<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>All Sux dot Com &#187; conservapedia</title>
	<atom:link href="http://allsux.com/category/conservapedia/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://allsux.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 12 Mar 2008 03:16:14 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Conservapedia: Your Number One Source for Blatant Hypocrisy and Flagrant Right-Wing BS</title>
		<link>http://allsux.com/2007/06/29/conservapedia-your-number-one-source-for-blatant-hypocrisy-and-flagrant-right-wing-bs/</link>
		<comments>http://allsux.com/2007/06/29/conservapedia-your-number-one-source-for-blatant-hypocrisy-and-flagrant-right-wing-bs/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 29 Jun 2007 09:31:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>kroq</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[allsux]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[conservapedia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[liberal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[wikipedia]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://allsux.com/2007/06/29/conservapedia-your-number-one-source-for-blatant-hypocrisy-and-flagrant-right-wing-bs/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Conservapedia is a conservative version of Wikipedia thatÂ is anything but what it claims to be: anÂ &#8220;encyclopedia you can trust.&#8221; The Conservapedia goes to great lengths to indicate that Wikipedia is full of trivial and even misleading articles, and emphasize the high quality of their own offerings. OK, agree or disagree, that sounds [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://allsux.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/06/welcome-nonchristians.jpg" title="Non-Christians Welcome at Conservapedia"></a><a href="http://allsux.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/06/welcome-nonchristians-or-not.jpg" title="Conservapedia Bible and History Quotes"></a><a href="http://allsux.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/06/conservapedia-first-image.jpg" title="Conservapedia - What the Heck is that Anyway?"><img src="http://allsux.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/06/conservapedia-first-image.jpg" alt="Conservapedia - What the Heck is that Anyway?" /></a></p>
<p>The <a rel="nofollow" href="http://conservapedia.com" title="Conservapedia">Conservapedia </a>is a conservative version of <a href="http://wikipedia.org" title="Wikipedia">Wikipedia</a> thatÂ is anything but what it claims to be: anÂ <em>&#8220;encyclopedia you can trust.&#8221;</em> The Conservapedia goes to great lengths to indicate that <a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.conservapedia.com/Wikipedia" title="Conservapedia Article on Wikipedia">Wikipedia is full of trivial and even misleading articles</a>, and emphasize the high quality of their own offerings. OK, agree or disagree, that sounds interesting, right? Let&#8217;s check out their mission statement:</p>
<p><a href="http://allsux.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/06/conservapedia-mission-statement.jpg" title="Conservapedia Mission Statement"><img width="450" src="http://allsux.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/06/conservapedia-mission-statement.jpg" alt="Conservapedia Mission Statement" height="110" /></a><a href="http://allsux.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/06/conservapedia-bashes-wikipedia-in-headline-news.jpg" title="Conservapedia Bashes Wikipedia"></a></p>
<p>A different take on things than Wikipedia, from a conservative perspective. Fascinating! Heck, I&#8217;ll admit &#8211; even as an active Wikipedia user &#8211; that both good and bad articles get published, it&#8217;s part of the shared knowledge system. However, <strong>right next to their mission statement</strong> they have a breaking news story that <strong>implies Wikipedia editors are in on a murder plot.</strong> For the moment let&#8217;s just look at the story, and table the obvious question: why, of all of the breaking news stories in the world, does theirs concern Wikipedia and some WWF pro wrestler?</p>
<p><a href="http://allsux.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/06/conservapedia-bashes-wikipedia-in-headline-news.jpg" title="Conservapedia Bashes Wikipedia"><img src="http://allsux.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/06/conservapedia-bashes-wikipedia-in-headline-news.jpg" alt="Conservapedia Bashes Wikipedia" /></a></p>
<p>First, there is <strong>nothing to suggest</strong>Â subsequent edits weren&#8217;t made by people who read the first edit. What sounds like a conspiracy theory is actually a lone gunman scenario.Â Moreover, the term &#8216;editor&#8217; toÂ a non-Wikipedia user probably implies someone in a position of authority and oversite. However, the person in question was an anonomous user. In fact, anyone in the world could have made that edit! <strong>That is the equivalent of implying that an anonomous caller to a news tip line is a reporter</strong>. Whew, OK, let&#8217;s catch our breath here and look farther down the site. Oh wait, this sounds promising:</p>
<p><a href="http://allsux.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/06/welcome-nonchristians.jpg" title="Non-Christians Welcome at Conservapedia"><img src="http://allsux.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/06/welcome-nonchristians.jpg" alt="Non-Christians Welcome at Conservapedia" /></a></p>
<p>Well nice! Yes, the Conservapedia insists that the <a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.conservapedia.com/Creation" title="Date of Creation According to Conservapedia">Earth was created 6,000 years ago</a>Â but at least they&#8217;re open to other viewpoints, right? Well, right under the above section on the front page we find something rather surprising. Specifically, a pair of quotes, from the bible and history respectively, that show a rather impressively definitive perspective:</p>
<p><a href="http://allsux.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/06/welcome-nonchristians-or-not.jpg" title="Conservapedia Bible and History Quotes"><img src="http://allsux.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/06/welcome-nonchristians-or-not.jpg" alt="Conservapedia Bible and History Quotes" /></a></p>
<p>The biblical quote is fairly harmless &#8211; though it still calls into question how welcome unbelievers truly are on the site. Much more interesting is the historical quote. So wait, let me see here, democracy is built on a belief in God &#8230; which really only the church can provide a basis for. So, in other words, we won&#8217;t have a whole democracy in the long run unless we are a fully Christian nation? Wow. OK, so we welcome the heathens &#8230; so we can convert them?</p>
<p>At this point, what else is there to say? There are plenty of more hilarious, bizarre and downright strange articles to look at on Conservapedia. Still, if you want to learn more about the Conservapedia in a technical, logical or reliable sense, you might as well look at the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservapedia" title="Wikipedia Article on Conservapedia">Wikipedia article on Conservapedia</a>. You&#8217;re at least somewhat more likely to get a straight answer that way.</p>
<div><a href="http://www.addthis.com/bookmark.php" onclick="window.open('http://www.addthis.com/bookmark.php?pub=&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fallsux.com%2F2007%2F06%2F29%2Fconservapedia-your-number-one-source-for-blatant-hypocrisy-and-flagrant-right-wing-bs%2F&amp;title=Conservapedia%3A+Your+Number+One+Source+for+Blatant+Hypocrisy+and+Flagrant+Right-Wing+BS', 'addthis', 'scrollbars=yes,menubar=no,width=620,height=520,resizable=yes,toolbar=no,location=no,status=no'); return false;" title="Bookmark using any bookmark manager!" target="_blank"><img src="http://s3.addthis.com/button1-bm.gif" width="125" height="16" border="0" /></a></div>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://allsux.com/2007/06/29/conservapedia-your-number-one-source-for-blatant-hypocrisy-and-flagrant-right-wing-bs/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>24</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

