Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 48 (9179 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: Jorge Parker
Post Volume: Total: 918,231 Year: 5,488/9,624 Month: 513/323 Week: 10/143 Day: 0/10 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   www.conservapedia.com - What do you think?
Tusko
Member (Idle past 216 days)
Posts: 615
From: London, UK
Joined: 10-01-2004


Message 1 of 167 (387881)
03-03-2007 11:13 AM


I don't know if you've heard about this, but someone has started up a new wiki aimed at countering the perceived liberal bias in Wikipedia.
Check out some of the articles, of most relevance to us perhaps:
Evolution
Mutations
Clearly it is very amateurish, and says some very funny, strange things. It must be noted that it has to some degree been compromised by piss-takers and pastiche-artists, hence the current lock-down on new accounts.
Personally, I think its as mad as a screaming weasel on a pogo-stick, and I think it might be potentially quite damaging - an example of a kind of social isolationism. I was just wondering what anyone else thought of it.
Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Tried tweeking topic title. There has been problems with replying to this topic.
Edited by Tusko, : Ah - thanks Adminnemooseus!I was going nuts trying to edit my hideous spelling and other errors there.

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by RAZD, posted 03-03-2007 5:06 PM Tusko has replied
 Message 4 by Chiroptera, posted 03-03-2007 5:07 PM Tusko has replied
 Message 5 by jar, posted 03-03-2007 5:17 PM Tusko has replied
 Message 8 by Straggler, posted 03-03-2007 5:41 PM Tusko has replied
 Message 9 by Omnivorous, posted 03-03-2007 5:47 PM Tusko has replied
 Message 39 by Jaderis, posted 03-04-2007 2:08 AM Tusko has replied
 Message 40 by arachnophilia, posted 03-04-2007 2:14 AM Tusko has not replied
 Message 57 by Hyroglyphx, posted 03-04-2007 7:53 PM Tusko has replied
 Message 106 by RAZD, posted 03-05-2007 8:39 PM Tusko has not replied

  
Tusko
Member (Idle past 216 days)
Posts: 615
From: London, UK
Joined: 10-01-2004


Message 13 of 167 (387939)
03-03-2007 6:25 PM
Reply to: Message 3 by RAZD
03-03-2007 5:06 PM


Re: christian fundamentalism ≠ all conservatives
Oh yes. Sit an infinite number of true Scotsmen down at an infinite number of typewriters....
Hey Presto!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by RAZD, posted 03-03-2007 5:06 PM RAZD has seen this message but not replied

  
Tusko
Member (Idle past 216 days)
Posts: 615
From: London, UK
Joined: 10-01-2004


Message 14 of 167 (387942)
03-03-2007 6:33 PM
Reply to: Message 4 by Chiroptera
03-03-2007 5:07 PM


What I find funniest about the whole thing is that before they had a lock-down to prevent new people having accounts (and perhaps also editing by non moderators?) there were quite a lot of piss-takers going on and modifying hotbutton entries for a joke... and the tragedy is in many cases you can't tell whether they are taking the piss or not.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by Chiroptera, posted 03-03-2007 5:07 PM Chiroptera has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 17 by Chiroptera, posted 03-03-2007 6:43 PM Tusko has not replied
 Message 27 by Chiroptera, posted 03-03-2007 7:13 PM Tusko has replied

  
Tusko
Member (Idle past 216 days)
Posts: 615
From: London, UK
Joined: 10-01-2004


Message 15 of 167 (387943)
03-03-2007 6:37 PM
Reply to: Message 5 by jar
03-03-2007 5:17 PM


Re: The rest of the world should be afraid, very afraid.
I read on a blog - I forget which one annoyingly - something that I thought was rather insightful. The writer was saying that they thought this was one example of a wider project of constructing a parallel reality: a reality in which you can be born, raised, live and die, and never come into meaningful contact with people with differing viewpoints.
It reminds me of the Amish. Except with computers.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by jar, posted 03-03-2007 5:17 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 18 by jar, posted 03-03-2007 6:52 PM Tusko has replied

  
Tusko
Member (Idle past 216 days)
Posts: 615
From: London, UK
Joined: 10-01-2004


Message 16 of 167 (387944)
03-03-2007 6:43 PM
Reply to: Message 6 by Quetzal
03-03-2007 5:24 PM


Re: The rest of the world should be afraid, very afraid.
Quetzal writes:
Very, very sad. It's as though AiG decided to write an encyclopedia. Let this be a further lesson: open framework, web-based encyclopedias are NOT an authoritative source. Unless you can verify the information through primary sources, of course.
The irony probably hasn't escaped you that this is now not an open framework encyclopedia - they've locked it down because people were screwing with it too much. I think
the discussion page for the Theory of Evolution entry is a great example of how the wiki ethos and this project seem to be incompatible. An individual is arguing for improvements and is being shouted down by others. Chaos.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by Quetzal, posted 03-03-2007 5:24 PM Quetzal has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 19 by Chiroptera, posted 03-03-2007 6:53 PM Tusko has not replied

  
Tusko
Member (Idle past 216 days)
Posts: 615
From: London, UK
Joined: 10-01-2004


Message 21 of 167 (387950)
03-03-2007 6:57 PM
Reply to: Message 8 by Straggler
03-03-2007 5:41 PM


Re: As mad as a screaming weasel on a pogo-stick
Seriously now, I think the problem you raise is a fascinating one; namely, how do you communicate with people who sincerely believe that logic, experiment, observation and evidence are fundamentally worthless, even dangerous?
When confronted with the bald fact that there are plenty of people who call themselves Christians (or in this case plenty of people who call themselves conservatives) who don't find the idea of an old earth or of evolution incompatible with their beliefs, how can they say that these people aren't true Christians (or conservatives) without even batting an eyelid?
How can they have come to believe this? It's a yawning, world-swallowing gulf in understanding, isn't it?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by Straggler, posted 03-03-2007 5:41 PM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 24 by Straggler, posted 03-03-2007 7:09 PM Tusko has not replied
 Message 30 by RAZD, posted 03-03-2007 7:27 PM Tusko has not replied

  
Tusko
Member (Idle past 216 days)
Posts: 615
From: London, UK
Joined: 10-01-2004


Message 22 of 167 (387952)
03-03-2007 6:59 PM
Reply to: Message 10 by CK
03-03-2007 5:52 PM


Re: The rest of the world should be afraid, very afraid.
Oh come on. That has to be a piss-taker.
Doesn't it?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by CK, posted 03-03-2007 5:52 PM CK has not replied

  
Tusko
Member (Idle past 216 days)
Posts: 615
From: London, UK
Joined: 10-01-2004


Message 25 of 167 (387957)
03-03-2007 7:09 PM
Reply to: Message 9 by Omnivorous
03-03-2007 5:47 PM


But do you know what the really sick thing is? The more that people take the piss by altering this godawful site, the more this proves to people inclined to take it seriously that the evolutionists/atheists/onanists are a nasty bunch who should be avoided: the more it proves that Wikipedia is biased - which to them is clearly synonymous with wrong.
Isn't that the biggest tragedy of all?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by Omnivorous, posted 03-03-2007 5:47 PM Omnivorous has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 59 by Omnivorous, posted 03-04-2007 10:40 PM Tusko has replied

  
Tusko
Member (Idle past 216 days)
Posts: 615
From: London, UK
Joined: 10-01-2004


Message 28 of 167 (387960)
03-03-2007 7:23 PM
Reply to: Message 18 by jar
03-03-2007 6:52 PM


Re: Christian Cult of Ignorance
What I find utterly paralysing is the claim that evolutionists/bad people are just as rabidly in thrall to their ideology as the Christians/good people. Forgetting for a moment that the unspoken flip-side of this argument is that they are admitting they are crazy zealots, I think it is true, with caveats. Although scientific methodology has brought us massive advances in medicine, engineering, agriculture and materials science to name but a few, its true that you have to believe in it to engage with it and to push it forward.
It seems self-evident to me that a scientific methodology is preferable, but I prefer it only because I have matured in a very specific kind of environment, and made very specific decisions. I could just as easily be asking WWJD.
I want someone to come up with a really good riposte to this line of argument because I think it becomes a bottom line in many fundamentalist's minds. Whether it makes sense or not, it is brilliantly divisive and I think it needs to be addressed.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by jar, posted 03-03-2007 6:52 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 31 by jar, posted 03-03-2007 7:30 PM Tusko has not replied
 Message 38 by Quetzal, posted 03-03-2007 9:08 PM Tusko has replied
 Message 43 by Phat, posted 03-04-2007 7:57 AM Tusko has replied

  
Tusko
Member (Idle past 216 days)
Posts: 615
From: London, UK
Joined: 10-01-2004


Message 29 of 167 (387961)
03-03-2007 7:26 PM
Reply to: Message 27 by Chiroptera
03-03-2007 7:13 PM


Re: It gets better!
Priceless!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by Chiroptera, posted 03-03-2007 7:13 PM Chiroptera has not replied

  
Tusko
Member (Idle past 216 days)
Posts: 615
From: London, UK
Joined: 10-01-2004


Message 41 of 167 (388012)
03-04-2007 7:15 AM
Reply to: Message 35 by Straggler
03-03-2007 8:17 PM


Re: Christian Cult of Ignorance
Its not just the fundamentalist Christians who are increasingly flexing their political muscle in this country. There is also the Sharia movement, which is seemingly quite entrenched. I think the idea of a secular society is being put increasingly under pressure. At the moment there isn't any real danger, but public opinion can slide and there isn't anything one can do when it does. Maybe that's excessively apocalyptic.
I think the laws that were brought in to prevent "incitement to religious hatred" and so forth are terribly counterproductive. Rather than extending the blasphemy laws, they should have levelled the playing field by removing all limits to free speech in religious matters.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 35 by Straggler, posted 03-03-2007 8:17 PM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 47 by Straggler, posted 03-04-2007 9:06 AM Tusko has replied

  
Tusko
Member (Idle past 216 days)
Posts: 615
From: London, UK
Joined: 10-01-2004


Message 127 of 167 (388727)
03-07-2007 12:54 PM
Reply to: Message 38 by Quetzal
03-03-2007 9:08 PM


Re: Christian Cult of Ignorance
That sounds pretty good to me too.
Its unfortunate that there are so many people for whom checking the evidence isn't so appealing. Perhaps its an affront to their belief -do not test the lord thy God? Or they simply have no interest in searching beyond the explanations that sit right before them because their lives are busy and interesting and they don't have the time to go thinking about erosion or dendochronology or whatever.
I think that it should be made clear that there really shouldn't be any harm in checking - and that exploring your beliefs should strengthen those beliefs worth holding on to.
I wonder how you go about doing that?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by Quetzal, posted 03-03-2007 9:08 PM Quetzal has not replied

  
Tusko
Member (Idle past 216 days)
Posts: 615
From: London, UK
Joined: 10-01-2004


Message 128 of 167 (388730)
03-07-2007 12:56 PM
Reply to: Message 39 by Jaderis
03-04-2007 2:08 AM


Re: Woeful inadequacy and outright distortions
I'm really not sure about the one about native (south) Americans. Do you think its genuine? I guess it could be. Eeeuch!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 39 by Jaderis, posted 03-04-2007 2:08 AM Jaderis has not replied

  
Tusko
Member (Idle past 216 days)
Posts: 615
From: London, UK
Joined: 10-01-2004


Message 129 of 167 (388733)
03-07-2007 1:09 PM
Reply to: Message 43 by Phat
03-04-2007 7:57 AM


Re: Christian Cult of Ignorance
You sound like you are saying that liberals are less dogmatic perhaps (sorry if thats a misreading). I don't know if you can make such blanket statements fairly. Maybe you can? Personally I think it divides along different lines - those who don't have enquiring minds are just going to get stuck with whatever beliefs they were born in to. Those who do have enquiring minds are subdivided into two categories: those who aren't readily able to admit they are wrong and those that are. There are people of both kinds who are religious and people of both kinds who are athiest. There are people of both kinds who are politically conservative and politically liberal.
How does that sound?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 43 by Phat, posted 03-04-2007 7:57 AM Phat has not replied

  
Tusko
Member (Idle past 216 days)
Posts: 615
From: London, UK
Joined: 10-01-2004


Message 131 of 167 (388735)
03-07-2007 1:16 PM
Reply to: Message 47 by Straggler
03-04-2007 9:06 AM


Re: Christian Cult of Ignorance
I don't feel uncomfortable telling you where I'm from - Gants Hill on the East end of the Central line... well, near enough.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 47 by Straggler, posted 03-04-2007 9:06 AM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 137 by Straggler, posted 03-07-2007 4:25 PM Tusko has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024