# "Conservapedia": The Right's answer to Wikipedia **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [March 5, 2007, 10:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservapedia-the-rights-answer-to-wikipedia/394731 "2007-03-05T22:04:20Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2007, 10:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservapedia-the-rights-answer-to-wikipedia/394731/1 "2007-03-05T22:04:20Z")
News to me they even thought they had any reason to **provide** an answer to the Wikipedia, but, according to the new [Conservapedia website:](http://www.conservapedia.com/Main_Page) > [@](#): > > 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. > > Conservapedia is an online resource and meeting place where we favor Christianity and America. Conservapedia has easy-to-use indexes to facilitate review of topics. You will much prefer using Conservapedia compared to Wikipedia if you want concise answers free of “political correctness”. Let’s see . . . here’s something from [the page on dinosaurs:](http://www.conservapedia.com/Dinosaur) > [@](#): > > Most scientists believe that dinosaurs lived from 230 million until 65 million years ago and that they are all currently extinct (except for birds, which many scientists consider to be descended from early therapod dinosaurs). They claim the fossil evidence supports their beliefs. However, there are a number of lines of evidence that point to dinosaurs and man coexisting. [2] [3] For example, trained scientists have reported seeing a live dinosaur. [4] A thousand people reported seeing a dinosaur-like monster in two sightings around Sayram Lake in Xinjiang according to the Chinese publication, China Today. [5] An expedition which included, Charles W. Gilmore, Curator of Vertebrate Paleontology with the United States National Museum, examined an ancient pictograph which is claimed to point to dinosaurs and man existing [6][7] The World Book Encyclopedia states that: “The dragons of legend are strangely like actual creatures that have lived in the past. They are much like the great reptiles [dinosaurs] which inhabited the earth long before man is supposed to have appeared on earth. Dragons were generally evil and destructive. Every country had them in its mythology.” [8] The Nile Mosaic of Palestrina, a second century piece of art, is said to appear to be a piece of artwork that shows a dinosaur and man coexisting. [9] Nope, no “political correctness” here, nosiree . . . ---
**Author:** ![DanBlather](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/f4b2a3/32.png) [@DanBlather](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DanBlather)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2007, 10:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservapedia-the-rights-answer-to-wikipedia/394731/2 "2007-03-05T22:07:25Z")
I think they need that because, as Colbert says, the facts themselves have a liberal bias. ---
**Author:** ![Subway\_Prophet](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecb155/32.png) [@Subway\_Prophet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Subway_Prophet)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2007, 10:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservapedia-the-rights-answer-to-wikipedia/394731/3 "2007-03-05T22:14:38Z")
This can _not_ end well. Nothing says “vandalize me!” like a good ol’ controversial wiki. ---
**Author:** ![Nancarrow](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/c37758/32.png) [@Nancarrow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nancarrow)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2007, 10:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservapedia-the-rights-answer-to-wikipedia/394731/4 "2007-03-05T22:14:55Z")
[Did this less than two weeks ago.](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=409304&highlight=conservapedia) Not that it shouldn’t be repeated as often as possible. Or that I’m one to lecture about hammering a point home. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Revenant\_Threshold](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f1d935/32.png) [@Revenant\_Threshold](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Revenant_Threshold)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2007, 10:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservapedia-the-rights-answer-to-wikipedia/394731/5 "2007-03-05T22:17:28Z")
CE is anti-Christian? There was I thinking it was Christianity-neutral. Christ Expired? ---
**Author:** ![I\_Love\_Me\_Vol.I](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/i_love_me_vol.i/32/521_2.png) [@I\_Love\_Me\_Vol.I](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/I_Love_Me_Vol.I)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2007, 10:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservapedia-the-rights-answer-to-wikipedia/394731/6 "2007-03-05T22:21:50Z")
So first the conservatives decide they need their own alternative to humor (with their knock-off of “The Daily Show”), and now decide they need their own alternative to facts? What the hell is going on here? What’s funny is funny, and what’s true is true. And wishing and praying to god just ain’t gonna change that. It’s sad and it is scary. ---
**Author:** ![Squink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5e925/32.png) [@Squink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Squink)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2007, 10:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservapedia-the-rights-answer-to-wikipedia/394731/7 "2007-03-05T22:22:08Z")
[Imagine that!](http://www.conservapedia.com/Special:Search?search=fiscal+responsibilty&go=Go) > [@](#): > > You searched for fiscal responsibilty > > There is no page titled “fiscal responsibilty”. You can create this page. > > For more information about searching Conservapedia, see Searching Conservapedia. > > Showing below 0 results starting with #1. > No page title matches > No page text matches ---
**Author:** ![Biffy\_the\_Elephant\_Shrew](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/e47c2d/32.png) [@Biffy\_the\_Elephant\_Shrew](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Biffy_the_Elephant_Shrew)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2007, 10:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservapedia-the-rights-answer-to-wikipedia/394731/8 "2007-03-05T22:23:34Z")
[QUOTE=BrainGlutton] News to me they even thought they had any reason to **provide** an answer to the Wikipedia [/QUOTE] Hell, I didn’t even know Wikipedia was a question. ---
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2007, 10:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservapedia-the-rights-answer-to-wikipedia/394731/9 "2007-03-05T22:26:22Z")
[QUOTE=Squink] [Imagine that!](http://www.conservapedia.com/Special:Search?search=fiscal+responsibilty&go=Go) [/QUOTE] 😃 This must be the Neoconservapedia. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2007, 10:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservapedia-the-rights-answer-to-wikipedia/394731/10 "2007-03-05T22:41:02Z")
[QUOTE=Revenant Threshold] CE is anti-Christian? There was I thinking it was Christianity-neutral. Christ Expired? [/QUOTE] Being Christian-neutral is a system that tries to reduce the net Christian emissions of individuals or organizations indirectly, through proxies who reduce their emissions and/or increase their absorption of change and progress. A wide variety of offset actions are available; Essays by Bertrand Russell and other humanists and non-believers is a common one. Renewing subscriptions to boards like this one is also a popular idea, including trading jab credits. The intended goal of being Christian-neutral is to combat global despair, The appeal of becoming Christian-neutral has contributed to the growth of voluntary offsets, which often are a more cost-effective alternative to reducing one’s own tithing. However, Christian-neutrals are not without controversy, with some hard atheists and extreme fundamentalists questioning the overall benefits of the practice. Shoot, I got crossed with the Carbon-neutral wiky entry! 😛 ---
**Author:** ![Queen\_Bruin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/e274bd/32.png) [@Queen\_Bruin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Queen_Bruin)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2007, 10:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservapedia-the-rights-answer-to-wikipedia/394731/11 "2007-03-05T22:55:14Z")
Well, now that I’ve read the entry for the [Roman Empire](http://www.conservapedia.com/Roman_Empire), I’ll just chuck this Suetonius into the trash. Conservapedia has all the exam information \*I \*need! ---
**Author:** ![Malacandra](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Malacandra](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malacandra)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2007, 11:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservapedia-the-rights-answer-to-wikipedia/394731/12 "2007-03-05T23:11:49Z")
[QUOTE=Revenant Threshold] CE is anti-Christian? There was I thinking it was Christianity-neutral. Christ Expired? [/QUOTE] If you’re dating your calendar from the (erroneously calculated) birth of Christ, but remove any reference to Christ from the dating system by saying “Common Era” and “Before Common Era”, I guess the supposition is that you’re actively opposed to mentioning Christ as you would in “Before Christ” and “_Anno Domini_” - and would really rather no-one mentioned Christ at all, ever. Not that there’s any undercurrent suggesting anything of the sort around here, of course. :dubious: ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2007, 11:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservapedia-the-rights-answer-to-wikipedia/394731/13 "2007-03-05T23:48:20Z")
Why don’t they just burn all books. Knowledge is so dangerous. It must be controlled by those with a higher calling and who are much wiser. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2007, 12:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservapedia-the-rights-answer-to-wikipedia/394731/14 "2007-03-06T00:00:04Z")
[QUOTE=Nancarrow] [Did this less than two weeks ago.](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=409304&highlight=conservapedia) [/QUOTE] Hmmm . . . for some reason, the page titled [“Homosphere”](http://www.conservapedia.com/Homosphere) is now very different (and less interesting) than it was two weeks ago . . . ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2007, 12:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservapedia-the-rights-answer-to-wikipedia/394731/15 "2007-03-06T00:04:37Z")
[QUOTE=Malacandra] If you’re dating your calendar from the (erroneously calculated) birth of Christ, but remove any reference to Christ from the dating system by saying “Common Era” and “Before Common Era”, I guess the supposition is that you’re actively opposed to mentioning Christ as you would in “Before Christ” and “_Anno Domini_” - and would really rather no-one mentioned Christ at all, ever. [/QUOTE] Or, alternatively, it might mean you want to date things by the widely used, therefore useful, “Common Era” but you do not want to acknowledge Jesus as your Lord as the phrase _Anno Domini_ denotes. “Common Era” has also been known as the [“Vulgar Era,”](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_era#Origins) BTW. ---
**Author:** ![George\_Kaplin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/3e96dc/32.png) [@George\_Kaplin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/George_Kaplin)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2007, 12:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservapedia-the-rights-answer-to-wikipedia/394731/16 "2007-03-06T00:10:50Z")
Since Conservapedia was set up with the express intent of providing a more Christian perspective on reality, let’s see how their article on Jesus measures up to Wikipedia’s article: [Conservapedia](http://www.conservapedia.com/Jesus) - 11 lines of text. [Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus) - 40 _pages_ of text. Doesn’t even bear comment, really, does it? ---
**Author:** ![Antinor01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ecae2f/32.png) [@Antinor01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Antinor01)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2007, 12:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservapedia-the-rights-answer-to-wikipedia/394731/17 "2007-03-06T00:13:45Z")
Ok, which one of you added this to the section on William Jefferson Clinton? > [@Conservapedia](#): > > 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. That is just awesome, especially considering the tone of the rest of the article on both him and Mrs. Clinton. ---
**Author:** ![bonzer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/45deac/32.png) [@bonzer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bonzer)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2007, 12:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservapedia-the-rights-answer-to-wikipedia/394731/18 "2007-03-06T00:14:29Z")
[QUOTE=BrainGlutton] Let’s see . . . here’s something from [the page on dinosaurs:](http://www.conservapedia.com/Dinosaur) [/QUOTE] Which shouldn’t come as a surprise, given that [according to this _Guardian_ article](http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,,2024724,00.html) ([linked to](http://www.conservapedia.com/Main_Page) on Conservapedia’s front page itself [sup]\*[/sup]) the founder is Andy Schlafly. Those of us who remember his forays into talk.origins on Usenet will attest that a) he’s a proud Creationist and b) dumber than a fencepost. [sub]\* I love the way they coyly label his quote from the article as by “a Conservapedia contributor” when the link itself emphasises that he’s the founder.[/sub] ---
**Author:** ![Ghanima](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/9e8a1a/32.png) [@Ghanima](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ghanima)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2007, 12:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservapedia-the-rights-answer-to-wikipedia/394731/19 "2007-03-06T00:19:51Z")
I found it interesting that the cites for the article about “God” are both Christian sites bashing Islam. And the entry for [Satan](http://www.conservapedia.com/Satan) is creepily nonchalantly passing off Christian religious beliefs as truth. ---
**Author:** ![Malacandra](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Malacandra](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malacandra)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2007, 12:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservapedia-the-rights-answer-to-wikipedia/394731/20 "2007-03-06T00:27:59Z")
[QUOTE=BrainGlutton] Or, alternatively, it might mean you want to date things by the widely used, therefore useful, “Common Era” but you do not want to acknowledge Jesus as your Lord as the phrase _Anno Domini_ denotes. “Common Era” has also been known as the [“Vulgar Era,”](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_era#Origins) BTW. [/QUOTE] Why not? That’s what “vulgar” means, and is why the Latin Vulgate Bible is so called. As to the other, “render unto Caesar” and all that. It doesn’t have to mean _your_ Lord if that sticks in your craw, but you have to admit that the argument itself lends weight to the “anti-Christian” assertion. 🙂 Or use “Anno Mundi” dating, only don’t use the antiscientific Jewish age of the world. Rather emulate Dionysius Exiguus and pick a suitable date, say three billion years before Darwin’s birth year. That makes this year 3,000,000,198, though it’ll make cheque-writing a bit more of a strain and, IT-wise, make all the Y2K programming look like a stroll in the park. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservapedia-the-rights-answer-to-wikipedia/394731.md?page=2)