|
|
#1
03-06-2007, 12:03 AM
|
|||
|
|||
wikipedia with out the liberal bias
http://www.conservapedia.com/Main_Page
one of many great gems, from the entry "Kangaroo" According to the origins model used by creation scientists, modern kangaroos, like all modern animals, originated in the Middle East[1] and are the descendants of the two founding members of the modern kangaroo baramin that were taken aboard Noah's Ark prior to the Great Flood. 
|
|
#4
03-06-2007, 01:10 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: wikipedia with out the liberal bias
[ QUOTE ]
http://www.conservapedia.com/Main_Page one of many great gems, from the entry "Kangaroo" According to the origins model used by creation scientists, modern kangaroos, like all modern animals, originated in the Middle East[1] and are the descendants of the two founding members of the modern kangaroo baramin that were taken aboard Noah's Ark prior to the Great Flood. [/ QUOTE ] Wow, what a ridiculous joke. More like Stupidopedia.
|
|
#5
03-06-2007, 03:48 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Out-Coultering Coulter
[ QUOTE ]
Obvious joke site. [/ QUOTE ]It does look like a joke and, if indeed it is, someone has gone to a lot of trouble putting it together! Check out the entry for Theory of Evolution. Mickey Brausch
|
|
#6
03-06-2007, 04:42 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Out-Coultering Coulter
It is not a joke. It was started as a site for home-school kids to input lessons from their textbooks. Though there are many articles that have been vandalized, so now it's almost impossible to tell what is untouched and what is the work of the vandals.
|
|
#7
03-06-2007, 05:27 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: wikipedia with out the liberal bias
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] http://www.conservapedia.com/Main_Page one of many great gems, from the entry "Kangaroo" According to the origins model used by creation scientists, modern kangaroos, like all modern animals, originated in the Middle East[1] and are the descendants of the two founding members of the modern kangaroo baramin that were taken aboard Noah's Ark prior to the Great Flood. [/ QUOTE ] Wow, what a ridiculous joke. More like Stupidopedia. [/ QUOTE ]
|
|
#8
03-06-2007, 09:01 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: wikipedia with out the liberal bias
To some people, this is
dead serious.
|
|
#9
03-06-2007, 09:08 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Out-Coultering Coulter
[ QUOTE ]
It is not a joke. [/ QUOTE ] Wikipedia's "powered by" Wikimedia. This site's "powered by" Mediawiki. It's a joke. There are certainly people out there who believe this crap, but this is a joke. Most importantly of all, these are extreme religious views, not conservative views. Even those who believe this crap wouldn't drag mainstream converatism into it. If it were real it would have been called "christianopedia" or something. This is a blatant attempt by some leftist to make fun of "conservatives".
|
|
#10
03-06-2007, 09:34 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Out-Coultering Coulter
[ QUOTE ]
Though there are many articles that have been vandalized, so now it's almost impossible to tell what is untouched and what is the work of the vandals. [/ QUOTE ] How can articles be vandalized when there's no way to edit them? This is just another thing where's they're aping Wikipedia, with whom article vandalization is often a topic. Just look at the entries beyond the evolution stuff. Thomas Jefferson's entry focuses almost entirely on his views towards Christianity. James Monroe's entry just says "Was the 5th president of the United States. Served as president from 1817-1825." Grover Cleveland doesn't have an entry at all. Lincoln's entry is like 4 paragraphs and also focuses largely on his Christianity as well as saying inaccurately that John Wilkes Booth was from the South. All of this makes it clear that there're only 1 or 2 people filling this site and certainly no "vandals".
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
