User talk:AugustO

From Conservapedia

Someone is trying to steal your name

Mr. August, I believe somebody is trying to pretend to be you on this site. hs name is AugusO and he called you an idiot on your talk page. Can you block him please? RachelW 15:09, 18 January 2012 (EST)

Thanks for your work! Unfortunately I'm not able to block anyone on this wiki. AugustO 08:37, 20 January 2012 (EST)

Revert war

AugustO - multiple administrators have reverted you on John 1-7 (Translated) - it's fine for you to discuss the issue on the talk page and try to change their mind, but don't revert-war. Thanks--IDuan 13:28, 21 March 2011 (EDT)

Indeed, my edits were reversed by two administrators. It didn't seem to be a war to me. But I would be quite interested in your input on Talk:John_1-7_(Translated)#Issue_with_translation_of_John_4:53 or Talk:Counterexamples_to_Relativity#John_4:53. Perhaps this could speed things up.

Thanks, AugustO 13:02, 22 March 2011 (EDT)

I've made my case for my reversion at Talk:John 1-7 (Translated). After a week, there is still no counter-argument, though I raised the topic on the talk page of the interested parties. Therefore I will go back to my preferred version of the translation.

AugustO 10:33, 16 April 2011 (EDT)

You comment to me has been read and I will take your comment into consideration

You comment to me has been read and I will take your comment into consideration. conservative 11:09, 20 June 2011 (EDT)

Thanks. Just one point: please respect this talk-page as my castle and refrain from tearing it down, and building it up again. So please, don't delete/recreate it!

AugustO 11:14, 20 June 2011 (EDT)

BTW, for those wondering: I made two points at conservative's talk page, namely:

• not using the preview button is not only annoying for other editors, it wastes resources (i.e., disc-space)
• deleting/recreating of pages messes up the article histories (like this), the list of user comments (like this) and some special functions (like credits).

AugustO 11:23, 20 June 2011 (EDT)

Greek Empire

Hi August, just wanted to say thankyou for your comments regarding my homework answer on the purported "Greek Empire". Appreciated! RexBanner 12:05, 12 October 2011 (EDT)

And I really enjoy your insightful answers - I'm learning from them (though I disagree slightly on the position of the prince electors - but perhaps you could contribute to the article?)

AugustO 15:16, 13 October 2011 (EDT)

What specifically about the Prince-Electors do you disagree with? RexBanner 16:28, 13 October 2011 (EDT)

• the original number of Kurfürsten was seven, it increased in 1648 and 1692 and decreased in 1777.
• the emperor was generally not a Kurfürst but could be any high ranking noble, see Frederick Barbarossa. Otherwise the number of eligible persons would have been only four!

AugustO 16:38, 13 October 2011 (EDT)

I think you're right about the former issue, regarding the number of members of the Aulic Council at various points. The second point is partly correct. The Emperor was not necessarily an Elector, but legally was obliged to be (a de jure but not de facto law). This was made official by the Reichstag of 1495. Ref: Peter Wilson, The Holy Roman Empire 1495-1806 (Basingstoke: Macmillan Publishers, 1999), pp. 17-18.

RexBanner 16:46, 13 October 2011 (EDT)

But have a look at the election of 1519, when Charles of Burgundy was elected (over Henry VIII of England) AugustO 16:53, 13 October 2011 (EDT)

As I say - de jure, not de facto!

RexBanner 17:04, 13 October 2011 (EDT)

Ah, the Holy Roman Empire, where so many things happened de facto, but not de jure. Well, the matter intrigued me, so I looked up the elections 1376 (first election after the Golden Bull) until 1790 (last election before the Reichsdeputationshauptschluss)

So, ten out of 23 times, the emperor wasn't an elector (though sometimes his daddy/mommy was). Before 1356 the situation is even more complicated. A very interesting subject!

AugustO 17:35, 13 October 2011 (EDT)

As is so often the case in politics, what is official and what is practised can frequently be different. Bear in mind the nature, though, of Late Medeival and Early Modern governance. Particularly in the HRE, which was a vague polity all its life, and even more so after the 1648 Treaty of Westphalia when the Emperor increasingly became a ceremonial figurehead rather than an actual political leader. Family ties and dynastic connections were far more relevant to participants and observers than the laws made by a distant and faraway government composed of people who followed different religions, represented different classes, and frequently did not speak the same language. Laws passed in capital cities were not universally enforceable until social and communicational changes in the nineteenth century, and even in the capitals, a person's family connections and personal wealth were more significant than law. As the old adage goes, "Might makes Right". RexBanner 17:55, 13 October 2011 (EDT)

sorry

sorry--SeanS 23:39, 16 October 2011 (EDT)

Blocked

Even if someone had been ignoring you, bringing it up in an insulting way is inappropriate. We have a meritocracy here. Earn your stripes and rise. Stand around complaining and get the boot. Godspeed. --Ed Poor ^Talk 23:04, 23 October 2011 (EDT)

I have unblocked you as per the discussion at user talk:Ed Poor. Please submit your writing plan to Ed Poor as detailed on that page. Welcome back!--CPalmer 10:35, 1 November 2011 (EDT)

Thanks for the unblock - I'll post writing plan in a short while... AugustO 17:41, 2 November 2011 (EDT)

Thanks!

Thanks for reverting the vandalism to my talk page recently.--CPalmer 09:03, 9 November 2011 (EST)

The least I can do! Thank you for incorporating me into your quite flattering list! AugustO 18:29, 9 November 2011 (EST)

Template:spam

As according to your request at user_talk:Aschlafly, I have created 2 proposed templates at user:JonM/sandbox. Please weigh in your opinion. Thanks!JonM 17:14, 7 January 2012 (EST)

Dear imposter

you ask: Instead of just creating rubbish articles with just a template, why not try writing a proper article?

• I'm aware that I'm creating only stubs: the only information the reader gets is the year when the battles took place - and a link to other battles of the same year. That's why I mark the articles as [[Category:Articles needing major improvement]]
• As these articles are quoted in the template, they are linked to automatically from scores of other places. That's why the feature so prominently in Special:WantedPages. Here, they draw away the attention from articles which are actually most wanted because editors linked to them manually.

I hope you see my rationale here - and spare me from further attacks.

AugustO 09:05, 20 January 2012 (EST)

Relativity: new page

I have created a page on which rebuttals to the "counterexamples" page can be presented perhaps more clearly. See Essay:Rebuttal to Counterexamples to Relativity

SamHB 22:54, 23 January 2012 (EST)

Thanks, sounds promising! AugustO 03:16, 24 January 2012 (EST)

SamHB (who has to edit from a college and can't log in just now) has asked me to suggest to you that you not raise objections to the "counterexamples" page by editing that page, especially if those edits are likely to be reverted by Andy. Please use the "rebuttal" page. I have just added material about whether the neutronos moved at exactly the speed of light. JudyJ 13:06, 17 March 2012 (EDT)

YOU'RE AMAZING!!!!

I can't believe you were able to restore all that! FOR THAT YOU GET TWO FREE UNBLOCKS!!!! Seriously, that was truly amazing. By chance can you restore the substantive entry also?

I'll think twice before blocking your account again!  :-).--Andy Schlafly 18:38, 26 March 2012 (EDT)

• I'm not very concerned about getting blocked - I trust in your sense of justice.
• Instead of two get-out-of-the-jail-free cards, I'd prefer if my questions wouldn't be ignored so often!

AugustO 18:52, 26 March 2012 (EDT)

I'm speechless that you were able to restore the E=mc² entry. That was miraculous and I'm going to thank God now for sending you to this site. Moreover, I'm wondering if I should ever edit an entry again after you've edited it!--Andy Schlafly 18:57, 26 March 2012 (EDT)

That was not that marvelous: I try to prepare my edits, often off-line. So I have sometimes the latest versions of the pages which I have edited.

Obviously, you wont agree with much what I'm saying on the subject of E=mc². I just ask you to consider the experimental evidence - E=mc² is used on a daily basis (ask User:RSchlafly!). Please, take a look again in the matter of the mass defect due to the binding energy, as addressed in my conversation with CPalmer: Talk:E=mc2#Aschlafly.2C_could_you_give_us...

Thanks, AugustO 19:04, 26 March 2012 (EDT)

The devil -- which means "chaos" -- is responsible for accidents and, in this case, the loss of E=mc², and God's intelligent intervention restored it, through you. It's the never-ending struggle between entropy and order, and thanks to you order prevailed!--Andy Schlafly 19:20, 26 March 2012 (EDT)

Science articles

I like the work you've done on trying to correct the E=mc² and relativity articles. It would be great if you felt like putting some of your stuff on Ameriwiki as well. We have a slightly different approach to science from CP. --SamCoulter 20:05, 29 March 2012 (EDT)

Let me second that. In fact, recent work on E=mc^2 has given me some insights on making a really nice AW article. Yes, SamC, I haven't forgotten about AW.  :-) I just get caught up in the enthusiasm very now and then. SamHB 22:36, 29 March 2012 (EDT)

GPS and Relativity

Hi AugustO,

Thank you for providing an actual link and for your interesting comments at Talk:Theory of relativity. I intend to wait about a week for some references to appear, and then remind folks if they don't. Having looked at your user and user talk pages, I can see how you might be feeling a bit uptight about communication or lack thereof. My intention is to treat the discussion re 'GPS and Relativity' as polite, calm, and non-confrontational as possible, always with the intention of presenting the truth in accordance with the evidence. While waiting I will continue as I have done for the last two months, tidying up and improving various uncontroversial articles. May God grant you patience and tact. RolandPlankton 08:53, 7 April 2012 (EDT)

Ah, I barely remember the days a year ago when I thought that I had the patience of Job. Well, I wish you luck for your endeavors, but I see no possible outcome in which anything contrary to the current position of Aschlafly will prevail in the articles: the insight is stronger than the source, I'm afraid...

AugustO 17:02, 7 April 2012 (EDT)

E=mc²

I'm considering making an "essay" page on the subject of E=mc^2, along the lines that most people (other than Andy) want. I had very good success, along similar lines, with the Essay:Rebuttal_to_Counterexamples_to_Relativity page. The two camps stopped yelling at each other, and each side presented their best arguments, free of interference. It would probably be best if this page were developed offline, by me, you, and a few others, like AndyFrankinson and JudyJ. Then it could be uploaded when we have something that we agree on (which I don't think will be hard.) Then the two sides won't be editing, or discussing, a page that they have disagreements with. Everyone will feel better. So I wonder if you could contact me at sam4557@gmail.com. SamHB 19:42, 9 April 2012 (EDT)

I don't doubt your honest intentions, but for me a position which is based solely on misreading sources and ignoring data is just not acceptable for a online encylopedia. Therefore it doesn't seem to be right to hide the actual data in a separate article just to spare the feelings of those who don't want to acknowledge it: I will choose being ignored at the talk-page of the main article over being ignored at some other place.... AugustO 07:51, 10 April 2012 (EDT)

You're probably right that making a "rebuttal" page for E=mc^2, or the other relativity-related pages, would not have as good results as the rebuttal to the "counterexamples" page. The reason is that the latter page is not trying to describe science, so people aren't irritated by the other page saying things they disagree with. The massive fighting going on with the relativity pages probably can't be stopped by creating another page.

Therefore, we (AndyFrankinson, JudyJ, and myself) have decided not to post a "rebuttal" page here at Conservapedia, though we will be posting it at Ameriwiki.

Getting into personal arguments with Andy is not my cup of tea.

I wish you good luck. SamHB

Dear User:Conservative

I'm up to a debate - why not here on Conservapedia? We just have to stick to the topics, avoid personal remarks, questioning the beliefs of our interlocutors, etc. Won't be a problem for me: It would be just like a nice discussion on a talk-page. --AugustO 16:30, 16 May 2012 (EDT)

I am assuming you are talking about debating the 15 questions for evolutionists with Shockofgod. Shockofgod is more a radio/video debate guy. Also, unlike some YouTube people, he has a job. wife, etc. so he may not be into written debate as it would probably require more time. Next, I could ask him if he wants to debate you via a written debate next time I go into his free chat room, but you could do the same HERE. My guess is that if he were to do a written debate, he would prefer it be held at his blog/website and not Conservapedia. The debate could be mentioned at Conservapedia though. He has over 20,000 YouTube subscribers plus if the debate were mentioned at Conservapedia, I would think you would have an audience for either type of debate. Conservative 17:11, 16 May 2012 (EDT)

I contacted Shockofgod and he prefers oral debates rather than written debates. He said if you want to debate him that you will need a mic and he is available at HERE. Please keep in mind in terms of a debate that he lives in the state of California. There have been rumors that I/we are Shockofgod which is a rumor that I/we will not confirm or deny. :) Conservative 22:04, 16 May 2012 (EDT)

• I'm more a written debate guy, being a foreigner and all that
• I'm not one of those YouTube people, so having a job. wife, etc. doesn't come as a surprise to me.
• He lives in California, I'm living in Germany. A written debate helps to handle the different time-zones.
• Why should I join his blog/website? Any debate on Conservapedia could be mentioned over there, too

AugustO 01:41, 17 May 2012 (EDT)

It sounds like there is a incompatibility in how you two like to debate (oral vs. written). Some things are not meant to be. :) Conservative 07:42, 17 May 2012 (EDT)

Observers

Umm, I was under the impression your name was Kenneth, not Carl?brenden 00:46, 17 May 2012 (EDT)

Man's downhill genetic slide - human genetic entropy

Evolutionist source:

I just discovered evolutionist Michael Lynch admitting this in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America in a December 3, 2009 article entitled: Rate, molecular spectrum, and consequences of human mutation (taken from the abstract): "Finally, a consideration of the long-term consequences of current human behavior for deleterious-mutation accumulation leads to the conclusion that a substantial reduction in human fitness can be expected over the next few centuries in industrialized societies unless novel means of genetic intervention are developed." [2]

Creationist sources:

Here are some additional resources concerning the issue of genetic entropy: Genetic entropy and Genetic entropy and Respected Cornell geneticist rejects Darwinism in his recent book and Review of J. C. Sanford's Genetic Entropy & the Mystery of the Genome and Genetic entropy: a literal fall from perfection. Also, here are a few videos: Dr. John Sanford "Genetic Entropy and the Mystery of the Genome" 1/2 and Dr. John Sanford "Genetic Entropy and the Mystery of the Genome" 2/2 Conservative 23:16, 18 May 2012 (EDT)

I'll take a look, thank you. But from a first glance at the abstract one gets the impression that this is a problem of industrialized societies - a very short span in the history of mankind. AugustO 23:23, 18 May 2012 (EDT)

Probation

Don't make changes to our manual of style or evade it, and don't pretend that an issue has been settled (your way) when you disagree with an admin. First warning.

Yes, I know you have a couple of get-out-of-jail-free cards for your E=mc^2 magic. Try not to make their use necessary. --Ed Poor ^Talk 13:27, 9 June 2012 (EDT)

... If you disagree with someone, give your reason.

... In addition, please don't place comments not directly related to improving an article, on that article's talk page ... especially if an administrator has removed them once already. If you can't contact an administrator by email or edit their user talk page, you can always post here or on Andy's talk page.

... don't be rude yourself, while "expecting" others not to be rude. --Ed Poor ^Talk 12:41, 14 June 2012 (EDT)

Mentioning categories without including pages in them

Hi AugustO,

I see that you are doing good work in categorizing quotes. For your information, you can insert an extra colon before the category name, as in

[[:Category:Template quotes]]

to include a wikilink to a category (Category:Template quotes) without placing the page in that category. Hope this helps, and keep up the good work!

(As an aside, I personally think that sysops should have some means for ordinary editors to contact them personally. If Admin A has his talk page protected, it is unreasonable to have to ask on a separate page to find some Admin B to contact Admin A regarding his decision to protect that page.) GregG 10:17, 14 June 2012 (EDT)

• Thanks - I remembered it after my <nowiki> detour...
• I totally agree to your aside!

AugustO 10:25, 14 June 2012 (EDT)

To be fair to Ed Poor, his page was getting attacked a lot before he protected it. But to be fair to everyone else, it's now been locked for six months, so perhaps it would be safe to unprotect it. I would have thought that having to watch twenty other pages to see what people were saying to him would be more hassle than the vandalism!--CPalmer 10:50, 14 June 2012 (EDT)

revert war

Where'd you go? I'm in a vandalism revert war with someone. You were logged in a few minutes ago. You need to come back and block this person. There's no point in my continuing until you or someone else does so. JudyJ 09:21, 18 June 2012 (EDT)

Sorry, at this time of the day I visit Conservapedia only for short times. I saw some vandalism, blocked Pyroced, looked at his contributions and reverted them. I left after five minutes without revisiting Special:RecentChanges and left you in half an hour of agony :-(

Maybe you should have contacted User:TerryH, who edited the main page in the midst of the vandalism spree: he his an administrator - and I'm a little bit surprised that he didn't spot the problem himself.

Again, sorry.

AugustO 09:57, 18 June 2012 (EDT)

contacting User: Conservative

You can contact me here http://conservapedia.com/User:Conservative/mail if you need to contact me. Conservative 10:23, 21 June 2012 (EDT)

Various problems

1. Don't pick fights with admins. Either follow instructions, or edit different articles. Last warning.
2. Don't use Conservapedia like a chat blog:

   Comments like the following don't help the general contributor:

   • @Ed Poor: nice to see you online- please see that section at the talk page
3. Drop the innocent act. You're not being persecuted: you're being told what to do by a senior admin. I let you slide before, because I thought you might change your ways. But don't make being here more trouble than it's worth.
4. Any more edit warring, or "playing dumb" or "acting innocent" and you'll be banned. --Ed Poor ^Talk 19:47, 10 July 2012 (EDT)

Went extra mile for you so....

I went an extra mile for you and did some research on 's-Hertogenbosch and created a move. Please return the favor by expanding the 's-Hertogenbosch entry, not being petulant and picayune about some of my activity, being more diplomatic with Ed Poor and using Admin channels more to resolve conflict. Conservative 07:41, 13 July 2012 (EDT)

Thank you - I hope this settles the matter. But this extra mile is a well-trodden path by now, not only I, but CPalmer, GTac, FrederickT3, Cmurphynz, JeffreyB, StaceyT and PenelopeP went there - and not only I, but User:Penelope and GTac got blocked over this. AugustO 11:25, 15 July 2012 (EDT)

Abschied

Hallo AugustO. Wollte nur sagen, dass du einen guten Lauf hier hattest. Dein Durchhaltevermögen war auf jeden Fall bewundernswert. Nachdem dir aber die sysop-Rechte entzogen wurden, wird es wohl nicht mehr lange dauern bis du verbannt wirst. Wirklich schade... Wünsche dir auf jeden Fall nur das Beste für die Zukunft.--VPropp 09:57, 13 July 2012 (EDT)

Conditions for contributing

Your contributions are amazingly helpful - most of the time. Just don't ignore admin instructions or make personal remarks. Please focus on the articles, not on the personalities of other contributors. --Ed Poor ^Talk 10:15, 13 July 2012 (EDT)

Short note

I don't know much about the particular church you attend within the Lutheran denomination of the Evangelical Church of Hesse Electorate-Waldeck. I know there are a wide variety of Anglican churches some of them theologically liberal and some are conservative in their theology.

Regardless of church's theology, I am going to endeavor to have less disputes with you and work with you on matters that we have agreement on if I am able to do so. Conservative 02:56, 17 September 2012 (EDT)

Generally there is nothing wrong with debate! BTW, I read the article "Germany's 'Cold Religion'". Markus Spieker made some valid points (though I think, e.g., that Luther would have driven most of the pastors at Mega-Churches from their pulpits,too.) The baseline of this article is that there are great differences between the churches in America and Europe: for instance in Germany it is quite unusual to leave your church in favor of another one in the same area - there isn't that much diversity, neither: you can't look for the church which fits you, you have to try to fit within your church (and perhaps change it...)

And there are cultural differences, too: So You may think of the Free Evangelical Churches as more conservative in an American sense, I have yet to meet a member of a Free Church in Germany who is against gun-control!

I don't mind to discuss my Church's politics. But I'd appreciate it if you thought twice before bringing them up in discussion of quite unrelated subjects (like this one).

Thanks.

AugustO 04:51, 19 September 2012 (EDT)

AugustO, thanks for your input. I hope to be traveling to Germany. There are some things I like about German culture and perhaps I will be visiting Germany. I am a fan of Kartoffelpuffer and the Autobahn. Maybe you will have a chance to finally meet the every so mysterious me/us. :)

By the way, when is Chancellor Angella Markel expected to be up for re-election? I heard post-German elections, there may be some more financial trouble in Europe.[3] Conservative 05:53, 19 September 2012 (EDT)

I shouldn't have troubled you about the timing of Merkel's election. It was easy enough to find that it is expected to be in the Fall of 2013. Conservative 01:32, 20 September 2012 (EDT)

AugustO, one last thing, the topics of homosexuality/abortion etc. are related to the creation vs. evolution controversy. For example, once you take away the Adam/Eve account, it undermines God's design/plan for men and women and opens the way for aberrant practices such as polygamy, homosexuality, bestiality, respect of the value of human life, eugenics, etc.[4][5][6] Genesis is very foundational to Christian theology.[7] In addition, evolutionary thinking is corrosive to Christianity theology.[8] Furthermore, often people's worldview/theology becomes more naturalistic via the adoption of naturalistic evolutionary worldview.[9] For example, the documentary hypothesis was a by product of an evolutionary view of religion.[10] I have yet to see a vibrant church where the miraculous happens regularly in a evolution believing church.[11] Miracles and naturalism don't mix. Conservative 09:17, 19 September 2012 (EDT)

The elections of the next Bundestag will take place in September or October 2013: the actual day will be deliberated by the Bundespräsident in December 2012 or January 2013. Generally the Bundeskanzler will come from the strongest party of the government, most probably the CDU/CSU (Angela Merkel's party) or the SPD (currently the leading party of the opposition). There will be some smaller parties in the next Bundestag - the Greens, the Liberals (FDP) and the leftists (Linke), perhaps even the pirates (harr, harr). Odds are that we end with a Gro?e Koaltion - a center-left government by CDU/CSU and SPD - in which case A. Merkel will be chancellor again. She is experienced with this kind of government, she presided the grand coaltion 2005-2009.

If you (and your parents - or is it a school-trip?) visit Germany, it will certainly be possible to meet and to show you around some of the remarkable places etc....

AugustO 12:18, 21 September 2012 (EDT)

Although the Germans have their faults, I like the creative energy, thoroughness and business acumen of the German people.[12] For example, as a percentage of their GDP, Germany exports about 4 times as much relatively speaking than the USA.[13] If you look at some of my articles, they display a certain degree of "Wenn schon, denn schon". :)

I have other reasons for wanting to visit Germany, but I would rather not go into them due to some gentlemen who are obsessed with me. Conservative 15:19, 21 September 2012 (EDT)

Andy's unresponsiveness

August, why do you stay here? I've been following Andy's "review" of your rights and Ken's constant abuse of your church. Why don't you move to one of the other conservative wikis? Nothing you do here will ever be taken seriously, because no visitors ever get further than the mainpage. Go speak to Rayment or Coulter, or even RatWiki.--BillyReuben 17:57, 17 October 2012 (EDT)

I may get quited sometimes - but I'm not a quitter. And I have a soft spot for the Conservapedia Bible Project - it helps me to keep up reading the originals and forces me to revisit my Greek lessons :-) --AugustO 18:01, 17 October 2012 (EDT)

What's your email

I'd like to send a message if that's cool with you. If you don't want to publish it here I list mine on my user page.--IDuan 16:59, 22 November 2012 (EST)

I just sent you an email (Subject: "my email address --EOM") --AugustO 17:06, 22 November 2012 (EST)

Iduan

Leave it be man. I agree with you that he seems like a bit of a twat, but I have dealt with him in the past and he isn't really a bad guy. He just appears to have his knickers in a twist over something. Perhaps if you leave him for a few days he will reflect on his actions a bit and apologise for overreacting. --DamianJohn 17:05, 22 November 2012 (EST)

Hebrews issue

Ask Andy to use this criteria in relation to his Book of Hebrews author hypothesis:

Historical science and avoiding logical fallacies

In 1970, the historian David Hackett Fischer wrote a noteworthy book entitled Historians’ Fallacies: Toward a Logic of Historical Thought.

An excellent review of Fischer's book declared:

In only approximately 300 pages, Fischer surveys an immense amount of background historical literature to point out a comprehensive variety of analytical errors that many, if not most, historians commit. Fischer points out specific examples of faulty or sloppy reasoning in the work of even the most prominent historians, making it a useful book for beginning students of history. While this book presumably did not make Fischer popular with many of his peers, it should be noted that his contributions as a historian have not been limited simply to criticizing the work of others; since 1976, he has published a number of well-received books on other historical topics.

In his book Historians’ Fallacies: Toward a Logic of Historical Thought, David Hackett Fischer presents 7 rules of thumb for historians that will help you when examining the historical evidence relating to origins science.

Fischer's 7 rules of thumb for historians:

1. The burden of proof for a historical claim is always upon the one making the assertion.

2. Historical evidence must be an answer to the question asked and not to any other question.

3. An historian must not merely provide good evidence, but the best evidence. And the best evidence, all other things being equal, is the evidence which is most nearly immediate to the event itself.

4. Evidence must always be affirmative. Negative evidence is no evidence at all. (In other words,absence of evidence is not necessarily evidence of absence)

5. The meaning of any historical evidence is dependent upon the context from which it is obtained from.

6. An empirical statement must not be more precise than its evidence warrants.

7. All inferences from historical evidence are probabilistic.

Source of above material can be found HERE

I hope that helps. Conservative 20:44, 25 November 2012 (EST)

Sorry, it doesn't. Helpful would be an answer to the question: Do you think that it is acceptable to present an insight of a single person in a Biblical matter (an insight shared by virtually no one) as a plausible theory? --AugustO 02:57, 26 November 2012 (EST)

Replied to your talk page comment

Hi, I just wanted to let you know that I replied to the comments you left on my talk page. I apologize for the delay in responding; I haven't been at Conservapedia recently due to being very busy in work/school/life. Take Care, Taj 17:05, 29 November 2012 (EST)

You made a comment I agree with

You recently made a comment on another page about how many articles here on Conservapedia seem overly short, and to be honest, I agree with you.

Many articles seem overly redundant, many could be merged with other articles, and many seem to be little more than placeholders.

I don't know if you and I are the only ones who have noticed this, but I just thought you should know that you aren't alone in noticing this particular problem.

PatrickMarion 08:50, 2 January 2013 (EST)PatrickMarion

Ta

Ta Sunshine! EJamesW 17:36, 4 January 2013 (EST)

(ta is Lancashire for thanks)

Thank you for your work in keeping the vandalism in check. :-) Much appreciated. Taj 17:30, 13 January 2013 (EST)

Thanks for you appreciation :-) --AugustO 02:44, 14 January 2013 (EST)

Thanks

Thanks for deleting all those repeated posts on the main page talk page. For whatever reason Flash seemed to decide to crash when I posted it !(gggrr)I think this may have something to do with it although I would have thought chrome was better than this! Dvergne 19:26, 13 January 2013 (EST)

You are welcome! --AugustO 02:44, 14 January 2013 (EST)

Obsolete information on abortion talk page

That was obsolete information on the abortion talk page. After January 25, 2013, the Conservapedia Pro-life Project may be substantially increased in terms of its various efforts such as content and other efforts.

Feel free to increase the size of the current articles and create new ones.

The Pro-life Project could exceed all previous efforts at Conservapedia. The pro-life cause is one of Andy's top issues.

I recently heard that Conservapedia was dead.

"The report of my death was an exaggeration" - Mark Twain Conservative 14:49, 14 January 2013 (EST)

• Talk pages are full of obsolete information. That's why they get archived.
• The information became relevant by your deletion: You wrote

This statement is more than two years old - so now we should be able to see the fruits of your activities. If there is't any to show, this reflects badly on your current string of announcements about the Question Evolution!-campaign. OTOH - if you have got something to show, this will increase the confidence in your announcement. So, what is it? How did you spread awareness?

--AugustO 14:58, 14 January 2013 (EST)

(EC) There were some hick-ups when I edited this section - I hope, no information was lost. AugustO

Setting aside your extraneous comments to the matter at hand, feel free to underestimate the Conservapedia Pro-life Projects prospects if you wish. That will not stop the project from moving forward though. Conservative 15:30, 14 January 2013 (EST)

So you won't comment on the success or failure of your efforts in 2010? Though this isn't surprising, it is still disappointing. And it is not a good omen for the upcoming undertakings. --AugustO 15:44, 14 January 2013 (EST)

The Wall Street Journal reported: "A comprehensive new study released by Baylor University yesterday, shows ...that the irreligious and the members of more liberal Protestant denominations, far from being resistant to superstition, tend to be much more likely to believe in the paranormal and in pseudoscience than evangelical Christians."[1]

re: good omens

Unlike members of shrinking Protestant denominations such as yourself, conservative Christians don't foretell the future using omens.

From the Wall Street Journal: "What Americans Really Believe," a comprehensive new study released by Baylor University yesterday, shows that traditional Christian religion greatly decreases belief in everything from the efficacy of palm readers to the usefulness of astrology. It also shows that the irreligious and the members of more liberal Protestant denominations, far from being resistant to superstition, tend to be much more likely to believe in the paranormal and in pseudoscience than evangelical Christians...."[14] Conservative 15:56, 14 January 2013 (EST)

Ronald Reagan famously said: Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me. If your efforts haven't been successful in the past, why should I trust you announcements for upcoming projects? Especially when you are seen trying to hide the record of past failures, it doesn't take a fortune-teller, but only someone with a little knowledge of statistics to predict future short-comings. --AugustO 16:06, 14 January 2013 (EST)

When Douglass MacArthur returned to the Philippines a second time, he prevailed. Unlike liberals, conservatives are not quitters! Conservative 16:21, 14 January 2013 (EST)

General MacArthur had a little bit more in his CV than being driven out of the Philippines in 1941. You, User:Conservative, are just heaping announcement of announcement (since at least 2010), but when General MacArthur made an announcement like "I came out of Bataan and I shall return", he followed through.... --AugustO 16:38, 14 January 2013 (EST)

Advanced copies of the Question evolution! campaign book for middle school students has been sent to young people in America, Canada and Australia.[15] You do know what the creationists will be saying soon, don't you? Veni, vidi, vici! 2013 is going to be a VERY BAD year for Darwinism![16] It is already happening, just like it was predicted![17][18][19][20] I hope that clears things up. :) Conservative 01:29, 9 March 2013 (EST)

Compton scattering

Your article on Compton scattering is excellent! It is well well presented and is pitched at just the right level for an educational wiki of this kind. The exposition was just the sort that I aspired to when I was active here. I wonder if you might give me permission to copy or adapt it to another wiki that I work on, that has a similar educational level. SamHB 22:47, 22 January 2013 (EST)

Thanks - I tried to keep the mathematics on an appropriate level.

Of course it may be reused - that's in the license, isn't it? But it is very nice of you to inform me!

AugustO 01:17, 23 January 2013 (EST)

Thanks. Just so you know that I'm not looking for permission to copy stuff all over the internet, this is for Amiriwiki. The rules seem to be that I can copy other people's work if I have their permission.

I'm also interested in some of your other stuff, like Cavendish lab. OK? SamHB 19:57, 31 January 2013 (EST)

Conservapedia rules

So you're aware, reverting admins without discussion is not okay. DouglasA 19:12, 23 January 2013 (EST)

You deleted a couple of my edits a single sweep and I don't know why!- And by reverting my edits you seem to have destroyed the edit-history of the article. Some of the edits I had explained at the talk-page:

• I added diacritics to some of the Greek words!
• I corrected the phonetic spelling into transliteration!
• I changed the translation were Greek words were omitted!

What's wrong about that? I'm deeply disappointed by this behavior - how can I improve the translation when my edits disappear without a trace? --AugustO 19:20, 23 January 2013 (EST)

Restorations

Both articles you have requested are restored. Karajou 09:37, 6 February 2013 (EST)

Thank you! Magdeburg looks legit - I googled parts of it and it doesn't seem to be plagiarized from elsewhere.

I need a little more time to check Ancient Egypt...

--AugustO 15:20, 6 February 2013 (EST)

Egypt

The articles you requested have been restored. Karajou 02:38, 13 February 2013 (EST)

Thanks! --AugustO 09:46, 13 February 2013 (EST)

Magdeburger

Uploaded as requested. [21] --Jpatt 14:39, 17 February 2013 (EST)

Thank you! I decided to cut back on editing for lent (it's time to accept that "someone is wrong on the internet"), so please excuse my belated response. --AugustO 08:43, 19 February 2013 (EST)

Yeah, it's like thinking, "I saw a slogan on someone's sweatshirt that I disagree with." Let's all remember that the Internet is a big place. --Ed Poor ^Talk 09:21, 19 February 2013 (EST)

Frage

Hallo August,

warum machst du hier mit? Ein Projekt, dass deine naturwissenschaftliche Expertise mit Füßen tritt und zugleich einem offensichtlich Geisteskranken (du weißt, wen ich meine) Adminrechte und auf der Hauptseite eine Bühne für ein Blog ohne echten Inhalt gibt. Warum tust du dir das an?

Du wirst Den Gründer nie dazu bringen können, gegen seine Überzeugung Physik zu lehren. Wer seine Kinder bei ihm lernen lässt, hat kein Interesse an einer normalen Erziehung. Und ein Kind, das doch mal hinterfragt, wird ohnehin nicht hier nachschauen.

Bitte steck deine Energie in ein anderes großes Enzyklopädieprojekt, dort ist das Ergebnis wenigstens von Dauer. Ja, auch dort gibt es Probleme. Aber wenn dort jemand diskutiert wie Andy oder der Geisteskranke, ist er seine Knöpfe flux wieder los. JohaanS 14:27, 19 February 2013 (EST)

Denken Sie an ihn als Missionar. EJamesW 16:15, 19 February 2013 (EST)

Als Dilettant im besten Sinne des Wortes ist es mir nicht möglich, in überzeugender Weise ein Übersetzungsprojekt - oder eine naturwissenschaftlichen Enyklopaedie voranzutreiben. Hier versuche ich aus einer Art Christenpflicht, die schlimmsten Übersetzungsungeheuerlichkeiten zu revidieren. Was aber die Relativitätstheoriedebatten betrifft, so dienen sie wohl in erster Linie dazu auzuloten, wie groß meine Verblüffungskapazitäten sind.

--AugustO 09:29, 26 February 2013 (EST)

E=mc²‎

Andy is the highest authority here, I don't think it wise to change his edits without further discussion with him. Wait until he replies to what you wrote on his talk page. Besides, physics is not my specialty but overall what he writes seems to make sense. - Markman 14:50, 28 February 2013 (EST)

Truth is the highest authority here (Everything you post must be true and verifiable). If you don't know what the article is about, please refrain from reverting the edits that have been discussed at the talk-page. Thank you. --AugustO 14:52, 28 February 2013 (EST)

Other than the fact that we should obey authority (Andy in this case), I also don't see why you're doing what you're doing. Once Andy sees what you're doing he'll revert it (justly in my opinion but we'll leave this aside for now). I'm only bringing the inevitable earlier, why fight it? - Markman 15:17, 28 February 2013 (EST)

Have a look at the diff: http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=E%3Dmc%C2%B2&curid=120039&diff=1037472&oldid=1037470

A character named Jonathan Grey links as couple of times to his web-site where he tries to sell his booklet.

Obedience is nice and dandy, but please, try reading the actual texts before editing!

Bye for today, AugustO 15:21, 28 February 2013 (EST)

Laws are made in order to be obeyed, and Andy is the ultimate source of authority here. It's not like we're a country or anything, if you don't like conservapedia nobody prevents you from going to wikipedia or that other wiki, the name of which I won't mention. Now please, cease your editing of the disputed article until Andy tells you otherwise.

Anyway, there's another law on this website called 90/10, and sadly due to this dispute of ours I'm getting close to violating it. I'm going to make one more edit on Andy's talk page and then I'll finish with talk page editing for this day. To conclude, please refrain from editing E=mc²‎ so long as Andy does not authorize you to do so. - Markman 15:30, 28 February 2013 (EST)

Markman, you may find that Andrew Schlafly excluded the Jonathan Grey's section from his last "reversion". It is quite unsatisfactory that he did so without acknowledging the fact that I alerted him (where is the "good catch" pat-on-the-back); but such silent admissions are often the best I can get.

So, again, please refrain from editing E=mc² - unless you can do so in an informed way. Thank you. --AugustO 08:39, 1 March 2013 (EST)

I don't know why Andy didn't include Jonathan Grey's section, and I wouldn't be surprised if it's simply because he missed it. However, by reverting his last edits you're continuing to be in defiance of his authority, which I must uphold. - Markman 08:46, 1 March 2013 (EST)

Oh, sorry, I didn't know that you were to uphold his authority. Must have missed this one in the list of Conservapedia:Commandments. But I command your for your ability to discern which edits Andrew Schlafly makes by accident and which by intent! --AugustO 08:53, 1 March 2013 (EST)

I'll pretend this recent blocking of mine did not happen. However, I advise you not to revert Andy's edits and wait for him to respond to you. I won't reply to you anymore on this subject since we are merely repeating ourselves by now. - Markman 10:01, 1 March 2013 (EST)

Thanks

Thanks for that Dvergne 08:58, 23 April 2013 (EDT)

Important message for you

See your user page. I await your response. --Ed Poor ^Talk 09:48, 29 April 2013 (EDT)

Don't keep me waiting too long Ed Poor, one has to admire your sense of humor. I made this comment originally on 06:35, 12 July 2012 (EDT) at Andrew Schlafly's talk-page. At that time, it would be absolutely fitting to answer to this comment in a timely fashion. But you didn't do so. Yes, you certainly have read the comment, as you deleted it a day later. The reason you gave: rv edit by blocked user

I'm not singling you out. I apply the same standard to everybody. In the case at hand, this didn't feel that way: as I have shown there were thousands of articles which were shorter than the one on Eindhoven - and you yourself have created scores of those articles. But the only articles in this length range which you singled out for merging were those on Dutch towns. Mind you, you never did the same for French, Russian, Belgium, etc. towns, or for any other category of short articles! So, should I have been flattered by the special attention you gave the articles which were related to the whole 's-Hertogenbosch - debacle?

--AugustO 11:20, 29 April 2013 (EDT)

You didn't respond to this. --Ed Poor ^Talk 12:02, 29 April 2013 (EDT)

Sorry for the delay --AugustO 13:51, 29 April 2013 (EDT)

Good, I saw your reply. --Ed Poor ^Talk 10:48, 30 April 2013 (EDT)

Little help?

Hi. I don't know if this is something you can help with, but you're a regular and you seem to be around today. This article looks like it was run through Google translate or something. Completely unreadable. I'd try to fix it, but I have no clue about the topic. It either needs serious fixing from someone who has the requisite knowledge, or deleting. Thanks for your help. EddyJ 09:58, 3 May 2013 (EDT)

Sorry, I can't help you there: English isn't my fist language, and I don't know much about the topic, neither. --AugustO 11:22, 3 May 2013 (EDT)

Can you delete the article then? It's totally nonsensical and nowhere near up to publishable standard. EddyJ 11:26, 3 May 2013 (EDT)

• I can't delete articles.
• The obvious thing for you would be to try to contact User:Regtangle or to state your considerations on Talk:Kwangju Riot

--AugustO 12:30, 3 May 2013 (EDT)

My articles

Thank you for liking my articles, your advice and for tidying them up. I have little experience with wikis but in future will look at the edit page of other articles to see how the formatting is done. I am surprised there are so little hymn articles, to me at least they are a very important part of Christianity. My Regards.--Patmac 14:56, 12 May 2013 (EDT)

Thank you - --AugustO 03:18, 14 May 2013 (EDT)

Deja Vu

Have been reading your exchanges with Conservative in Jan 2012. --Patmac 21:47, 17 May 2013 (EDT)