Make your own reality at Conservapedia!

[Amor Fati]

Enjoy democracy in knowledge but despise Wiki's liberal bias?  Check out Conservapedia!  

Main page description:  

"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."

More hilarious highlights via  Daily Kos


This kind of shit must drive atheist-conservatives completely up the wall.

[MrE2Me]

Hahaha, the great "advances" of Christianity.  The irony is so big they don't even notice it...

But yeah, objective facts tend to be "anti-American" and "anti-Christian".  Welcome to the real world.

[SteveS]

Hey, I finally checked this link out.  It's remarkable.  While it really doesn't deserve a detailed review, I thought it would be fun to try.  The kids are asleep, the house is quiet, and I've got a six pack on hand (I freely confess that I do really weird things with my free time, and no, I don't need the alcohol, I can stop drinking any time I want, I've just never wanted to).

Initial Impressions, aka Reaching for the Bottle Opener
Okay, right off the bat, the front page says

A conservative encyclopedia you can trust.

Okay, so what is everyone worried about?  It says right here you can trust it, geez......

Posting of obscenity here is punishable by up to 10 years in jail under 18 USC § 1470. Vandalism is punishable up to 10 years in jail per 18 USC § 1030. We will trace your IP address if necessary.

Oh.  Maybe that's what everyone’s worried about.  I wonder, if I created a page that they didn't agree with, they wouldn't do something nasty like claim it was "obscene" and that posting it constituted "vandalism", would they?  Gulp.  Maybe I'll just leave it alone.  If this thing were alive it'd be a porcupine (please don't feed it).  I was honestly expecting to see "Thanks for your cooperation.  Signed, the Gestapo".

First Drink, Atheism
Pop, hiss, foam….(slurp)
http://www.conservapedia.com/Atheism.  Now, granted, this could have been better, but all in all it's not blatantly objectionable.  Maybe this isn't so bad after all?  Now why don't I really believe that....(chugs)

Second Drink, Christianity
Pop, hiss, foam….(slurp)
http://www.conservapedia.com/Christianity.  Okay.  At least they toss in some caveats, but do they really make this any more palatable:

People can claim to be Christians, yet not be so. Jesus said that just as weeds grow along with the wheat, so there will be non-believers with the believers, wolves and false-teachers among the lambs

Interesting.  Apparently I'm a weed (I am starting to feel green, and I don't think it's the beer).

We will see differences in denominations, differences among people claiming to be Christians, but only God can see the heart. We ask for an outward confession of faith, and if the person does so, we also look for spiritual growth, for fruit in their lives--evidence that the Holy Spirit is working in them. "Love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, gentleness and self control" are evidences of the Holy Spirit, as is good doctrine, speaking truthfully, being faithful to Scripture, and loving God with our whole heart, soul, mind and strength, and our neighbors as ourselves.

This whole "we" and "our" business is, well, it's just not objective.  I don't deny that asking a Christian about Christianity is a useful exercise, it's just, well, then shouldn’t this be a “Christianapedia”?  Wait, you don't think, no, I mean they wouldn’t have, right?  Only one way to find out, so time for a side query (and a third drink)...

Third Drink, A New ‘Pedia?
Pop, hiss, foam….(slurp)

Firefox can't find the server at www.christianapedia.com.
Firefox can’t find the server at www.christiapedi.com (either)

Oh well.  It was worth a try. (chugs)

Back to our article.  Lol, as you go down it's get's a lot worse.  Is there any controversy involving Christianity?  Well, the article says

It is a misunderstanding that there is much conflict or different thought within Christianity on certain issues. Christians get their truth from Scripture, and usually it is those who do not hold to Scripture who are the ones trying to drill up controversy.

Thanks for clearing that up.  Odd though, I thought there was controversy about something.  Maybe homosexuality?  Let's see, oh, here we go,

Scripture says that homosexuality is "an abomination" to God ( Dt 18 ) and is a perversion against nature( Rom 1 ). Because it is God Who gives life and families and children, marriage is a holy sacrament, and families are to be desired the way He as our Creator intended for us. So Christians understand the importance of family, of real love, and are against homosexuality, while still loving the person who struggles with the sin. The sin is not denied, however, and the full text of Scripture is proclaimed, because it is the Word of God.

And that answers that.  Afterall,

Christianity competes in the marketplace of ideas in the world with many religions and secular philosophies. It stands alone for Truth.

Fourth Drink, Islam
Pop, hiss, foam….(slurp)
http://www.conservapedia.com/Islam.  Here it seems we are back on relatively neutral ground.  Although this article is short (haha, conservative throughout?) and not very informative, I found it basically free of gross misconduct.  Cheers (burp).

Fifth Drink (already?), Politics
Pop, hiss, foam....(slurp)
Considering the above three references, I find the site far more willing to “get funky” when pimping it's own cause, rather than going out of it's way to trash on the opposition.  Er, well, at least until I compared the articles on "Democratic Party", http://www.conservapedia.com/Democrat and "Republican Party", http://www.conservapedia.com/Republican_Party.  Particularly, the "Criticism" section under "Democratic Party" seems a tad biased.  Noticeable in it's absence is any "Criticism" section under "Republican Party".

Bathroom Break
Verdict?  Articles that are short, lack information, and in some cases are really just collections of opinions (for a good example see http://www.conservapedia.com/Abortion).

I know that you are all deeply shocked.  I am too.  But I've got one beer left, and I possess an inquisitive nature, so I wondered to myself.......(flush)

Is There A Liberapedia?
Pop, hiss, foam....(slurp)
Yes, there is, it's at http://www.liberapedia.com/index.php?title=Main_Page.  On its main page it purports itself to be,

Saving The World From Neoconservative Facist Hatemongering Racists

A calm, rational response like this has finally thrown into highlight the difference between the political factions.  Let’s look inside, shall we ... wait a minute, Great Scott!  This ‘pedia appears to be empty (Hah!  Take that Geraldo!).  Of course, in my opinion this makes it far superior to the conservapedia.  Since silence wins the day, I’d like to call into question the wisdom of even putting up this liberapedia main page.  Anyway, let us hope it remains empty, or it's just going to be more of the same, only this time different.

Where'd I put my beer?  Oh.  How'd it get way up there?  (rolls over) And whose idea was it to put a carpet on the wall?

Public Service Message: Don’t Drink and Deride.  Ba Bump Bump.  Thanks, I’ll be here all the week….

[Kestrel]

How did I miss this yesterday?

LOL Great Steve!  

[SteveS]

Thanks Kestrel.  I had a lot of fun writing it (as if you couldn't tell).