Changes

=== Please comment or ask questions here: ===

=== Please comment or ask questions here: ===

'''Please sign all comments with "<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>". Thank you.'''

'''Please sign all comments with "<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>". Thank you.'''

"To those who have gone to public schools and been inundated with mainstream media their whole life, this may seem like a strong conservative bias."

"To those who have gone to public schools and been inundated with mainstream media their whole life, this may seem like a strong conservative bias."

Just watched the show and I was surprised that Colbert didn't go as hard on Mr. Schlafly as I expected.  For instance, Schlafly claimed that Conservapedia is a site where the best of the common people make their contributions and the correct information 'bubbles to the top.'  However, it's hard to see how this can happen if articles like Evolution ("ARTICLE OF THE YEAR EDITION") are completely locked down.  Granted, I understand the administrators have a legitimate need to prevent vandalism - Wikipedia has the same problem sometimes - but the article is basically cemented in a controversial, inaccurate, and poorly written form.  For instance, the first paragraph includes the sentence --  "Since World War II a majority of the most prominent and vocal defenders of the evolutionary position which employs methodological naturalism have been atheists."  This has nothing to do with the rest of the paragraph, doesn't transition into the next paragraph, and just feels like a cheap attempt to take a shot at the theory within a poor thesis statement.  And seriously guys, the pictures of Hitler and Stalin are laughable.  Did they also get slapped into the articles on socialism, homosexuality, and Islam?

Just watched the show and I was surprised that Colbert didn't go as hard on Mr. Schlafly as I expected.  For instance, Schlafly claimed that Conservapedia is a site where the best of the common people make their contributions and the correct information 'bubbles to the top.'  However, it's hard to see how this can happen if articles like Evolution ("ARTICLE OF THE YEAR EDITION") are completely locked down.  Granted, I understand the administrators have a legitimate need to prevent vandalism - Wikipedia has the same problem sometimes - but the article is basically cemented in a controversial, inaccurate, and poorly written form.  For instance, the first paragraph includes the sentence --  "Since World War II a majority of the most prominent and vocal defenders of the evolutionary position which employs methodological naturalism have been atheists."  This has nothing to do with the rest of the paragraph, doesn't transition into the next paragraph, and just feels like a cheap attempt to take a shot at the theory within a poor thesis statement.  And seriously guys, the pictures of Hitler and Stalin are laughable.  Did they also get slapped into the articles on socialism, homosexuality, and Islam?