User:GregG/RSS 6

From Conservapedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Contents

Mon, 26 Mar 2012 17:41:12 GMT (edit by Phukkwit)

<html>

 <head>
   <title>User talk:Aschlafly</title>
   <base href="http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:RecentChanges&feed=atom">
 </head>
 <body id="msgFeedSummaryBody" selected="false">

Blanked the page

<a href="http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=User_talk:Aschlafly&diff=970671&oldid=970535">Show changes</a>

 </body>

</html>

Mon, 26 Mar 2012 17:52:13 GMT (edit by JoMar)

<html>

 <head>
   <title>User:JoMar</title>
   <base href="http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:RecentChanges&feed=atom">
 </head>
 <body id="msgFeedSummaryBody" selected="false">

New user account

 </body>

</html>

Mon, 26 Mar 2012 17:47:34 GMT (edit by MihailD)

<html>

 <head>
   <title>User talk:Aschlafly</title>
   <base href="http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:RecentChanges&feed=atom">
 </head>
 <body id="msgFeedSummaryBody" selected="false">

Undo revision 970671 by <a href="/Special:Contributions/Phukkwit" title="Special:Contributions/Phukkwit">Phukkwit</a> (<a href="/index.php?title=User_talk:Phukkwit&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="User talk:Phukkwit (page does not exist)">talk</a>)

<a href="http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=User_talk:Aschlafly&diff=970677&oldid=970671">Show changes</a>

 </body>

</html>

Mon, 26 Mar 2012 17:46:48 GMT (edit by MihailD)

<html>

 <head>
   <title>User talk:Karajou</title>
   <base href="http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:RecentChanges&feed=atom">
 </head>
 <body id="msgFeedSummaryBody" selected="false">

Undo revision 970672 by <a href="/Special:Contributions/Phukkwit" title="Special:Contributions/Phukkwit">Phukkwit</a> (<a href="/index.php?title=User_talk:Phukkwit&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="User talk:Phukkwit (page does not exist)">talk</a>)

<a href="http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=User_talk:Karajou&diff=970676&oldid=970672">Show changes</a>

 </body>

</html>

Mon, 26 Mar 2012 17:53:05 GMT (edit by JoMar)

<html>

 <head>
   <title>Talk:Main Page</title>
   <base href="http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:RecentChanges&feed=atom">
 </head>
 <body id="msgFeedSummaryBody" selected="false">

Reverted edits by James wilson to last edit by NKeaton

<col class='diff-marker' /> <col class='diff-content' /> <col class='diff-marker' /> <col class='diff-content' />
← Older revision Revision as of 17:53, 26 March 2012
Line 539: Line 539:
::CPalmer, I am certainly not anti-rain. :)  I merely quoted the verse to demonstrate the point that God is involved to some degree in weather/rain. The degree of involvement is not a matter I want to discuss at this point but the accounts of Noah, Elijah and the words/actions of Christ himself bolsters the view that God influences weather.  There are plenty of verses in the Bible to support this view. Conservative 09:50, 26 March 2012 (EDT)
::CPalmer, I am certainly not anti-rain. :)  I merely quoted the verse to demonstrate the point that God is involved to some degree in weather/rain. The degree of involvement is not a matter I want to discuss at this point but the accounts of Noah, Elijah and the words/actions of Christ himself bolsters the view that God influences weather.  There are plenty of verses in the Bible to support this view. Conservative 09:50, 26 March 2012 (EDT)
:::I still think that the more interesting question is why these supposedly brilliant atheists couldn't plan around the weather forecast, or at least arrange some kind of wet weather alternative to their event.--CPalmer 09:56, 26 March 2012 (EDT)
:::I still think that the more interesting question is why these supposedly brilliant atheists couldn't plan around the weather forecast, or at least arrange some kind of wet weather alternative to their event.--CPalmer 09:56, 26 March 2012 (EDT)
 +
::::You live in such a shamefully hate-filled and disjointed world, "Conservative". I pray that you seek mental health care and that someone with authority here do something to stop you from further harming this website. You're an embarrassment. Nate 13:19, 26 March 2012 (EDT)
== Has the scope of Conservapedia changed? ==
== Has the scope of Conservapedia changed? ==
 </body>

</html>

Mon, 26 Mar 2012 17:52:13 GMT (edit by JoMar)

<html>

 <head>
   <title>User:JoMar</title>
   <base href="http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:RecentChanges&feed=atom">
 </head>
 <body id="msgFeedSummaryBody" selected="false">

New user account

 </body>

</html>

Mon, 26 Mar 2012 17:57:25 GMT (edit by FiNate)

<html>

 <head>
   <title>Talk:Main Page</title>
   <base href="http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:RecentChanges&feed=atom">
 </head>
 <body id="msgFeedSummaryBody" selected="false">

Rain:

<col class='diff-marker' /> <col class='diff-content' /> <col class='diff-marker' /> <col class='diff-content' />
← Older revision Revision as of 17:57, 26 March 2012
Line 539: Line 539:
::CPalmer, I am certainly not anti-rain. :)  I merely quoted the verse to demonstrate the point that God is involved to some degree in weather/rain. The degree of involvement is not a matter I want to discuss at this point but the accounts of Noah, Elijah and the words/actions of Christ himself bolsters the view that God influences weather.  There are plenty of verses in the Bible to support this view. Conservative 09:50, 26 March 2012 (EDT)
::CPalmer, I am certainly not anti-rain. :)  I merely quoted the verse to demonstrate the point that God is involved to some degree in weather/rain. The degree of involvement is not a matter I want to discuss at this point but the accounts of Noah, Elijah and the words/actions of Christ himself bolsters the view that God influences weather.  There are plenty of verses in the Bible to support this view. Conservative 09:50, 26 March 2012 (EDT)
:::I still think that the more interesting question is why these supposedly brilliant atheists couldn't plan around the weather forecast, or at least arrange some kind of wet weather alternative to their event.--CPalmer 09:56, 26 March 2012 (EDT)
:::I still think that the more interesting question is why these supposedly brilliant atheists couldn't plan around the weather forecast, or at least arrange some kind of wet weather alternative to their event.--CPalmer 09:56, 26 March 2012 (EDT)
 +
 +
ken:LA LA LA LA LA I CANT HEAR YOU!:):) Images will do fine in a debate.
== Has the scope of Conservapedia changed? ==
== Has the scope of Conservapedia changed? ==
 </body>

</html>

Mon, 26 Mar 2012 17:57:00 GMT (edit by EvelynBernstein)

Spam edit, removed

Mon, 26 Mar 2012 17:56:44 GMT (edit by EvelynBernstein)

<html>

 <head>
   <title>User:EvelynBernstein</title>
   <base href="http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:RecentChanges&feed=atom">
 </head>
 <body id="msgFeedSummaryBody" selected="false">

New user account

 </body>

</html>

Mon, 26 Mar 2012 17:56:12 GMT (edit by Aschlafly)

<html>

 <head>
   <title>Talk:Main Page</title>
   <base href="http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:RecentChanges&feed=atom">
 </head>
 <body id="msgFeedSummaryBody" selected="false">

Reverted edits by <a href="/Special:Contributions/JoMar" title="Special:Contributions/JoMar">JoMar</a> (<a href="/index.php?title=User_talk:JoMar&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="User talk:JoMar (page does not exist)">talk</a>) to last revision by <a href="/index.php?title=User:MihailD&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="User:MihailD (page does not exist)">MihailD</a>

<col class='diff-marker' /> <col class='diff-content' /> <col class='diff-marker' /> <col class='diff-content' />
← Older revision Revision as of 17:56, 26 March 2012
Line 539: Line 539:
::CPalmer, I am certainly not anti-rain. :)  I merely quoted the verse to demonstrate the point that God is involved to some degree in weather/rain. The degree of involvement is not a matter I want to discuss at this point but the accounts of Noah, Elijah and the words/actions of Christ himself bolsters the view that God influences weather.  There are plenty of verses in the Bible to support this view. Conservative 09:50, 26 March 2012 (EDT)
::CPalmer, I am certainly not anti-rain. :)  I merely quoted the verse to demonstrate the point that God is involved to some degree in weather/rain. The degree of involvement is not a matter I want to discuss at this point but the accounts of Noah, Elijah and the words/actions of Christ himself bolsters the view that God influences weather.  There are plenty of verses in the Bible to support this view. Conservative 09:50, 26 March 2012 (EDT)
:::I still think that the more interesting question is why these supposedly brilliant atheists couldn't plan around the weather forecast, or at least arrange some kind of wet weather alternative to their event.--CPalmer 09:56, 26 March 2012 (EDT)
:::I still think that the more interesting question is why these supposedly brilliant atheists couldn't plan around the weather forecast, or at least arrange some kind of wet weather alternative to their event.--CPalmer 09:56, 26 March 2012 (EDT)
-
::::You live in such a shamefully hate-filled and disjointed world, "Conservative". I pray that you seek mental health care and that someone with authority here do something to stop you from further harming this website. You're an embarrassment. Nate 13:19, 26 March 2012 (EDT)
 
== Has the scope of Conservapedia changed? ==
== Has the scope of Conservapedia changed? ==
 </body>

</html>

Mon, 26 Mar 2012 17:55:33 GMT (edit by FiNate)

<html>

 <head>
   <title>User:FiNate</title>
   <base href="http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:RecentChanges&feed=atom">
 </head>
 <body id="msgFeedSummaryBody" selected="false">

New user account

 </body>

</html>

Mon, 26 Mar 2012 17:54:30 GMT (edit by JoMar)

<html>

 <head>
   <title>Talk:E=mc²</title>
   <base href="http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:RecentChanges&feed=atom">
 </head>
 <body id="msgFeedSummaryBody" selected="false">

Aschlafly, could you give us...:

<col class='diff-marker' /> <col class='diff-content' /> <col class='diff-marker' /> <col class='diff-content' />
← Older revision Revision as of 17:54, 26 March 2012
Line 129: Line 129:
:::Aschlafly, two protons (1.0073amu) and two neutrons (1.0087amu) have a combined mass of 4.0320 amu. An alpha-particle - existing from two protons and two neutrons - has a mass of 4.0015 amu. How do you explain this diminution of mass?
:::Aschlafly, two protons (1.0073amu) and two neutrons (1.0087amu) have a combined mass of 4.0320 amu. An alpha-particle - existing from two protons and two neutrons - has a mass of 4.0015 amu. How do you explain this diminution of mass?
:::AugustO 13:42, 26 March 2012 (EDT)
:::AugustO 13:42, 26 March 2012 (EDT)
 +
:James wilson, please stop trying to disrupt discussions that are pointing out errors in the article, even if they don't conform to your worldview.
 </body>

</html>

Mon, 26 Mar 2012 17:53:05 GMT (edit by JoMar)

<html>

 <head>
   <title>Talk:Main Page</title>
   <base href="http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:RecentChanges&feed=atom">
 </head>
 <body id="msgFeedSummaryBody" selected="false">

Reverted edits by James wilson to last edit by NKeaton

<col class='diff-marker' /> <col class='diff-content' /> <col class='diff-marker' /> <col class='diff-content' />
← Older revision Revision as of 17:53, 26 March 2012
Line 539: Line 539:
::CPalmer, I am certainly not anti-rain. :)  I merely quoted the verse to demonstrate the point that God is involved to some degree in weather/rain. The degree of involvement is not a matter I want to discuss at this point but the accounts of Noah, Elijah and the words/actions of Christ himself bolsters the view that God influences weather.  There are plenty of verses in the Bible to support this view. Conservative 09:50, 26 March 2012 (EDT)
::CPalmer, I am certainly not anti-rain. :)  I merely quoted the verse to demonstrate the point that God is involved to some degree in weather/rain. The degree of involvement is not a matter I want to discuss at this point but the accounts of Noah, Elijah and the words/actions of Christ himself bolsters the view that God influences weather.  There are plenty of verses in the Bible to support this view. Conservative 09:50, 26 March 2012 (EDT)
:::I still think that the more interesting question is why these supposedly brilliant atheists couldn't plan around the weather forecast, or at least arrange some kind of wet weather alternative to their event.--CPalmer 09:56, 26 March 2012 (EDT)
:::I still think that the more interesting question is why these supposedly brilliant atheists couldn't plan around the weather forecast, or at least arrange some kind of wet weather alternative to their event.--CPalmer 09:56, 26 March 2012 (EDT)
 +
::::You live in such a shamefully hate-filled and disjointed world, "Conservative". I pray that you seek mental health care and that someone with authority here do something to stop you from further harming this website. You're an embarrassment. Nate 13:19, 26 March 2012 (EDT)
== Has the scope of Conservapedia changed? ==
== Has the scope of Conservapedia changed? ==
 </body>

</html>

Mon, 26 Mar 2012 17:58:37 GMT (edit by FiNate)

<html>

 <head>
   <title>Assfly:assfly</title>
   <base href="http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:RecentChanges&feed=atom">
 </head>
 <body id="msgFeedSummaryBody" selected="false">

Created page with "Already missing LA...can't wait to go back this summer We support thewoman behind the breast cancer. Read 's blog about her experience for Tomorrow on the Marshall stand at NAMM,..."

New page

Already missing LA...can't wait to go back this summer We support thewoman behind the breast cancer. Read 's blog about her experience for Tomorrow on the Marshall stand at NAMM, Joe Satriani will be signing at 12:30pm, and Kerry King at 1:30pm! are you serious?? ?? Heyy (: vdd kkkkk vlw s2!! This job is wearing me out mf ask u to do to much n don't pay u either this is what I told you.! :P The City of ... mhm. and i did talk. Mi social media No me deja colocar mi avatar =S ZYAN??????????????????????????? Top10mtv1D Gol de CSK xd "To truly love is to have the courage to just walk away." - Taylor Swift

AMY CLAPPPPP :) I've been feeling weird. check me out on my good friend 's mohrstories 'cast. much hilarity and cursing ensues. you know how we do. I'm at McDonald's (515 W. Main St., Branson vou sim meu anjo. Aw more jokes on snl. This time with animals. Yay homophobia! ugh Nice touch. As each all-star is introduced, screen shows pix of him in youth hockey yup next week! White girls with fat > I actually hate being a girl É imenso o orgulho que sentimos! Vamos continuar com esse belo trabalho juntos, Killjoys! WE ARE MAKING THE NOISE! Latin America Loves MR Love that is following me bigfan
Não tem como abraçarmos a mentira e a verdade ou a bondade e a maldade. Carater não é uma pilula, mas uma decisão. I had to go to court for Gold and the anachronism of Elite BRIC Central Banking illegally gambling with luggage. I won my case. if you follow ill follow you and give a shout out ExcusesGuysMake "I wasn't near my phone." But you messagein tho...via mobile.... who has a better personality Denise Welch or Tulisa ?? askfrankie Gotta figure out the plan though! Interestingly, getting more engagement on than Google+ for story about Obama's G+ Hangout ^^ gl with LtZ chubbz <3 u :P SEGUIDOR_PREMIADO SORTEIO DE MIL_REAIS em perfumes da PERFUMARIA_CURITIBA com 200mil seg. Siga/kingo.to/ZoZ- A todo esto; ayer vi Conan que no la había visto...y es una ofensa a Robert E Howard..y al publico haha.. :D ajarin pakenya dong cc idola.. XD I'm at WKU love with me! left about 200 copies of alilbitofcash cds in my car I'm about to sell them an do ...
my 2550ste message voor xx and now they're following me around and shooting at me. Lol! remessage if you will protect kpop when people talking bad about it >_< If he does that in the 4th I'll be impressed. Hawks 52 Blazers 41. Joe Johnson scored 10 pts _ all in the final 2:42. Coragem Vivina rsrs, Boa noite :) Would be nice if we score a few at Swansea tomorrow so that could make an appearance, very eager to see him on the big stage. CFC vamo ai na piscina memu que chova ? (: Well review PMQs on Wed with and - join and on BBC2 from 1130-1300 bbcdp
Más grande que Pelé? Neymar alabó a Messi y asegura "está por encima de todos". I hate when people don't text back >>>> -___- haha road trip! Wakker OM 22:30 WORDT EEN GRATIS TEAM VIEZE MUTS VERLOOT ! (ROOD) RT + FOLLOW ! gratis hefbundyzinnen RT ! Vandy better not lose to loveing nerd village either lol that would definitely make this day dontdothistome RT if you will be tuning in for the full 12 hours of the ASOT550 broadcast from LA via ! Just ate a chicken wheat wrap in my fridge - 5 days old. It was like eating a damp roll of toilet paper brimming with antique food. 2 TT de mi ídolo, se puede pedir algo mas? Boyfriend Will Be Perfect <3 Verify Beliebers What's up w/people in their 30s saying 'I'm so old now'...I NEVER hear my 50 and up friends talk that way...or my parents uliveonce wakeup me da susto el pelao negro!!! ta mas tiezo que soldao ruzo Acabo de fazer pronunciamento na Alesc sobre a SAÚDE no Mundo, no Brasil e em Santa Catarina, neste Dia Mundial da Saúde. Avanços e atrasos.

Te persigo incanzablemente, ¡Ja! como si tuviera la más mínima esperanza de que verás como algo más que "un amigo".. ": soon as you don't give a love that's when they wanna care" Emma Harrison's changing the name of her company to Afr4ude. Kok sulli semua sihh (?) Everyone looks so different!! Rodney Purvis of Upper Room Christian named NC Gatorade Player of the Year. He has signed with NC State University. for sure~ he's leaving tomorrow tho. R u talking tonight? Haha Photo: What car do you think will be number 1 on our 100 most beautiful list? Hamlin has to pit again for a loose wheel. On pit road now.
 </body>

</html>

Mon, 26 Mar 2012 17:58:29 GMT (edit by Aschlafly)

deletion of spam edit removed

Mon, 26 Mar 2012 17:58:14 GMT (edit by FiNate)

Spam edit, removed

Mon, 26 Mar 2012 18:00:24 GMT (edit by Baobab)

<html>

 <head>
   <title>French language</title>
   <base href="http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:RecentChanges&feed=atom">
 </head>
 <body id="msgFeedSummaryBody" selected="false">

Object Pronouns: 'en' doesn't denote location

<col class='diff-marker' /> <col class='diff-content' /> <col class='diff-marker' /> <col class='diff-content' />
← Older revision Revision as of 18:00, 26 March 2012
Line 24: Line 24:
French is a predominately SVO with some SOV aspects. For example...
French is a predominately SVO with some SOV aspects. For example...
-
Il mange une pomme à Paris (lit. He eats an apple in Paris)<br />Il y en mange une (He eats one there; note the change in word order)
+
Il mange une pomme à Paris (lit. He eats an apple in Paris)<br />Il y en mange une (He eats one; note the change in word order)
Edouard va parler aux professeurs (Edouard is going to talk to the professors)<br />Edouard va leur parler (lit. Edouard is going them to speak)
Edouard va parler aux professeurs (Edouard is going to talk to the professors)<br />Edouard va leur parler (lit. Edouard is going them to speak)
 </body>

</html>

Mon, 26 Mar 2012 17:58:37 GMT (edit by FiNate)

<html>

 <head>
   <title>Assfly:assfly</title>
   <base href="http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:RecentChanges&feed=atom">
 </head>
 <body id="msgFeedSummaryBody" selected="false">

Created page with "Already missing LA...can't wait to go back this summer We support thewoman behind the breast cancer. Read 's blog about her experience for Tomorrow on the Marshall stand at NAMM,..."

New page

Already missing LA...can't wait to go back this summer We support thewoman behind the breast cancer. Read 's blog about her experience for Tomorrow on the Marshall stand at NAMM, Joe Satriani will be signing at 12:30pm, and Kerry King at 1:30pm! are you serious?? ?? Heyy (: vdd kkkkk vlw s2!! This job is wearing me out mf ask u to do to much n don't pay u either this is what I told you.! :P The City of ... mhm. and i did talk. Mi social media No me deja colocar mi avatar =S ZYAN??????????????????????????? Top10mtv1D Gol de CSK xd "To truly love is to have the courage to just walk away." - Taylor Swift

AMY CLAPPPPP :) I've been feeling weird. check me out on my good friend 's mohrstories 'cast. much hilarity and cursing ensues. you know how we do. I'm at McDonald's (515 W. Main St., Branson vou sim meu anjo. Aw more jokes on snl. This time with animals. Yay homophobia! ugh Nice touch. As each all-star is introduced, screen shows pix of him in youth hockey yup next week! White girls with fat > I actually hate being a girl É imenso o orgulho que sentimos! Vamos continuar com esse belo trabalho juntos, Killjoys! WE ARE MAKING THE NOISE! Latin America Loves MR Love that is following me bigfan
Não tem como abraçarmos a mentira e a verdade ou a bondade e a maldade. Carater não é uma pilula, mas uma decisão. I had to go to court for Gold and the anachronism of Elite BRIC Central Banking illegally gambling with luggage. I won my case. if you follow ill follow you and give a shout out ExcusesGuysMake "I wasn't near my phone." But you messagein tho...via mobile.... who has a better personality Denise Welch or Tulisa ?? askfrankie Gotta figure out the plan though! Interestingly, getting more engagement on than Google+ for story about Obama's G+ Hangout ^^ gl with LtZ chubbz <3 u :P SEGUIDOR_PREMIADO SORTEIO DE MIL_REAIS em perfumes da PERFUMARIA_CURITIBA com 200mil seg. Siga/kingo.to/ZoZ- A todo esto; ayer vi Conan que no la había visto...y es una ofensa a Robert E Howard..y al publico haha.. :D ajarin pakenya dong cc idola.. XD I'm at WKU love with me! left about 200 copies of alilbitofcash cds in my car I'm about to sell them an do ...
my 2550ste message voor xx and now they're following me around and shooting at me. Lol! remessage if you will protect kpop when people talking bad about it >_< If he does that in the 4th I'll be impressed. Hawks 52 Blazers 41. Joe Johnson scored 10 pts _ all in the final 2:42. Coragem Vivina rsrs, Boa noite :) Would be nice if we score a few at Swansea tomorrow so that could make an appearance, very eager to see him on the big stage. CFC vamo ai na piscina memu que chova ? (: Well review PMQs on Wed with and - join and on BBC2 from 1130-1300 bbcdp
Más grande que Pelé? Neymar alabó a Messi y asegura "está por encima de todos". I hate when people don't text back >>>> -___- haha road trip! Wakker OM 22:30 WORDT EEN GRATIS TEAM VIEZE MUTS VERLOOT ! (ROOD) RT + FOLLOW ! gratis hefbundyzinnen RT ! Vandy better not lose to loveing nerd village either lol that would definitely make this day dontdothistome RT if you will be tuning in for the full 12 hours of the ASOT550 broadcast from LA via ! Just ate a chicken wheat wrap in my fridge - 5 days old. It was like eating a damp roll of toilet paper brimming with antique food. 2 TT de mi ídolo, se puede pedir algo mas? Boyfriend Will Be Perfect <3 Verify Beliebers What's up w/people in their 30s saying 'I'm so old now'...I NEVER hear my 50 and up friends talk that way...or my parents uliveonce wakeup me da susto el pelao negro!!! ta mas tiezo que soldao ruzo Acabo de fazer pronunciamento na Alesc sobre a SAÚDE no Mundo, no Brasil e em Santa Catarina, neste Dia Mundial da Saúde. Avanços e atrasos.

Te persigo incanzablemente, ¡Ja! como si tuviera la más mínima esperanza de que verás como algo más que "un amigo".. ": soon as you don't give a love that's when they wanna care" Emma Harrison's changing the name of her company to Afr4ude. Kok sulli semua sihh (?) Everyone looks so different!! Rodney Purvis of Upper Room Christian named NC Gatorade Player of the Year. He has signed with NC State University. for sure~ he's leaving tomorrow tho. R u talking tonight? Haha Photo: What car do you think will be number 1 on our 100 most beautiful list? Hamlin has to pit again for a loose wheel. On pit road now.
 </body>

</html>

Mon, 26 Mar 2012 17:58:29 GMT (edit by Aschlafly)

Deletion of spam edit, removed

Mon, 26 Mar 2012 17:58:14 GMT (edit by FiNate)

Spam edit, removed

Mon, 26 Mar 2012 17:58:12 GMT (edit by Aschlafly)

<html>

 <head>
   <title>User:EvelynBernstein</title>
   <base href="http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:RecentChanges&feed=atom">
 </head>
 <body id="msgFeedSummaryBody" selected="false">

blocked [[<a href="/index.php?title=User:EvelynBernstein&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new mw-userlink" title="User:EvelynBernstein (page does not exist)">EvelynBernstein</a> (<a href="/index.php?title=User_talk:EvelynBernstein&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="User talk:EvelynBernstein (page does not exist)">Talk</a> | <a href="/Special:Contributions/EvelynBernstein" title="Special:Contributions/EvelynBernstein">contribs</a>)]] with an expiry time of 2 years (account creation disabled)

 </body>

</html>

Mon, 26 Mar 2012 17:57:25 GMT (edit by FiNate)

<html>

 <head>
   <title>Talk:Main Page</title>
   <base href="http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:RecentChanges&feed=atom">
 </head>
 <body id="msgFeedSummaryBody" selected="false">

Rain:

<col class='diff-marker' /> <col class='diff-content' /> <col class='diff-marker' /> <col class='diff-content' />
← Older revision Revision as of 17:57, 26 March 2012
Line 539: Line 539:
::CPalmer, I am certainly not anti-rain. :)  I merely quoted the verse to demonstrate the point that God is involved to some degree in weather/rain. The degree of involvement is not a matter I want to discuss at this point but the accounts of Noah, Elijah and the words/actions of Christ himself bolsters the view that God influences weather.  There are plenty of verses in the Bible to support this view. Conservative 09:50, 26 March 2012 (EDT)
::CPalmer, I am certainly not anti-rain. :)  I merely quoted the verse to demonstrate the point that God is involved to some degree in weather/rain. The degree of involvement is not a matter I want to discuss at this point but the accounts of Noah, Elijah and the words/actions of Christ himself bolsters the view that God influences weather.  There are plenty of verses in the Bible to support this view. Conservative 09:50, 26 March 2012 (EDT)
:::I still think that the more interesting question is why these supposedly brilliant atheists couldn't plan around the weather forecast, or at least arrange some kind of wet weather alternative to their event.--CPalmer 09:56, 26 March 2012 (EDT)
:::I still think that the more interesting question is why these supposedly brilliant atheists couldn't plan around the weather forecast, or at least arrange some kind of wet weather alternative to their event.--CPalmer 09:56, 26 March 2012 (EDT)
 +
 +
ken:LA LA LA LA LA I CANT HEAR YOU!:):) Images will do fine in a debate.
== Has the scope of Conservapedia changed? ==
== Has the scope of Conservapedia changed? ==
 </body>

</html>

Mon, 26 Mar 2012 17:56:12 GMT (edit by Aschlafly)

<html>

 <head>
   <title>Talk:Main Page</title>
   <base href="http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:RecentChanges&feed=atom">
 </head>
 <body id="msgFeedSummaryBody" selected="false">

Reverted edits by <a href="/Special:Contributions/JoMar" title="Special:Contributions/JoMar">JoMar</a> (<a href="/index.php?title=User_talk:JoMar&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="User talk:JoMar (page does not exist)">talk</a>) to last revision by <a href="/index.php?title=User:MihailD&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="User:MihailD (page does not exist)">MihailD</a>

<col class='diff-marker' /> <col class='diff-content' /> <col class='diff-marker' /> <col class='diff-content' />
← Older revision Revision as of 17:56, 26 March 2012
Line 539: Line 539:
::CPalmer, I am certainly not anti-rain. :)  I merely quoted the verse to demonstrate the point that God is involved to some degree in weather/rain. The degree of involvement is not a matter I want to discuss at this point but the accounts of Noah, Elijah and the words/actions of Christ himself bolsters the view that God influences weather.  There are plenty of verses in the Bible to support this view. Conservative 09:50, 26 March 2012 (EDT)
::CPalmer, I am certainly not anti-rain. :)  I merely quoted the verse to demonstrate the point that God is involved to some degree in weather/rain. The degree of involvement is not a matter I want to discuss at this point but the accounts of Noah, Elijah and the words/actions of Christ himself bolsters the view that God influences weather.  There are plenty of verses in the Bible to support this view. Conservative 09:50, 26 March 2012 (EDT)
:::I still think that the more interesting question is why these supposedly brilliant atheists couldn't plan around the weather forecast, or at least arrange some kind of wet weather alternative to their event.--CPalmer 09:56, 26 March 2012 (EDT)
:::I still think that the more interesting question is why these supposedly brilliant atheists couldn't plan around the weather forecast, or at least arrange some kind of wet weather alternative to their event.--CPalmer 09:56, 26 March 2012 (EDT)
-
::::You live in such a shamefully hate-filled and disjointed world, "Conservative". I pray that you seek mental health care and that someone with authority here do something to stop you from further harming this website. You're an embarrassment. Nate 13:19, 26 March 2012 (EDT)
 
== Has the scope of Conservapedia changed? ==
== Has the scope of Conservapedia changed? ==
 </body>

</html>

Mon, 26 Mar 2012 17:55:33 GMT (edit by FiNate)

<html>

 <head>
   <title>User:FiNate</title>
   <base href="http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:RecentChanges&feed=atom">
 </head>
 <body id="msgFeedSummaryBody" selected="false">

New user account

 </body>

</html>

Mon, 26 Mar 2012 17:54:30 GMT (edit by JoMar)

<html>

 <head>
   <title>Talk:E=mc²</title>
   <base href="http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:RecentChanges&feed=atom">
 </head>
 <body id="msgFeedSummaryBody" selected="false">

Aschlafly, could you give us...:

<col class='diff-marker' /> <col class='diff-content' /> <col class='diff-marker' /> <col class='diff-content' />
← Older revision Revision as of 17:54, 26 March 2012
Line 129: Line 129:
:::Aschlafly, two protons (1.0073amu) and two neutrons (1.0087amu) have a combined mass of 4.0320 amu. An alpha-particle - existing from two protons and two neutrons - has a mass of 4.0015 amu. How do you explain this diminution of mass?
:::Aschlafly, two protons (1.0073amu) and two neutrons (1.0087amu) have a combined mass of 4.0320 amu. An alpha-particle - existing from two protons and two neutrons - has a mass of 4.0015 amu. How do you explain this diminution of mass?
:::AugustO 13:42, 26 March 2012 (EDT)
:::AugustO 13:42, 26 March 2012 (EDT)
 +
:James wilson, please stop trying to disrupt discussions that are pointing out errors in the article, even if they don't conform to your worldview.
 </body>

</html>

Mon, 26 Mar 2012 18:01:30 GMT (edit by Baobab)

<html>

 <head>
   <title>French language</title>
   <base href="http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:RecentChanges&feed=atom">
 </head>
 <body id="msgFeedSummaryBody" selected="false">

Undo revision 970685 by <a href="/Special:Contributions/Baobab" title="Special:Contributions/Baobab">Baobab</a> (<a href="/User_talk:Baobab" title="User talk:Baobab">talk</a>)

<col class='diff-marker' /> <col class='diff-content' /> <col class='diff-marker' /> <col class='diff-content' />
← Older revision Revision as of 18:01, 26 March 2012
Line 24: Line 24:
French is a predominately SVO with some SOV aspects. For example...
French is a predominately SVO with some SOV aspects. For example...
-
Il mange une pomme à Paris (lit. He eats an apple in Paris)<br />Il y en mange une (He eats one; note the change in word order)
+
Il mange une pomme à Paris (lit. He eats an apple in Paris)<br />Il y en mange une (He eats one there; note the change in word order)
Edouard va parler aux professeurs (Edouard is going to talk to the professors)<br />Edouard va leur parler (lit. Edouard is going them to speak)
Edouard va parler aux professeurs (Edouard is going to talk to the professors)<br />Edouard va leur parler (lit. Edouard is going them to speak)
 </body>

</html>

Mon, 26 Mar 2012 18:01:24 GMT (edit by JoMar)

<html>

 <head>
   <title>Conservapedia:Wheel war</title>
   <base href="http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:RecentChanges&feed=atom">
 </head>
 <body id="msgFeedSummaryBody" selected="false">

Created page with "Ooh, wheel war, with JamesWilson and NKeaton! ==Team JamesWilson== ==Team NKeaton== GregG 00:47, 27 March 2012 (EDT)"

New page

Ooh, wheel war, with JamesWilson and NKeaton!


==Team JamesWilson==
==Team NKeaton==

JoMar 14:01, 26 March 2012 (EDT)
 </body>

</html>

Mon, 26 Mar 2012 18:04:23 GMT (edit by Aschlafly)

<html>

 <head>
   <title>Talk:E=mc²</title>
   <base href="http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:RecentChanges&feed=atom">
 </head>
 <body id="msgFeedSummaryBody" selected="false">

Reverted edits by <a href="/Special:Contributions/JoMar" title="Special:Contributions/JoMar">JoMar</a> (<a href="/index.php?title=User_talk:JoMar&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="User talk:JoMar (page does not exist)">talk</a>) to last revision by <a href="/User:AugustO" title="User:AugustO">AugustO</a>

<col class='diff-marker' /> <col class='diff-content' /> <col class='diff-marker' /> <col class='diff-content' />
← Older revision Revision as of 18:04, 26 March 2012
Line 129: Line 129:
:::Aschlafly, two protons (1.0073amu) and two neutrons (1.0087amu) have a combined mass of 4.0320 amu. An alpha-particle - existing from two protons and two neutrons - has a mass of 4.0015 amu. How do you explain this diminution of mass?
:::Aschlafly, two protons (1.0073amu) and two neutrons (1.0087amu) have a combined mass of 4.0320 amu. An alpha-particle - existing from two protons and two neutrons - has a mass of 4.0015 amu. How do you explain this diminution of mass?
:::AugustO 13:42, 26 March 2012 (EDT)
:::AugustO 13:42, 26 March 2012 (EDT)
-
:James wilson, please stop trying to disrupt discussions that are pointing out errors in the article, even if they don't conform to your worldview.
 
 </body>

</html>

Mon, 26 Mar 2012 18:03:48 GMT (edit by Aschlafly)

Deletion of spam edit removed

Mon, 26 Mar 2012 18:01:30 GMT (edit by Baobab)

<html>

 <head>
   <title>French language</title>
   <base href="http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:RecentChanges&feed=atom">
 </head>
 <body id="msgFeedSummaryBody" selected="false">

Undo revision 970685 by <a href="/Special:Contributions/Baobab" title="Special:Contributions/Baobab">Baobab</a> (<a href="/User_talk:Baobab" title="User talk:Baobab">talk</a>)

<col class='diff-marker' /> <col class='diff-content' /> <col class='diff-marker' /> <col class='diff-content' />
← Older revision Revision as of 18:01, 26 March 2012
Line 24: Line 24:
French is a predominately SVO with some SOV aspects. For example...
French is a predominately SVO with some SOV aspects. For example...
-
Il mange une pomme à Paris (lit. He eats an apple in Paris)<br />Il y en mange une (He eats one; note the change in word order)
+
Il mange une pomme à Paris (lit. He eats an apple in Paris)<br />Il y en mange une (He eats one there; note the change in word order)
Edouard va parler aux professeurs (Edouard is going to talk to the professors)<br />Edouard va leur parler (lit. Edouard is going them to speak)
Edouard va parler aux professeurs (Edouard is going to talk to the professors)<br />Edouard va leur parler (lit. Edouard is going them to speak)
 </body>

</html>

Mon, 26 Mar 2012 18:01:24 GMT (edit by JoMar)

<html>

 <head>
   <title>Conservapedia:Wheel war</title>
   <base href="http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:RecentChanges&feed=atom">
 </head>
 <body id="msgFeedSummaryBody" selected="false">

Created page with "Ooh, wheel war, with JamesWilson and NKeaton! ==Team JamesWilson== ==Team NKeaton== GregG 00:47, 27 March 2012 (EDT)"

New page

Ooh, wheel war, with JamesWilson and NKeaton!


==Team JamesWilson==
==Team NKeaton==

JoMar 14:01, 26 March 2012 (EDT)
 </body>

</html>

Mon, 26 Mar 2012 18:00:24 GMT (edit by Baobab)

<html>

 <head>
   <title>French language</title>
   <base href="http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:RecentChanges&feed=atom">
 </head>
 <body id="msgFeedSummaryBody" selected="false">

Object Pronouns: 'en' doesn't denote location

<col class='diff-marker' /> <col class='diff-content' /> <col class='diff-marker' /> <col class='diff-content' />
← Older revision Revision as of 18:00, 26 March 2012
Line 24: Line 24:
French is a predominately SVO with some SOV aspects. For example...
French is a predominately SVO with some SOV aspects. For example...
-
Il mange une pomme à Paris (lit. He eats an apple in Paris)<br />Il y en mange une (He eats one there; note the change in word order)
+
Il mange une pomme à Paris (lit. He eats an apple in Paris)<br />Il y en mange une (He eats one; note the change in word order)
Edouard va parler aux professeurs (Edouard is going to talk to the professors)<br />Edouard va leur parler (lit. Edouard is going them to speak)
Edouard va parler aux professeurs (Edouard is going to talk to the professors)<br />Edouard va leur parler (lit. Edouard is going them to speak)
 </body>

</html>

Mon, 26 Mar 2012 18:05:53 GMT (edit by Aschlafly)

<html>

 <head>
   <title>Talk:Main Page</title>
   <base href="http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:RecentChanges&feed=atom">
 </head>
 <body id="msgFeedSummaryBody" selected="false">

Reverted edits by <a href="/Special:Contributions/FiNate" title="Special:Contributions/FiNate">FiNate</a> (<a href="/index.php?title=User_talk:FiNate&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="User talk:FiNate (page does not exist)">talk</a>) to last revision by <a href="/User:Aschlafly" title="User:Aschlafly">Aschlafly</a>

<col class='diff-marker' /> <col class='diff-content' /> <col class='diff-marker' /> <col class='diff-content' />
← Older revision Revision as of 18:05, 26 March 2012
Line 539: Line 539:
::CPalmer, I am certainly not anti-rain. :)  I merely quoted the verse to demonstrate the point that God is involved to some degree in weather/rain. The degree of involvement is not a matter I want to discuss at this point but the accounts of Noah, Elijah and the words/actions of Christ himself bolsters the view that God influences weather.  There are plenty of verses in the Bible to support this view. Conservative 09:50, 26 March 2012 (EDT)
::CPalmer, I am certainly not anti-rain. :)  I merely quoted the verse to demonstrate the point that God is involved to some degree in weather/rain. The degree of involvement is not a matter I want to discuss at this point but the accounts of Noah, Elijah and the words/actions of Christ himself bolsters the view that God influences weather.  There are plenty of verses in the Bible to support this view. Conservative 09:50, 26 March 2012 (EDT)
:::I still think that the more interesting question is why these supposedly brilliant atheists couldn't plan around the weather forecast, or at least arrange some kind of wet weather alternative to their event.--CPalmer 09:56, 26 March 2012 (EDT)
:::I still think that the more interesting question is why these supposedly brilliant atheists couldn't plan around the weather forecast, or at least arrange some kind of wet weather alternative to their event.--CPalmer 09:56, 26 March 2012 (EDT)
-
 
-
ken:LA LA LA LA LA I CANT HEAR YOU!:):) Images will do fine in a debate.
 
== Has the scope of Conservapedia changed? ==
== Has the scope of Conservapedia changed? ==
 </body>

</html>

Mon, 26 Mar 2012 18:05:11 GMT (edit by MihailD)

<html>

 <head>
   <title>E=mc²</title>
   <base href="http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:RecentChanges&feed=atom">
 </head>
 <body id="msgFeedSummaryBody" selected="false">

Added some basic encyclopedic information before we get onto the debunking.

<col class='diff-marker' /> <col class='diff-content' /> <col class='diff-marker' /> <col class='diff-content' />
← Older revision Revision as of 18:05, 26 March 2012
Line 1: Line 1:
-
E=mc<sup>2</sup> is a meaningless, almost nonsensical, statement in [[physics]] that purports to relate all matter to light.  In fact, no theory has successfully unified the laws governing mass (i.e., gravity) with the laws governing light (i.e., electromagnetism).  Simply put, E=mc<sup>2</sup> is liberal claptrap.
+
E=mc<sup>2</sup> is an equation used in physics to relate energy to mass. It states that the total energy E of a body in all forms is equal to that body's mass m multiplied by the square of the speed of light c. The equation only holds true if SI units are used, hence E is measured in joules, m in [[kilogram|kilograms]] and c in metres per second. In other systems of units a addition constant of proportionality would be required.
 +
 
 +
The equation is a meaningless, almost nonsensical, statement that purports to relate all matter to light.  In fact, no theory has successfully unified the laws governing mass (i.e., gravity) with the laws governing light (i.e., electromagnetism).  Simply put, E=mc<sup>2</sup> is liberal claptrap.
Biblical Scientific Foreknowledge predicts that a unified theory of all the laws of physics is impossible, because light and matter were created at different times, in different ways, as described in the Book of Genesis.
Biblical Scientific Foreknowledge predicts that a unified theory of all the laws of physics is impossible, because light and matter were created at different times, in different ways, as described in the Book of Genesis.
 </body>

</html>

Mon, 26 Mar 2012 18:04:43 GMT (edit by Aschlafly)

<html>

 <head>
   <title>Conservapedia:Wheel war</title>
   <base href="http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:RecentChanges&feed=atom">
 </head>
 <body id="msgFeedSummaryBody" selected="false">

deleted "[[<a href="/index.php?title=Conservapedia:Wheel_war&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Conservapedia:Wheel war (page does not exist)">Conservapedia:Wheel war</a>]]"

 </body>

</html>

Mon, 26 Mar 2012 18:12:19 GMT (edit by DorMouse)

<html>

 <head>
   <title>Talk:Main Page</title>
   <base href="http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:RecentChanges&feed=atom">
 </head>
 <body id="msgFeedSummaryBody" selected="false">

Rain:

<col class='diff-marker' /> <col class='diff-content' /> <col class='diff-marker' /> <col class='diff-content' />
← Older revision Revision as of 18:12, 26 March 2012
Line 531: Line 531:
By the way, your church hierarchy was wrong in the Galileo affair as well. The funny thing is that some prideful Catholics still can't get over the fact that the church was wrong in the Galileo affair as evidenced by the Catholic Robert Sungenis, Ph.D. who maintains that Galileo was wrong and the RCC was right as can be seen HERE. The Roman Catholic Church at the time of the Galileo affair was so enthralled by Aristotle (who was a mere man) that they blew it in the Galileo affair.[1][2]  History has a way of repeating itself and now the post 1950s liberal Roman Catholic Church is a follower of Darwinism via its ideological cousin theistic evolution. Conservative 06:54, 26 March 2012 (EDT)
By the way, your church hierarchy was wrong in the Galileo affair as well. The funny thing is that some prideful Catholics still can't get over the fact that the church was wrong in the Galileo affair as evidenced by the Catholic Robert Sungenis, Ph.D. who maintains that Galileo was wrong and the RCC was right as can be seen HERE. The Roman Catholic Church at the time of the Galileo affair was so enthralled by Aristotle (who was a mere man) that they blew it in the Galileo affair.[3][4]  History has a way of repeating itself and now the post 1950s liberal Roman Catholic Church is a follower of Darwinism via its ideological cousin theistic evolution. Conservative 06:54, 26 March 2012 (EDT)
-
 
+
Invisible Red telephone! Operation Flying Fortress is gathering steam, and soon Conservapedia's articles will be ranking high on a certain search engine starting with the letter "G", to the chargrin of Athiest Militant Evolutioninsts! :):):) So, gentlemen at another site, what are your responses? :):):) Global Atheism is Shrinking, much to the chargrin of Richard Dawkins, and friends!":):):)
:The above seems unduly anti-Catholic.
:The above seems unduly anti-Catholic.
:"The rain it raineth on the just and on the unjust." I don't think bad weather at any event, no matter how atheistic, can be considered evidence of God's disapproval. It would be more pertinent to ask, if all these atheists are so scientifically minded, why they couldn't plan their event to avoid the rain.
:"The rain it raineth on the just and on the unjust." I don't think bad weather at any event, no matter how atheistic, can be considered evidence of God's disapproval. It would be more pertinent to ask, if all these atheists are so scientifically minded, why they couldn't plan their event to avoid the rain.
Line 539: Line 539:
::CPalmer, I am certainly not anti-rain. :)  I merely quoted the verse to demonstrate the point that God is involved to some degree in weather/rain. The degree of involvement is not a matter I want to discuss at this point but the accounts of Noah, Elijah and the words/actions of Christ himself bolsters the view that God influences weather.  There are plenty of verses in the Bible to support this view. Conservative 09:50, 26 March 2012 (EDT)
::CPalmer, I am certainly not anti-rain. :)  I merely quoted the verse to demonstrate the point that God is involved to some degree in weather/rain. The degree of involvement is not a matter I want to discuss at this point but the accounts of Noah, Elijah and the words/actions of Christ himself bolsters the view that God influences weather.  There are plenty of verses in the Bible to support this view. Conservative 09:50, 26 March 2012 (EDT)
:::I still think that the more interesting question is why these supposedly brilliant atheists couldn't plan around the weather forecast, or at least arrange some kind of wet weather alternative to their event.--CPalmer 09:56, 26 March 2012 (EDT)
:::I still think that the more interesting question is why these supposedly brilliant atheists couldn't plan around the weather forecast, or at least arrange some kind of wet weather alternative to their event.--CPalmer 09:56, 26 March 2012 (EDT)
 +
:It is just rain, no? Please, people, less talk, more edits!14:12, 26 March 2012 (EDT)
== Has the scope of Conservapedia changed? ==
== Has the scope of Conservapedia changed? ==
 </body>

</html>

Mon, 26 Mar 2012 18:05:53 GMT (edit by Aschlafly)

<html>

 <head>
   <title>Talk:Main Page</title>
   <base href="http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:RecentChanges&feed=atom">
 </head>
 <body id="msgFeedSummaryBody" selected="false">

Reverted edits by <a href="/Special:Contributions/FiNate" title="Special:Contributions/FiNate">FiNate</a> (<a href="/index.php?title=User_talk:FiNate&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="User talk:FiNate (page does not exist)">talk</a>) to last revision by <a href="/User:Aschlafly" title="User:Aschlafly">Aschlafly</a>

<col class='diff-marker' /> <col class='diff-content' /> <col class='diff-marker' /> <col class='diff-content' />
← Older revision Revision as of 18:05, 26 March 2012
Line 539: Line 539:
::CPalmer, I am certainly not anti-rain. :)  I merely quoted the verse to demonstrate the point that God is involved to some degree in weather/rain. The degree of involvement is not a matter I want to discuss at this point but the accounts of Noah, Elijah and the words/actions of Christ himself bolsters the view that God influences weather.  There are plenty of verses in the Bible to support this view. Conservative 09:50, 26 March 2012 (EDT)
::CPalmer, I am certainly not anti-rain. :)  I merely quoted the verse to demonstrate the point that God is involved to some degree in weather/rain. The degree of involvement is not a matter I want to discuss at this point but the accounts of Noah, Elijah and the words/actions of Christ himself bolsters the view that God influences weather.  There are plenty of verses in the Bible to support this view. Conservative 09:50, 26 March 2012 (EDT)
:::I still think that the more interesting question is why these supposedly brilliant atheists couldn't plan around the weather forecast, or at least arrange some kind of wet weather alternative to their event.--CPalmer 09:56, 26 March 2012 (EDT)
:::I still think that the more interesting question is why these supposedly brilliant atheists couldn't plan around the weather forecast, or at least arrange some kind of wet weather alternative to their event.--CPalmer 09:56, 26 March 2012 (EDT)
-
 
-
ken:LA LA LA LA LA I CANT HEAR YOU!:):) Images will do fine in a debate.
 
== Has the scope of Conservapedia changed? ==
== Has the scope of Conservapedia changed? ==
 </body>

</html>

Mon, 26 Mar 2012 18:05:11 GMT (edit by MihailD)

<html>

 <head>
   <title>E=mc²</title>
   <base href="http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:RecentChanges&feed=atom">
 </head>
 <body id="msgFeedSummaryBody" selected="false">

Added some basic encyclopedic information before we get onto the debunking.

<col class='diff-marker' /> <col class='diff-content' /> <col class='diff-marker' /> <col class='diff-content' />
← Older revision Revision as of 18:05, 26 March 2012
Line 1: Line 1:
-
E=mc<sup>2</sup> is a meaningless, almost nonsensical, statement in [[physics]] that purports to relate all matter to light.  In fact, no theory has successfully unified the laws governing mass (i.e., gravity) with the laws governing light (i.e., electromagnetism).  Simply put, E=mc<sup>2</sup> is liberal claptrap.
+
E=mc<sup>2</sup> is an equation used in physics to relate energy to mass. It states that the total energy E of a body in all forms is equal to that body's mass m multiplied by the square of the speed of light c. The equation only holds true if SI units are used, hence E is measured in joules, m in [[kilogram|kilograms]] and c in metres per second. In other systems of units a addition constant of proportionality would be required.
 +
 
 +
The equation is a meaningless, almost nonsensical, statement that purports to relate all matter to light.  In fact, no theory has successfully unified the laws governing mass (i.e., gravity) with the laws governing light (i.e., electromagnetism).  Simply put, E=mc<sup>2</sup> is liberal claptrap.
Biblical Scientific Foreknowledge predicts that a unified theory of all the laws of physics is impossible, because light and matter were created at different times, in different ways, as described in the Book of Genesis.
Biblical Scientific Foreknowledge predicts that a unified theory of all the laws of physics is impossible, because light and matter were created at different times, in different ways, as described in the Book of Genesis.
 </body>

</html>

Mon, 26 Mar 2012 18:04:43 GMT (edit by Aschlafly)

<html>

 <head>
   <title>Conservapedia:Wheel war</title>
   <base href="http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:RecentChanges&feed=atom">
 </head>
 <body id="msgFeedSummaryBody" selected="false">

deleted "[[<a href="/index.php?title=Conservapedia:Wheel_war&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Conservapedia:Wheel war (page does not exist)">Conservapedia:Wheel war</a>]]"

 </body>

</html>

Mon, 26 Mar 2012 18:04:23 GMT (edit by Aschlafly)

<html>

 <head>
   <title>Talk:E=mc²</title>
   <base href="http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:RecentChanges&feed=atom">
 </head>
 <body id="msgFeedSummaryBody" selected="false">

Reverted edits by <a href="/Special:Contributions/JoMar" title="Special:Contributions/JoMar">JoMar</a> (<a href="/index.php?title=User_talk:JoMar&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="User talk:JoMar (page does not exist)">talk</a>) to last revision by <a href="/User:AugustO" title="User:AugustO">AugustO</a>

<col class='diff-marker' /> <col class='diff-content' /> <col class='diff-marker' /> <col class='diff-content' />
← Older revision Revision as of 18:04, 26 March 2012
Line 129: Line 129:
:::Aschlafly, two protons (1.0073amu) and two neutrons (1.0087amu) have a combined mass of 4.0320 amu. An alpha-particle - existing from two protons and two neutrons - has a mass of 4.0015 amu. How do you explain this diminution of mass?
:::Aschlafly, two protons (1.0073amu) and two neutrons (1.0087amu) have a combined mass of 4.0320 amu. An alpha-particle - existing from two protons and two neutrons - has a mass of 4.0015 amu. How do you explain this diminution of mass?
:::AugustO 13:42, 26 March 2012 (EDT)
:::AugustO 13:42, 26 March 2012 (EDT)
-
:James wilson, please stop trying to disrupt discussions that are pointing out errors in the article, even if they don't conform to your worldview.
 
 </body>

</html>

Mon, 26 Mar 2012 18:03:48 GMT (edit by Aschlafly)

Deletion of spam edit, removed

Mon, 26 Mar 2012 18:25:46 GMT (edit by Joaquín Martínez)

<html>

 <head>
   <title>Al Qaeda</title>
   <base href="http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:RecentChanges&feed=atom">
 </head>
 <body id="msgFeedSummaryBody" selected="false">

External links:

<col class='diff-marker' /> <col class='diff-content' /> <col class='diff-marker' /> <col class='diff-content' />
← Older revision Revision as of 18:25, 26 March 2012
Line 14: Line 14:
==External links==
==External links==
 +
*Bush shares al Qaeda plans - Jon Ward, Washington Times - May 24, 2007
*Bush shares al Qaeda plans - Jon Ward, Washington Times - May 24, 2007
 </body>

</html>

Mon, 26 Mar 2012 18:12:57 GMT (edit by Aschlafly)

<html>

 <head>
   <title>E=mc²</title>
   <base href="http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:RecentChanges&feed=atom">
 </head>
 <body id="msgFeedSummaryBody" selected="false">

putting jargon in a footnote

<col class='diff-marker' /> <col class='diff-content' /> <col class='diff-marker' /> <col class='diff-content' />
← Older revision Revision as of 18:12, 26 March 2012
Line 1: Line 1:
-
E=mc<sup>2</sup> is an equation used in physics to relate energy to mass. It states that the total energy E of a body in all forms is equal to that body's mass m multiplied by the square of the speed of light c. The equation only holds true if SI units are used, hence E is measured in joules, m in kilograms and c in metres per second. In other systems of units a addition constant of proportionality would be required.
+
E=mc<sup>2</sup> is a meaningless, almost nonsensical, statement that purports to relate all matter to light.<ref>The equation claims that the total energy E of a body in all forms is equal to that body's mass m multiplied by the square of the speed of light c. The equation only holds true if SI units are used, hence E is measured in joules, m in kilograms and c in metres per second. In other systems of units a addition constant of proportionality would be required.</ref> In fact, no theory has successfully unified the laws governing mass (i.e., gravity) with the laws governing light (i.e., electromagnetism).  Simply put, E=mc<sup>2</sup> is liberal claptrap.
-
 
+
-
The equation is a meaningless, almost nonsensical, statement that purports to relate all matter to light. In fact, no theory has successfully unified the laws governing mass (i.e., gravity) with the laws governing light (i.e., electromagnetism).  Simply put, E=mc<sup>2</sup> is liberal claptrap.
+
Biblical Scientific Foreknowledge predicts that a unified theory of all the laws of physics is impossible, because light and matter were created at different times, in different ways, as described in the Book of Genesis.
Biblical Scientific Foreknowledge predicts that a unified theory of all the laws of physics is impossible, because light and matter were created at different times, in different ways, as described in the Book of Genesis.
Line 14: Line 12:
The equality of the mass equivalent of radiation to the mass lost by a radiating body is derivable from Poincaré’s momentum of radiation (1900) and his principle of relativity (1904).

—Herbert Ives, 1952

The equality of the mass equivalent of radiation to the mass lost by a radiating body is derivable from Poincaré’s momentum of radiation (1900) and his principle of relativity (1904).

—Herbert Ives, 1952

 +
 +
The equation E=mc<sup>2</sup> is an equation used in physics to relate energy to mass. It states that the total energy E of a body in all forms is equal to that body's mass m multiplied by the square of the speed of light c. The equation only holds true if SI units are used, hence E is measured in joules, m in kilograms and c in metres per second. In other systems of units a addition constant of proportionality would be required.
== Examples of how meaningless E=mc² is: descriptions for the layman ==
== Examples of how meaningless E=mc² is: descriptions for the layman ==
 </body>

</html>

Mon, 26 Mar 2012 18:42:32 GMT (edit by SamCoulter)

<html>

 <head>
   <title>E=mc²</title>
   <base href="http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:RecentChanges&feed=atom">
 </head>
 <body id="msgFeedSummaryBody" selected="false">

This is just wrong. The equation holds true with any system of units.

<col class='diff-marker' /> <col class='diff-content' /> <col class='diff-marker' /> <col class='diff-content' />
← Older revision Revision as of 18:42, 26 March 2012
Line 13: Line 13:
The equality of the mass equivalent of radiation to the mass lost by a radiating body is derivable from Poincaré’s momentum of radiation (1900) and his principle of relativity (1904).

—Herbert Ives, 1952

The equality of the mass equivalent of radiation to the mass lost by a radiating body is derivable from Poincaré’s momentum of radiation (1900) and his principle of relativity (1904).

—Herbert Ives, 1952

-
The equation E=mc<sup>2</sup> is an equation used in physics to relate energy to mass. It states that the total energy E of a body in all forms is equal to that body's mass m multiplied by the square of the speed of light c. The equation only holds true if SI units are used, hence E is measured in joules, m in kilograms and c in metres per second. In other systems of units a addition constant of proportionality would be required.
+
The equation E=mc<sup>2</sup> is an equation used in physics to relate energy to mass. It states that the total energy E of a body in all forms is equal to that body's mass m multiplied by the square of the speed of light c. The equation is usually expressed in SI units, hence E is measured in joules, m in kilograms and c in metres per second. In the US of Imperial systems the appropriate units are foot-pounds, pounds and feet per second.
== Examples of how meaningless E=mc² is: descriptions for the layman ==
== Examples of how meaningless E=mc² is: descriptions for the layman ==
 </body>

</html>

Mon, 26 Mar 2012 18:25:46 GMT (edit by Joaquín Martínez)

<html>

 <head>
   <title>Al Qaeda</title>
   <base href="http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:RecentChanges&feed=atom">
 </head>
 <body id="msgFeedSummaryBody" selected="false">

External links:

<col class='diff-marker' /> <col class='diff-content' /> <col class='diff-marker' /> <col class='diff-content' />
← Older revision Revision as of 18:25, 26 March 2012
Line 14: Line 14:
==External links==
==External links==
 +
*Bush shares al Qaeda plans - Jon Ward, Washington Times - May 24, 2007
*Bush shares al Qaeda plans - Jon Ward, Washington Times - May 24, 2007
 </body>

</html>

Mon, 26 Mar 2012 18:12:57 GMT (edit by Aschlafly)

<html>

 <head>
   <title>E=mc²</title>
   <base href="http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:RecentChanges&feed=atom">
 </head>
 <body id="msgFeedSummaryBody" selected="false">

putting jargon in a footnote

<col class='diff-marker' /> <col class='diff-content' /> <col class='diff-marker' /> <col class='diff-content' />
← Older revision Revision as of 18:12, 26 March 2012
Line 1: Line 1:
-
E=mc<sup>2</sup> is an equation used in physics to relate energy to mass. It states that the total energy E of a body in all forms is equal to that body's mass m multiplied by the square of the speed of light c. The equation only holds true if SI units are used, hence E is measured in joules, m in kilograms and c in metres per second. In other systems of units a addition constant of proportionality would be required.
+
E=mc<sup>2</sup> is a meaningless, almost nonsensical, statement that purports to relate all matter to light.<ref>The equation claims that the total energy E of a body in all forms is equal to that body's mass m multiplied by the square of the speed of light c. The equation only holds true if SI units are used, hence E is measured in joules, m in kilograms and c in metres per second. In other systems of units a addition constant of proportionality would be required.</ref> In fact, no theory has successfully unified the laws governing mass (i.e., gravity) with the laws governing light (i.e., electromagnetism).  Simply put, E=mc<sup>2</sup> is liberal claptrap.
-
 
+
-
The equation is a meaningless, almost nonsensical, statement that purports to relate all matter to light. In fact, no theory has successfully unified the laws governing mass (i.e., gravity) with the laws governing light (i.e., electromagnetism).  Simply put, E=mc<sup>2</sup> is liberal claptrap.
+
Biblical Scientific Foreknowledge predicts that a unified theory of all the laws of physics is impossible, because light and matter were created at different times, in different ways, as described in the Book of Genesis.
Biblical Scientific Foreknowledge predicts that a unified theory of all the laws of physics is impossible, because light and matter were created at different times, in different ways, as described in the Book of Genesis.
Line 14: Line 12:
The equality of the mass equivalent of radiation to the mass lost by a radiating body is derivable from Poincaré’s momentum of radiation (1900) and his principle of relativity (1904).

—Herbert Ives, 1952

The equality of the mass equivalent of radiation to the mass lost by a radiating body is derivable from Poincaré’s momentum of radiation (1900) and his principle of relativity (1904).

—Herbert Ives, 1952

 +
 +
The equation E=mc<sup>2</sup> is an equation used in physics to relate energy to mass. It states that the total energy E of a body in all forms is equal to that body's mass m multiplied by the square of the speed of light c. The equation only holds true if SI units are used, hence E is measured in joules, m in kilograms and c in metres per second. In other systems of units a addition constant of proportionality would be required.
== Examples of how meaningless E=mc² is: descriptions for the layman ==
== Examples of how meaningless E=mc² is: descriptions for the layman ==
 </body>

</html>

Mon, 26 Mar 2012 18:12:19 GMT (edit by DorMouse)

<html>

 <head>
   <title>Talk:Main Page</title>
   <base href="http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:RecentChanges&feed=atom">
 </head>
 <body id="msgFeedSummaryBody" selected="false">

Rain:

<col class='diff-marker' /> <col class='diff-content' /> <col class='diff-marker' /> <col class='diff-content' />
← Older revision Revision as of 18:12, 26 March 2012
Line 531: Line 531:
By the way, your church hierarchy was wrong in the Galileo affair as well. The funny thing is that some prideful Catholics still can't get over the fact that the church was wrong in the Galileo affair as evidenced by the Catholic Robert Sungenis, Ph.D. who maintains that Galileo was wrong and the RCC was right as can be seen HERE. The Roman Catholic Church at the time of the Galileo affair was so enthralled by Aristotle (who was a mere man) that they blew it in the Galileo affair.[5][6]  History has a way of repeating itself and now the post 1950s liberal Roman Catholic Church is a follower of Darwinism via its ideological cousin theistic evolution. Conservative 06:54, 26 March 2012 (EDT)
By the way, your church hierarchy was wrong in the Galileo affair as well. The funny thing is that some prideful Catholics still can't get over the fact that the church was wrong in the Galileo affair as evidenced by the Catholic Robert Sungenis, Ph.D. who maintains that Galileo was wrong and the RCC was right as can be seen HERE. The Roman Catholic Church at the time of the Galileo affair was so enthralled by Aristotle (who was a mere man) that they blew it in the Galileo affair.[7][8]  History has a way of repeating itself and now the post 1950s liberal Roman Catholic Church is a follower of Darwinism via its ideological cousin theistic evolution. Conservative 06:54, 26 March 2012 (EDT)
-
 
+
Invisible Red telephone! Operation Flying Fortress is gathering steam, and soon Conservapedia's articles will be ranking high on a certain search engine starting with the letter "G", to the chargrin of Athiest Militant Evolutioninsts! :):):) So, gentlemen at another site, what are your responses? :):):) Global Atheism is Shrinking, much to the chargrin of Richard Dawkins, and friends!":):):)
:The above seems unduly anti-Catholic.
:The above seems unduly anti-Catholic.
:"The rain it raineth on the just and on the unjust." I don't think bad weather at any event, no matter how atheistic, can be considered evidence of God's disapproval. It would be more pertinent to ask, if all these atheists are so scientifically minded, why they couldn't plan their event to avoid the rain.
:"The rain it raineth on the just and on the unjust." I don't think bad weather at any event, no matter how atheistic, can be considered evidence of God's disapproval. It would be more pertinent to ask, if all these atheists are so scientifically minded, why they couldn't plan their event to avoid the rain.
Line 539: Line 539:
::CPalmer, I am certainly not anti-rain. :)  I merely quoted the verse to demonstrate the point that God is involved to some degree in weather/rain. The degree of involvement is not a matter I want to discuss at this point but the accounts of Noah, Elijah and the words/actions of Christ himself bolsters the view that God influences weather.  There are plenty of verses in the Bible to support this view. Conservative 09:50, 26 March 2012 (EDT)
::CPalmer, I am certainly not anti-rain. :)  I merely quoted the verse to demonstrate the point that God is involved to some degree in weather/rain. The degree of involvement is not a matter I want to discuss at this point but the accounts of Noah, Elijah and the words/actions of Christ himself bolsters the view that God influences weather.  There are plenty of verses in the Bible to support this view. Conservative 09:50, 26 March 2012 (EDT)
:::I still think that the more interesting question is why these supposedly brilliant atheists couldn't plan around the weather forecast, or at least arrange some kind of wet weather alternative to their event.--CPalmer 09:56, 26 March 2012 (EDT)
:::I still think that the more interesting question is why these supposedly brilliant atheists couldn't plan around the weather forecast, or at least arrange some kind of wet weather alternative to their event.--CPalmer 09:56, 26 March 2012 (EDT)
 +
:It is just rain, no? Please, people, less talk, more edits!14:12, 26 March 2012 (EDT)
== Has the scope of Conservapedia changed? ==
== Has the scope of Conservapedia changed? ==
 </body>

</html>

Mon, 26 Mar 2012 18:48:32 GMT (edit by Aschlafly)

<html>

 <head>
   <title>Template:Mainpageright</title>
   <base href="http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:RecentChanges&feed=atom">
 </head>
 <body id="msgFeedSummaryBody" selected="false">

<col class='diff-marker' /> <col class='diff-content' /> <col class='diff-marker' /> <col class='diff-content' />
← Older revision Revision as of 18:48, 26 March 2012
(One intermediate revision not shown)
Line 3: Line 3:
<!-- Please, to help with searching of topics, include tag line in edit notes below before saving. EG:"Obama Fails" -->
<!-- Please, to help with searching of topics, include tag line in edit notes below before saving. EG:"Obama Fails" -->
<!--============================BEGIN COPY BELOW THIS LINE!=============================== -->
<!--============================BEGIN COPY BELOW THIS LINE!=============================== -->
 +
Liberal double standard: Conservative Rick Santorum stands by use of profane word in encounter with New York Times reporter," and the lamestream media make this big news. [9]  But the media are quiet when a liberal swears.
 +
----
The analysis that the Mainstream Media should have done on the Zimmerman case, but didn't. [10]
The analysis that the Mainstream Media should have done on the Zimmerman case, but didn't. [11]
----
----
 </body>

</html>

Mon, 26 Mar 2012 18:42:51 GMT (edit by SamCoulter)

<html>

 <head>
   <title>E=mc²</title>
   <base href="http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:RecentChanges&feed=atom">
 </head>
 <body id="msgFeedSummaryBody" selected="false">

<col class='diff-marker' /> <col class='diff-content' /> <col class='diff-marker' /> <col class='diff-content' />
← Older revision Revision as of 18:42, 26 March 2012
(One intermediate revision not shown)
Line 13: Line 13:
The equality of the mass equivalent of radiation to the mass lost by a radiating body is derivable from Poincaré’s momentum of radiation (1900) and his principle of relativity (1904).

—Herbert Ives, 1952

The equality of the mass equivalent of radiation to the mass lost by a radiating body is derivable from Poincaré’s momentum of radiation (1900) and his principle of relativity (1904).

—Herbert Ives, 1952

-
The equation E=mc<sup>2</sup> is an equation used in physics to relate energy to mass. It states that the total energy E of a body in all forms is equal to that body's mass m multiplied by the square of the speed of light c. The equation only holds true if SI units are used, hence E is measured in joules, m in kilograms and c in metres per second. In other systems of units a addition constant of proportionality would be required.
+
The equation E=mc<sup>2</sup> is an equation used in physics to relate energy to mass. It states that the total energy E of a body in all forms is equal to that body's mass m multiplied by the square of the speed of light c. The equation is usually expressed in SI units, hence E is measured in joules, m in kilograms and c in metres per second. In the US or Imperial systems the appropriate units are foot-pounds, pounds and feet per second.
== Examples of how meaningless E=mc² is: descriptions for the layman ==
== Examples of how meaningless E=mc² is: descriptions for the layman ==
 </body>

</html>

Mon, 26 Mar 2012 18:50:02 GMT (edit by JanW)

<html>

 <head>
   <title>Talk:Main Page</title>
   <base href="http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:RecentChanges&feed=atom">
 </head>
 <body id="msgFeedSummaryBody" selected="false">

Main Page Left:

<col class='diff-marker' /> <col class='diff-content' /> <col class='diff-marker' /> <col class='diff-content' />
← Older revision Revision as of 18:50, 26 March 2012
Line 502: Line 502:
:Newton, you have your own account at "that other site", so instead of posting red telephone messages that cast serious doubt on your sanity, why not use it?22:33, 25 March 2012 (EDT)
:Newton, you have your own account at "that other site", so instead of posting red telephone messages that cast serious doubt on your sanity, why not use it?22:33, 25 March 2012 (EDT)
 +
 +
Yet ANOTHER ludicrously derailed conversation about the way this site appears.  My particular bugbear, and one that I cannot understand is being forgotten about by Mr. Schlafly, is the Conservtive Bible Project.  That project needs work, is unique to Conservapedia and authentically a product of this site, has nothing to do with other websites to which most of the Main Page now diverts people, is an enormously valid project, and ought to be pinned to the top of Main Page Left.  Instead of which we now have a picture of Hitler, the most repulsive man in history.  The Art Masterpieces section and the Conservative Bible Project should be the first things people see when they come here - instead, they see a deranged racist lunatic, with links that pull people away from doing any useful work here.  It's stupid, and makes this place a complete joke.  And, adding insult to injury, the idiot who writes all this nonsense then claims that the only reason people complain about it are liberals?  As another user above points out, this is the kind of stuff liberals LOVE - it makes us look like their cartoon portrayal of 'looney right-wingers'.  It's CONSERVATIVES who object to the abject humiliation of this site by that user, not liberals.  PLEASE DO SOMETHING ABOUT THIS USER!  And please, no responses asking me to answer 15 questions about anything.  JanW 14:50, 26 March 2012 (EDT)
== Conservapedia Sports? ==
== Conservapedia Sports? ==
 </body>

</html>

Mon, 26 Mar 2012 18:48:32 GMT (edit by Aschlafly)

<html>

 <head>
   <title>Template:Mainpageright</title>
   <base href="http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:RecentChanges&feed=atom">
 </head>
 <body id="msgFeedSummaryBody" selected="false">

<col class='diff-marker' /> <col class='diff-content' /> <col class='diff-marker' /> <col class='diff-content' />
← Older revision Revision as of 18:48, 26 March 2012
(One intermediate revision not shown)
Line 3: Line 3:
<!-- Please, to help with searching of topics, include tag line in edit notes below before saving. EG:"Obama Fails" -->
<!-- Please, to help with searching of topics, include tag line in edit notes below before saving. EG:"Obama Fails" -->
<!--============================BEGIN COPY BELOW THIS LINE!=============================== -->
<!--============================BEGIN COPY BELOW THIS LINE!=============================== -->
 +
Liberal double standard: Conservative Rick Santorum stands by use of profane word in encounter with New York Times reporter," and the lamestream media make this big news. [12]  But the media are quiet when a liberal swears.
 +
----
The analysis that the Mainstream Media should have done on the Zimmerman case, but didn't. [13]
The analysis that the Mainstream Media should have done on the Zimmerman case, but didn't. [14]
----
----
 </body>

</html>

Mon, 26 Mar 2012 18:42:51 GMT (edit by SamCoulter)

<html>

 <head>
   <title>E=mc²</title>
   <base href="http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:RecentChanges&feed=atom">
 </head>
 <body id="msgFeedSummaryBody" selected="false">

<col class='diff-marker' /> <col class='diff-content' /> <col class='diff-marker' /> <col class='diff-content' />
← Older revision Revision as of 18:42, 26 March 2012
(One intermediate revision not shown)
Line 13: Line 13:
The equality of the mass equivalent of radiation to the mass lost by a radiating body is derivable from Poincaré’s momentum of radiation (1900) and his principle of relativity (1904).

—Herbert Ives, 1952

The equality of the mass equivalent of radiation to the mass lost by a radiating body is derivable from Poincaré’s momentum of radiation (1900) and his principle of relativity (1904).

—Herbert Ives, 1952

-
The equation E=mc<sup>2</sup> is an equation used in physics to relate energy to mass. It states that the total energy E of a body in all forms is equal to that body's mass m multiplied by the square of the speed of light c. The equation only holds true if SI units are used, hence E is measured in joules, m in kilograms and c in metres per second. In other systems of units a addition constant of proportionality would be required.
+
The equation E=mc<sup>2</sup> is an equation used in physics to relate energy to mass. It states that the total energy E of a body in all forms is equal to that body's mass m multiplied by the square of the speed of light c. The equation is usually expressed in SI units, hence E is measured in joules, m in kilograms and c in metres per second. In the US or Imperial systems the appropriate units are foot-pounds, pounds and feet per second.
== Examples of how meaningless E=mc² is: descriptions for the layman ==
== Examples of how meaningless E=mc² is: descriptions for the layman ==
 </body>

</html>

Mon, 26 Mar 2012 18:51:22 GMT (edit by MihailD)

<html>

 <head>
   <title>E=mc²</title>
   <base href="http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:RecentChanges&feed=atom">
 </head>
 <body id="msgFeedSummaryBody" selected="false">

Clarify units issue.

<col class='diff-marker' /> <col class='diff-content' /> <col class='diff-marker' /> <col class='diff-content' />
← Older revision Revision as of 18:51, 26 March 2012
Line 13: Line 13:
The equality of the mass equivalent of radiation to the mass lost by a radiating body is derivable from Poincaré’s momentum of radiation (1900) and his principle of relativity (1904).

—Herbert Ives, 1952

The equality of the mass equivalent of radiation to the mass lost by a radiating body is derivable from Poincaré’s momentum of radiation (1900) and his principle of relativity (1904).

—Herbert Ives, 1952

-
The equation E=mc<sup>2</sup> is an equation used in physics to relate energy to mass. It states that the total energy E of a body in all forms is equal to that body's mass m multiplied by the square of the speed of light c. The equation is usually expressed in SI units, hence E is measured in joules, m in kilograms and c in metres per second. In the US or Imperial systems the appropriate units are foot-pounds, pounds and feet per second.
+
The equation E=mc<sup>2</sup> is an equation used in physics to relate energy to mass. It states that the total energy E of a body in all forms is equal to that body's mass m multiplied by the square of the speed of light c. The equation is usually expressed in SI units, hence E is measured in joules, m in kilograms and c in metres per second. In the US or Imperial systems the appropriate units are foot-pounds, pounds and feet per second. However in some systems of units (for example, if E were to be measured in electron volts) an additional constant of proportionality would be required.
== Examples of how meaningless E=mc² is: descriptions for the layman ==
== Examples of how meaningless E=mc² is: descriptions for the layman ==
 </body>

</html>

Mon, 26 Mar 2012 18:54:05 GMT (edit by SamCoulter)

<html>

 <head>
   <title>E=mc²</title>
   <base href="http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:RecentChanges&feed=atom">
 </head>
 <body id="msgFeedSummaryBody" selected="false">

Clarifying a bit more. The constant of proportionality is required to convert E in one unit to E in another, not to determine E.

<col class='diff-marker' /> <col class='diff-content' /> <col class='diff-marker' /> <col class='diff-content' />
← Older revision Revision as of 18:54, 26 March 2012
Line 13: Line 13:
The equality of the mass equivalent of radiation to the mass lost by a radiating body is derivable from Poincaré’s momentum of radiation (1900) and his principle of relativity (1904).

—Herbert Ives, 1952

The equality of the mass equivalent of radiation to the mass lost by a radiating body is derivable from Poincaré’s momentum of radiation (1900) and his principle of relativity (1904).

—Herbert Ives, 1952

-
The equation E=mc<sup>2</sup> is an equation used in physics to relate energy to mass. It states that the total energy E of a body in all forms is equal to that body's mass m multiplied by the square of the speed of light c. The equation is usually expressed in SI units, hence E is measured in joules, m in kilograms and c in metres per second. In the US or Imperial systems the appropriate units are foot-pounds, pounds and feet per second. However in some systems of units (for example, if E were to be measured in electron volts) an additional constant of proportionality would be required.
+
The equation E=mc<sup>2</sup> is an equation used in physics to relate energy to mass. It states that the total energy E of a body in all forms is equal to that body's mass m multiplied by the square of the speed of light c. The equation is usually expressed in SI units, hence E is measured in joules, m in kilograms and c in metres per second. In the US or Imperial systems the appropriate units are foot-pounds, pounds and feet per second. However to give an output in certain units (for example, if E were to be measured in electron volts) an additional constant of proportionality would be required after E=mc<sup>2</sup> had been calculated.
== Examples of how meaningless E=mc² is: descriptions for the layman ==
== Examples of how meaningless E=mc² is: descriptions for the layman ==
 </body>

</html>

Mon, 26 Mar 2012 18:51:22 GMT (edit by MihailD)

<html>

 <head>
   <title>E=mc²</title>
   <base href="http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:RecentChanges&feed=atom">
 </head>
 <body id="msgFeedSummaryBody" selected="false">

Clarify units issue.

<col class='diff-marker' /> <col class='diff-content' /> <col class='diff-marker' /> <col class='diff-content' />
← Older revision Revision as of 18:51, 26 March 2012
Line 13: Line 13:
The equality of the mass equivalent of radiation to the mass lost by a radiating body is derivable from Poincaré’s momentum of radiation (1900) and his principle of relativity (1904).

—Herbert Ives, 1952

The equality of the mass equivalent of radiation to the mass lost by a radiating body is derivable from Poincaré’s momentum of radiation (1900) and his principle of relativity (1904).

—Herbert Ives, 1952

-
The equation E=mc<sup>2</sup> is an equation used in physics to relate energy to mass. It states that the total energy E of a body in all forms is equal to that body's mass m multiplied by the square of the speed of light c. The equation is usually expressed in SI units, hence E is measured in joules, m in kilograms and c in metres per second. In the US or Imperial systems the appropriate units are foot-pounds, pounds and feet per second.
+
The equation E=mc<sup>2</sup> is an equation used in physics to relate energy to mass. It states that the total energy E of a body in all forms is equal to that body's mass m multiplied by the square of the speed of light c. The equation is usually expressed in SI units, hence E is measured in joules, m in kilograms and c in metres per second. In the US or Imperial systems the appropriate units are foot-pounds, pounds and feet per second. However in some systems of units (for example, if E were to be measured in electron volts) an additional constant of proportionality would be required.
== Examples of how meaningless E=mc² is: descriptions for the layman ==
== Examples of how meaningless E=mc² is: descriptions for the layman ==
 </body>

</html>

Mon, 26 Mar 2012 18:50:02 GMT (edit by JanW)

<html>

 <head>
   <title>Talk:Main Page</title>
   <base href="http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:RecentChanges&feed=atom">
 </head>
 <body id="msgFeedSummaryBody" selected="false">

Main Page Left:

<col class='diff-marker' /> <col class='diff-content' /> <col class='diff-marker' /> <col class='diff-content' />
← Older revision Revision as of 18:50, 26 March 2012
Line 502: Line 502:
:Newton, you have your own account at "that other site", so instead of posting red telephone messages that cast serious doubt on your sanity, why not use it?22:33, 25 March 2012 (EDT)
:Newton, you have your own account at "that other site", so instead of posting red telephone messages that cast serious doubt on your sanity, why not use it?22:33, 25 March 2012 (EDT)
 +
 +
Yet ANOTHER ludicrously derailed conversation about the way this site appears.  My particular bugbear, and one that I cannot understand is being forgotten about by Mr. Schlafly, is the Conservtive Bible Project.  That project needs work, is unique to Conservapedia and authentically a product of this site, has nothing to do with other websites to which most of the Main Page now diverts people, is an enormously valid project, and ought to be pinned to the top of Main Page Left.  Instead of which we now have a picture of Hitler, the most repulsive man in history.  The Art Masterpieces section and the Conservative Bible Project should be the first things people see when they come here - instead, they see a deranged racist lunatic, with links that pull people away from doing any useful work here.  It's stupid, and makes this place a complete joke.  And, adding insult to injury, the idiot who writes all this nonsense then claims that the only reason people complain about it are liberals?  As another user above points out, this is the kind of stuff liberals LOVE - it makes us look like their cartoon portrayal of 'looney right-wingers'.  It's CONSERVATIVES who object to the abject humiliation of this site by that user, not liberals.  PLEASE DO SOMETHING ABOUT THIS USER!  And please, no responses asking me to answer 15 questions about anything.  JanW 14:50, 26 March 2012 (EDT)
== Conservapedia Sports? ==
== Conservapedia Sports? ==
 </body>

</html>

Mon, 26 Mar 2012 18:57:02 GMT (edit by Aschlafly)

<html>

 <head>
   <title>Template:Mainpageright</title>
   <base href="http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:RecentChanges&feed=atom">
 </head>
 <body id="msgFeedSummaryBody" selected="false">

<col class='diff-marker' /> <col class='diff-content' /> <col class='diff-marker' /> <col class='diff-content' />
← Older revision Revision as of 18:57, 26 March 2012
Line 3: Line 3:
<!-- Please, to help with searching of topics, include tag line in edit notes below before saving. EG:"Obama Fails" -->
<!-- Please, to help with searching of topics, include tag line in edit notes below before saving. EG:"Obama Fails" -->
<!--============================BEGIN COPY BELOW THIS LINE!=============================== -->
<!--============================BEGIN COPY BELOW THIS LINE!=============================== -->
-
Liberal double standard: Conservative Rick Santorum stands by use of profane word in encounter with New York Times reporter," and the lamestream media make this big news. [15]  But the media are quiet when a liberal swears.
+
Liberal double standard: Conservative "Rick Santorum stands by use of profane word in encounter with New York Times reporter," and the lamestream media make this big news. [16]  But the media are quiet when a liberal swears.
----
----
The analysis that the Mainstream Media should have done on the Zimmerman case, but didn't. [17]
The analysis that the Mainstream Media should have done on the Zimmerman case, but didn't. [18]
 </body>

</html>

Mon, 26 Mar 2012 18:54:05 GMT (edit by SamCoulter)

<html>

 <head>
   <title>E=mc²</title>
   <base href="http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:RecentChanges&feed=atom">
 </head>
 <body id="msgFeedSummaryBody" selected="false">

Clarifying a bit more. The constant of proportionality is required to convert E in one unit to E in another, not to determine E.

<col class='diff-marker' /> <col class='diff-content' /> <col class='diff-marker' /> <col class='diff-content' />
← Older revision Revision as of 18:54, 26 March 2012
Line 13: Line 13:
The equality of the mass equivalent of radiation to the mass lost by a radiating body is derivable from Poincaré’s momentum of radiation (1900) and his principle of relativity (1904).

—Herbert Ives, 1952

The equality of the mass equivalent of radiation to the mass lost by a radiating body is derivable from Poincaré’s momentum of radiation (1900) and his principle of relativity (1904).

—Herbert Ives, 1952

-
The equation E=mc<sup>2</sup> is an equation used in physics to relate energy to mass. It states that the total energy E of a body in all forms is equal to that body's mass m multiplied by the square of the speed of light c. The equation is usually expressed in SI units, hence E is measured in joules, m in kilograms and c in metres per second. In the US or Imperial systems the appropriate units are foot-pounds, pounds and feet per second. However in some systems of units (for example, if E were to be measured in electron volts) an additional constant of proportionality would be required.
+
The equation E=mc<sup>2</sup> is an equation used in physics to relate energy to mass. It states that the total energy E of a body in all forms is equal to that body's mass m multiplied by the square of the speed of light c. The equation is usually expressed in SI units, hence E is measured in joules, m in kilograms and c in metres per second. In the US or Imperial systems the appropriate units are foot-pounds, pounds and feet per second. However to give an output in certain units (for example, if E were to be measured in electron volts) an additional constant of proportionality would be required after E=mc<sup>2</sup> had been calculated.
== Examples of how meaningless E=mc² is: descriptions for the layman ==
== Examples of how meaningless E=mc² is: descriptions for the layman ==
 </body>

</html>

Mon, 26 Mar 2012 18:57:48 GMT (edit by DavidE)

<html>

 <head>
   <title>Natural units</title>
   <base href="http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:RecentChanges&feed=atom">
 </head>
 <body id="msgFeedSummaryBody" selected="false">

new article

New page

Natural units are units of measurement that are derived when a natural constant, such as Planck's constant or the speed of light in a vacuum, is set to one.<ref>Natural units</ref>

==References==

<references/>
 </body>

</html>

Mon, 26 Mar 2012 18:57:02 GMT (edit by Aschlafly)

<html>

 <head>
   <title>Template:Mainpageright</title>
   <base href="http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:RecentChanges&feed=atom">
 </head>
 <body id="msgFeedSummaryBody" selected="false">

<col class='diff-marker' /> <col class='diff-content' /> <col class='diff-marker' /> <col class='diff-content' />
← Older revision Revision as of 18:57, 26 March 2012
Line 3: Line 3:
<!-- Please, to help with searching of topics, include tag line in edit notes below before saving. EG:"Obama Fails" -->
<!-- Please, to help with searching of topics, include tag line in edit notes below before saving. EG:"Obama Fails" -->
<!--============================BEGIN COPY BELOW THIS LINE!=============================== -->
<!--============================BEGIN COPY BELOW THIS LINE!=============================== -->
-
Liberal double standard: Conservative Rick Santorum stands by use of profane word in encounter with New York Times reporter," and the lamestream media make this big news. [19]  But the media are quiet when a liberal swears.
+
Liberal double standard: Conservative "Rick Santorum stands by use of profane word in encounter with New York Times reporter," and the lamestream media make this big news. [20]  But the media are quiet when a liberal swears.
----
----
The analysis that the Mainstream Media should have done on the Zimmerman case, but didn't. [21]
The analysis that the Mainstream Media should have done on the Zimmerman case, but didn't. [22]
 </body>

</html>

Mon, 26 Mar 2012 19:26:59 GMT (edit by AugustO)

<html>

 <head>
   <title>E=mc²</title>
   <base href="http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:RecentChanges&feed=atom">
 </head>
 <body id="msgFeedSummaryBody" selected="false">

that's nothing unusual...

<col class='diff-marker' /> <col class='diff-content' /> <col class='diff-marker' /> <col class='diff-content' />
← Older revision Revision as of 19:26, 26 March 2012
Line 13: Line 13:
The equality of the mass equivalent of radiation to the mass lost by a radiating body is derivable from Poincaré’s momentum of radiation (1900) and his principle of relativity (1904).

—Herbert Ives, 1952

The equality of the mass equivalent of radiation to the mass lost by a radiating body is derivable from Poincaré’s momentum of radiation (1900) and his principle of relativity (1904).

—Herbert Ives, 1952

-
The equation E=mc<sup>2</sup> is an equation used in physics to relate energy to mass. It states that the total energy E of a body in all forms is equal to that body's mass m multiplied by the square of the speed of light c. The equation is usually expressed in SI units, hence E is measured in joules, m in kilograms and c in metres per second. In the US or Imperial systems the appropriate units are foot-pounds, pounds and feet per second. However to give an output in certain units (for example, if E were to be measured in electron volts) an additional constant of proportionality would be required after E=mc<sup>2</sup> had been calculated.
+
The equation E=mc<sup>2</sup> is an equation used in physics to relate energy to mass. It states that the total energy E of a body in all forms is equal to that body's mass m multiplied by the square of the speed of light c. The equation is usually expressed in SI units, hence E is measured in joules, m in kilograms and c in metres per second. In the US or Imperial systems the appropriate units are foot-pounds, pounds and feet per second. However -- as in any physical equation -- to give an output in certain units (for example, if E were to be measured in electron volts) an additional constant of proportionality would be required after E=mc<sup>2</sup> had been calculated.
== Examples of how meaningless E=mc² is: descriptions for the layman ==
== Examples of how meaningless E=mc² is: descriptions for the layman ==
 </body>

</html>

Mon, 26 Mar 2012 19:02:02 GMT (edit by MihailD)

<html>

 <head>
   <title>E=mc²</title>
   <base href="http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:RecentChanges&feed=atom">
 </head>
 <body id="msgFeedSummaryBody" selected="false">

A Counterexample: Speed of Extremely Energetic Neutrinos:

<col class='diff-marker' /> <col class='diff-content' /> <col class='diff-marker' /> <col class='diff-content' />
← Older revision Revision as of 19:02, 26 March 2012
Line 101: Line 101:
However, the classical formula breaks down at speeds close to <math>c</math>, and indeed, as the speed of a massive object approaches <math>c</math>, the object's kinetic energy approaches <math>+\infty</math>.
However, the classical formula breaks down at speeds close to <math>c</math>, and indeed, as the speed of a massive object approaches <math>c</math>, the object's kinetic energy approaches <math>+\infty</math>.
-
Several scientists have gone on record stating that the neutrinos, which have mass, travel at precisely the speed of light.  This dispoves the Theory of Relativity and the claim that E=mc<sup>2</sup>.
+
Several scientists have gone on record stating that the neutrinos, which have mass, travel at precisely the speed of light.  If true, this dispoves the Theory of Relativity and the claim that E=mc<sup>2</sup>. However, it is more likely that those scientists are using language inaccurately. It is impossible to measure the speed of neutrinos precisely. What is meant is the difference between the speed of light and the speed of the neutrinos is too small to measure.
== References ==
== References ==
 </body>

</html>

Mon, 26 Mar 2012 19:01:25 GMT (edit by Aschlafly)

<html>

 <head>
   <title>Robert Taft</title>
   <base href="http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:RecentChanges&feed=atom">
 </head>
 <body id="msgFeedSummaryBody" selected="false">

improved

<col class='diff-marker' /> <col class='diff-content' /> <col class='diff-marker' /> <col class='diff-content' />
← Older revision Revision as of 19:01, 26 March 2012
Line 24: Line 24:
==Labor issues==
==Labor issues==
The Taft-Hartley Act single-handedly ended a growing problem of strikes after World War II, and preserved capitalism in the United States. Ever since, Democrats have sought unsuccessfully for its repeal.  It bans "unfair" union practices, outlaws closed shops, and authorizes the President to seek federal court injunctions to impose an eighty-day cooling-off period if a strike threatened the national interest.  
The Taft-Hartley Act single-handedly ended a growing problem of strikes after World War II, and preserved capitalism in the United States. Ever since, Democrats have sought unsuccessfully for its repeal.  It bans "unfair" union practices, outlaws closed shops, and authorizes the President to seek federal court injunctions to impose an eighty-day cooling-off period if a strike threatened the national interest.  
-
 
==Foreign policy==  
==Foreign policy==  
-
Taft was an isolationist in 1939-41 and strongly opposed American entry into World War II, while supporting military mobilization and limited aid to Britain. He strongly endorsed the America First Committee, arguing in January 1941 that "Hitler's defeat is not vital to us."<ref> Taft, Papers 2:218</ref>  
+
In 1939-1941 Taft strongly opposed American entry into World War II, while supporting military mobilization and limited aid to Britain. He strongly endorsed the America First Committee, arguing in January 1941 that "Hitler's defeat is not vital to us."<ref> Taft, Papers 2:218</ref>  
After Pearl Harbor (Dec. 1941), he strongly supported an all-out war against Germany and Japan.  The war itself, Taft always argued, was being fought to "make clear that national aggression cannot succeed in this world"<ref> Taft, Papers 2:443</ref>, and not as liberals said to advance the Four Freedoms, the Atlantic Charter, or publisher Henry Luce's "American Century."  
After Pearl Harbor (Dec. 1941), he strongly supported an all-out war against Germany and Japan.  The war itself, Taft always argued, was being fought to "make clear that national aggression cannot succeed in this world"<ref> Taft, Papers 2:443</ref>, and not as liberals said to advance the Four Freedoms, the Atlantic Charter, or publisher Henry Luce's "American Century."  
Line 33: Line 32:
In 1945 Taft found the new United Nations Charter sacrificed "law and justice" to "force and expediency."  he lost some popularity when he stated that the Nuremberg trials were based on faulty ex post facto statutes; that position earned him a chapter in Senator John F. Kennedy's famous book, Profiles in Courage (1958).  
In 1945 Taft found the new United Nations Charter sacrificed "law and justice" to "force and expediency."  he lost some popularity when he stated that the Nuremberg trials were based on faulty ex post facto statutes; that position earned him a chapter in Senator John F. Kennedy's famous book, Profiles in Courage (1958).  
-
In the late 1940s he was isolationist and did not see Stalin's Soviet Union as a major threat. Nor did he pay much attention to internal Communism. The true danger he said was big government and runaway spending. He supported the Truman Doctrine, reluctantly approved the Marshall Plan but tried to cut its budget, and opposed NATO as unnecessary and provocative. In 1950-52 he took the lead condemning President Harry S. Truman's handling of the Korean War. Taft tolerated Senator Joseph McCarthy's attacks on Democrats, claimed President Truman was fostering a "police state," and blamed General George C. Marshall for the loss of China and the subsequent Korean War.  
+
In the late 1940s Taft did not view Stalin's Soviet Union as a major threat. Nor did he pay much attention to internal Communism. The true danger he said was big government and runaway spending. He supported the Truman Doctrine, reluctantly approved the Marshall Plan but tried to cut its budget, and opposed NATO as unnecessary and provocative. In 1950-52 he took the lead condemning President Harry S. Truman's handling of the Korean War. Taft tolerated Senator Joseph McCarthy's attacks on Democrats, claimed President Truman was fostering a "police state," and blamed General George C. Marshall for the loss of China and the subsequent Korean War.  
-
 
+
Berger (1967) rejected the idea that Taft was an "isolationist", which is a pejorative term used by liberals against conservatives who oppose globalism. Berger says Taft was rather a "conservative nationalist at odds with the struggling attempts of liberal American policy-makers to fashion a program in the postwar years." Taft profoundly believed in the exceptionalism of America and its people, and argued the "principal purpose of the foreign policy of the United States is to maintain the liberty of our people." Taft identified three fundamental requirements for the maintenance of American liberty-an economic system based on free enterprise, a political system based on democracy, and national independence and sovereignty. All three, he feared, might be destroyed in a war, or even by extensive preparations for war, so he did not see Stalin's Soviet Union as a major threat to American values. Nor did he pay much attention to internal Communism. The true danger he said was big government and runaway spending. He supported the Truman Doctrine, reluctantly approved the Marshall Plan, and opposed NATO as unnecessary and provocative. He consistently opposed the draft and took the lead condemning President Harry S. Truman's handling of the Korean War.<ref> See John Moser, "Principles Without Program: Senator Robert A. Taft and American Foreign Policy," Ohio History, (1999) 108#2 pp. 177-192. </ref>  
-
Berger (1967) rejected the idea that Taft was an "isolationist." Berger says Taft was rather a "conservative nationalist at odds with the struggling attempts of liberal American policy-makers to fashion a program in the postwar years." Taft profoundly believed in the exceptionalism of America and its people, and argued the "principal purpose of the foreign policy of the United States is to maintain the liberty of our people." Taft identified three fundamental requirements for the maintenance of American liberty-an economic system based on free enterprise, a political system based on democracy, and national independence and sovereignty. All three, he feared, might be destroyed in a war, or even by extensive preparations for war, so he did not see Stalin's Soviet Union as a major threat to American values. Nor did he pay much attention to internal Communism. The true danger he said was big government and runaway spending. He supported the Truman Doctrine, reluctantly approved the Marshall Plan, and opposed NATO as unnecessary and provocative. He consistently opposed the draft and took the lead condemning President Harry S. Truman's handling of the Korean War.<ref> See John Moser, "Principles Without Program: Senator Robert A. Taft and American Foreign Policy," Ohio History, (1999) 108#2 pp. 177-192. </ref>  
+
==Presidency==
==Presidency==
Line 67: Line 65:
* Wunderlin, Clarence E. Jr., et al. eds. The Papers of Robert A. Taft  vol 1, 1889-1939 (1998); vol 2; 1940-1944 (2001); vol 3 1945-1948 (2003) online edition; vol 4, 1949-1953 (2006).
* Wunderlin, Clarence E. Jr., et al. eds. The Papers of Robert A. Taft  vol 1, 1889-1939 (1998); vol 2; 1940-1944 (2001); vol 3 1945-1948 (2003) online edition; vol 4, 1949-1953 (2006).
-
 
+
====Footnotes====
-
====notes====
+
<references/>
<references/>
 </body>

</html>

Mon, 26 Mar 2012 18:57:48 GMT (edit by DavidE)

<html>

 <head>
   <title>Natural units</title>
   <base href="http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:RecentChanges&feed=atom">
 </head>
 <body id="msgFeedSummaryBody" selected="false">

new article

New page

Natural units are units of measurement that are derived when a natural constant, such as Planck's constant or the speed of light in a vacuum, is set to one.<ref>Natural units</ref>

==References==

<references/>
 </body>

</html>

Mon, 26 Mar 2012 19:30:57 GMT (edit by Aschlafly)

<html>

 <head>
   <title>Robert Taft</title>
   <base href="http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:RecentChanges&feed=atom">
 </head>
 <body id="msgFeedSummaryBody" selected="false">

Foreign policy:

<col class='diff-marker' /> <col class='diff-content' /> <col class='diff-marker' /> <col class='diff-content' />
← Older revision Revision as of 19:30, 26 March 2012
Line 26: Line 26:
==Foreign policy==  
==Foreign policy==  
-
In 1939-1941 Taft strongly opposed American entry into World War II, while supporting military mobilization and limited aid to Britain. He strongly endorsed the America First Committee, arguing in January 1941 that "Hitler's defeat is not vital to us."<ref> Taft, Papers 2:218</ref>  
+
In 1939-1941 Taft strongly opposed American entry into World War II, while supporting military mobilization and limited aid to Britain. He endorsed the America First Committee, arguing in January 1941 that "Hitler's defeat is not vital to us."<ref> Taft, Papers 2:218</ref>  
-
After Pearl Harbor (Dec. 1941), he strongly supported an all-out war against Germany and Japan.  The war itself, Taft always argued, was being fought to "make clear that national aggression cannot succeed in this world"<ref> Taft, Papers 2:443</ref>, and not as liberals said to advance the Four Freedoms, the Atlantic Charter, or publisher Henry Luce's "American Century."  
+
After Pearl Harbor (Dec. 1941), he completely supported an all-out war against Germany and Japan.  The war itself, Taft always argued, was being fought to "make clear that national aggression cannot succeed in this world,"<ref> Taft, Papers 2:443</ref> and not as liberals said to advance the Four Freedoms, the Atlantic Charter, or publisher Henry Luce's "American Century."  
In 1945 Taft found the new United Nations Charter sacrificed "law and justice" to "force and expediency."  he lost some popularity when he stated that the Nuremberg trials were based on faulty ex post facto statutes; that position earned him a chapter in Senator John F. Kennedy's famous book, Profiles in Courage (1958).  
In 1945 Taft found the new United Nations Charter sacrificed "law and justice" to "force and expediency."  he lost some popularity when he stated that the Nuremberg trials were based on faulty ex post facto statutes; that position earned him a chapter in Senator John F. Kennedy's famous book, Profiles in Courage (1958).  
Line 34: Line 34:
In the late 1940s Taft did not view Stalin's Soviet Union as a major threat. Nor did he pay much attention to internal Communism. The true danger he said was big government and runaway spending. He supported the Truman Doctrine, reluctantly approved the Marshall Plan but tried to cut its budget, and opposed NATO as unnecessary and provocative. In 1950-52 he took the lead condemning President Harry S. Truman's handling of the Korean War. Taft tolerated Senator Joseph McCarthy's attacks on Democrats, claimed President Truman was fostering a "police state," and blamed General George C. Marshall for the loss of China and the subsequent Korean War.  
In the late 1940s Taft did not view Stalin's Soviet Union as a major threat. Nor did he pay much attention to internal Communism. The true danger he said was big government and runaway spending. He supported the Truman Doctrine, reluctantly approved the Marshall Plan but tried to cut its budget, and opposed NATO as unnecessary and provocative. In 1950-52 he took the lead condemning President Harry S. Truman's handling of the Korean War. Taft tolerated Senator Joseph McCarthy's attacks on Democrats, claimed President Truman was fostering a "police state," and blamed General George C. Marshall for the loss of China and the subsequent Korean War.  
-
Berger (1967) rejected the idea that Taft was an "isolationist", which is a pejorative term used by liberals against conservatives who oppose globalism. Berger says Taft was rather a "conservative nationalist at odds with the struggling attempts of liberal American policy-makers to fashion a program in the postwar years." Taft profoundly believed in the exceptionalism of America and its people, and argued the "principal purpose of the foreign policy of the United States is to maintain the liberty of our people." Taft identified three fundamental requirements for the maintenance of American liberty-an economic system based on free enterprise, a political system based on democracy, and national independence and sovereignty. All three, he feared, might be destroyed in a war, or even by extensive preparations for war, so he did not see Stalin's Soviet Union as a major threat to American values. Nor did he pay much attention to internal Communism. The true danger he said was big government and runaway spending. He supported the Truman Doctrine, reluctantly approved the Marshall Plan, and opposed NATO as unnecessary and provocative. He consistently opposed the draft and took the lead condemning President Harry S. Truman's handling of the Korean War.<ref> See John Moser, "Principles Without Program: Senator Robert A. Taft and American Foreign Policy," Ohio History, (1999) 108#2 pp. 177-192. </ref>  
+
Berger (1967) rejected the idea that Taft was an "isolationist", which is a pejorative term used by liberals against conservatives who oppose globalism. Berger says Taft was rather a "conservative nationalist at odds with the struggling attempts of liberal American policy-makers to fashion a program in the postwar years." Taft profoundly believed in the exceptionalism of America and its people, and argued the "principal purpose of the foreign policy of the United States is to maintain the liberty of our people." Taft identified three fundamental requirements for the maintenance of American liberty-an economic system based on free enterprise, a political system based on democracy, and national independence and sovereignty. All three, he feared, might be destroyed in a war, or even by extensive preparations for war, so he did not see Stalin's Soviet Union as a major threat to American values. Nor did he pay much attention to internal Communism. The true danger he said was big government and runaway spending. He supported the Truman Doctrine, reluctantly approved the Marshall Plan, and opposed NATO as unnecessary and provocative. He consistently opposed the draft and took the lead condemning President Harry S. Truman's handling of the Korean War.<ref> See John Moser, "Principles Without Program: Senator Robert A. Taft and American Foreign Policy," Ohio History, (1999) 108#2 pp. 177-192. </ref>
==Presidency==
==Presidency==
 </body>

</html>

Personal tools