From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Off topic

A large portion of this article appears to be off topic. A small paragraph about him, mostly about his discussion with Ray comfort (which I have watched, and the only problem he had was stuttering), compared to a much larger paragraph about Atheists debating with Creationists as a whole. --MacN 14:51, 9 February 2011 (EST)

Thanks for the input. I added some material. Conservative 04:17, 2 October 2011 (EDT)

Pointless, offensive, and full of childish, not to mention baseless attacks

Last I checked, this site was named Conservapedia, not Christian Conservapedia. This does not so much describe Thunderf00t as it does attack him, and furthermore attacks all Atheists without regard for political affiliation. Not all Atheists are Liberals, and not all Conservatives are Christians. Editors would do well in remembering this when creating info pages, as well as bringing forth substantiations for their arguments about Atheists in general. --KiloByter 20:05, 25 April 2011 (EST)

You're entitled to your opinion, and we are entitled to our's. DMorris 23:15, 25 April 2011 (EDT)
Indeed, I'm entitled to my opinion; however, frankly, I should think these pages should have absolutely as little to do with opinion as possible, given that Encyclopedias are supposed to shed objective knowledge. If it is the will of the site administrators and community to skew facts due to petty bias, then by all means go ahead. I would however suggest then that the sites name be changed from Conservapedia to Authoritopedia, as Organic Conservatism, and indeed Conservatism should have no need for half-truths and bogus claims.

This is not to say that I disagree with any of the staff or members in general, after all, I am entitled to my opinion. But, I must wholeheartedly disagree with the representation of atheists in general among the political spectrum, and in general by this community as being vile and unwanted. Believers among you, make enemies of atheists if you must, but I find it is irresponsible and shameful to shun fellow conservatives simply because of religious beliefs or lack-thereof. Pardon, moreover to the point, it should be said that I am not trying to make an attack here. I am also not trying to imply that bias is encouraged. I only meant that, if it was or should ever be the will of the community to do so, then they have every right, but I believe the moniker they use would then be inappropriate concerning the political history surrounding Conservatism. KiloByter 22:14, May 1st 2011 (EDT)

Something you'll learn from me if you remain here is that I am a nice guy. You just simply don't seem to understand how Conservapedia works. You should refrain from trying to tell us what to do in your first edit, it makes you look like you're here to cause trouble, a possibility I haven't ruled out yet, but I'm assuming good faith for now. DMorris 22:23, 1 May 2011 (EDT)
Kilobyter, even atheist Matt Dillahunty indicated he was "disappointed" in Thunderf00t's debate performance and referred to his debate performance as "weak sauce".VIDEO Plus this is true as well: On October 1, 2011, the popular video creator Shockofgod created a video mentioning Thunderf00t and atheist Matt Dillahunty which discussed Thunderf00t's and Matt Dillahunty's inability to answer Creation Ministries International's list of 15 Questions that evolutionists cannot satisfactorily answer which are a focus of their Question evolution! campaign. VIDEO Conservative 04:15, 2 October 2011 (EDT)

As time progresses, I am sure this article will have less and less importance to Conservapedia. Right now, atheism is but a sqeak in American society and it is heading towards being just a half a squeak in American society - atheism will be CUT in half.VIDEO Atheism will be just be a footnote in American history no doubt or perhaps even half a footnote. :) Conservative 06:04, 2 October 2011 (EDT)