Front Office Football Central

Front Office Football Central (https://forums.operationsports.com/fofc//index.php)

- FOFC Archive (https://forums.operationsports.com/fofc//forumdisplay.php?f=27)

- - Conservapedia! (https://forums.operationsports.com/fofc//showthread.php?t=57169)

Because Wikipedia is too biased.

http://www.conservapedia.com

Some excerpts:

Unicorn:

Quote:

The existence of unicorns is controversial. Secular opinion is that they are mythical. However, they are referred to in the Bible nine times,[1] which provides an unimpeachable de facto argument for their once having been in existence.

Bill Clinton:

Quote:

The re-election of Clinton despite the demonstrated preference of the electorate in 1994 for Republican candidates may well be due to the electorate's preference for a divided government

Global Warming:

Quote:

It should be noted that these scientists are motivated by a need for grant money in their field of climatology. Therefore, their work can not be considered unbiased, though no more than any scientist in any other field .[4]. Also, these scientists are mostly liberal athiests, untroubled by the hubris that man can destroy the Earth which God gave him.[5]

Quote:

The re-election of Clinton despite the demonstrated preference of the electorate in 1994 for Republican candidates may well be due to the electorate's preference for a divided government

I have heard people on both sides say that. How can any voters vote for a divided govt in which they have no power or control over how others will vote in states outside of their own? Last I checked, there are no "national" elections, just for state representatives, initiatives and electorates.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Buccaneer (Post 1401863)

I share your skepticism, but there are two posited explanations.

1. During Presidential election years, some Political Scientists believe they have data which shows people will vote for a President of one party and a local congressman/senator of another party specifically to create gridlock, usually where they have no very strong feelings about any of the candidates. While I'm sure this trend exists, I'm skeptical about how much of an impact it really has.

2. During midterm elections, there's a fair amount of evidence to suggest the party not in the White House has an advantage.

i thought environmental protectionism was becoming the new flight of Fancy for religious conservatives, no?

Also, these scientists are mostly liberal athiests, untroubled by the hubris that man can destroy the Earth which God gave him.

There are people that believe that man can't destroy the Earth because it was given to them.

Seems like it would be pretty easy if we really tried.

The brilliant entry for Fox News:

Quote:

Fox News was started in 1996 in response to the other cable news channels which all had obvious liberal biases. Because of this, Rupert Murdoch decided to start a real new channel which would tell the truth. The success of Fox news over every other news channel is because it is fair and balanced. [1] It has many people on it who work to spread truth such as Sean Hannity who is a great American. [2]. Fox News is best because instead of just telling you what to think, they only report the news unbiased and then allow the viewer to decide. [3].

In 2005 the White House selected Tony Snow from Fox News to be the new White House press secretary which was a great honor for Fox because it showed how well it was presenting the real truth instead of the fake liberal version. [4]

References

1. ↑ Fair & Balanced[1]
2. ↑ Sean Hannity[2]
3. ↑ We Report. You Decide.[3]
4. ↑ Tony Snow to be Named White House Press Secretary[4]

Are we sure this isn't a parody?

Quote:

Originally Posted by st.cronin (Post 1402093)

Are we sure this isn't a parody?

I keep thinking that as well.

It seems to have been started with serious intent, but I'm sure some of the entries have been "vandalized".

One funny thing I found is that they claim Wikipedia is biased in part because they use CE instead of AD. When you look at Conservapedia's index, though, they use CE in their breakdowns for world history.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JPhillips (Post 1402102)

One funny thing I found is that they claim Wikipedia is biased in part because they use CE instead of AD.

That was exactly the moment when I suspected the whole effort was with ironic intent.

I know from my time in the Bible belt that the CE/AD argument is very real for some religious conservatives.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JPhillips (Post 1402104)

I know from my time in the Bible belt that the CE/AD argument is very real for some religious conservatives.

I've heard that, but at the same time its such a preposterous notion that I imagine it invites mockery of this type.

I actually think the CE/AD argument has some merits. I mean they're both measuring the same time period so why not be up front about what it is that was being measured?

Quote:

Originally Posted by st.cronin (Post 1402103)

That was exactly the moment when I suspected the whole effort was with ironic intent.

Mine was when their source for the claim that Sean Hannity was a great American was, in fact, Sean Hannity. :)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Barkeep49 (Post 1402108)

I actually think the CE/AD argument has some merits. I mean they're both measuring the same time period so why not be up front about what it is that was being measured?

Yeah, but at the same time to get outraged about it is just stupid.

Quote:

Originally Posted by st.cronin (Post 1402115)

Yeah, but at the same time to get outraged about it is just stupid.

That goes both ways I feel on this one, which is why I'm generally apathetic about whether it's AD or CE that is being used.

Quote:

Bill Clinton managed to serve two terms without botching the prosecution of two wars, manipulating intelligence, engaging in a systematic program of torture, or mishandling the federal response to flooding of a major American city. Obviously, he is the devil incarnate.

Yes, a good portion of the site is satire.

Regardless of it's sources, truth, or motivations, the point has been made and Republicans will lose votes for this! :)

I vote satire:

http://www.conservapedia.com/Judicial_Activism

Quote:

There are two major types of judicial activism practiced in the United States' court system:

1. Liberal judges striking down laws that uphold core conservative American values
2. Liberal judges refusing to strike down laws that subvert core conservative American values

Quote:

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight (Post 1402588)

I vote satire:

http://www.conservapedia.com/Judicial_Activism

Or just honest. ;)

On the question of whether this is real, it seems that Eagle Forum is behind it. It definitely started off as a serious endeavor.

Quote:

Originally Posted by John Galt (Post 1402592)

Or just honest. ;)

A moment of clarity?

Quote:

Originally Posted by EagleFan (Post 1403414)

A moment of clarity?

You're funny.

I'll post my feelings on this web encyclopedia as soon as I finish this plate of Unicorn meat.

I was looking around Conservapedia for some humorous stuff, but unfortunately the Big Bang entry is pretty reasonable:

Quote:

The Big Bang is a theory that the universe was once in a very hot, dense state and then expanded outwards, approximately 14 billion years ago. It is the most popular theory about the origin of the universe, widely accepted in the scientific community. It was first proposed by Georges-Henri Lemaitre. More evidence for the Big Bang was found by Edwin Hubble. Later George Gamow predicted that the Big Bang would leave an observable microwave background radiation. This radiation was subsequently discovered by Bell Labs and found to be close to that predicted by Gamow (Gamow predicted a background radiation level equivalent to a 3 K black body object, and the observed level is that of a 2.725 K body).

The Genesis account of creation begins "In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth, and the earth was without form and void, and darkness was upon the face of the deep; and God said, 'let there be light', and Lo, there was light." Some have interpreted this as figurative description of the Big Bang as understood by current cosmologists; in this way, the big bang theory can be seen as a validation of biblical text..

Young-Earth creationists hotly contest the Big Bang Theory because they believe that the Bible proves that the Universe is far younger than 14 billion years.

Thankfully, the Gipper didn't dissappoint:

Quote:

Reagan was strongly opposed to the concept of Big government, advocating a reduction in the size and budget of the federal government, although during his terms in office the government size and budget both increased rather than decreasing due to tax-and-spend Democrats.

The entire entropy article:

Quote:

Entropy is a measure of disorder in a system, first postulated by Lazare Carnot in 1803.

Creationist scientist Henry Morris argues that the law of Entropy, also known as the Second Law of Thermodynamics, disproves evolution: "...the Second law, however, that wipes out the theory of evolution. There is a universal process of change, and it is a directional change, but it is not an upward change."[1]