Conservapedia is a much-needed alternative to Wikipedia, which is increasingly anti-Christian and anti-American.
So finally here it is: Conservapedia!
(“There is no page titled “zappa”. You can create this page. “)
-
Archives
- May 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
- July 2006
- June 2006
- May 2006
- April 2006
- March 2006
- February 2006
- January 2006
- December 2005
- November 2005
- October 2005
- September 2005
- August 2005
- July 2005
- June 2005
- May 2005
- April 2005
- March 2005
- February 2005
- January 2005
- December 2004
- November 2004
- October 2004
- September 2004
- August 2004
- July 2004
- June 2004
- May 2004
- April 2004
- March 2004
- February 2004
- January 2004
- December 2003
- November 2003
- October 2003
- September 2003
- August 2003
- July 2003
- June 2003
- May 2003
- April 2003
- March 2003
- February 2003
- January 2003
- December 2002
- November 2002
- October 2002
- September 2002
- August 2002
- July 2002
- June 2002
- May 2002
- April 2002
- March 2002
- February 2002
- January 2002
- December 2001
- November 2001
- October 2001
- September 2001
- August 2001
- July 2001
-
Meta
a co-worker pointed out that there is no page titled “contraceptive” either. strange…
Ohmyohmyohmy…. what a find.
On the page Examples of Bias in Wikipedia they’ve made a fine collection of bias themselves.
Also: where is it stated that Wikipedia is or should be an American-only medium? That’s right, cower before the existance of different viewpoints!
I was also hard pressed at finding any page on conservapedia that doesn’t mention wikipedia at all.
As usual the fun hides in the Talk pages… Oh, and they do have a page on homosexuality!
Nothing on mk Ultra or Freemasons.
and it doesn’t stop there
Personally, I like reading up what the world is really all about on Uncyclopedia
Ideology filters knowledge. Looking for facts & figures to prove their right. Always been that way.
Basic line ( and thus major point for discussion ) is: the content of the history books in high school.
Fun for the whole traditional family-unit!
Anyone wanna start up a “Torquemada” page … or an “Iran-Contra” page … or a “Halliburton” page … or a “Tammy Faye Baker” page?
Or fer that matter, can ANY entity in the known multiverse kindly tell me just what the flaming frack ” A CONSERVATIVE ENCYCLOPEDIA YOU CAN TRUST” actually IS?!
Phew, it’s the paradoxical pong of Eau d’Oxymoron!
Quick, Ethyl – The Flit!
Funny that Frank called himself a ‘conservative’. He was always ahead of his time. The American Republican party is not conservative in any coherent sense, any American sense of the word, and that’s becoming very clear to a lot of people in the ‘States at the moment (not just rabid individuals like me!). The Democrats are the conservatives AND the liberals now. ‘Conservative’ is not the same as ‘authoritarian’ (‘watch the Nazis run your town’).
What ‘conservative’ means depends on what you’re trying to conserve, which would vary depending on what country you’re in. Frank liked parts of the US constitution (the Bill of Rights) and wanted to conserve them. That kind of conservatism is starting to make a comeback, thank god.
Uhh … & they really do have a debate entitled:
“Crusades…Good or Bad?”
Yeah, no guff mcduff … & the “Good” team looks like it’s kicking butt.
Holy fuck.
A visual conservative encyclopedia — a mouth sewn shut, eyes glued closed, ears plugged with ideas you already believe!