More Proof That Right-Wingers Aren’t Even Trying Anymore

Please allow me to introduce you to the latest contraption from The Land of Small-Mindedness: Conservapedia. Get it? Conservapedia? Isn’t that oh-so cute and clever? Apparently dissatisfied with Wikipedia’s general tendency toward striving for factual accuracy, far-Right twits have devised this insult to human intellect. Why the need for a “conservative” version of Wikipedia? Look no further than this alarming fact:

On Wikipedia, many of the dates are provided in the anti-Christian “C.E.” instead of “A.D.”, which Conservapedia uses.

How dare those liberal Jesus-haters reference an alternative dating standard! Why, that’s certainly anti-Christian!

Seriously, this is demagogical lunacy of the highest order. For even more of a giggle I suggest you search for “homosexuality,” “abortion,” and “evolution.” Just be careful you don’t laugh so hard you make yourself sick.

27 thoughts on “More Proof That Right-Wingers Aren’t Even Trying Anymore

  1. Just one more example of how xians have absolutely no originality whatsoever.  I’ve rarely seen a christian t-shirt, bumper sticker or poster that was not a “christianized” version of a real life marketing campaign. The one that comes to mind is the insipid “Got Jesus?” bumper stickers.  If it weren’t for Madison Avenue, I think most christians would be resigned to putting “Turn or Burn” stickers on their cars.

  2. I have a feeling the Conservapedia officers are going to be very busy removing hijacked entries.

    The entries for homosexuality and evolution were concise and fair so I’m not sure why you pointed them out. The abortion entry was a bit more schiztzoid but it did have this winning portion:

    Most Christian conservatives regard human life as beginning at conception and consider abortion to be the murder of innocent babies while in the womb of their mother. They believe babies should be murdered within the first few years after they’re born, especially if God orders the hit.

    Yup, I predict many jokes will be played on Conservapedia.

    I doubt it will be taken seriously as an information resource, especially when it seeks from the outset to favor pro-Christian and pro-America entries. At least I wouldn’t use it as a term paper reference or as a link to bolster an online argument. (But then neither is Wikipedia generally allowed as a term paper reference.)

    Another example of incongruence – On the front page News/Today in History section it says:

    Did you know that faith is a uniquely Christian concept? Add to the explanation of what it means, and how it does not exist on other religions.

    Yet in the entry linked to, it says:

    While the Christian religion does indeed put great emphasis on faith, faith is the basis of nearly all known religions, some of which demand more faith of their followers than even Christianity.

    Fascinating website. Thanks for the introduction.

  3. The entries for homosexuality and evolution were concise and fair so I’m not sure why you pointed them out

    That’s not how they read earlier this afternoon. With this rate of editing, the sight may prove to be shortlived. Almost a bummer, as it’s a source of (unintentional) hilarity.

    P.S. Check out their Conservative Commandments. This is not a dream.

  4. Damn!!! I had to look the fucker up contrary to the ultra-intelligent part of me realising that giving them a hit [?] tends to lend credence to their existence.
    Well … one won’t hurt (said the actress to the bishop)  LOL

    Let’s look up something reeeellly easy … what about ‘god’.
    This is fun.
    I DO NOT fucking believe it.

    Search results From Conservapedia You searched for god
    Jump to: navigation, search For more information about searching Conservapedia, see Searching Conservapedia. Showing below 0 results starting with #1. No page title matches No page text matches

    This must be a wind-up. I’ll Conse ‘jesus’

    The name Jesus is simply the name “Joshua” translated first into Greek, then English. In Christian discourse, the name Jesus almost always refers specifically to Jesus of Nazareth, believed by Christian followers to be God’s dad, who came to earth as a human c 2 AD. However, God has recently revealed on His blog that Jesus is actually His nephew, not His son. [1] The life of Jesus is recorded in the Bible in the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. According to the Gospels, Jesus died on the cross for our sins, and three days later he rose from the dead.

    Aaahh, humour; interesting. smile

    Theocracy From Conservapedia
    With any luck, a new modern theocracy will be established within the United States by the end of the decade.

    They could be serious.

    You searched for morality
    There is no page titled “morality”. You can create this page.

    Wonder why.

    Atheist morality: As for allegations that atheism contributes to crime, here are studies showing that in fact the opposite is true: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article571206.ece
    Finally, evidence of the inverse correlation between religiosity and intelligence: http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/religiosity-and-intelligence

    Interesting.

    I honestly don’t know if this site is beautifully crafted satire or if xianity itself is … beautifully crafted satire.

    I’ll go along with Brock on his observations as well as his predictions.
    They’re gonna busy as beavers in a whorehouse. wink

  5. Thanks SS for no end of humour
    Has anyone seen the global warming one?

    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

    And they complain about bias:

    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

    It goes on…

    Liberals would like to see the economy of America destroyed by forcing us to drive solar cars to work, and use geothermal energy to heat our homes. Global warming is merely a thinly-veiled liberal attempt to destroy capitalism.

    So in earnest I clicked the liberal link:

    Modern liberals are treasonous [1] and generally hate America [2].

    Or let’s try reality from:

    American Heritage Dictionary – lib·er·al (lĭb’ər-əl, lĭb’rəl) Pronunciation Key adj.

  6. Just more proof that they’ve created their own reality.  I wonder what the entry under “color of the sky” would be…

  7. I honestly don’t know if this site is beautifully crafted satire or if xianity itself is … beautifully crafted satire.

    The depressing thing is that people may not be in on that joke, LuckyJohn!

    You got those fellas in Oz? They seem slightly more common here in NZ than back in Germany, but not to a frightening degree yet.

    Anyway, reminds me of the guy who wanted to delete a duplicate computer file named “10 commandments” from his computer, and it said “illegal operation” an refused to do it. Ever since, he believes God directly controls his computer, and his harddrive must be full of duplicate drivel by now (Oh, well, could have guessed that wink. Read it on here as well, I believe…

  8. Ing: You got those fellas in Oz?

    I suppose we do but they don’t seem to make much noise or I don’t read or watch the right [sic] news productions.
    I think I should try and find a site similar to SEB in Oz so I can keep abreast of religious type news but I’m too apathetic.

    I just looked up the SMH to confirm there’s a state election on today and noticed a headline: Battle of the Beige, so I guess there is.
    No. I’m glad I read the first page of the article.
    Looks like the election is on 24th March.
    That’s good. It’ll give me more time to decide between bland and bland. wink

  9. I am getting to the point with these assholes where I don’t even care anymore! Used to get upset or incensed and rant and rave but now just go “fuck it,” I can’t let myself get twisted because these people are idiots.
    I would like to talk to a shrink or someone someday, and ask them “how can such normal looking, seemingly intelligent people actualy believe this shit?”
    My ex-brother in law was like that. He was a smart, ambitious go getter who would discuss science and everything else with me. It wasn’t until I had known him for almost ten years that I found out he thought the earth was only 7000 years old. I thought he was pulling my leg but the SOB was SERIOUS! (He was a Pentacostal – should have known when during his wedding, as soon as the band started playing and the bar was opened, his whole half of the room got up and left. That was OK, more booze for us!)

  10. I would like to talk to a shrink or someone someday, and ask them “how can such normal looking, seemingly intelligent people actualy believe this shit?”

    I’m not a shrink, but I think I have the answer: fear.

  11. I think it’s more than just fear, Sadie, I think there’s something really wrong with their minds. It’s like they have a little faith field around that section of their brains and logic can’t penetrate it.

  12. little faith field

    I read ‘mine’ field in there before I concentrated on the words.
    Then I realised ‘mine field’ would work too.
    Don’t think, do or say this or that cos otherwise the invisible man operating the invisible surveillance camera in the sky will swoooop down and graaab ya.

  13. There are so many things at play here that it really would be difficult to pin any one thing down.  Coming from someone that used to buy into the 9/11 conspiracy bullshit I can say that one big part of it is the need to look for answers.

    Part of the reason why religion is so popular is the scariness of death.  No one truly knows what happens when we die, and others still like living so much they wish for it to continue.  One way to do this is to assume there is an after life.

    With conspiracy theories, some things are so fucked up that the solution given cannot be the correct one.  There has to be some big plan involved for whatever reason they rationalize in their head.

    So while fear is a part of it in the sense of, believe what I teach you or go to hell, people willingly have to submit to this belief on some level.  Those that do, I do not believe are in any way unbalanced or fucked up (however some could be).  I just think they are looking for answers, and what they find in this website, and the one I posted about suits them for whatever reason.

    Some people just seem to be so willing to find an answer they just willingly accept what is being told, and turn off the filters.  Then they rationalize it in their head through other events and what not.

    Or they assume to get a passage to heaven they have to believe in all of this bullshit.  Being a good person just aint enough…

  14. Yea, but fear, or the conditioning in childhood or whatever puts a snerpy in your brain and that’s the weird part. Slapping them don’t seem to help either!!

    Your “w.t.f.” scribe;
    Allan

  15. Webs, I think you’re right about people wanting answers.  Proverbs 22:6 says; “Train up a child in the way that he should go, and when he is old he will not depart from it.”  In other words, satisfy the hunger for answers early on, and they’ll have little reason to look deeper.  (The Bible has less kind things to say about the psychology of female humans)

    The fact that most people are untroubled by the fact that they believe the same religion as most other people in their country shows that intellectual rigor is still a relatively new idea.  It has not had as much time as religion had to permeate our culture.

  16. Fear is such a strong emotion that it very often has the ability to override human intellect and rationality. I do think that it’s more than just a fear of going to “hell” or even fear of death that drives so much of religious fundamentalism, though. Keep in mind that there is a strong correlation between religious fundamentalism and traditionalism/authoritarianism. The world is always changing, but the rate of change has accelerated drastically in the last few centuries and even more so in the last seven decades. Traditional social roles no longer fit like they once did, and this is something that is truly threatening to a large number of people. I don’t believe that there is any one snappy answer for the rise of militant fundamentalism (Christian, Muslim, or what-not), but I do strongly believe that, once you strip away all the other factors, you find fear of some sort or another.

  17. Atheist morality: As for allegations that atheism contributes to crime, here are studies showing that in fact the opposite is true: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article571206.ece

    Heh, in Chicago, the worst neighborhoods have the most churches.  Which is funny until you think about all the dirt poor people giving money to some reverend who probably has a nice house and a new car.

  18. The most popular article today is “Examples of Bias in Wikipedia”.  Aside from the victimized attitude that the page emotes (which I fully believe is a key component of most religions, the need to feel that you are a persecuted minority, or rather, have an enemy), I guess they really just don’t get the whole idea of a Wiki, as opposed to a traditional encyclopedia. 

    If they were railing against Encyclopedia Britanica or Encarta, I could understand, but for Crust’s sake, this is Wikipedia we’re talking about.  I see it as being about as accurate as getting information from people at work, or relatives.

    I don’t know about these guys, but when I was doing my time in fundyland, I was constantly being told to not take what the pastor(s) or anyone else said as truth without verifying it myself (through the Bible of course…). Even though they weren’t really interested in seeing anyone do their own studies (that actually is what ultimately led to my “apostacy”), it’s still good advice.  Wikipedia is a good source of quick facts and info, but I don’t think anyone should take what it says at face value.

  19. Hmmm…it almost sounds as if they (meaning fundies) are desperate enough to don on their tinfoil hats and dig the bomb shelter of their own reality.  Then, it’s entirely possible that they won’t be tresspassing on *my* reality for much longer.  In which case, I’m all grins, and good shuttance to ‘em.  See you in 20 years, wankers.  Let’s hope that science has a cure for you by then.

  20. I can’t thank you enough for bringing this site to my attention. I checked the evolution page, and was shocked to discover that according to one (obviously nobel-prize winning) contributor, evolution violates the second law of thermodynamics. I of course being a paragon of truth and virtue was going to edit the entry with something a little less idiotic (and maybe a little funnier) when I realized that for some reason you can’t create new accounts to edit articles anymore…hmmmmmmmmm…

  21. That’s cause we are the low men on the totem pole.  Other science bloggers, raving happy skeptics and jokers have knocked the site into a loop.  From my understanding the site was so badly vandalized that it will take months of proof reading to find all the bad puns and stupid insertions, as well as eliminate all the “taboo” knowledge injected into it.  Just by looking at some of the non-vandalized articles however it looks like they probably will never get around to it.  It isn’t a conservative blog, it is a American Fundamentalist blog which is now a vandal hot spot.  They probably disabled account creation to stop the flood of crazed alterations however I doubt that this measure will be enough.  Already I’m hearing of a market for still running accounts from which to wreck havoc.  It was an interesting experiment however it was probably destined to fail as it did.  Only choice now is to pray for holy internet intervention.

    *by the way, love the new spell checker on the site Les.  Saves me so much time making sure I got something spelled right*

  22. The bias in wiki appears to be mostly with the fact that English people speak English, and that its down right anti God to have a ‘u’ or ‘s’ in the correct place.  OK, evolution of language and all that, though why do we in Britain have to suffer Americanisations- we have many products (especially far east imports) that use ‘color’ etc. 

    The point started getting wierd when they whined about the fact that Wiki uses the correct spelling of Habsburg, rather than the American Hapsburg.  THIS IS A PROPER NAME.  If Mr John Harbour came to the US, would they insist he call himself Mr Harbor. 

    Personally I think we in Britain should retaliate, and start talking about the World Trade Centre on 11/9.

  23. Sorry to triple dip but I had to share this.

    If you consiwiki ‘Jesus’ you get a short entry, part of which contains a link in the words “God has recently revealed on His blog that Jesus is actually His nephew, not His son” 

    This link takes you to a subpage in BlogoftheGods.

    Go on, read it. God telling you the bible is all true.  And pointing out if he wanted us to know how old the Earth is, He wouldn’t have hidden the evidence underground.

  24. It technically was a Soviet policy.  Wikipedia itself has an article that sites the name, though it’s hyphenated and not an actual proper name.
    Wikipedia – de-stalinization, so I suspect conservapedia is serious about it.  The fundies tend to make up new labels for stuff from existing names and ideas so they can keep everything in nice, easily definable black and white terms.  For example, I’ve never called or considered myself an “Evolutionist”, or a “Darwinist”, though by the fundy definition I fit both.  I’d never, ever, ever call myself either one though.

    I suspect “Destalinization” is of a similar vein.  Religious nuts, be they muslim or christian seem to require everything to be neatly defined, even though reality just isn’t really that convenient.  Its evidence of their faith based reality, as opposed to the reality based reality that rational people live in.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.