Printable View
www.conservapedia.com
This says it all really. The idea that for fundamentalists, the only acceptable sources of information are the ones they control and censor entirely. If these people weren't pulling the strings of the world, they would be funny.
:help:
What do you mean, "not funny"? They're a riot.
Indeed - quite funny.
Admit it Idaho, you added the "Legacy" section to the entry on Bill Clinton :stare:
I'm becoming a trigger-happy moderator.
I was just about to edit this thread, thinking the title indicated another of those Dutch groups wanting to protect paedophiles.
Fragony, it's all your fault.
:wink:
Sure blame whitey ~;)
Just for comparison with the entry on Clinton I read up the entry on GWB ... uhm ... very concise ...
Looks like the Fundamentalistcrackpotapedia to me. Is there a flat map of the Earth in there or does it list July 25 2031 BC as the Earths birthday?
It's rubbish
I clicked on the entry for "Age of Metal" and there was no Black Sabbath, no Saxon, no Slayer, just some garbage about copper and bronze tools.
And you can't edit without logging in, chizz.
A much better source of information to fit this audience is found below with plenty of material for every persuasion.
Warning, some sections might offend the sensitives in attendance so do not read if you are sensitive and will complain later that you made the decision to click on the below links. :smash:
(links removed by Ser Clegane - inappropriate content)
Oh yes, much sicker than the first……Okay Liberals (choke) win!Quote:
Originally Posted by ShadeHonestus
I love the open mind these people display. :dizzy2:
Okay, those links were over the top, but I couldn't resist.
And I was unaware of material available on the site which was porn in nature lol.
I so want to register and make a post about how the word 'colour' was invented in xxxx CE by the English before some fanatical Christian colonists rebelled and couldn't spell.
Can anyone else think of more ways of breaking this rules list? Be imaginative!
This is just part of a grand British conspiracy (known as the overuse of "u") to cheat at Scrabble.Quote:
Originally Posted by BDC
http://www.conservapedia.com/IndexQuote:
When referencing dates based on the approximate birth of Jesus, give appropriate credit for the basis of the date (B.C. or A.D.). "BCE" and "CE" are unacceptable substitutes because they deny the historical basis. See CE.
Am i missing something here?
Conservapaedia. That should drive 'em nuts.
Someone needs to go through and replace every single entry of that...Quote:
Originally Posted by KukriKhan
Anyway, this page wins my award for most ridiculous entry ever.
Some people's understand of biology is just so... terrible. Ye gods. It's not even up to GCSE (16 year old) level, so why write an response?! And why does being pro-Christian/American automatically make you some sort of pro-idiocy.
No entry on USA.
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
Also, lulz for over simplicity:
http://www.conservapedia.com/Is_demo...ble_in_Iraq%3F
:laugh4:Quote:
Originally Posted by Ser Clegane
Interesting.
From "The Conservapedia Commandments" (I ask you to look specifically at rule #6):
http://www.conservapedia.com/The_Con...a_Commandments
From the entry for "Evolution:"Quote:
The Commandments
Edits which violate these rules will be deleted. Users who violate the rules repeatedly will be blocked. A blatantly inappropriate entry, such as vandalism or obscenity, can result in immediate blocking without warning.
- Everything you post must be true and verifiable.
- Always cite and give credit to your sources, even if in the public domain.
- Edits/new pages must be family-friendly, clean, concise, and without gossip or foul language.
- When referencing dates based on the approximate birth of Jesus, give appropriate credit for the basis of the date (B.C. or A.D.). "BCE" and "CE" are unacceptable substitutes because they deny the historical basis. See CE.
- As much as is possible, American spelling of words must be used.[1]
- Do not post personal opinion on an encyclopedia entry. Opinions can be posted on Talk:pages or on debate or discussion pages.
http://www.conservapedia.com/Evolution
:laugh4:Quote:
Originally Posted by Conservapedia
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAQuote:
Supporters propound upon the Theory of Evolution as if it has scientific support, which it does not. They switch tactics when pressed against the wall with solid scientific proofs against the Theory of Evolution by stating that evolution is "only" a theory. Using this flip-flop approach they try to have it both ways. They claim scientific support when none exists, and they claim it is only a theory when the theory straddles them with outlandish, impossible conclusion that violate scientific truths. Evolutionists simply ignore reality, slink into denial and walk away when presented with the scientific facts.
Replace that with evolutionists with creationists and evolution with creation. That's to funny.
http://www.conservapedia.com/Evolution
Edit: Crap, Goofball beat me to it!
That is weird. Quit eavesdropping in my brain for your own safety. There's lots of creepy, disturbing stuff in there...Quote:
Originally Posted by Ice
What do you recommend the daring, wayward adventurer bring if it so vexes them to venture there?Quote:
Originally Posted by Goofball
The Institute for Creation Research.
Anyone else notice the cunning oxymoron?
Or possibly just morons.
EDIT: This site has to be a spoof. It's just not possible for anyone to write that stuff without a big grin on their face. A really thorough spoof...
Well, if you want to fit in, I would suggest you bring a midget, Scarlett Johansson, a St. Bernard, and a family-sized can of Crisco...Quote:
Originally Posted by CrossLOPER
:whip:
If I had to bet money, I'd say it was not written by a conservative at all. Probably a leftisit who makes it moderate enough to in some ways appeal to some from the hard right, but at the same time make everyone else look and roll their eyes.
I will not even bother looking at it.
WHAT. THE. EFF.Quote:
Originally Posted by Goofball
:laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4:Quote:
Bill Clinton managed to serve two terms without botching the prosecution of two wars, manipulating intelligence, engaging in a systematic program of torture, or mishandling the federal response to flooding of a major American city. Obviously, he is the devil incarnate. Clinton also attempted to use the American military to kill Osama Bin Laden and Al Qaeda, an action which was properly seen as a mere attempt to distract the nation from the Monica Lewisnky scandal.
Who's been editing ?
Wow, I dare say the link in the original post is the single greatest link ever posted on this site.
I wish them much success with that site, it's great! :2thumbsup:
"Moderate enough....to appeal to some from the hard right"?!Quote:
Originally Posted by Vuk
Thats my boy!