them only good as a source of unpaid labor, and who approves of sexual violence or murder to terrorize them into submission as a hater of children, yes.
|
# ? Mar 17, 2014 19:24 |
Oh my god. Oh my loving god. I've found what is possibly the most magnificently stupid poo poo on Conservapedia. You remember the Conservapedia Bible Project, where they tried retranslating the Bible? Now they've got the Conservative Dictionary Project, necessary in order to combat Liberal Bias in Popular Dictionaries. And they've got twenty-six pages, each of which is full of "true conservative meanings" and "false liberal redefinitions". the Conservative Dictionary Project entry on "Compassion" posted:
the Conservative Dictionary Project entry on "working class" posted:True conservative meaning - communist concept intended to turn workers against management.
|
|
# ? Mar 18, 2014 04:42 |
|
I love how they specify that caring about people is liberal as well. These people would eat babies if you paid them.
|
# ? Mar 18, 2014 04:49 |
|
I'm pretty sure baby eating is something they do for free.
|
# ? Mar 18, 2014 04:54 |
|
It's taking "Feed a man a fish and you feed him for a day, teach a man to fish and feed him for a lifetime." to its extreme. While it's true that teaching someone a valuable skill probably will do more for them in the long run, conservatives think the "short term" gain is just doing harm.
|
# ? Mar 18, 2014 04:55 |
Conservative Dictionary Project's entry on 'logic' posted:
|
|
# ? Mar 18, 2014 04:59 |
|
It's true, that's on my logic syllabus. DAMMIT CONSERVAPEDIA, EXPOSED AGAIN.
|
# ? Mar 18, 2014 05:03 |
|
Ok that has to be a troll. It has to be.
|
# ? Mar 18, 2014 05:07 |
|
QuarkJets posted:If you can think of one or two Greek and Arab figures that satisfy your criteria, then my point is already proven. There are more than one or two, but disproving the idea that science only existed from the Age of Enlightenment onward, specifically with Newton for some reason, only needed one counterexample. Not really. I don't know if this is because you're coming into the argument late or because you've missed this point but the argument isn't over whether science can possibly exist outside a Christian framework, the argument is about whether Christian beliefs and theology in the early modern era were a necessary prerequisite for the scientific revolution to occur. Pointing out the existence of a limited number of pseudo-scientists who share a family resemblance to the methods eventually pioneered during the Newtonian revolution hardly qualifies as a definitive answer to this question. quote:(To start, the field of Aristotelian physics and its countless practitioners/contributors nicely satisfies your criteria, being a set of laws based on empirical observations that was developed millenia ago. If you want to look at non-European cultures specifically, you could go look at China's Scientific Revolution, lasting from 600-900AD) Aristotelian physics is closer to philosophy than it is to what we would recognize as modern science. His explanation of gravity, for instance, was that all substances have a natural tendency to move toward their "natural" place in the universe. While he could point to natural phenomena that might be taken as broadly supporting this view, i.e. stones fall and air bubbles move up through water, its hardly an example of what we'd think of as modern science. It seems like you're reducing science to any kind of attempt to explain natural phenomena that doesn't immediately invoke the supernatural, which is not really a definition I'm comfortable with. Science is a specific set of procedures, not just a general commitment to investigate the world. And if we want to understand how those procedures developed we need to look at the actual time and place when they emerged. it feels like you're trying to water down the definition of science a great deal.
|
# ? Mar 18, 2014 05:11 |
|
Also, in the spirit of contributing something to the thread other than a derail, this was pretty amazing:quote:George Orwell, whose real name was Eric Arthur Blair (June 25, 1903 - January 21, 1950), was a leading and open-minded English writer, essayist and journalist who became critical of his ideological allies on the left. He hated imperialism[1] and grew increasingly conservative, adopting and raising a child and becoming a member of the Church of England.[2] The tension between the conservative Orwell grew to become, and the democratic socialist he still allowed others to view him as, may account for some of his interesting word inventions like "doublethink". Because of his liberal past, Orwell's increasingly conservative writings were accepted and praised by the clueless liberal intelligentsia. Sure he was a socialist, but he wasn't really/ a socialist, he was actually a conservative who was fooling those stupid liberals.
|
# ? Mar 18, 2014 05:35 |
|
Helsing posted:Also, in the spirit of contributing something to the thread other than a derail, this was pretty amazing: If you're a Socialist/Communist/Liberal/Slightly Left Wing, you agree with everything Stalin did. George Orwell didn't like Stalin, ergo he was a conservative.
|
# ? Mar 18, 2014 06:33 |
|
Thanks Helsing. Content: quote:Science consists of three aspects: first, it provides systematic descriptions of everything in the world and all of human experience, generally considered as scientific knowledge. Second, there are the men (and in more recent times, women) of science who have amassed these descriptions and communicate them to everyone else. Third, there are the methods by which they carry out this work (see scientific method). Science can be divided into two areas: natural science, dealing with the physical, natural world,[1] and social science, dealing with society and human nature.
|
# ? Mar 18, 2014 07:06 |
|
This is the pure essence of Conservapedia in a nutshell:quote:Ash Wednesday is tomorrow. I was just wondering if you had any plans for the main page to reflect this occasion, as we begin our Lenten journey. GregG 21:39, 4 March 2014 (EST)
|
# ? Mar 18, 2014 14:53 |
|
A brief note that it's Ash Wednesday coupled with a few puff sentences about what it means for Christian adherents should be the easiest thing in the world to write. Oh wait, nope, gonna go write five pages on why the word "Jello" is liberal.
|
# ? Mar 18, 2014 16:54 |
More of the Conservative Dictionary Project posted:
What exactly are they arguing is false about the liberal definition of "Conservapedia" ? more of the same posted:cyber-terrorism
|
|
# ? Mar 18, 2014 19:05 |
|
Even easier "And so it begins The Great Fast, is this why Penn Jillette can't get Indian ladies with luscious hair? See also Atheists and Obesity".
|
# ? Mar 18, 2014 19:08 |
|
quote:welfare quote:woman quote:feminism
|
# ? Mar 18, 2014 19:08 |
|
quote:Bush Derangement Syndrome (BDS) quote:Bias quote:Christian quote:hate crime quote:Machismo quote:Obamacare quote:Openmindedness
|
# ? Mar 18, 2014 19:29 |
|
The administration that set the tone of the 21st century - 70% good 30% bad.
|
# ? Mar 18, 2014 19:33 |
|
I absolutely refuse to believe those are not trolls. I don't think even Conservapedia would flat out say "women are not equal to men" that bluntly.
|
# ? Mar 18, 2014 19:55 |
Mr.Unique-Name posted:I absolutely refuse to believe those are not trolls. I don't think even Conservapedia would flat out say "women are not equal to men" that bluntly. ... do you know how Phyllis Schlafly became famous in the first place?
|
|
# ? Mar 18, 2014 20:31 |
|
Mr.Unique-Name posted:I absolutely refuse to believe those are not trolls. I don't think even Conservapedia would flat out say "women are not equal to men" that bluntly. Someone's new to the Schlafly world. He has in the past "that bluntly" said women weren't equal
|
# ? Mar 18, 2014 20:38 |
|
quote:Another creationist classic has been created by Dr. Don Batten: Arguments evolutionists should not use.[2] Next on the news, our sources report that a youtube commentator described a christian apologetics video as "Neat". Regarding the recent findings of the Bicep2 crew "mum" is the word.
|
# ? Mar 18, 2014 20:52 |
|
quote:hate crime I love this one, they didn't even bother to define the term itself. What's a dictionary? Oh, just list things that we don't like about thing And guess who was the real racists all along? quote:Racism But wait a second... quote:society
|
# ? Mar 18, 2014 21:03 |
|
Mr.Unique-Name posted:I absolutely refuse to believe those are not trolls. I don't think even Conservapedia would flat out say "women are not equal to men" that bluntly. Anne Colter has seriously, honestly, and vehemently argued that women should never have been given the right to vote. Let that sink in.
|
# ? Mar 18, 2014 21:05 |
|
SocketWrench posted:Someone's new to the Schlafly world. Didn't he write separate homeschooling exams for boys and girls?
|
# ? Mar 18, 2014 21:19 |
|
ToxicSlurpee posted:Anne Colter has seriously, honestly, and vehemently argued that women should never have been given the right to vote. I don't think that Ann Coulter is actually all that serious or honest. She'll say whatever outrageous thing she can to make a buck. The crowd she's riling up to buy her book certainly exists and shouldn't be dismissed, but Ann herself probably doesn't believe a lot of the things she's said over the years.
|
# ? Mar 18, 2014 21:43 |
|
cafel posted:I don't think that Ann Coulter is actually all that serious or honest. She'll say whatever outrageous thing she can to make a buck. The crowd she's riling up to buy her book certainly exists and shouldn't be dismissed, but Ann herself probably doesn't believe a lot of the things she's said over the years. Oh I know but the problem is that there are enough people that agree with her that her show is popular.
|
# ? Mar 18, 2014 21:46 |
|
"There is no such thing as society" -- Noted Liberal Margaret Thatcher
|
# ? Mar 18, 2014 21:50 |
|
Helsing posted:"There is no such thing as society" -- Noted Liberal Margaret Thatcher Yeah but duh, she's a woman and therefore cannot be expected to be as reasonable and logical as asdwhochrist I can't do this, even when talking about a person as loathsome as Maggie Thatcher.
|
# ? Mar 18, 2014 22:57 |
|
Captain_Maclaine posted:Yeah but duh, she's a woman and therefore cannot be expected to be as reasonable and logical as asdwhochrist I can't do this, even when talking about a person as loathsome as Maggie Thatcher. If you badmouth her, her ghost will come steal your milk.
|
# ? Mar 18, 2014 23:20 |
|
Helsing posted:"There is no such thing as society" -- Noted Liberal Margaret Thatcher As an American, I find it amazing that every time I believe that my opinion of Thatcher has hit the lowest point it can reach, I find out about something she did or said that manages to drive it lower. She somehow manages to make Reagan look palatable and I'm of the firm opinion that he was Satan incarnate.
|
# ? Mar 18, 2014 23:21 |
|
cafel posted:As an American, I find it amazing that every time I believe that my opinion of Thatcher has hit the lowest point it can reach, I find out about something she did or said that manages to drive it lower. She somehow manages to make Reagan look palatable and I'm of the firm opinion that he was Satan incarnate. Reagan was often so senile he didn't know what he was doing. Thatcher had no such excuse.
|
# ? Mar 18, 2014 23:29 |
|
Thatcher was also a class-traitor in a way that Reagan was not. Thinking of that famous burn, let's see what CP has to say about Zhou Enlai: quote:Zhou Enlai (1898–1976) was a leading communist in China who served as Premier of the People's Republic of China from 1949 until his death. He also served as China's foreign minister from 1949 to 1958. Zhou was portrayed as a selfless hero to the Chinese people. During the Cultural Revolution, Zhou used his influence to try to shield innocents from the increasingly violent Red Guard. He began to end China's isolation from the world when he invited an American table tennis team to tour China in 1971. Not much. I was hoping for some Black Panther references. Or maybe Kissinger?
|
# ? Mar 18, 2014 23:41 |
|
cafel posted:As an American, I find it amazing that every time I believe that my opinion of Thatcher has hit the lowest point it can reach, I find out about something she did or said that manages to drive it lower. She somehow manages to make Reagan look palatable and I'm of the firm opinion that he was Satan incarnate. Speaking of Kissinger, their article is pretty boring. It needs to be spiced up. Quick, somebody send Andy or Conservative the Get Your War On comics about Kissinger.
|
# ? Mar 19, 2014 00:01 |
|
quote:xenophobia True conservative meaning - fear and hatred of strangers or foreigners or of anything that is strange or foreign Huh... that looks strangely familiar... dictionary.com posted:xen·o·pho·bi·a For gently caress's sake, you can't take a "false liberal definition", swap two words around and say it's a different definition. I expected a bit more effort than that. But for as terrible as the dictionary project is, there is one term both sides can apparently agree on: quote:propaganda
|
# ? Mar 19, 2014 00:02 |
|
quote:Political aspects of relativity
|
# ? Mar 19, 2014 00:49 |
|
The article by Lawrence Tribe seems pretty dumb, but that's not an argument against relativity, it's an argument against misusing scientific concepts. Silver2195 fucked around with this message at 01:05 on Mar 19, 2014 |
# ? Mar 19, 2014 01:03 |
|
|
# ? Jun 11, 2024 12:44 |
|
"Extrapolating theories to metaphorically justify personal political agendas? That's my racket!"
|
# ? Mar 19, 2014 01:20 |