Saying the natural range of these animals is "Australia and Tasmania" is the sort of thing that would get every Tasmanian really riled up, I can tell you. At least, mostways, those of em that got enuff book-larning to be able to read. It's a bit like saying "United States and Alaska", only worse, becoz we didn't BUY Tasmania. God thru it in when he done give the place to the British. So I have changed it. MylesP email@example.com 7 Apr 2007 AD
- Finally, some really useful information on one of GOD's favorite creatures. Flippin 12:59, 6 April 2007 (EDT)
myles325 reporting.Despite my fulsome protests on the separation of Mother and Child by treating Tasmania as if it was NOT a component state of Australia (see above at the very top), Jeremiah 6:66 has orphaned the state again. Why, why, why? May I remind you that I LIVE HERE. Not in Tasmania, which is full of congenital defectives and inbred degenerates, but in Australia. And I can tell you, they are OUR congenital defectives and we will fight to the end before you take them away from us. So I have reunited Mother Country and freak state. If I find them parted again, I shall dob you in to the Tasmanian Tourist Bureau, and you don’t want to mix it up with them I can tell you. They make the freaks from Deliverance look like a bunch of Sunday School teachers.
And I might also dob you in to the Young Earth Creation crowd. I am sure they had much more sympathy for the ABSOLUTELY TRUE epic story of the heroic platypus’s journey from Noah’s Ark to Australia, than they do for the atheistic, commie, evil-utionist pack of Satanic lies you replaced it with. There’s a place for that kind of stuff, mate, and it’s called Wikipedia. We all came over here to get away from God-defying blasphemy like what you just done put out. Though Wikipedia would just chuck it out the window as being too simplistic. And Uncyclopedia would give it the chop coz it ain’t funny. No, you might have to start your own ‘cylopedia. How about Leftoverpedia? Or Crapopedia? Or boohoonoonewantsmepedia?
Also, what you’ve left us with does very little to tell us WHY the platypus is so renowned amongst the lands. Sure, there are bits of the truth there. But you’ve GOT to say “the platypus is a mammal which lays eggs like a bird / reptile, yet suckles its young like a mammal. It has fur like a mammal, but also sports a lovely bill like a bird.” You see, THAT is why some boffins in England thought that some joker was trying to pull their legs. They thought that a practical joker had stitched PARTS of other animals together. Of course, things like that did happen, and it was uproarious fun when experts were taken in, specially evil-ution type experts.
(On an aside here, I rem a case where the students of a Natural Philosophy course at a University (for so Biology / Zoology was called) did that very thing. They stitched together various parts of a grasshopper, a large spider and a dragonfly and gravely presented the chimera to Professor Featheringshaw, claiming to have found it behind the quad next to the Oak Tree by Maudlin College, after cricket last Sunday and just afore the rowing blues. Well, young Hamish 111 had first clapped eyes on him and calling “Hi fellows, here’s sport!”, had caught the little blighter in his straw boater, didn’t he? “Whatever could it be, Professor?”, chorused the young scallywags. The Professor peered at the corpse of the strange “new discovery” in the palm of his hand for a space, then asked, “Did it hum when you caught it?”. “Why yes…yes!” they ejaculated, “Hum…did he ever! He hummed like no other insect we have ever heard on God’s Earth!”, chorused the shapely-bottomed scamps, “He hummed and hummed and hummed, Professor, he hummed like he was fit to bust!!”
“Just as I thought”, said Professor Featheringshaw, pensively stroking his chin, “It’s a HUMBUG!!!”. And with that he playfully produced his birch, and applied it smartly to the proffered behinds of his young charges, who could scarce escape the dusting as they were laughing too hard, and the tears on their cheeks were from helpless mirth rather than anguish. Ypres, the Somme, Galipolli, the tears were real there, and so many of the ones in that room tasted of them, and never returned...)
But I digress. Here’s a free hint. Ever thought of dropping that Jeremiah handle? You know what a Jeremiad is, don’t you? You might as well have called yourself Partypooper. Or how about Wetblanket? Or Completedowner? All of these are synonyms for Jeremiah, excepting they do not quite convey the relentless savagery of his attacks, his utter inhumanity, nor frankly the sheer insanity of what is , I presume, your unlikely spiritual mentor. You don’t seem like such a disagreeable old cove, when all is said and done, so what on Earth would tie you to this, the Father of all curmudgeons? And on another matter. By asserting, without equivocation, that evolution is a FACT, and that the world is millions or billions of years old, your article directly contradicts many others in Wikipedia which stand by the record of Creation Week, and Noah’s Ark in Genesis. Having differences of opinion is one thing. But the promulgation of two irreconcilable world views, both of them asserted as fact, and both nestling cheek by jowl in this very compendium, cannot provide a secure foundation of knowledge, not in Conservapedia, not in any pedia but Aliceinwonderlandopedia.
And where did I, then, learn of the details of the platypus’s journey across the world, fraught as it was with many a daring deed, many a desperate plight, many a selfless deed as marsupials came together to defend themselves against the forces of evil, and make a new life in the Great Southern Land? Where did I learn of all this? Why, I slumbered in a fitful fever, tossing with sweat on my brow, and I saw it in a dream vouchsafed me by the Merciful One. I glimpsed it in a fragment of parchment, a line of a song, a reflection in a pool. I heard it behind the humming of a bug and the carolling of magpies. I felt it in the buss of a summer zephyr. I smelt it behind a shop which sold falafels. I forgot it when I put on my clothes, and remembered it again when I was naked. And then a voice said unto me, “You will go out and tell the others what you have seen and heard”. And so I will, and so I do, in places and times. But the words of a prophet in his native land are thought fit for nought but archives, and my hour is not yet come. --MylesP 11:41, 9 April 2007 (EDT)
- Sorry about removing your edits; I've reinserted them now, slightly reworked. Hope we can work together on making this a really special page. --Jeremiah4-22 15:47, 9 April 2007 (EDT)
- I've removed 'em. Is it possible to work it out here with proper citations prior to posting such material? Is this one person's account? or is there a reputable source that makes such a statement? Ultimately, Everything you post must be true and verifiable. (from Rules) --Mtur 15:50, 9 April 2007 (EDT)
" (no one says "monotreme" - let's use plain English)"
- There is a wonderful economy of word and thought in the above. I could learn from this man. Still, it is incumbent upon him to tell us where the other tremes went. --MylesP 11:51, 9 April 2007 (EDT)
I say "monotreme" (and have a background in biology) - let's use words that have precisely defined meanings. --Jeremiah4-22 15:39, 8 April 2007 (EDT)
- Yes, I'm sure you ARE the grand pooh bah bile-ologist around here. But I think we have heard quite enough from you for one day. And please don't pull rank. If we respected science, we'd hardly be here, would we? --MylesP 11:51, 9 April 2007 (EDT)
- He has a point. Merely being a biologist is not enough. Conservapedia has a healthy level of anti-intellectualism, because we need to keep out the liberal propaganda that has infected higher education. Being qualified in biology, unless that qualification comes from a Creationist Christian college, is actually grounds to respect you less. - NewCrusader
- How about some technical articles using technical terms and some ordinary egg-laying mammal articles for us laymen and our grade-school children? --Ed Poor 15:52, 9 April 2007 (EDT)
- If we call it a monotreme, we need to define monotreme. Considering the origin of the word, we don't want to open up that can of worms. This is a family encyclopedia, not a place for discussing the more unusual examples of reproductive anatomy. Egg-laying mammal it is. - NewCrusader
platypus / canetoad compared to article page / talk page
The cane toad, an imported menace, spreads ever on thruout Australia, while the terrain of the platypus is forever diminishing.. Now have you ever compared the article pages of some of these entries with their corresponding talk pages? --MylesP 23:19, 13 April 2007 (EDT)
100,000 yrs - platypus before Creation?
Wait, if the earth is ~6,000 years old, how could platypus fossils have been found 100,000 yrs ago? --Ephilei 10:45, 3 May 2007 (EDT)
- Who told you the earth was 6,000 years old, you gullible fool! It's at least twice as old if not older.Muschifresser 10:48, 3 May 2007 (EDT)
I'm confused about this too? There seems to be a huge disparity across many of the articles here regarding what might be the age of the Earth. The Dinosaur article suggests a 6000 year old Earth too. Is there no agreement? 50something 05:37, 29 May 2007 (EDT)
- The answer is simply that there are a number of editors who are unwilling or unable to accept that these ages are not factual, but based on a belief system, and persist in inserting them into articles, frequently despite being quite aware of Conservapedia's stance on that issue, and some of them remain undetected for some time. Philip J. Rayment 11:41, 29 May 2007 (EDT)
- No, there is no agreement. None at all. Conservapedia's editors have mostly succeeded in banning Evilutionists, but it is still split between young-earth and old-earth creationists, with a scattering of 'young earth, old universe' thrown in for good measure. Because of this, timescales often get changed back and forth until the point is reached where they are simply ommited to end the squabbling. That seems to be the easiest solution: If in doubt, cut it out. - NewCrusader.