BS: Conservapedia: Is this a joke??!?

Subject: BS: Conservapedia: Is this a joke??!?
From: Mrrzy
Date: 01 Jul 08 - 08:01 PM

Check this out, and tell me what you think!

Subject: RE: BS: Conservapedia: Is this a joke??!?
From: John on the Sunset Coast
Date: 01 Jul 08 - 09:37 PM

What do you think? From the title you chose, I'm thinking you do think it's a joke. I'll check it out later.

Subject: RE: BS: Conservapedia: Is this a joke??!?
From: Celtaddict
Date: 01 Jul 08 - 09:55 PM

One of the first hits on a Google of Conservapedia:

What Would Jesus Wiki?
Conservapedia is the web's go-to reference for conservative Christians, but for everyone else it's one of the biggest laughs on the net. By Michael Calore.
www.wired.com/techbiz/it/news/2007/02/72818

Subject: RE: BS: Conservapedia: Is this a joke??!?
From: John on the Sunset Coast
Date: 01 Jul 08 - 11:22 PM

I took a quick look. I read a couple of things, and found the articles pertaining to science troubling. Then I went to a page called "CE" which pertains to dating historical events. The entry is an anecdote asking why the change from AD to CE. The questioner states that s/he asked a Rabbi, and he professed not to know the answer. I found this anecdote is not to be believed. I registered with the site to edit the entry only to find that it is locked..can't be edited w/o contacting the administrator. Checked out the John McCain entry, and it seems pretty straight forward; it is editable so have at him guys.

Is it a joke? No. Is it useful? Some things are, but the articles on science and religion are strictly for staunch Christian Conservatives from the few I looked at. I doubt I'll visit the site again.

Subject: RE: BS: Conservapedia: Is this a joke??!?
From: Amos
Date: 01 Jul 08 - 11:23 PM

It is not intended as a joke; but it does carry a certain pathos with it.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Conservapedia: Is this a joke??!?
From: Peace
Date: 02 Jul 08 - 12:49 AM

"but it does carry a certain pathos with it"

Wasn't he one of the three Musketeers?

Subject: RE: BS: Conservapedia: Is this a joke??!?
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 02 Jul 08 - 03:30 AM

Only if the fourth one was an aftershave

Subject: RE: BS: Conservapedia: Is this a joke??!?
From: Mooh
Date: 02 Jul 08 - 06:43 AM

It's a bad joke and somewhat offensive without even leaving the main page.

Subject: RE: BS: Conservapedia: Is this a joke??!?
From: GUEST,Jonny Sunshine
Date: 02 Jul 08 - 07:26 AM

Sadly not. Unless it's a very elaborate hoax by amoral atheist pro-gay, anti-life commie-loving liberals designed to make conservatives look like narrow-minded bigots who cry "liberal bias" to anything that doesn't share their outlook.

Subject: RE: BS: Conservapedia: Is this a joke??!?
From: Jim Dixon
Date: 02 Jul 08 - 04:31 PM

Naturally, Wikipedia has an article about Conservapedia, just as Conservapedia has an article about Wikipedia.

Reading both of them is a good way to get a handle on the difference in their points of view.

Subject: RE: BS: Conservapedia: Is this a joke??!?
From: Muswell Hillbilly
Date: 02 Jul 08 - 04:42 PM

The difference, or so it appears to me, between Conservapedia and Wikipedia is that former is opiniated and biased while the latter tries to remain unopiniated and unbiased much the same as an encyclopedia

Subject: RE: BS: Conservapedia: Is this a joke??!?
From: John on the Sunset Coast
Date: 02 Jul 08 - 07:42 PM

I agree that Conservapedia is opinionated and biased--just consider the name--but they are up front with it, so no surprise. There is some good information there, but the reader needs to filter it.

I have found several articles I would consider opinion in the past, but I would not consider Wiki to be biased. It is an open environment where much is posted without citation. Opinion and errors show up there, but can be corrected or amended by anyone registered. But the changes are not necessarily accurate either. This openness is both its strength and its weakness

I do use Wiki as a first-look place. If there are links, I'll follow them, or I'll Google or both.

Subject: RE: BS: Conservapedia: Is this a joke??!?
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 02 Jul 08 - 08:26 PM

"can be corrected or amended by anyone registered"

ANYBODY, even the unregistered can edit ANYTHING at Wiki... except for maybe a few locked items.

Subject: RE: BS: Conservapedia: Is this a joke??!?
From: Don Firth
Date: 02 Jul 08 - 09:27 PM

. . . "can be corrected or amended by anyone registered."

Can the same be said for Conservapedia? Anyone care to take bets?

Whether or not this is a joke depends on what you mean by "joke."

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Conservapedia: Is this a joke??!?
From: Don Firth
Date: 02 Jul 08 - 09:35 PM

Hmm. Just reading the Wikipedia article on Conservapedia the Jim Dixon linked to answered that question. Only articles filtered through the conservative Christian viewpoint.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Conservapedia: Is this a joke??!?
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 03 Jul 08 - 03:17 AM

Yer right Don - definitely a Joke.


A very bad one...

Subject: RE: BS: Conservapedia: Is this a joke??!?
From: Wesley S
Date: 03 Jul 08 - 09:05 AM

Joke or not we all have a choice to never read it again. And that choice is a good thing to quote Martha S.

Subject: RE: BS: Conservapedia: Is this a joke??!?
From: Mrrzy
Date: 03 Jul 08 - 09:22 AM

LOL, peace!

New question: Is it scary?

Subject: RE: BS: Conservapedia: Is this a joke??!?
From: frogprince
Date: 03 Jul 08 - 10:51 AM

Scary? yes, a little bit; I'm not losing sleep over it, but: It specifically touts itself as a proper source for the home-schooled. I've been less than comfortable with the rising home-school movement.
There are legitimate reasons for that alternative for many people. But I'm concerned that a substantial share of home-school parents have gone that way to protect their children from the "evil" teaching of science, tolerance, etc., in the public schools. The Conservapedia seems clearly intended to reinforce, and lend intellectual credibility, to that faction. More generally, we don't need more "respectible" sources nudging susceptible people in that direction.

Subject: RE: BS: Conservapedia: Is this a joke??!?
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 03 Jul 08 - 05:34 PM

I read three different articles and saw a lot of argument and almost no data. Can one really hope to define something by arguing with the existence of the word?

Subject: RE: BS: Conservapedia: Is this a joke??!?
From: GUEST,Jonny Sunshine
Date: 04 Jul 08 - 06:06 AM

Reading Conservapedia is pretty depressing, though the entry on "dinosaur" is good for a laugh. I tried looking up "UFO" and it just came up with a blank page.

Subject: RE: BS: Conservapedia: Is this a joke??!?
From: Bee
Date: 04 Jul 08 - 01:19 PM

If you want to see an example of Conservapedia at its most asinine, here they are harassing Richard Lenski, a scientist whose painstaking twenty year experiments with e.coli have recently paid off with phenomenal results. Conservapedia's main troll, Andy Schafly (yes, that Phyllis' son) has escalated from making truly absurd demands to currently threatening legal assaults.

The links all go to Pharyngula at ScienceBlogs, but all relevant links are included in PZ's posts, as are the sequence of events, Lenski's excellent responses, and explanations as to why Conservapedia's demands make no sense whatsoever, as they couldn't understand Lenski's data, have no lab facilities in which to keep, store or grow the bacteria they are demanding(!), and clearly have no clue what they are asking for.

http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008/06/hubris_gall_arroganceinanity.php

http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008/06/lenski_gives_conservapdia_a_le.php

http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008/07/schlafly_wants_to_play_rough_n.php