115
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 26:
Line 26: − + Line 38:
Line 38: − + Line 44:
Line 44: − + − + Line 60:
Line 60: − + − + − |Observed that [[Barack Obama]] is likely Muslim and could become the first Muslim President.+ − + − |Beginning in March of 2008, Conservapedia begins chronicling higher education moral corruption via its [[Professor values]] article. Starting in 2010, Conservapedia repeatedly warns students about picking their college majors on its main page. See: [[Worst college majors]] Conservapedia also cites [[Gerald Celente]] about future protests in Europe/Europe and cites Celente concerning useless college majors which needlessly rack up debts in young people. Conservapedia warns about a future "higher educational bubble".<ref>http://conservapedia.com/Main_Page/archive91</ref>+ Line 82:
Line 82: − + − + Line 97:
Line 97: − + − |Conservapedia identifies the significance of an effort to recall Menendez from office.+ − + − |''Conservapedia'' predicted that [[Rick Santorum]] was a stalking horse for [[Mitt Romney]]+ Line 122:
Line 122: − + Line 128:
Line 128: − + Line 152:
Line 152: − + Line 166:
Line 166: − +
Phase 2 in progress--adding internal citations to our predictions. Missing one date, please see talk page for more
|January 30, 2013 <ref>http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2013/01/fox-news-ratings-hit-year-low-155638.html</ref>
|January 30, 2013 <ref>http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2013/01/fox-news-ratings-hit-year-low-155638.html</ref>
|-
|-
|May 7, 2007
|May 07, 2007
|The speed of light varies.<ref>http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Essay:Quantifying_Openmindedness&oldid=147388</ref>
|The speed of light varies.<ref>http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Essay:Quantifying_Openmindedness&oldid=147388</ref>
|Liberals shout down anything contrary to the [[Theory of Relativity]].
|Liberals shout down anything contrary to the [[Theory of Relativity]].
|February 24, 2008
|February 24, 2008
|-
|-
|October 4, 2007
|October 04, 2007
|In 2007, Conservapedia creates its [[Homosexuality in animals myth]] article.<ref>http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Homosexuality_in_animals_myth&oldid=308759</ref>
|In 2007, Conservapedia creates its [[Homosexuality in animals myth]] article.<ref>http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Homosexuality_in_animals_myth&oldid=308759</ref>
|Liberals tout a supposed "gay [[penguin]]" in a California zoo.<ref>http://americansfortruth.com/2009/07/15/gay-penguin-flies-straight/</ref> Liberals rabidly deny someone can be an [[ex-homosexuals|ex-homosexual]]. Ex-homosexual is faced with a $10,000 fine, spends $7,000 in legal fees, and is forced to go to pro-homosexuality classes by a liberal judge who claimed he engaged in a aggressive behavior in a discussion with homosexual man (during his discussion the ex-homosexual man was holding a baby).<ref>http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=56702</ref>
|Liberals tout a supposed "gay [[penguin]]" in a California zoo.<ref>http://americansfortruth.com/2009/07/15/gay-penguin-flies-straight/</ref> Liberals rabidly deny someone can be an [[ex-homosexuals|ex-homosexual]]. Ex-homosexual is faced with a $10,000 fine, spends $7,000 in legal fees, and is forced to go to pro-homosexuality classes by a liberal judge who claimed he engaged in a aggressive behavior in a discussion with homosexual man (during his discussion the ex-homosexual man was holding a baby).<ref>http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=56702</ref>
|July 15, 2009
|July 15, 2009
|-
|-
| January 10, 2008
|January 10, 2008
|Conservapedia observes that [[Shaken Baby Syndrome]] is a doubtful theory by governmental child protective services, which has resulted in dubious convictions.<ref>http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Shaken_Baby_Syndrome&oldid=367617</ref>
|Conservapedia observes that [[Shaken Baby Syndrome]] is a doubtful theory by governmental child protective services, which has resulted in dubious convictions.<ref>http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Shaken_Baby_Syndrome&oldid=367617</ref>
|The governmental "experts" must be right and Conservapedia must somehow be wrong.
|The governmental "experts" must be right and Conservapedia must somehow be wrong.
|Years later, even [[National Public Radio]] admitted doubts about a conviction for Shaken Baby Syndrome, and [[Democrat]] Governor [[Jerry Brown]] commuted a high-profile sentence for it.<ref>http://www.scotusblog.com/2012/04/shaken-baby-case-an-update/#.T4DftOjeRkI.email</ref>
|Years later, even [[National Public Radio]] admitted doubts about a conviction for Shaken Baby Syndrome, and [[Democrat]] Governor [[Jerry Brown]] commuted a high-profile sentence for it.<ref>http://www.scotusblog.com/2012/04/shaken-baby-case-an-update/#.T4DftOjeRkI.email</ref>
|April 7, 2012
|April 07, 2012
|-
|-
|February 27, 2008
|February 27, 2008
|[[liberal denial]] in response
|[[liberal denial]] in response
|Prominent African American physician Benjamin Carson observes, "The bullies are ... especially the media who like to just beat on anybody who doesn't toe the line ... they suppress [[freedom of speech]]."<ref>http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2013/03/09/dr-carson-media-bullies-suppress-freedom-speech-beat-anyone-who-doesn#ixzz2N5XWfVMc</ref>
|Prominent African American physician Benjamin Carson observes, "The bullies are ... especially the media who like to just beat on anybody who doesn't toe the line ... they suppress [[freedom of speech]]."<ref>http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2013/03/09/dr-carson-media-bullies-suppress-freedom-speech-beat-anyone-who-doesn#ixzz2N5XWfVMc</ref>
|March 9, 2013
|March 09, 2013
|-
|-
|October 5, 2008 <ref>http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Barack_Hussein_Obama&oldid=530340</ref>
|October 05, 2008
|Observed that [[Barack Obama]] is likely Muslim and could become the first Muslim President.<ref>http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Barack_Hussein_Obama&oldid=530340</ref>
|While liberals would denounce the religion of Obama's future rival, [[Mitt Romney]], they insist that Obama's religion cannot be questioned.
|While liberals would denounce the religion of Obama's future rival, [[Mitt Romney]], they insist that Obama's religion cannot be questioned.
|Once elected, Obama stops attending church, and he eschews using a Bible for his official swearing-in procedure; [[Obama's Religion|Obama makes it clear that he is likely Muslim]] in additional ways.
|Once elected, Obama stops attending church, and he eschews using a Bible for his official swearing-in procedure; [[Obama's Religion|Obama makes it clear that he is likely Muslim]] in additional ways.
|January 21, 2009
|January 21, 2009
|-
|-
|March 24, 2008 <ref>http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Professor_values&oldid=412536</ref>
|March 24, 2008
|Beginning in March of 2008, Conservapedia begins chronicling higher education moral corruption via its [[Professor values]] article.<ref>http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Professor_values&oldid=412536</ref> Starting in 2010, Conservapedia repeatedly warns students about picking their college majors on its main page. See: [[Worst college majors]] Conservapedia also cites [[Gerald Celente]] about future protests in Europe/Europe and cites Celente concerning useless college majors which needlessly rack up debts in young people. Conservapedia warns about a future "higher educational bubble".<ref>http://conservapedia.com/Main_Page/archive91</ref>
|Liberal colleges and liberal press do not give enough attention to the issue of picking a college major. Nor does the liberal press sufficiently warn about future protests. Liberal press does not give adequate coverage to the issue of higher education moral corruption. Liberal press and liberal academia do not sufficiently warn about the poor education universities and colleges are often providing.
|Liberal colleges and liberal press do not give enough attention to the issue of picking a college major. Nor does the liberal press sufficiently warn about future protests. Liberal press does not give adequate coverage to the issue of higher education moral corruption. Liberal press and liberal academia do not sufficiently warn about the poor education universities and colleges are often providing.
|January 18, 2011. It is reported that a study shows that a very large percentage of college students are not developing higher thinking skills.<ref>http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2011/01/18/106949/study-many-college-students-not.html</ref> The trend of liberal colleges closing their doors continues.<ref>http://www.insidehighered.com/views/2009/07/09/baldwin</ref><ref>http://www.inthesetimes.com/article/5312/losing_liberal_arts/</ref>
|January 18, 2011. It is reported that a study shows that a very large percentage of college students are not developing higher thinking skills.<ref>http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2011/01/18/106949/study-many-college-students-not.html</ref> The trend of liberal colleges closing their doors continues.<ref>http://www.insidehighered.com/views/2009/07/09/baldwin</ref><ref>http://www.inthesetimes.com/article/5312/losing_liberal_arts/</ref>
|"The science is settled" that rapid [[global warming]] is somehow occurring, despite much evidence to the contrary.
|"The science is settled" that rapid [[global warming]] is somehow occurring, despite much evidence to the contrary.
|In 2011, frigid temperatures, October blizzards, and rejection of the theory by the American public; liberals try to change the terminology to "[[climate change]]"; in 2011 and 2013, even the [[liberal media]] admit there has been no atmospheric warming since 1998.
|In 2011, frigid temperatures, October blizzards, and rejection of the theory by the American public; liberals try to change the terminology to "[[climate change]]"; in 2011 and 2013, even the [[liberal media]] admit there has been no atmospheric warming since 1998.
|July 6, 2011 <ref>http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100095506/there-has-been-no-global-warming-since-1998/</ref>
|July 06, 2011 <ref>http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100095506/there-has-been-no-global-warming-since-1998/</ref>
|-
|-
|August 4, 2009
|August 04, 2009
|Conservapedia indicates that [[Ben Bernanke]]'s investment portfolio dropped in value in 2008.<ref>http://conservapedia.com/Main_Page/Previous_Conservapedia_Breaking_News/Archives/August_2009</ref> In addition, Conservapedia declares, "Given the abysmal economic policy of Bernanke and the [[Obama administration]], Bernanke probably should invest in gold."<ref>http://conservapedia.com/Main_Page/Previous_Conservapedia_Breaking_News/Archives/August_2009</ref> During the period of 2010-2011, Conservapedia cited the investor Jim Rogers who repeatedly suggests that people invest in commodites.<ref>http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special%3ASearch&redirs=0&search=%22Jim+rogers%22&fulltext=Search&ns0=1</ref><ref>[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KLL9YdR2y2g Jim Rogers : Missing out on Commodities?]</ref>
|Conservapedia indicates that [[Ben Bernanke]]'s investment portfolio dropped in value in 2008.<ref>http://conservapedia.com/Main_Page/Previous_Conservapedia_Breaking_News/Archives/August_2009</ref> In addition, Conservapedia declares, "Given the abysmal economic policy of Bernanke and the [[Obama administration]], Bernanke probably should invest in gold."<ref>http://conservapedia.com/Main_Page/Previous_Conservapedia_Breaking_News/Archives/August_2009</ref> During the period of 2010-2011, Conservapedia cited the investor Jim Rogers who repeatedly suggests that people invest in commodites.<ref>http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special%3ASearch&redirs=0&search=%22Jim+rogers%22&fulltext=Search&ns0=1</ref><ref>[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KLL9YdR2y2g Jim Rogers : Missing out on Commodities?]</ref>
|Liberals call Conservapedians "gold bugs"
|Liberals call Conservapedians "gold bugs"
|World economy continues to skate on thin ice and the Eurozone is experiencing significant economic problems.
|World economy continues to skate on thin ice and the Eurozone is experiencing significant economic problems.
|-
|-
|January 14, 2010<ref>http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Robert_Menendez&oldid=744786</ref>
|January 14, 2010
|Conservapedia identifies the significance of an effort to recall Menendez from office.<ref>http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Robert_Menendez&oldid=744786</ref>
|Liberals stood by Menendez for years.
|Liberals stood by Menendez for years.
|Finally the ''[[New York Times]]'' said that [[Harry Reid]] should take a committee gavel away from Menendez. <ref>http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/09/opinion/mr-menendezs-ethics-problem.html?hp&_r=0</ref>
|Finally the ''[[New York Times]]'' said that [[Harry Reid]] should take a committee gavel away from Menendez. <ref>http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/09/opinion/mr-menendezs-ethics-problem.html?hp&_r=0</ref>
|February 8, 2013
|February 8, 2013
|-
|-
|March 14, 2010<ref>http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Presidential_Election_2012&oldid=762021</ref>
|March 14, 2010
|''Conservapedia'' predicted that [[Rick Santorum]] was a stalking horse for [[Mitt Romney]]<ref>http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Presidential_Election_2012&oldid=762021</ref>
|Some mistakenly viewed Santorum as the only other option besides Romney, at the expense of [[Newt Gingrich]]
|Some mistakenly viewed Santorum as the only other option besides Romney, at the expense of [[Newt Gingrich]]
|After taking votes away from Gingrich, Santorum surprised many by dropping out of the race, practically giving the victory to Romney; Santorum then endorsed Romney-like [[Jon Bruning]] instead of the [[conservative]] [[Don Stenberg]] for [[U.S. Senate]] in [[Nebraska]], and then endorsed Romney in a late-night email.<ref>http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/santorum-underwhelming-endorsement-romney-081055500.html</ref>
|After taking votes away from Gingrich, Santorum surprised many by dropping out of the race, practically giving the victory to Romney; Santorum then endorsed Romney-like [[Jon Bruning]] instead of the [[conservative]] [[Don Stenberg]] for [[U.S. Senate]] in [[Nebraska]], and then endorsed Romney in a late-night email.<ref>http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/santorum-underwhelming-endorsement-romney-081055500.html</ref>
|-
|-
|June 30, 2010
|June 30, 2010
|In an [[Letter to Douglas Moo|open letter to a leader]] of a new revision to the [[NIV]] [[Bible]], ''Conservapedia'' expressed "concern that your Committee might produce a liberal translation that distorts and conceals references to the unborn child in appeasement of the pro-abortion position."
|In an [[Letter to Douglas Moo|open letter to a leader]] of a new revision to the [[NIV]] [[Bible]], ''Conservapedia'' expressed "concern that your Committee might produce a liberal translation that distorts and conceals references to the unborn child in appeasement of the pro-abortion position."<ref>http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Letter_to_Douglas_Moo&oldid=791512</ref>
|No response to the letter, and a prior expression of ridicule of the [[Conservapedia Bible Project]] before that.
|No response to the letter, and a prior expression of ridicule of the [[Conservapedia Bible Project]] before that.
|The new version [[Feminist Bible|distorts and conceals numerous references]] to the unborn child in the Bible, apparently to appease the pro-abortion position.
|The new version [[Feminist Bible|distorts and conceals numerous references]] to the unborn child in the Bible, apparently to appease the pro-abortion position.
|-
|-
|August 10, 2010
|August 10, 2010
|In August of 2010, Conservapedia created the article [[Women's views of Richard Dawkins]] indicating that [[Richard Dawkins]] had a significant problem with the women segment of the marketplace and that he [[Abrasiveness of Richard Dawkins|was abrasive]] and [[Atheism and cowardice|cowardly.]]
|In August of 2010, Conservapedia created the article [[Women's views of Richard Dawkins]] indicating that [[Richard Dawkins]] had a significant problem with the women segment of the marketplace and that he [[Abrasiveness of Richard Dawkins|was abrasive]] and [[Atheism and cowardice|cowardly.]]<ref>http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Women%27s_views_of_Richard_Dawkins&oldid=803578</ref>
|Atheist men scoff at the article.
|Atheist men scoff at the article.
|In July of 2011, the [[Elevatorgate]] scandal occurs. A woman in the [[Skepchick]] community says "I look forward to watching your legacy crash and burn."<ref>[https://docs.google.com/file/d/0BzoCyyqmp5b5LUdobkxhblpmTDA/edit?pli=1 Skepchick woman]</ref> <ref>http://skepchick.org/2011/07/dear-richard-dawkins/</ref>
|In July of 2011, the [[Elevatorgate]] scandal occurs. A woman in the [[Skepchick]] community says "I look forward to watching your legacy crash and burn."<ref>[https://docs.google.com/file/d/0BzoCyyqmp5b5LUdobkxhblpmTDA/edit?pli=1 Skepchick woman]</ref> <ref>http://skepchick.org/2011/07/dear-richard-dawkins/</ref>
|-
|-
|July 2, 2011
|July 2, 2011
|[[Chris Christie]] will endorse [[Mitt Romney]] for president
|[[Chris Christie]] will endorse [[Mitt Romney]] for president <ref>http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=United_States_Presidential_Race_-_Endorsements_for_Republicans_2012&oldid=944456</ref>
|The [[lamestream media]] insisted that Christie was a contender himself.
|The [[lamestream media]] insisted that Christie was a contender himself.
|Chris Christie made a special endorsement of Mitt Romney for president
|Chris Christie made a special endorsement of Mitt Romney for president
|-
|-
|November 2, 2011
|November 2, 2011
|Conservapedia claimed that [[Pacific Institute]] was not a non-partisan environmental group but deceitful liberals promoting lies.
|Conservapedia claimed that [[Pacific Institute]] was not a non-partisan environmental group but deceitful liberals promoting lies.<ref>http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Pacific_Institute&oldid=933383</ref>
|Pretend that Peter Gleick and other environmentalists don't utilize bad science or push political agendas
|Pretend that Peter Gleick and other environmentalists don't utilize bad science or push political agendas
|Pacific Institute's president Peter Gleick promoted bad science and pushed a biased liberal political agenda by admitting to fraud in 2012. <ref>[http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2012/02/21/climate-scientist-admits-stealing-docs-from-conservative-think-tank/ Climate scientist admits stealing docs from conservative think tank, Fox News, February 21, 2012]</ref>
|Pacific Institute's president Peter Gleick promoted bad science and pushed a biased liberal political agenda by admitting to fraud in 2012. <ref>[http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2012/02/21/climate-scientist-admits-stealing-docs-from-conservative-think-tank/ Climate scientist admits stealing docs from conservative think tank, Fox News, February 21, 2012]</ref>