• 🛑Hello, this board in now turned off and no new posting.
    Please REGISTER at Anabolic Steroid Forums, and become a member of our NEW community! 💪
  • 💪Muscle Gelz® 30% Off Easter Sale👉www.musclegelz.com Coupon code: EASTER30🐰

Forget that Wikipedia nonsense

Conservapedia is a much-needed alternative to Wikipedia, which is increasingly anti-Christian and anti-American. On Wikipedia, many of the dates are provided in the anti-Christian "C.E." instead of "A.D.", which Conservapedia uses. Christianity receives no credit for the great advances and discoveries it inspired, such as those of the Renaissance. Read a list of many Examples of Bias in Wikipedia.

Conservapedia is an online resource and meeting place where we favor Christianity and America. Conservapedia has easy-to-use indexes to facilitate review of topics. You will much prefer using Conservapedia compared to Wikipedia if you want concise answers free of "political correctness".
How am I going to put this nicely...

This shit is fucking retarded.

1 - wikipedia is the best thing since sliced bread. It's absolutely genious. It's free, easy to use, and contains so damn much information it never ceases to amaze you. Wikipedia + Google = Instant knowledge about everything. I'm not even going to get into an argument about this. If you don't like wikipedia, you simply don't know how to use it properly.

2- wikipedia is about the last thing on earth that's politically correct. It's fundamental source of information is everyone. That's the brilliancy behind it. It's unbiased and not politically correct. It doesn't make any profit and it doesn't have any lifestyle or religion connected to it. It's just information, pure information. It's fucking hypocrisy that wikipedia is politically correct, while a religiously inspired and patriotic site like conservapedia is not.

3 - "Christianity receives no credit for the great advances and discoveries it inspired, such as those of the Renaissance." Guess what? Christianity is the bad motherfucker that caused the Dark Ages, where science was practically exstinct and every bit of knowledge came from some fictional book called 'The Bible'. The Renaissance was the rebirth of the ratio and science. It was centered at the exact opposite of Christianity.

4 - Religion and science don't mix in general. Saying you have a better source of information because it was inspired by Christianity is like saying you have a bigger cock because you're a girl.

5 - wikipedia is not anti anything. Like I just explained, wikipedia is the absolute prototype of freedom and the Age of Reason.

"I dare you, no I double dare you, b*tch" to prove me wrong.
 
They're going to provide us with a more scientific, unbiased and not politically correct view on the matter. :rolleyes:
Like removing such un-scientific things as carbon-dated fossilized dinosaur remains and replacing them with proven references from the King James bible?
 
In all fairness we should read this entire link to understand the true foundations of the new site. Interesting read, and one that explains the driving force behind the site.

It takes a while for the page to load, but be patient ... it'll come.
 
Pure comedy Gold

http://www.conservapedia.com/Bill_Clinton


A special prosicutor was named to investigate Clinton for allegations of impropriety in the Whitewater real-estate scandal, an investment of Clintons in a failed real estate venture. Although nothing came out of this investigation, and it turned out that Clinton actually lost money on his investment, one of the results of the investigation was that the special prosecutor turned to investigating other Clinton activities, one of which (the Monica Lewinsky scandal) resulted in an impeachment trial. 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.
 
The main flaw in their reasoning is that 'wikipedia' has wronged them. However, 'wikipedia' is in fact the combination of everyone that ever posted something there. There is no face or group behind the information.

Secondly, things written on wikipedia are to be taken as things written on wikipedia. On wikipedia it is cleary stated that there is no certainty everything on the site is correct.

Just look at their list of 'flaws' in 'wikipedia'. Some of the points are proposterous.

Instead of making a new anti-wikipedia site they should just have followed the system of wikipedia. They should have edited any errors. That's what wikipedia is all about, shared wisdom. One makes a mistake, another corrects it.

--------

Nacho, that's goddamn funny shit! Clinton is the devil incarnate. Pure unbiased science right there, people.
 
IML Gear Cream!
Like removing such un-scientific things as carbon-dated fossilized dinosaur remains and replacing them with proven references from the King James bible?

Because we all know evolution is proven fact and that only retards question that life just evolved from nothing. :rolleyes:
 
I have never felt that wikipedia was biased but I really never paid attention. I have heard many interviews with people who claim that using Wikipedia for research is absurd b/c it is riddled with inaccurate information.

I use it all the time for quick info but you gotta keep in mind that some of it is bs.
 
Because we all know evolution is proven fact and that only retards question that life just evolved from nothing. :rolleyes:
100$ if you can point out the flaws in the theory of evolution to me. I'll give you a hint: they don't say life evolved from nothing. (My English is lacking here, sorry.) Have you even understood the endosymbiosis theory?
 
100$ if you can point out the flaws in the theory of evolution to me. I'll give you a hint: they don't say life evolved from nothing. (My English is lacking here, sorry.) Have you even understood the endosymbiosis theory?

I am not arrogant enough to say I can prove anything. I chuckle at you guys who think you can. Evolution IS religion...you accept it on faith.

That's fine..just admit it.
 
Pure comedy Gold

http://www.conservapedia.com/Bill_Clinton


A special prosicutor was named to investigate Clinton for allegations of impropriety in the Whitewater real-estate scandal, an investment of Clintons in a failed real estate venture. Although nothing came out of this investigation, and it turned out that Clinton actually lost money on his investment, one of the results of the investigation was that the special prosecutor turned to investigating other Clinton activities, one of which (the Monica Lewinsky scandal) resulted in an impeachment trial. 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.
:wtf:
 
Because we all know evolution is proven fact and that only retards question that life just evolved from nothing. :rolleyes:
Pepper ... bro ... where the fuck you been? Long time since I've had the chance to enjoy your religious perspective. God blessed you with the time to post in this thread ... Allah-huakbar.

We do all see that evolution is a proven fact and that yes ... only retards question that life evolved from nothing. The science of evolution does prove it's foundations pretty well, while people that look into the origins of the bible are beginning to see that the book was written and rewritten by men with political intentions.
 
The evolutionary theory seems to be solid. I do not, however, see how this negates any existance of God.
 
The evolutionary theory seems to be solid. I do not, however, see how this negates any existance of God.

Ahh ... yes ... well I don't intend to deny God outright. The bible is too dubious in origin to be counted as a source for the theory of creationism is what I meant to propose.
 
that site sucks my cock because it takes to fucking long to load.
 
How am I going to put this nicely...

This shit is fucking retarded.

1 - wikipedia is the best thing since sliced bread. It's absolutely genious. It's free, easy to use, and contains so damn much information it never ceases to amaze you. Wikipedia + Google = Instant knowledge about everything. I'm not even going to get into an argument about this. If you don't like wikipedia, you simply don't know how to use it properly.

2- wikipedia is about the last thing on earth that's politically correct. It's fundamental source of information is everyone. That's the brilliancy behind it. It's unbiased and not politically correct. It doesn't make any profit and it doesn't have any lifestyle or religion connected to it. It's just information, pure information. It's fucking hypocrisy that wikipedia is politically correct, while a religiously inspired and patriotic site like conservapedia is not.

3 - "Christianity receives no credit for the great advances and discoveries it inspired, such as those of the Renaissance." Guess what? Christianity is the bad motherfucker that caused the Dark Ages, where science was practically exstinct and every bit of knowledge came from some fictional book called 'The Bible'. The Renaissance was the rebirth of the ratio and science. It was centered at the exact opposite of Christianity.

4 - Religion and science don't mix in general. Saying you have a better source of information because it was inspired by Christianity is like saying you have a bigger cock because you're a girl.

5 - wikipedia is not anti anything. Like I just explained, wikipedia is the absolute prototype of freedom and the Age of Reason.

"I dare you, no I double dare you, b*tch" to prove me wrong.



:clapping: :clapping: :clapping:

witchblade0wnd
 
We do all see that evolution is a proven fact and that yes ... only retards question that life evolved from nothing.

Oh..please...proven? :lol:

Evolution is a religion....the more you write, the more I believe it.

I've been around...the religious bashing that goes on here keeps me out of most of these threads. Weak moment...it just makes my skin crawl when you guys talk about evolution like it proven and only tards would dare question it. That just simply aint so...

I am not going to try to logically "prove" Christianity because I can't. It is a matter of faith. So is evolution, you just refuse to admit it.
 
Oh, and Bonecrusher, you don't use science to crush or ridicule Christians and I respect that....however, the bashing that witchblade has even done here is really the norm. There is a clearly an anti-Christian edge to most evolutionists.
 
Ahh ... yes ... well I don't intend to deny God outright. The bible is too dubious in origin to be counted as a source for the theory of creationism is what I meant to propose.


OK. One more...I see the idiots are moving in so this thread will be crap soon...

Don't you think that most evolutionists would kick you out of the club for suggesting God was involved?
 
Oh..please...proven? :lol:

Evolution is a religion....the more you write, the more I believe it.

I've been around...the religious bashing that goes on here keeps me out of most of these threads. Weak moment...it just makes my skin crawl when you guys talk about evolution like it proven and only tards would dare question it. That just simply aint so...

I am not going to try to logically "prove" Christianity because I can't. It is a matter of faith. So is evolution, you just refuse to admit it.
There are a few stretches along the way that require one have "faith" that the further proof needed will eventually show up. Kinda like waiting on the bus in LA. The timing sux, and the people behind the wheel are a little flakey but you know it will eventually show up.

What form of Christianity do you follow Pepper? BTW it really is good to see you around still. Hope all is well in your life and with your loved ones.
 
There are a few stretches along the way that require one have "faith" that the further proof needed will eventually show up. Kinda like waiting on the bus in LA. The timing sux, and the people behind the wheel are a little flakey but you know it will eventually show up.

Hmmm...sounds like "faith" to me.:shrug:

What form of Christianity do you follow Pepper? BTW it really is good to see you around still. Hope all is well in your life and with your loved ones.

I am Presbyterian...which is too broad...the denomination I belong too would be considered to be on the conservative side.

Yeah, we are doing good. How about you? I am dieting...dropped about 40 lbs...so I feel alot better. I am also addicted to online poker now and still not over the officiating in SBXL :)
 
I have nothing against religion. It has been a required part of evolution since the beginning, people have to have reason. However, now, with the aid of science, 'miracles' and teachings of major religion, have become less common.

But if anyone tries to tell me that darwins 'evolution' is not to be taught as part of science in school, in favour of some idiotic, and completley foundless "god created us" ideology, can get to f**k. Honestly, think about it. Does your faith tell you to ignore fact? I don't think so.
If you really believe this "god creation theory" should be taught in school, then don't read this. Your not worthy of my time.
 
Hmmm...sounds like "faith" to me.:shrug:



I am Presbyterian...which is too broad...the denomination I belong too would be considered to be on the conservative side.

Yeah, we are doing good. How about you? I am dieting...dropped about 40 lbs...so I feel alot better. I am also addicted to online poker now and still not over the officiating in SBXL :)
I'm good.

Just had a fight with the ex-wife's pit-bull. Had to punch him in the face a few times as he tried to bite me. Caught him in the schnoz as he came at me all three times ... kinda exciting. He jumped at me and I smashed him back then he just kinda looked all wobbly for a sec then he jumped again. He did finally manage to go down after the third hit. Hard headed dog ... guys normally go on the first hit and always on the second. Dog took three hits ... my hands are still shaking LOL. Haven't been in a fight in like 14 months ... now it's with a frucking big ass pit-bull :laugh:

Other than fighting the damn dog life is great. Work is outstanding, but I'm still single.
 
"If you're religious, you can't be in the 'club' of the evolution theory." In fact, most of the world's leading scientists are religious, so your statement holds no ground. Things is, religious people are accepted by evolutionists, but evolutionists are rarely accepted by religious people. Wikipedia does not bash Conservapedia, Conservapedia bashes wikipedia.

faith (fāth) Pronunciation Key
n.
2. Belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence.
Religion is based on faith.

the·o·ry /ˈθiəri, ˈθɪəri/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[thee-uh-ree, theer-ee] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
???noun, plural -ries.
1. a coherent group of general propositions used as principles of explanation for a class of phenomena: Einstein's theory of relativity.

sci·ence /ˈsaɪəns/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[sahy-uhns] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
???noun
1. a branch of knowledge or study dealing with a body of facts or truths systematically arranged and showing the operation of general laws: the mathematical sciences.
2. systematic knowledge of the physical or material world gained through observation and experimentation.

Stephen J. Gould said:
Evolution is both a fact and a theory. Biologists consider the existence of
evolution to be a fact in much the same way that physicists do so for gravity.
The theory of evolution is based on science, and is widely regarded as fact. The main reason it's not yet a proven fact, is that scientific experiments
can't be conducted due to the time ranges involved. One would have to conduct experiments over thousands of years.

Mind you, this is not a matter of opinion.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution
 
Back
Top