Conservatives afraid of facts have put together the unintentionally hilarious Conservapedia. Jon Swift explains.
Comments are closed.
Open source, procurement, and gov tech.
Conservatives afraid of facts have put together the unintentionally hilarious Conservapedia. Jon Swift explains.
Comments are closed.
I’m almost completely certain that it is satire. Almost.
Wow.
I love how they claim that wikipedia is so biased and inaccurate and is nothing like a “real encyclopedia” and yet if you look up the definition of “pagan” it reads “a pagan is someone who beleives in false gods. The First Commandment is, Thou shalt have no other gods before Me.
Most pagans are ancient, like the Greeks and Romans, but there are also modern pagans like witches and Muslims, who do not beleive in Jesus.”
Oh yeah, that’s exactly the sort of definition I’d expect to find in a legitimate encyclopedia. And I like how they diss wiki for mispelling someone’s name but then mispell “believe.”
You can’t have Gods before me, but you can have lesser gods after me…
Looks like they’re no longer adding new accounts. And I wanted to clarify the meaning of “confirmed bachelor” in the King James entry…
I think a lot of the hilarity is intentional, though it’s impossible to tell for sure with some of it. There’s no way they’re going to be able to completely exclude spoofers unless they give up on having a big community working on it (which would essentially mean giving up on the project). I imagine people will be playing a game of seeing how outrageous they can be without having their fakes recognized and reverted.
Conservatives aren’t afraid of facts. We’re annoyed at how the largely liberal media interprets them. The NYT headline, “Crime is Down but Prisons Keep Filling” is a classic example of the disconnect between the media and conservatives.
Their article on the Holocaust makes me sad.
If you cannot live in China where the government will censor and slant the facts you can access via the internet, what’s wrong with having access to censorship here in the U.S.? Lots of folks don’t feel comfortable with being able to read all views of some subjects, and would only like to read what keeps them in their “comfort zone”. Who wants to be upset by reading things that don’t comport with one’s view of reality? This free speech stuff has just gone too far. There are so-called “Christian” search engines out there that serve the same purpose, allowing people to search for information that will present only “hits” presenting views with which they agree. Why should people in China be the only ones entitled to censorship? It’s just not fair.
Clever girl, that April.