13 Sep 2009, 8:03 pm
...and I run into this little gem on its autism page:
Quote:
The is enormous pressure to deny that vaccinations are causing autism, as such a revelation would result in political, legal, and financial consequences for those who have been supporting increases in vaccination. As researchers denied smoking caused lung cancer for decades, researchers now claim that vaccination is not causing autism.
I love you Conservapedia, don't ever change!
Disclaimer: Conservapedia is an encyclopedia that sees the world through the crazy eyes of Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell, Fox News and so on. Go to any subject and you'll find yourself either laughing or crying, or something in between.
14 Sep 2009, 4:19 am
14 Sep 2009, 8:42 am
iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius
14 Sep 2009, 9:54 am
iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius
14 Sep 2009, 9:59 am
14 Sep 2009, 10:34 am
iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius
14 Sep 2009, 10:42 am
14 Sep 2009, 11:43 am
http://conservapedia.com/Evolution
Science is trying to destroy us.
http://www.conservapedia.com/Barack_Obama
Birth certificate crap and, a subtle reference to him being the anti-christ, and all that good paranoia, fearmongering, and black PR and propaganda.
http://www.conservapedia.com/George_Bush
Hail our master.
Now as far as Jesus riding on dinosaurs, this isn't on Conservapedia yet, but most likely because they haven't found a way to interject it into an article yet. Anyway, this is what I'm talking about:
Earth is 6000-years-old, so they like to pay lip-service to that. It goes on like that. For example, Dinosaurs were vegetarians until Eve ate the apple. I'm sorry I can't go on like this, it makes my brain hurt to unravel this weird alternate reality that Creationists live in.
14 Sep 2009, 12:05 pm
^Can't stop laughing... at Jesus-riding-dinosaur..... Too funny.
iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius
14 Sep 2009, 5:23 pm
14 Sep 2009, 8:51 pm
Quote:
For one, even Young Earth Creationists accept evolution, for the definition that it is the "time rate of change of allele frequency". Also, a lot of the founders of the major branches of science were creationists, as well as people like Von Braun and others in the modern era and today even having PhD's in science majors. Christians and Creationists aren't afraid of "science" destroying their beliefs. And really, evolution, even in the sense of all the storytelling, diagrams, and septillions of years of fictional history, is only one facet of biology. Take it away, you still have all the rest of observable and testable science left.
Young Earth Creationists do NOT accept evolution. If you are a Creationist, you do not by definition accept Evolution, but rather believe that the bible is a literary record of our history. I am pretty interested in who these PhD-wielding Creationists within science are, because I certainly haven't of them. Christians and Creationists ARE afraid of Science destroying their beliefs, this is one of the primary goals of the Discovery Institute -- To heal what they see as Science destroying the fabric of morality by telling people that they're monkeys and therefore can do whatever they want. Also, evolution is not only a theory, it's a fact and it can and is tested every day. Also, we have fossils that can be dated back millions of years. Wanna go further, you can do that, too, with different radioactive dating methods. To keep it simple, Carbon 14 dating can easily disprove an Earth only 6000-years-old, dead organisms have been dated over 50.000 years old with this method, so we don't really need to resort to "fictional history".
Quote:
Two, Obama is doing basically the same things as Bush except he has immunity from insult for two reasons, 1) insulting him would make you a racist, and 2) he's a democrat.
Three, eh some people hated Julius Caesar, some loved him. Bush isn't like Caesar, but there is always polarity in people's feelings for leaders.
Three, eh some people hated Julius Caesar, some loved him. Bush isn't like Caesar, but there is always polarity in people's feelings for leaders.
About two: Alright, Obama is NOT doing the same things as Bush. He has trouble keeping his promises like closing Guantanamo, but Bush and Obama are in no way comparable. I think what you perceive as immunity from criticism stems from how the idiotic accusations lobbed at him are deflected because they're ret*d - I.e: He's a socialist! He's a communist! He's the anti-Christ! He's a racist! He's a Kenyan socialist, communist, anti-christ beast who is not an American citizen and he hates white people! All that being said, some of his supporters are kind of wacky, but they pale in comparison to Bush's supporters.
Three - You know, the difference between Bush and other controversial leaders is Bush is unpopular because his policies if you wanna call them that, has, and are killing his fellow countrymen. Bush is unpopular because of the wars and the civil liberties he eroded, it's not just random chance who likes him and who don't. His largest base of support however is the Christian right, and of course we see Schlafly all those dumbasses praising him and not seeing any problems whatsoever about him.
Quote:
Now while Regulus was encamped beside the Bagradas river, there appeared a serpent of huge bulk, the length of which is said to have been one hundred and twenty feet (for its slough was carried to Rome for exhibition), and the rest of its body corresponded in size. It destroyed many of the soldiers who approached it and some also who were drinking from the river. Regulus overcame it with a crowd of soldiers and with catapults.
After thus destroying it, he gave battle by night to Hamilcar, who was encamped upon a high, wooded spot; and he slew many in their beds as well as many who had been aroused. Any who escaped fell in with the Romans guarding the roads and perished. In this way a large part of the Carthaginians was destroyed and many of their cities were going over to the Romans. "
After thus destroying it, he gave battle by night to Hamilcar, who was encamped upon a high, wooded spot; and he slew many in their beds as well as many who had been aroused. Any who escaped fell in with the Romans guarding the roads and perished. In this way a large part of the Carthaginians was destroyed and many of their cities were going over to the Romans. "
iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius
14 Sep 2009, 9:23 pm
EC wrote:
Young Earth Creationists do NOT accept evolution. If you are a Creationist, you do not by definition accept Evolution, but rather believe that the bible is a literary record of our history.
No, we don't accept the psuedohistorical baggage that people make up to attach to the process of evolution, but the definition of evolution as "time rate of change of allele frequency" is perfectly acceptable. Believing in the historical parts of the Bible, yes I do that. What impact does that have with noticing that cockatiels and budgies are related? Also, what impact does it have on Boyle's Law, or the Le Chattier principle? What impact does rejecting the fabricated timeline of evolution have against Newton's Laws? Or Kepler's Laws? There is no impact on real science.
EC wrote:
I am pretty interested in who these PhD-wielding Creationists within science are, because I certainly haven't of them.
Here are only a few who are bold enough to have their names published: Link.
EC wrote:
Quote:
Now while Regulus was encamped beside the Bagradas river, there appeared a serpent of huge bulk, the length of which is said to have been one hundred and twenty feet (for its slough was carried to Rome for exhibition), and the rest of its body corresponded in size. It destroyed many of the soldiers who approached it and some also who were drinking from the river. Regulus overcame it with a crowd of soldiers and with catapults.
After thus destroying it, he gave battle by night to Hamilcar, who was encamped upon a high, wooded spot; and he slew many in their beds as well as many who had been aroused. Any who escaped fell in with the Romans guarding the roads and perished. In this way a large part of the Carthaginians was destroyed and many of their cities were going over to the Romans. "
After thus destroying it, he gave battle by night to Hamilcar, who was encamped upon a high, wooded spot; and he slew many in their beds as well as many who had been aroused. Any who escaped fell in with the Romans guarding the roads and perished. In this way a large part of the Carthaginians was destroyed and many of their cities were going over to the Romans. "
My quote wasn't from the Bible. That was from Roman History by Cassius Dio, fragments of book 11.
14 Sep 2009, 9:59 pm
iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius
14 Sep 2009, 10:08 pm
15 Sep 2009, 11:33 am
I just looked at the article on Social Democracy. The only reference they use is Friedrich A. Hayek's Road to Serfdom (Reader's Digest Condensced Version). How can you take a site like that seriously?
Quote:
Social democratic nations in Scandinavia have made their people happy despite a difficult northern European climate with regular winter dark.
iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius
15 Sep 2009, 11:55 am
Henriksson wrote:
I just looked at the article on Social Democracy. The only reference they use is Friedrich A. Hayek's Road to Serfdom (Reader's Digest Condensced Version). How can you take a site like that seriously?
Quote:
Social democratic nations in Scandinavia have made their people happy despite a difficult northern European climate with regular winter dark.
In the same manner that one could take any other wiki. It's all user developed content that is supposed to have citing.
Just like, which is more reliable concerning information about the Roman Army? Wikipedia (or any wiki site) or an expert like Adrian Goldsworthy?
