Goneoffthedeependpedia

[SLCPUNK]

A conservative's answer to Wikipedia

Seeing a liberal bias on the popular online encyclopedia, a teacher launches Conservapedia -- to give a different angle on the facts, he says.

Andy Schlafly was appalled. He was teaching a history class to home-schooled teens and one student had just turned in an assignment that dated events as "BCE," before the common era ? rather than "BC," before Christ.

"Where did that come from?" he demanded.

Her answer: "Wikipedia."

At that, Schlafly knew he had to act. In his mind, the popular online encyclopedia ? written and edited by self-appointed experts worldwide ? was riddled with liberal bias. Dating events without referring to the New Testament was just one example. How about Wikipedia's entry on golfer Zach Johnson, winner of the 2007 Masters? Not a single word about how Johnson gave credit for his win to Jesus Christ.

Thus was born Conservapedia.com ? labeled "a conservative encyclopedia you can trust."

Schlafly, 46, started small, urging his students to post brief ? often one-sentence ? entries on ancient history. He went live with the site in November. In the last six months, it's grown explosively, offering what Schlafly describes as fair, scholarly articles. Many have a distinctly religious-right perspective.

Take the Pleistocene Epoch. Most scientists know it as the ice age and date it back at least 1.6 million years. But Conservapedia calls it "a theorized period of time" ? a theory contradicted, according to the entry, by "multiple lines of evidence" indicating that the Earth is less than 10,000 years old, as described in the Book of Genesis.

"We have certain principles that we adhere to, and we are up-front about them," Schlafly writes in his mission statement. "Beyond that we welcome the facts."

Conservapedia defines environmentalists as "people who profess concern about the environment" and notes that some would want to impose legal limits on the use of toilet paper.

Femininity? The quality of being "childlike, gentle, pretty, willowy, submissive."

A hike in minimum wage is referred to as "a controversial manoeuvre that increases the incentive for young people to drop out of school."

And the state of the economy under President Bush? Much better than the "liberal media" would have you think: "For example, during his term Exxon Mobile has posted the largest profit of any company in a single year, and executive salaries have greatly increased as well."

With fewer than 12,000 entries and typos galore (the misspelling of Mobil above; the mayor of L.A. is referred to as "Anthony Varigoso"), Conservapedia isn't about to supplant Wikipedia ? which boasts 1.8 million articles in English alone.

But the all-volunteer site has several thousand active readers and writers. Schlafly encourages his students to use it as a reference, saying that the articles are more concise than those on Wikipedia. On the home page, just above the daily Bible verse, he tallies total views: 12.3 million and counting.

Conservapedia's critics for the most part have no problem with the articles heaping praise on former President Reagan and Margaret Thatcher, former prime minister of Britain. But they worry about material presented as fact in science and medicine entries that typically seek to debunk evolution, condemn homosexuality and raise fears about abortion. They're also concerned that children who stumble onto the site will assume everything in it is authoritative.

Schlafly says students can always follow the footnotes to get more information, but few links connect to dissenting ? or even mainstream ? views.

"The project specifically targets high-schoolers, and that's probably what I find most dangerous," said Andreas Kjeldsen, 27, a Danish graduate student who wrote several entries on medieval history before stopping in protest.

Many, perhaps most, of Conservapedia's articles are free of ideology. There are brisk, straightforward entries about hundreds of topics: the tuba, Claude Monet, the nation of Latvia, Robin Hood, polygons, the Renaissance.

But consider the entry on Hillary Diane Rodham Clinton (b. 1947). She "may suffer from a psychological condition that would raise questions about her fitness for office" ? namely, "clinical narcissism," Conservapedia asserts. Evidence of her instability includes her "ever-changing opinion of the Iraq war." Though Schlafly demands that entries be rigorously footnoted, these sentences are not.

Schlafly calls the armchair psychology "borderline in acceptability" for his site, but he defends the Clinton article on balance as "an objective, bias-free piece from a conservative perspective."

More

[Bill 213]

Conservapedia's entry on Dubya:? ?


George Walker Bush (born 1946) was the Governor of Texas (1996-2001) and has served as the Republican President of the United States of America since 2001. Campaigning on the notion that the United States should not be in the business of nation-building,[1] he won the office by a narrow margin in the decisive State of Florida. Legal challenges to the certified vote count went all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court in 2000. Democratic contender Al Gore initially conceded defeat on the night of the election, but then contested the outcome for weeks until the Supreme Court case Bush v. Gore.

In 2004, George W. Bush won reelection, including a 300,000 vote (5%) victory[2] in the State of Florida where the outcome had been so close in 2000. Democratic candidate John Kerry quickly conceded defeat the day after the election.

In 2006, the Democratic Party narrowly won control of both Houses of Congress, leaving the final two years of the Bush Administration in a state of divided government.

Contents [hide]
1 Foreign policy
2 Economic issues
3 Family
4 References
 

Foreign policy
George W. Bush has spent most of his Presidency focusing on foreign policy issues, namely the war on terror in response to the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks against the USA. As part of the fight against terrorism, he received Congressional approval to invade the countries of Afghanistan and Iraq, and the military has successfully effected regime changes in those countries. He is now working to end the Iraqi insurgency and stabilize the region.

In a show down with Congressional Democrats after taking control of the U.S. House of Representatives and Senate in the 2006 Congressional Midterm elections, Democrats retreated on their pledge to end the Iraq War early and bring the troops home. Democrats had threatened to withhold funding for the troops unless a date certain for withdrawal was set. After the final vote, 280-142 in the House and 80-14 in the Senate, the anti-War movement was defeated. The deal cut with Democratic leaders in exchange for their acquiescing to fund the troops calls for the President to sign legislation raising the minimum wage. [3] One commentator remarked, "Despite all the talk of standing up to George W. Bush, despite all the bravado about taking control of Congress, despite the so-called mandate to change direction, Democrats caved....They claim that the majority of Americans are with them on the Iraq issue, but...President Bush, at the weakest moment of his presidency, still bested his Democratic rivals." [4]

Economic issues
Though the liberal media continues to disparage Bush's handling of the economy, they often neglect to report the many aspects of the economy that Bush has improved. For example, during his term Exxon Mobil has posted the largest profit of any company in a single year, and executive salaries have greatly increased as well.[5] This is due to changes in the stock market that lead to a record high in 2006. Corporations show profits growing by double digits growth.[6] Even the working class is benefiting from the Bush economy, as unemployment hits an all time low in March 2007.[7] Bush worked with Democrats to raise the minimum wage to a more livable level.[8]

Family
George W. Bush is the son of George H. W. Bush, who served as vice-president from 1981 to 1989 and as president from 1989 to 1993.

George W. Bush is a member of the United Methodist Church, and many people feel that George W. Bush's faith is sincere and profound. The Faith of George W. Bush, a non-political book by author Stephen Strang, made the New York Times best-sellers list. [9]
--------------------------------
Please tell me that an oil executive wrote that...because if some fucking idiot is excited about Bush's oil buddies becoming super rich while the rest of the economy suffers, then WOW.  I can't believe people are so fucking idiotic. 

[freedom78]

Yeah, I've searched around on there before.  They do make some effort at offering alternate perspectives, though there is an occasional surreal moment, where they throw out a random fact that is just meant to drive conservatives away from belief in a particular issue.  For example:

The theory of evolution is a naturalistic explanation of the history of life on earth (This refers to the theory of evolution which employs methodological naturalism and is commonly taught in public schools and universities). The concept of materialistic evolution differs from the concept of Theistic Evolution in positing that God does not guide the theorized process of macroevolution. A majority of the most prominent and vocal defenders of the naturalistic evolutionary position since World War II have been atheists.

 

Good stuff.

However, I'll go on record and say I don't give a rat's ass about BC vs. BCE.  BC doesn't bother me, because I think it references what is probably the most important historical event in human history.  I'm not making a religious argument, and I can see why one might bother some people, but if you don't think the birth of Christ was a seminal event in how the cultures of the world developed, how and why wars were fought, and so on, then you're blind to history.

Now, if someone wants it to be BC because it's an easier way to count how many years we've had to baptize the heathens...well, that would rub some the wrong way. 

[Where is Hassan Nasrallah ?]

However, I'll go on record and say I don't give a rat's ass about BC vs. BCE.  BC doesn't bother me, because I think it references what is probably the most important historical event in human history.

for 33% of the "humans" ..... of course, white christian countries are the ones that count .....

because i can tell you, there are a lot of people that reallydon't care about a guy dead for 2000 years.
Then again, the 2000 years of stupidity and arrogance, that bothered some people. (90% of christian in south america ... what a joke!)

[freedom78]

However, I'll go on record and say I don't give a rat's ass about BC vs. BCE.  BC doesn't bother me, because I think it references what is probably the most important historical event in human history.

for 33% of the "humans" ..... of course, white christian countries are the ones that count .....

because i can tell you, there are a lot of people that reallydon't care about a guy dead for 2000 years.
Then again, the 2000 years of stupidity and arrogance, that bothered some people. (90% of christian in south america ... what a joke!)

You haven't been around much lately!  Welcome back.  I had missed having someone intentionally misinterpret my posts. 

Anyway, it's a pretty big event for non-white, non-Christians, too!  Crusades ring a bell?  I'm not talking about Christianity as a religion, but as something that has had a profound impact on the history of the world.  I'm not discussing it as good or bad...just as important. 

[Izzy]

Wow, the American right never cease to amaze me

For those Americans with an education may i suggest relocation to Britain - hell, its not a great place but u should see what we do with the religious and right wing over here!

Promoting Christianity in a classroom would be grounds for a good ol' firing and i dont think i've ever heard someone deny evolution.

[fuckin crazy]

A primary supporter:

TRIBUTE TO KENT HOVIND

EDIT : my new favorite song

[stolat]

The definition of femininity: childlike, gentle, pretty, willowy, submissive.....

The first 3, understandable feminine wiles.....

Submissive.....yes, serves it purposes, men like it, good sex can come of this......

But willowy!?? Since when has impersonating a tree enhanced one's feminity???

Maybe that's why men want to chop the trees down.....

 

[fuckin crazy]

, submissive ...
Maybe that's why men want to chop the trees down.....

 

Men can be submissive too ... just ask Madam ...

EDIT : better leave the rest out

[stolat]

, submissive ...
Maybe that's why men want to chop the trees down.....

 

Men can be submissive too ... just ask Madam ...

EDIT : better leave the rest out

Yes, Madame Lash et al would have something to say about that........


       
     

[2NaFish]

i dont mind him having a right-wing version of wiki, what bothers me is that students cite wikipedia as a direct source of information in essays. Bloody ridiculous. Yes, its an informative sight and can be used for some backround reading, but its riddled with errors and fallacies. i'd fail anyone using it as a source without even reading their essay.

[fuckin crazy]

i dont mind him having a right-wing version of wiki, what bothers me is that students cite wikipedia as a direct source of information in essays. Bloody ridiculous. Yes, its an informative sight and can be used for some backround reading, but its riddled with errors and fallacies. i'd fail anyone using it as a source without even reading their essay.

As a primary source yes, but tertiary?

[2NaFish]

i dont mind him having a right-wing version of wiki, what bothers me is that students cite wikipedia as a direct source of information in essays. Bloody ridiculous. Yes, its an informative sight and can be used for some backround reading, but its riddled with errors and fallacies. i'd fail anyone using it as a source without even reading their essay.

As a primary source yes, but tertiary?

yip. wiki has no place in the academic world. if you want to know something look it up in a book written by somebody that knows what they are talking about rather than some random yahoo.

[Communist China]

There's no doubt, of course, that Fox News is closer to mainstream America than CBS, ABC, NBC or CNN. But, after all, that was its founding mission.

Finaly, an encyclopedia that isn't so damn biased, and tels the real truth.