Conservapedia

[filkertom]

If you have not seen it yet... well, you may not; it's been so thoroughly slashdotted that you can't get to it. But you can read about it, with many tasty excerpts in the comments, here.

Comments

[daundelyon.livejournal.com]

I've been trying to look at it since this morning, and my computer refuses to connect. Apparently it knows crap when it tries to link to it. ~_^

[beldar.livejournal.com]

PLEASE tell me that site is a spoof of neocon nonsense! I can't believe people would actually believe the stuff that is posted there.

I noticed a front-page reference to "faith" being unique to Christianity and actually looked at the article. I can see how the gullible can be taken in by something like that, because it kinda made sense if you don't stop to think about it for more than a few seconds.

There are conservatives with intellects -- why do none of them seen to be on the internet?

[zibblsnrt.livejournal.com]

Heh, I saw it a couple days ago. The religion articles were generally across-the-board funny; the Islam one had a (well-written, factual) paragraph about the basic tenets and practices of Islam - and another paragraph of equal size talking about moon gods and human sacrifice. I think it described the Eastern Orthodox church as a minor splinter sect of Catholicism, too; that article was a poor-grammared sentence long.

Oh, and you're not allowed to say "CE" or "BCE" on it.

[andamaroo.livejournal.com]

This is my favorite so far:

The observed widespread warming of the atmosphere and ocean, together with ice-mass loss, support the conclusion that it is extremely unlikely that global climate change of the past 50 years can be explained without external forcing, and very likely that is not due to known natural causes alone."[3]

It should be noted that these scientists are largely motivated by a need for grant money in their fields. Therefore, their work can not be considered unbiased.[4] Also, these scientists are mostly liberal athiests, untroubled by the hubris that man can destroy the Earth which God gave him.[5]

There are some scientists among the critics of the theory that global warming is caused by human activity. For example, Dr. Fred Singer observed that "CO2 changes have lagged about 800 years behind the temperature changes. Global warming has produced more CO2, rather than more CO2 producing global warming."[6]

[smallship1.livejournal.com]

Truly, all information is contained on the web. And all disinformation as well. Because it's owned by the people.

[ddrussianinja.livejournal.com]

I love their list of examples of Wikipedia bias. Any of their "valid" claims, if you follow the citations, explain that those examples have since been remedied... But they still keep them there as examples of bias.

Then there are the completely ridiculous claims.

They say "colour" instead of "color"! That's Un-American!

Who taught these people how to set up a Wiki?

[thatcrazycajun.livejournal.com]

Sadly, it is all too real, as is the home site of the woman who started it. People such as this interpret anything not actively and ardently supportive of their own worldview as a bias against it and in favor of the opposing one. You can't reason with them.

[snowishness.livejournal.com]

Most of it may be too real, but some of it, at least in one of the recenter edits, almost has to be deliberately ironic/sarcastic.

"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."

That is from the Bill Clinton article. Sadly much of this does seem to be completely sincere, as from Massachusetts Liberal:

“A Liberal from Massachusetts. Generally, they want to throw out all rules of God, and live like animals. Often they are also evolutionists.”

[filkertom.livejournal.com]

There are a number of obvious vandalisms all over the site. Makes it harder to figure out what's real and what's not, as the principal identifying characteristic of modern conservatism is to say, do, and advocate things that are so over the top that you can't believe it's not satire....

[darthparadox.livejournal.com]

I'm not entirely sure that that second one isn't satire as well. It's not just the over-the-top-ness, but also the subtle juxtaposition between "living like animals" and "evolutionists" amuses me.

But yeah, it's like Tom says. It's next to impossible to determine the difference between satire and sincerity in a place like that. Which is why I maintain that satire is dead. It just can't keep up with reality.

[randwolf.livejournal.com]

The stupid! It tickles!

[daundelyon.livejournal.com]

I finally mangaged to get a look at this beast. The historian in me is crying in a corner at the ignorance of it all.

[unclelumpy.livejournal.com]

A small group of idiots making a large amount of noise.

Pay it no heed.

[filkertom.livejournal.com]

Oh, it's all good, Lump. Lots of blogs are having loads of fun with it, and it looks as if by the end of the weekend it'll be every bit as widely regarded as Pajamas Media, i.e., not at all. They've shot themselves in the foot so badly that they have no hope of ever having any respect from anybody.