Page 2 of 7 [ 104 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 7  Next

Master_Pedant
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Mar 2009
Age: 28
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,926

21 Mar 2010, 10:45 am

Another lovely gem from the Conservapedia (this time, it's hompage):

Quote:
Our own Andy Schlafly takes over as lead counsel for the Committee to Recall Robert Menendez from the Office of United States Senator. This will be a precedent-setting case, because no Senator or Representative has ever been recalled before. [6]


http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php? ... did=636272



Sand
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 94
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,876
Location: Finland

21 Mar 2010, 10:53 am

ruveyn wrote:
Orwell wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
but the matter has not been well established to my satisfaction.

And frankly, no one gives a damn whether or not you are satisfied by the explanations given. I am not able to seriously discuss climate change science as it is well outside the fields I have personally studied; I suspect it is also well outside your expertise. The best I can do is defer to people who do know the science, and they seem to believe there is cause for concern.


I give a damn and I will act to the extent I can act to prevent my claims to a carbon footprint from being hijacked on fraudulent grounds. And I am not the only one who feels that way. I will vote for those who oppose controls and rationing imposed on grounds I consider insufficient and outright fraudulent. As I said, I am not a lone voice in the night. There are millions who feel and think on the matter as I do, and by God, sir, we will be heard! People like me vote negatively when we are sufficiently motivated. I would like to see the U.N. stop that.

ruveyn


You evidently pick your mass to agree with for democratic support of a scientific observation. There are probably a good many Muslims and Christians with different ideas than you. How come you don't defer to their democratic pressure?



Master_Pedant
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Mar 2009
Age: 28
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,926

21 Mar 2010, 11:33 am

Priceless gem: Fred Phelps is a "liberal".

http://www.conservapedia.com/Fred_Phelps#References



NobelCynic
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Nov 2006
Age: 71
Gender: Male
Posts: 683
Location: New Jersey, U.S.A.

21 Mar 2010, 11:58 am

If you think that's good, check out what they have to say about our President.

http://www.conservapedia.com/Barack_Obama


_________________
NobelCynic (on WP)
My given name is Kenneth


Master_Pedant
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Mar 2009
Age: 28
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,926

21 Mar 2010, 12:05 pm

Quote:
Association of American Physicians and Surgeons observed that Obama used techniques of mind control in his campaign...


I'm surprised they didn't airbrush a Hitler mustache onto Obama.

I find their "Causes of Atheism" article particularly disturbing.



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 83
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,726
Location: New Jersey

21 Mar 2010, 12:07 pm

Sand wrote:

You evidently pick your mass to agree with for democratic support of a scientific observation. There are probably a good many Muslims and Christians with different ideas than you. How come you don't defer to their democratic pressure?


Voting is the only legal path permitted to me. So I tread on it.

ruveyn



Master_Pedant
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Mar 2009
Age: 28
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,926

21 Mar 2010, 12:13 pm

Quote:
Liberal values
From Conservapedia
(Redirected from Liberal Values)
Jump to: navigation, search
Liberal values refers to the value system commonly held by liberals, just as Professor values and Hollywood values do for professors and Hollywood respectively. Liberal values stand in stark opposition to conservative values and thus reject those things which conservatives hold to be dear and true. This includes, but is not limited to:
..
Bigotry itself, an almost uniquely liberal trait.
...
Mistaking conclusions for facts.



http://www.conservapedia.com/Liberal_Values



Sand
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 94
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,876
Location: Finland

21 Mar 2010, 12:54 pm

ruveyn wrote:
Sand wrote:

You evidently pick your mass to agree with for democratic support of a scientific observation. There are probably a good many Muslims and Christians with different ideas than you. How come you don't defer to their democratic pressure?


Voting is the only legal path permitted to me. So I tread on it.

ruveyn


Thinking is a great path. It's worth a try.



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 83
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,726
Location: New Jersey

21 Mar 2010, 2:29 pm

Sand wrote:

Thinking is a great path. It's worth a try.


I think better than 95 percent of the human. Think first, then vote.

If you check out what I say, I do think. Mostly nasty thoughts. And I am consistent. Consistently nasty. And justly so. As Theodore Sturgeon, the second greatest sci fi author of the twentieth century said -- 85 percent of everything is sh*t.

ruveyn



NobelCynic
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Nov 2006
Age: 71
Gender: Male
Posts: 683
Location: New Jersey, U.S.A.

21 Mar 2010, 2:31 pm

Here's a surprise. They didn't come down that hard on Harry Potter.


_________________
NobelCynic (on WP)
My given name is Kenneth


Orwell
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Aug 2007
Age: 30
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,765
Location: Room 101

21 Mar 2010, 2:46 pm

ruveyn wrote:
Sand wrote:

Thinking is a great path. It's worth a try.


I think better than 95 percent of the human. Think first, then vote.

Ruveyn, get over yourself. 95th percentile is really not all that impressive—indeed, it means there are a couple hundred million people currently living who are smarter than you. In person, I virtually never even interact with people below the 95th percentile merely because of where I go to school and what departments I study in. The bulk of my friends and acquaintances would probably be ranked in at least the 97th percentile. If we pretend for the sake of argument that IQ tests mean anything, there is as wide a gap between me and you as there is between you and the common people you reject as unworthy, and I know plenty enough people next to whom I am a dull-witted simpleton.

Remember, even if you are one in a million, there's thousands more where you came from. And by the IQ measurement you hold so dear, you are only one in twenty.


_________________
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH


Master_Pedant
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Mar 2009
Age: 28
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,926

21 Mar 2010, 3:07 pm

Orwell, doesn't IQ's correlations with achievement dimminish after a score of 130 on the standford binet scale?



Orwell
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Aug 2007
Age: 30
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,765
Location: Room 101

21 Mar 2010, 3:14 pm

Master_Pedant wrote:
Orwell, doesn't IQ's correlations with achievement dimminish after a score of 130 on the standford binet scale?

Something like that, yes. Also, it turns out that there is almost no correlation between IQ and rationality, meaning that even highly "intelligent" people (according to the IQ tests) often believe absurdities and show all the same failures in reasoning as the hoi polloi. On top of that, this site is frequented mostly by autistics, and IQ tests seem to be almost completely invalidated when you're dealing with an autistic test-taker.

In short, IQ doesn't mean a damn thing, but I get annoyed with people who think it does.


_________________
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH


pandabear
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Aug 2007
Age: 61
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,629

21 Mar 2010, 4:05 pm

Awesomelyglorious wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
Your notion of what an as*hole is, is quite defective. You believe you have Right and Reason on your side. You are mistaken.

ruveyn

How can it be defective? I don't even care who has "right and reason", as nobody knows what those things are. The issue is that you fit into the best approximation I have at the moment, and I can't conceive of an as*hole outside of whatever I am approximating. I am not a Platonist and do not hold to a Platonic as*hole.


You guys are so cute sometimes.

So is that conservatopedia.



pandabear
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Aug 2007
Age: 61
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,629

21 Mar 2010, 5:05 pm

As one might suspect, homosexuality, which is an obsession with conservatives, gets quite a long article (probably one of the longest) in the conservatopedia:

http://www.conservapedia.com/Homosexual

Their coverage of Jesus gets rather silly

http://www.conservapedia.com/Jesus

They don't care much for Jehovah's witnesses

http://www.conservapedia.com/Jehovah%27s_Witness

and especially Mormons

http://www.conservapedia.com/Book_of_Mormon