Conservapedia - User contributions [en]

User talk:Jpatt

2011-08-26T16:55:02Z

InflamedFanny:

<nowiki>== Archive 2008 ==
[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:Jpatt/Subway_Troll Here]

== Archive 2009 ==
[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:Jpatt/2009]

== Archive 2010 ==
[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:Jpatt/2010]

== Your block policy ==

I was just wondering; why are you blocking people with the reason that they don't give their name?

People can simply say whatever name they wanted and you wouldn't know if it is true or not.
More importantly the account creation page states that submitting your name is '''optional'''
Can please explain the reasoning behind your block policy?

ps: I'd appreciate you not blocking me merely for asking this question. I just ask out of curiosity ;)

Thanks.

[[User:Philny|Philny]] 18:20, 4 January 2011 (EST)
:Just as it is optional for first name last initial, the block policy is of the administrators discretion. It helps eliminate sock accounts used by [troll]]s and if the user is truly interested in contributing in good faith, they will recreate their username as commanded. Do users/trolls use fake names? absolutely. Are you really Phil? I chose not to recreate your account but I could be wrong about you. Time will tell. Hope this is a sufficient answer. Have a great day! --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 19:28, 4 January 2011 (EST)

:::Jpatt. In all honesty I don't see how your practice would help eliminate sock accounts. People can simply lie about who they are. Socks are best controlled through an IP range block if you asked me.
::Lastly I would think that good faith would be assumed for new people until they explicitly become trolls/vandals. but hey that's just me.
::I'm still trying to get rid of those liberal Wikipepdia ways. [[User:Philny|Philny]] 19:54, 4 January 2011 (EST)

:::Is it foolproof? No. They are not blocked from contributing just blocked from using that name. So it is of good faith on our part to allow them to recreate a username. I did not create the policy and I was subject to the same policy when I first joined. We'll banish someone when needed and we will ferret out those fake accounts over time. To obey an administrators request is the first step toward recognizing a good faith contributor.--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 20:18, 4 January 2011 (EST)

::::Hi. My former name was STramp, but you seem to have decided that that cannot be my real name. I'm not quite sure why?[[User:StevenTramp|StevenTramp]] 21:23, 10 May 2011 (EDT)

== Re:Welcome! ==

Thanks for the welcome! I'll be sure to read the Editor's Guide ;) --[[User:AznBurger|AznBurger]] 21:36, 19 January 2011 (EST)

== Conservative 3737, "everything you say is conservative" ==

...but really not [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Chris_Matthews&curid=10356&diff=846659&oldid=846644 family-friendly.] Thanks for heading him off! [[User:Martyp|Martyp]] 16:32, 5 February 2011 (EST)

:The IP is a school and he didn't actually cuss which would cross the line. I am willing to give a second chance if the rules are followed. BTW, I hope no hard feelings for targeting you in the past. Your edits were excellent.--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 16:38, 5 February 2011 (EST)
::Life is too short for hard feelings. Good call on the "second chance" thing. [[User:Martyp|Martyp]] 16:39, 5 February 2011 (EST)

== Hello, there is a reason I don't use my real name ==

I'll write you an email about it if you like, I would have before but you locked the email so I could not. Account creation was also turned off, which makes recreating my account difficult. --[[User:AlaskanEconomy2|AlaskanEconomy2]] 20:43, 8 February 2011 (EST)
:I now feel pretty foolish not having checked this account before creating that one. Thanks/sorry. --[[User:AlaskanEconomy|AlaskanEconomy]] 20:52, 8 February 2011 (EST)

== Thanks ==

Thanks for uploading that image yesterday. With regards to my username, I created it before there was any specific username policy on Conservapedia's Guidelines or Commandments page (even though I've only been contributing recently). If it is important that I have username that contains only my name/initials, I will change it. --[[User:Toadaron|Toadaron]] 17:40, 18 February 2011 (EST)

== New conservative pages for 2011 ==

I noticed you were laying down plans for pages to create. I think you might consider making a page on the pence amendment, the recent 240-185 house vote to amend Title X to remove the family planning grants from organizations that perform abortions (like planned parenthood). While I support the decision the issue is outside of my area of specialization and I am afraid of getting some important facts wrong. --[[User:AlaskanEconomy|AlaskanEconomy]] 20:43, 22 February 2011 (EST)
:Maybe at some future point. It's too early to determine the outcome. You're welcome to start it.--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 20:45, 22 February 2011 (EST)

== uploading images ==

How can I upload non-political, non-controversial images that I made myself to Conservapedia? I suppose you or the Conservapedia administration would like to preview images before uploading them? How do I show them for you to preview? [[User:HPadleckas|HPadleckas]] 21:34, 28 February 2011 (EST)

:Send to conservapedia@zoho.com--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 21:39, 28 February 2011 (EST)

==Celebrity crime==

Hi, Jpatt. I'm wondering how and when we should report (gloat over?) celebrity crime, like a female pop star arrested for being drunk in public, getting a speeding ticket, etc. Are we trying to prove that Hollywood produces (or encourages) self-indulgent behavior, or what? --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 13:53, 2 March 2011 (EST)

:Personally, I don't have a litmus test for inclusion. I simply take celebrities, be it Democrat or Republican, and post their crimes. As role models, they need to be exposed as to why they make headlines. Their behavior is an example of who "not to follow". If you have suggestions, of course I would work with you. --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 15:04, 2 March 2011 (EST)

::I had nothing in mind, just trying to stimulate thought here. Carry on, my good man! :-) --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 01:21, 5 March 2011 (EST)

== Delete ==

Hey Jpatt - I manually copy-pasted move a page from [[Frankfurt school]] to [[Essay:Frankfurt school]] - but upon examining the content it appears that the original author - CharlieO - copy pasted that from another site. Could you delete both pages? Thanks!--[[User:Iduan|I]][[User_talk:Iduan|Duan]] 18:50, 26 March 2011 (EDT)
:No problem. --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 18:57, 26 March 2011 (EDT)

==Photo upload==
Hi, I would like to upload a photo of myself, I don't have the rights, can you do it for me? Thanks.--[[User:SarahWollstone|SarahWollstone]] 20:35, 8 April 2011 (EDT)
Yes, send to conservapedia@zoho.com --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 21:19, 8 April 2011 (EDT)
Thanks. :)--[[User:SarahWollstone|SarahWollstone]] 21:23, 8 April 2011 (EDT)

I just sent it to you. :) --[[User:SarahWollstone|SarahWollstone]] 21:32, 8 April 2011 (EDT)

:Done. [http://www.conservapedia.com/images/4/42/Me.jpg]--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 21:41, 8 April 2011 (EDT)

Thank you. :)--[[User:SarahWollstone|SarahWollstone]] 21:44, 8 April 2011 (EDT)

== I need you to check your email ==

K? [[User:DMorris|DMorris]] 23:20, 27 April 2011 (EDT)

== nice reversions! ==

You're fast, sir.--[[User:Iduan|I]][[User_talk:Iduan|Duan]] 19:50, 2 May 2011 (EDT)
:Did you hear? I'm Quick Draw McGraw!--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 19:54, 2 May 2011 (EDT)

== Thank you ==

Thank you for the helpful links and the welcome. I hope to become a valuable member of the community.

== Editing the Wicca page ==

I would like to formally request that the "murders" section be removed for the reasons stated on the talk page.

This is not a place to smear other people or post inflammatory material. {{unsigned|HarabecW}}

:I digress, this is a place to educate others and to warn them to stay clear of witchcraft. Find another topic to edit. --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 22:30, 6 May 2011 (EDT)

::I have looked at some of the disputed links, and while I don't know enough about the sources themselves to question their reliability, for most of the stories no causal relationship is established between the person's religious beliefs and their actions. One might just as well divide any story about crime between those where the perpetrator was male or female and argue that their gender was the causal factor. [[User:WilliamB1|WilliamB1]] 22:41, 6 May 2011 (EDT)

:::A person's beliefs and their actions are always tied together whether you agree or not. If Wiccans start making the news for rape, I will start a new section. --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 23:10, 6 May 2011 (EDT)

== Stubs ==

Do we use stub tags here on Conservapedia?-[[User:StevenTramp|StevenTramp]] 23:46, 10 May 2011 (EDT)
:It's not really recommended or necessary.--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 19:35, 11 May 2011 (EDT)

== Mistake of an email ==

I sent you an email raising a question - having seen the new evidence you can safely ignore it - sorry for that!--[[User:Iduan|I]][[User_talk:Iduan|Duan]] 20:05, 12 May 2011 (EDT)

==Ravens==

I noticed you reverted changes made to the Tower of London article that mentioned the legend of the ravens. I know you banned the editor for vandalism, but in this case, the story is true. There is a legend telling that if the ravens at the Tower leave, it portends the downfall of both the Tower and the kingdom. I know it's trivia, but it's fun too and I'd love to see it added back into the article. Here's a link about the story. http://www.hrp.org.uk/TowerOfLondon/stories/theravens.aspx [[User:SharonW|SharonW]] 21:32, 12 May 2011 (EDT)
:No problem. Go ahead and add it back.--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 21:38, 12 May 2011 (EDT)
::Thanks! I'll add the reference too.[[User:SharonW|SharonW]] 22:36, 12 May 2011 (EDT)

== Religion headline ==

Hi - that's a great news story, but I wonder if I may suggest a small change to the wording? At present is says "study came up with similar findings" but no other findings are listed to be similar too; it's an out of context quote.

I'd suggest saying something like "'''[[Religion]] comes naturally, even instinctively, to human beings,''' says a 3-year, multi-million Pound survey conducted by Oxford University." Maybe even add that it is a liberal institution, that offered tenure to Richard Dawkins? [[User:TracyS|TracyS]] 12:25, 13 May 2011 (EDT)

== Maria Shriver ==

Hi - I noticed you added "Schwarzenegger" for Shriver's last name. I don't believe she ever changed her name legally and has never gone by the name "Schwarzenegger". [[User:SharonW|SharonW]] 10:25, 20 May 2011 (EDT)
:Ok, I'll remove it. After her divorce she can go from Mrs. Maria Shriver to Ms. Maria Shriver. New age liberals are a joke. --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 12:19, 20 May 2011 (EDT)

== user:JimMac ==

Hi - this user is vandalising articles and constantly reverting me. Please can you show him the door? [[User:TracyS|TracyS]] 10:52, 27 May 2011 (EDT)

==[[Raymond Davis Affair]]==
Do you know anything of this? The Obama administration evidently invoked Islamic law to circumvent the judicial system in Pakistan to obtain a Blackwater (or whatever) operative in Pakistan only weeks before the Abbotobad raid. People in Pakistan are very upset. The democratically elected regime & military are cooperating with the US because they fear Islamic fundementalism, yet when it suits him, Obama pays $2.3 million in blood money under Koranic law to get a hired mercenary out. Ironic. [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 20:03, 27 May 2011 (EDT)
:I haven't heard this but it wouldn't surprise me.--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 20:07, 27 May 2011 (EDT)
::Raymond was CIA--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 20:07, 27 May 2011 (EDT)

== user:Jefferson ==

I wasn't sure how to contact you other than this, please let me know if there is another way if you would be so kind. I was not aware of the policy against using fact tags, thank you for informing me. I had seen them used in several articles and assumed it was okay. I would appreciate if you would clear something up for me about the citation policy, please: why is it the responsibility of a person who discovers uncited work to find the citation rather than the original poster of the work? I thought it would have been in the spirit of the encyclopedia's "no gossip" rules that statements should be cited and that calling attention to uncited materials would be helpful in clearing the site of gossip. Thanks again for filling me in and not banning me outright to begin with. I appreciate the help![[User:Jefferson|Jefferson]] 23:25, 3 June 2011 (EDT)

:Jefferson, thanks for the mature response. It is the original poster who is supposed to reference. Our suggestion is if you find questionable content, put it on the talk page. If it can be discussed through, then someone can add a citation. If nobody questions the talk page, feel free to delete the questionable content. Unfortunately, this is not spelled out for new users yet. In the scope of ideology, a liberal would find fault with every conservative sentence. So there may be citation requests on other pages but it is not an acceptable form of contribution here. Let me know if I can be of any help. --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 23:47, 3 June 2011 (EDT)
::Perhaps it would be useful to delete the fact tag template all together? [[User:DMorris|DMorris]] 23:49, 3 June 2011 (EDT)
:::I don't know why I didn't think of that. For some reason I thought it was built-in to wikimedia but it's a tag, sure it should be deleted. Will discuss with Aschlafly.--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 23:52, 3 June 2011 (EDT)

== No rules found for editing a new article ==
The rules encourage discussion of intent of substantial edit of established articles, and discourage taking liberties of simply substantially editing those articles with no prior discussion. But, I have been substantially editing articles which I have created, and which no one else has either edited or commented on ('invisible' editors). Should I discuss with 'invisible' editors my intent of substantial edits of articles in regard to which they are 'invisible'?[[User:PatternOfPersona|PatternOfPersona]] 21:09, 6 June 2011 (EDT)
:The short answer is no. Discussions will be made upon disagreements. Substantial edits to established articles need not require approval either. Though if you are deleting content instead of adding to or replacing a viewpoint, then you will face resistance from other contributors and reverts. Hope that helps. --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 21:17, 6 June 2011 (EDT)

== Uncited Sentences ==
"[[Conservapedia:Footnotes_-_technical_help#Completely_Uncited_Article_or_Completely_Uncited_Section_of_an_Article|If a sentence needs to be cited please use the "fact" template at the end of the sentence.]]" I'm only following Conservapedia protocol. -[[User:StudioFire|StudioFire]] 00:14, 11 June 2011 (EDT)

I also suggest that you reread the [[Conservapedia:Commandments|Conservapedia Commandments]], which include: "''Everything'' you post must be ''true'' and ''verifiable''." as well as "''Do not post personal opinion'' on an encyclopedia entry." There should be a Commandment for Ad hoc reasoning, seeing as how that seems to justify much of the content on this site...[[User:StudioFire|StudioFire]] 00:25, 11 June 2011 (EDT)
:That includes you, StudioFire. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 00:56, 11 June 2011 (EDT)

::Thanks for the immature response StudioFail which proves the reasoning on the fact tags. We allow content from liberals but if we let them add citation requests- they'll find something wrong with every page.--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 10:08, 11 June 2011 (EDT)

== revision delete ==

What's the point of oversighting vandals if all they do is blank the page?--[[User:CamilleT|CamilleT]] 15:29, 19 June 2011 (EDT)

:Aesthetics, red links are messy. Just so you know, France won the 100 year war between England and most of their colonial wars in Africa.--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 16:07, 19 June 2011 (EDT)
:: <nowiki>:D</nowiki> I've a feeling that French military history is going to be something of a meme around my presence. Someone who dislikes France might say France took their time kicking the British out during the 100 years war. Someone who likes France would then refer you to William the Conqueror. Then we'd be told that William the Conqueror doesn't count, because he wasn't French, he was a Normand. Never mind that because of his conquest of England English courts spoke French for 300 years after his death. The whole subject is rather tired to me. I've never been one for Patriotism, either for France or the USA. I know better than to associate myself with the failures and achievements of others just because we share an ethnic group or political boundaries.--[[User:CamilleT|CamilleT]] 16:18, 19 June 2011 (EDT)

== Dike! ==

What brought on that reversion to a perfectly innocuous edit? --[[User:XavierC|XavierC]] 21:12, 27 June 2011 (EDT)

:Just curious as to your intentions. Carry on great patron saint.--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 21:14, 27 June 2011 (EDT)

== Thank you for your kind welcome! ==

I appreciate it. =) -Melissa Fox, 2011

== Regarding "Fair and balanced is not part of the Conservative platform" Essay ==

I was surprised at the boldness of this essay. Have you ever read George Orwell's ''Animal Farm''? If not, I'd like to suggest you at least read a comprehensive synopsis of it. It has the very famous line "All animals are equal, but some animals are ''more'' equal than others.", and I couldn't help but feel that your essay had the same viewpoint (except with humans, obviously).

Another quote from the book for you to consider:

{{Cquote|Do not imagine, comrades, that leadership is a pleasure. On the contrary, it is a deep and heavy responsibility. No one believes more firmly than Comrade Napoleon that all animals are equal. He would be only too happy to let you make your decisions for yourselves. But sometimes you might make the wrong decisions, comrades, and then where should we be?|20px|20px|George Orwell's ''Animal Farm''}}

Perhaps you can see the slight correlation I made between the your essay and ''Animal Farm''. I do not write this in spite, and I have no malicious intentions...I just thought I'd use my First Amendment right to instigate some casual, intelligent conversation. --[[User:LifeHelper|LifeHelper]] 13:38, 1 July 2011 (EDT)

:I did read Animal Farm about 25 years ago. Subconscience-based viewpoint? You are what you fill your mind with but I wrote it due to liberals insistence that Conservapedia be fair. A lie is still a lie even if everyone believes it and the truth is still the truth, even if nobody believes it. To be fair is to give lies equal time. --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 13:59, 1 July 2011 (EDT)

::Forgive me for quoting Orwell again;

{{Cquote|If all records told the same tale — then the lie passed into history and became truth.|20px|20px|George Orwell's ''1984''}}

Food for thought! -[[User:LifeHelper|LifeHelper]] 14:27, 1 July 2011 (EDT)

A lie never becomes the truth, only puts on the appearance of truth, clothed in the truth but at heart, still a lie. --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 15:09, 1 July 2011 (EDT)

::"A just weight and balance are the LORD's." -- Proverbs, 16:11. [[User:DavidHRG|DavidHRG]] 14:34, 1 July 2011 (EDT)

:::Sure, I believe that. Judgement is for the Lord. "What is desirable in a man is his kindness, and it is better to be a poor man than a liar." --Proverbs 19:22 So we are able to tell what is wrong and what is right, we don't wait for His judgement to tell us.--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 14:57, 1 July 2011 (EDT)

== BHO ==

Hi. I was just curious as to why you deleted my edit to the Obama page. Because last time I checked, I could source my claim, and yours just happened to be hear-say conspiracy theory that you're wasting your time with. If you're searching for the truth and not slander why not go with the claim that can be proven like mine? - http://conservapedia.com/User:MAVE182

:Mave182, maybe you didn't read my message to you. Proven claims... kidding right? How do you get proof when the person were talking about hasn't yet disclosed it? Hear-say, conspiracy theory? Here is my message to you, again. '' a few mass visits, black liberation theology, invitation for atheists to join WH Faith-based initiatives, no baptism record and much more secrecy. The refs just don't legitimize Obama's faux Christianity.'' Let me add his disdain for traditional marriage, his support of death to womb children, his constant pandering to the Muslim faith? He's as Christian as much as Stalin was.--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 22:02, 1 July 2011 (EDT)

Hey my conservative brethren. In case you don't know what proven means, here's how. You say something then back it up with evidence, not free floating hate speech you heard from Glenn Beck. Cite just one of those claims with a source that agrees, and be source i mean something legitimate. As for my claim, here's a few things that back up his Christianity.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/36287446/Www-barackobama-com-Factcheck-2007-11-12-Obama-Has-Never
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27775757
http://www.ucc.org/news/obama-inauguration.html
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1907610,00.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/03/AR2010020303619.html
http://www.newsweek.com/2008/07/11/finding-his-faith.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QOOCABMz6jg
You shouldn't deny truth just because it doesn't cater to your narrow minded, slandering viewpoint.
--[[User:MAVE182|MAVE182]] 22:20, 1 July 2011 (EDT) 

Love how you provide ''the drinkers of Obama's bathwater'' as proof. --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 22:29, 1 July 2011 (EDT)

::Hi JPatt. I gave the guy a day to review the site and its aims. Personally I don't agree with many of the things on Conservapedia but I respect its rules and understand its right to present what information it does. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 23:10, 1 July 2011 (EDT)

:::The truth is non-negotiable, lack of agreement is not an easy thing to digest. As I observe on social media, the right is magnifying each and every flaw in their candidates. Let's hope that our common sense and values overcome the many flaws we all have.--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 23:26, 1 July 2011 (EDT)
::::From our flaws we find perfection.[[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 03:09, 2 July 2011 (EDT)

Tolaration of more than one religion doesnt make you a bad christian. In fact, I believe if you can't do that, it makes you a very poor Christian. And if you prefer, here's a source that doesn't drink obama's bathwater, but rather chugs the radical right's urine. http://politics.blogs.foxnews.com/2010/09/28/obama-christian-choice
As for Max, the entire point of this site is putting up a non-bias viewpoint that is based on fact. Fact is, Barack Obama is a practicing Christian. You may disagree with his politics which is fine, but according to the 1st Ammendment, this man shouldn't be denied the right to practice his religion and shouldn't be slandered as a Christian for unrelated issues. --[[User:MAVE182|MAVE182]] 17:01, 3 July 2011 (EDT)

:I refuse to reply to any future posts of yours on my page. Your sharp tongue speaks all righteous leftist points, a Cafeteria Christian, one that ignores Intrinsic Evil and an apologist for outright sin. What Christian would support the evil that Obama supports? You slander Glenn Beck, you slander Fox News and then you have to gall to call me a slanderer. You can chose to live like the pigs do but you aren't fooling anyone here, you hear?--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 18:16, 3 July 2011 (EDT)

::It's very simple MAVE and since you came off ''your'' high horse, I guess that does merit a response. I am talking beyond accuracy and beyond statistics. I am talking about absolutes. Who are you MAVE? Let's talk about MAVE, hidden in the shadows, full of knowledge- yet identity unknown, a keyboard diva? To continue to communicate with you would mean I have to match wits with an unknown, convert you into my way of thinking. When I know already that you are passionate, yet deceptive, not intent to learn, only to play games and waste time. Just because I will call out wrong and confront evil, don't try and pass it off as like I'm trying to act as a tough guy. You just make yourself sound thuggish. Jesus rules! Amen. --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 22:19, 3 July 2011 (EDT)

== I thought you might enjoy this ==

*[[Essay: Acute Conservapedia obsessive compulsive disorder]]

::Fixed typo [[User:Conservative|conservative]] 20:01, 2 July 2011 (EDT)

==Book of Tobit==

Hi Jpatt; I was looking for the Conservapedia article on the Book of Tobit; it's a red link in the Bible article. If I read the search results correctly, you deleted it. May I ask why? I'm interested in working on an article about Tobit unless there's a good reason for omitting from Conservapedia. Thanks in advance --[[User:Bwebster|Bwebster]] 19:27, 3 July 2011 (EDT)

:I don't recall deleting but it may have been a copied source. Please, recreate how you feel best. Incorporate deleted information if it is valid.--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 23:18, 3 July 2011 (EDT)

== John Adams "Notable Quote" Error ==

I just came across the article on John Adams and I found an error. You listed as a notable quote "[The Declaration of Independence] That it laid the cornerstone of human government upon the first precepts of Christianity." However the accompanying footnote takes you to Gingrich's book, Rediscovering God in America pg 6 at Google books where the quote is attributed to John ''Quincy'' Adams. Im new to Conservapedia so I dont know if I should go ahead and make the edit. I'll just leave it to you. --[[User:JR|JR]] 13:20, 10 July 2011 (EDT)
:Newbie, nice to meet you. Now that is a good catch and clearly an error on my part. In the future, no harm nor foul to edit pages. Quotes are tough to verify. Sites like Brainyquote will not suffice. --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 19:00, 10 July 2011 (EDT)

Nice to meet you too. Ive read the edit policy since my post so Im up to speed on what to do now. Thanks! --[[User:JR|JR]] 19:59, 10 July 2011 (EDT)

== Thank you ==
Thank you for moving my new article to one with a proper name. I wasn't sure how to go about it, so thank you. Any tips on how to edit/create articles would help alot, if you have the time of course. --[[User:CAndrs|CAndrs]] 20:10, 13 July 2011 (EDT)

== Quadrupling Conservapedia's traffic ==

I have a simple plan which I think could quadruple Conservapedia's web traffic in a short time that will not cost any money. I should find out in a week if I get the cooperation of a couple of key individuals. The only downside of my plan is it doesn't involve the concepts of [[Essay: Does Richard Dawkins have machismo?|machismo]], [[Atheism and obesity|mentioning the obesity with any subcultures]] or referring to [[Essay: Atheism is a clown and it did not know it|atheism as a worldview for clowns.]] :) [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 08:45, 14 July 2011 (EDT)
:::I think my simple plan will be implemented based on some receptive feedback I received. I have to implement some things first. Not sure how fast it will happen though. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 19:26, 14 July 2011 (EDT)

== FOIA ==
[[User:FOIA]] has been blocked? [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 15:24, 15 July 2011 (EDT)
:Never mind. I see what happened. Good block. Thanks. [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 15:40, 15 July 2011 (EDT)

== Singer images ==

I found some replacements from the Wikimedia Commons. They're on the page now. Thanks!!!--[[User:JamesWilson|JamesWilson]] 08:18, 1 August 2011 (EDT)

I thank you greatly, Jpatt!--[[User:JamesWilson|JamesWilson]] 14:57, 1 August 2011 (EDT)

== Unblocked ==

Thanks. --[[User:Michaeldsuarez|Michaeldsuarez]] 09:06, 10 August 2011 (EDT)

== Please let me know if you want to serve on a blocking policy refinement panel ==

Please let me know if you want to serve on a blocking policy refinement panel. I invited someone to edit Conservapedia and they were blocked and they should not have been. I got the block overturned. So I think there is room for improvement in Conservapedia's blocking policy. You can sign up [[User:Conservative/Sysops who want to serve on a blocking policy refinement panel|HERE]]. I invited active Syops/Admins plus people with blocking rights who might wish to be Sysops. If I left anyone out, please let them know about the panel. The people with blocking rights can sign up [[User talk:Conservative/Sysops who want to serve on a blocking policy refinement panel|HERE]]. The panel will probably convene when Iduan is back from his summer vacation or fairly soon afterwards. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 13:47, 13 August 2011 (EDT)
:Thanks for the invite. I decline.--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 14:17, 13 August 2011 (EDT)
:::I knew you would decline, but I didn't want to be impolite. :) [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 14:19, 13 August 2011 (EDT)

== Vandalism ==

Thanks for undoing the vandalism on my page!--[[User:MorrisF|MorrisF]] 14:46, 13 August 2011 (EDT)

== Brewmaster's degree ==

Hi JPatt, I noticed that you added [http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Worst_College_Majors&curid=102717&diff=901252&oldid=891798 brewmaster] to the list of "worst college majors." That made me think of a friend of mine who is an actual brewmaster. Would you believe that he can basically live anywhere he wants to, and there will always be a job for him wherever he goes (provided there are breweries nearby)? In whatever economy, anywhere in the world, there's a built-in demand for what he's capable of making. I'd call that a pretty darned good major. [[User:JDWpianist|JDWpianist]] 16:28, 15 August 2011 (EDT)
:LOL, yeah I think i would enjoy being a brewmaster. Doesn't sound too stressful. Anyway, I gained the insight from this months Popular Science magazine Awesome Labs- 25 of the coolest places to pursue science. Anyway, it costs alot of money to go to college. Learning to brew your own beer is done by millions of people without a degree. "Every year, 10 or so student gain careers in small business" - says the brewmaster professor. --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 16:54, 15 August 2011 (EDT)

==Ferrari==
What is up with these guys? I can barely think of a more objective fact than "Ferraris are overpriced." Even Ferrari owners wouldn't argue with me, being overpriced is part of why people buy them so they can show off their money. How do I proceed? --CraigF 3:59 August 16th (ETC)
:Ok, I think they final got my logic. [[User:CraigF|CraigF]] 4:01, 16 August 2011 (EDT)
::Me personally, I like the Lamborghini. It is however, a bit overpriced as well.--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 19:44, 16 August 2011 (EDT)
:::I like Lambos too, sort of the muscle cars of Italy, but I've still seen them get trounced by American iron too many times to justify their huge price tags. --[[User:CraigF|CraigF]] 22:27, 16 August 2011 (EDT)
==[[Henry Ford]]==
Sorry to bother you again, but I'm having trouble. I tried to remove some slanderous remarks from the Henry Ford page, but people reverted me and demanded references to refute a bunch of propaganda designed to harm Ford's reputation. At the same time they want references to prove an obvious fact that Ferdinand Porsche happily worked with the Nazis. I don't really get it, this is an pro American wiki that is focused on fact not propaganda. --[[User:CraigF|CraigF]] 00:43, 17 August 2011 (EDT)
:Sorry again, it looks like it was resolved, I guess I was wrong. I guess it is good that I am learning, but I'm going to have to really evaluate my thinking. --[[User:CraigF|CraigF]] 01:08, 17 August 2011 (EDT)

== Vandal ==

Pleas block vandal. http://conservapedia.com/Special:Contributions/HankK
:Thank you. --[[User:ZachJ|ZachJ]] 16:49, 17 August 2011 (EDT)

:| Liberal wandal terminated. I expect we'll see him again before public school is back in session. --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 16:54, 17 August 2011 (EDT)
== Removing facts ==
Ok I admit I was wrong about Henry Ford. History isn't my best subject, but SharonW keeps removing well known facts from my articles and says she can't find references. I found some references and readded what I said, but what if she changes it back, I get the impression she doesn't know that much about cars. I have to go to bed, so don't worry about responding unitl tomorrow. --[[User:CraigF|CraigF]] 02:52, 19 August 2011 (EDT)
:I like the pages you are adding. With that said, we take this project seriously. I suggest you let others change your work as they see fit. They'll likely take the edge off your comments but the rest remains, don't take it personal. I'll back you up my friend, just keep adding and let me know any problems that occur. We will work through it together.--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 12:37, 19 August 2011 (EDT)
::Thanks Jpatt! --[[User:CraigF|CraigF]] 16:11, 19 August 2011 (EDT)</nowiki>

User talk:BHathorn

2011-08-26T16:54:31Z

InflamedFanny:

<nowiki>{{welcome}}--[[User:JamesWilson|JamesWilson]] 10:18, 4 August 2011 (EDT)

== Articles ==

I assume you wrote them.--[[User:JamesWilson|JamesWilson]] 20:56, 22 August 2011 (EDT)

:Yes, I am the author of the two articles. [[User:BHathorn|BHathorn]] 22:43, 24 August 2011 (EDT)</nowiki>

User:BHathorn

2011-08-26T16:54:17Z

InflamedFanny:

<nowiki>{{useful links}}</nowiki>

User talk:RLorain

2011-08-26T16:53:58Z

InflamedFanny: InflamedFanny

InflamedFanny

User:RLorain

2011-08-26T16:53:37Z

InflamedFanny:

<nowiki>I yam what I yam -- here to save everyone from bad grammar
{{User C}}
{{User free software}}
{{User coder}}
{{User HTML}}
{{User Own mail}}
{{User comp-5}}
{{User comp-5 v2}}
{{User comp-6}}
{{User research}}
{{User American}}
{{User cosmonaut}}
{{User Interest}}
{{User Geek}}
{{User noracists}}
{{User nobias}}
{{User Mythbusters}}
{{User Socrates}}
{{User Earth}}
{{User lose weight}}
{{Userbox |border-c=#000 |border-s=1 |id-c=#fff |id-s=12 |id-fc=#000 |info-c=#039 |info-s=8 |info-fc=#fff |id=ENG |info=Master of the English Language}}</nowiki>

User talk:JimJast

2011-08-26T16:52:42Z

InflamedFanny:

<nowiki>{{welcome}}
Hi Jim Jast, welcome to Conservapedia. Knowing your interests, I would suggest a good article for you to work on would be [[Big Bang theory]]. But I'd suggest you edit the [[Talk:Big Bang theory|Talk page]] first, to check if other editors are happy with your edits, before making them to the proper article (at least until you get the feel for the site.) If you want to check on anything, good people to talk to would be [[User talk:Conservative|Conservative]] or [[User talk:RobSmith|RobSmith]], since they are both admins and have been around much longer than me. [[User:Maratrean|Maratrean]] 20:48, 15 July 2011 (EDT)

:Hi Maratrean, The [[Big Bang theory]] is not a theory in scientific sense since it is not verifyable, which is required from all "scientific" theories. It is only a (lame) hypothesis that the universe came about in such way. In my opinion it is just a creationist fairy tale proposing how it could happen if the universse were not eternal (as it most likely is), and if there was a way of creating energy out of nothing. The later thing is necessary for such a "BB universe" to exist, and for several reasons. (i) If there was no universe in its place and it got created "somehow" the energy had to be supplied. (ii) If it already started function as we see it now, it needs constant supply of energy to compensate for constant loss of energy of photons for "dynamical friction" which is a problem for any moving objects in the universe with which it interacts gravitationally. Even photons need this energy delievered, as I described [http://www.fuw.edu.pl/~wjast/160.htm it here]. Besides the above paper explains all the observations so that the Big Bang hypothesis is not needed any more. [[User:JimJast|JimJast]] 15:39, 16 July 2011 (EDT)
::Hi JJ. I hope you fit in here. I suspect your ideas will be welcomed here more than at certain other places. --[[User:DamianJohn|DamianJohn]] 14:45, 17 July 2011 (EDT)

==Your gravitation theory==
Hi JimJast, I've just commented on your theory [[Talk:Gravitation_demystified|here]]. --[[User:MM87|'''MM''']]''[[User_talk:MM87|'''''87''''']] 17:13, 9 August 2011 (EDT)

== Problems ==

Mr. Jast:

I note with some concern the things that you have been writing, about yourself, and about relativity and such. They lead me to suspect that you are a "crackpot". Your statements that things your have written have been rejected by the scientific establishment only reinforce this. Now I'm not going to recommand that your writings be deleted or reverted, though I will raise some questions below. People should have a forum from which they can argue for what they believe, and Conservapedia may be just the place for you. It certainly hosts other seriously unorthodox ideas. I like to think that the scientific and mathematical articles at Conservapedia do not go off into seriously and demonstrably wrong things, but it's not for me to say. This may be just the right forum for you.

:I have similar suspicions. Most items on the crackpottery checklist (grandiose claims of new discoveries, complaints of censorship by the establishment, use of non-standard definitions etc) are ticked off. --[[User:SamCoulter|SamCoulter]] 14:45, 25 August 2011 (EDT)

::Hi Sam, I'd have the same suspicions if not for the results of very elementry calculations and the ''"Gravitation"'' by Misner, Thorne, and Wheeler that I bought myself and it confirmed my suspicions about [[relativists]] described also by [[Richard Feynman]]. So I believe Feynman whom I know from his books rather than [[relativists]] who made at least 7 serious errors in their book. I didn't expect the book is still around. Yet it still is despite those errors. Most likely no one ever read it (except me). [[User:JimJast|JimJast]] 15:18, 25 August 2011 (EDT)

:::Feynman was an atheist, an evolutionist and very much what you call a "relativist." --[[User:SamCoulter|SamCoulter]] 15:37, 25 August 2011 (EDT)

:::: [http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/crackpot.html Crackpot index] by John Baez:
:::
:::: 1 point for every statement that is widely agreed on to be false.
:::: - "that the universe is not expanding"
:::: 2 points for every statement that is clearly vacuous.
:::: - "It suggests the existence of overlooked by cosmologists the antisymmetric part of Ricci tensor in time domain,"
:::: 5 points for each such statement that is adhered to despite careful correction.
::::
:::: 5 points for each mention of "Einstien", "Hawkins" or "Feynmann".
:::: -Einstein and Feynman get mentioned a lot, especially Einstein.
:::: 10 points for pointing out that you have gone to school, as if this were evidence of sanity.
:::: -"electronic engineering in which I have MS degree from Warsaw Politechnic"
:::: 10 points for beginning the description of your theory by saying how long you have been working on it. (10 more for emphasizing that you worked on your own.)
:::: - "I'm a sculptor who by a strange twist of fate consisting of proving mathematically in February 1985 that the universe is not expanding"
:::: 10 points for each new term you invent and use without properly defining it.
:::: "Hubble tensor" or taking it as the 'anti-symmetric part of the Ricci tensor' than that's just zero and that's still a fail.
:::: 10 points for each statement along the lines of "I'm not good at math, but my theory is conceptually right, so all I need is for someone to express it in terms of equations".
:::: - "Einstein was not able to manage "his blunder", while I could, and in rather straight forward manner, practically not knowing any tensor calculus being a sculptor rather than a cosmologist"
:::: 10 points for each favorable comparison of yourself to Einstein, or claim that special or general relativity are fundamentally misguided (without good evidence).
:::: See above quote. Even worse than "favorable comparison".
:::: 30 points for suggesting that Einstein, in his later years, was groping his way towards the ideas you now advocate.
:::: Yep.
:::: 40 points for claiming that the "scientific establishment" is engaged in a "conspiracy" to prevent your work from gaining its well-deserved fame, or suchlike.
:::: http://conservapedia.com/Relativists
:::: 50 points for claiming you have a revolutionary theory but giving no concrete testable predictions.
:::: --[[User:MatthewQ|MatthewQ]] 16:16, 25 August 2011 (EDT)

First, I note that some of your citations lead to broken internet links.

Now, in your user page, you make a few claims about your achievements. One the particularly interested me was the claim of singlehandedly being one of the first to invent a computer display that does not print on paper. Presumably this was one of the first "electronic" computer displays of text. Can you tell us just what it was that you invented? Matrix fonts? Stroke fonts? Point-plotting CRT displays? Stroke CRT displays? LED displays? LCD displays? TFT displays? Gas-discharge ("nixie") displays? This happens to be an area that I am interested in, and my knowledge of its early history is incomplete.

Now, on some of your other pages, you make some rather unfathomable claims. I haven't gone through them in detail, being an impatient person, but there are a few points I noticed:

In Einsteinian gravitation:

step 8 -- the "antisymmetric part of Ricci tensor". What? The Ricci tensor is symmetric.

step 11 -- you discovered this in 1986, but couldn't show it to Einstein because he was dead? That's a lot of Hubris! Where did you publish it?

In [http://www.conservapedia.com/Talk:Counterexamples_to_Relativity#Correcting_example_.231_.28G.CE.BC.CE.BD_.3D_8.CF.80KT.CE.BC.CE.BD.29], you say that the original equation was R mu nu = 8 pi K T mu nu? Nonsense. That would violate conservation of mass/energy. Conservation says that the 4-divergence of T mu nu is zero. Ricci's tensor does not have that property. Einstein's tensor does, due to having the trace removed, and the Bianchi identities. Einstein's tensor, and the fact that the equation involves it and not Ricci's tensor, was not introduced in 1973. It's been there all along, since 1915 or so.

:Hi, Let me address your concerns one by one:

::First, I note that some of your citations lead to broken internet links.

:This is because my account on the university physics server has been blocked for the reason not known yet but I hope to learn when the guy who ordered bloking my account returns from his vacations.

::Now, in your user page, you make a few claims about your achievements. One the particularly interested me was the claim of singlehandedly being one of the first to invent a computer display that does not print on paper. Presumably this was one of the first "electronic" computer displays of text. Can you tell us just what it was that you invented? Matrix fonts? Stroke fonts? Point-plotting CRT displays? Stroke CRT displays? LED displays? LCD displays? TFT displays? Gas-discharge ("nixie") displays? This happens to be an area that I am interested in, and my knowledge of its early history is incomplete.

:The part I invented was "stroke fonts" that worked together with a "Point-plotting CRT display". The "character generator" as I called it then, worked this way that there was a number of rows of magnetic cores aranged in a rectangular matrix into which a character was written with a wire dedicated to this particular character (about 100 wires) and then a xy coordinates were read from the matrix one by one with one wire per one word (about 30 wires) so each character was displayed in about 30 strokes. We (me and my staff of 4) completed building this display around 1965 and since that time it was operational and able to plot grapths with descriptions with about 1024x1024 resolution.

::Now, on some of your other pages, you make some rather unfathomable claims. I haven't gone through them in detail, being an impatient person, but there are a few points I noticed:

::In Einsteinian gravitation:

::step 8 -- the "antisymmetric part of Ricci tensor". What? The Ricci tensor is symmetric.

:This requires longer answer but short answer is that it does not have to be called "Ricci" since it is just a tensor that sits there representing spacetime geometry. It may be called differently since I'm not paricularly attached to this name. I already call the temporal part of it the "Hubble tensor" and this part has to be antisymmetric. If Ricci can't have antisymmetric part then we dump it since the spacetime has to have "Hubble tensor" (anti symmetric) desribing trmporal features of spacetime and symmetric part describing it spatial features since the spacetime has to be flat. I asked the guys around here and they say that they don't really know what type of a tensor Ricci is.

::step 11 -- you discovered this in 1986, but couldn't show it to Einstein because he was dead? That's a lot of Hubris! Where did you publish it?

:Einstein died in 1955 so how could I show it to him in 1986? Are you serious?

:I never published anything since the only referee who has seen my paper didn't believe that the universe isn't expanding so this referee recommanded the rejection of my paper dispite my proof that in our universe the Hubble constant must be about 70km/s/Mpc without yet any expansion. The referee said that my math is OK but he thinks that the universe expands. The CP is practically the first place where I may say that the universe isn't expanding and show how I know it. And wnybody who knows high school calculus can check it.

:Do you belive that universe is expanding? If yes then with what you support your claim (against all Einsteinian stuff that I present that even predicted the illusion of accelerating expansion observed within 1 standard deviation)?

::In [http://www.conservapedia.com/Talk:Counterexamples_to_Relativity#Correcting_example_.231_.28G.CE.BC.CE.BD_.3D_8.CF.80KT.CE.BC.CE.BD.29], you say that the original equation was R mu nu = 8 pi K T mu nu? Nonsense. That would violate conservation of mass/energy. Conservation says that the 4-divergence of T mu nu is zero. Ricci's tensor does not have that property. Einstein's tensor does, due to having the trace removed, and the Bianchi identities. Einstein's tensor, and the fact that the equation involves it and not Ricci's tensor, was not introduced in 1973. It's been there all along, since 1915 or so.

:You see: I say R but you say it is not Ricci, so I believe you and call it H (from Hubble). The name is not important just its functions. And H has its symmetric and anti symmetric parts. Now let's check if its divergence can be zero. Why not?
:Actually it was the name I proposed already to the same referee in 1986 but he didn't like it for the reason that then the Einstein field equation must be different. I didn't mind but he did without explaining me why. Maybe you will? [[User:JimJast|JimJast]] 12:35, 15 August 2011 (EDT)

::First, as far as the computer displays, I'm convinced.

::But you seem to be explaining the Ricci problem by saying that you are using the term "Ricci's tensor" to mean something other than what the rest of the world calls it. I strongly recommend not doing this. Use normal conventions. People will be more inclined to read your articles, and to believe you when you say that your articles are understandable to high school students, if you write in a way that makes that clear. Your nonstandard ways of approaching the subject may be working against you. For example, you claim that the "invariant mass" is not a fundamental property of something, whereas the "relativistic mass" (0 component of the 4-momentum) is, and that the fact that different observers measure different values of this isn't a problem. Just divide by gamma and you get a number that all observers agree on. Most scientists find it more intellectually satisfying to take the invariant quantity as fundamental. In fact, the term "relativistic mass" has been obsolete since the mid 20th century.

::To take another example, your claim that the curvature of spacetime causes time dilation, and that time dilation ''in turn'' causes gravity (that is, causes geodesics not to appear "straight"), fails to explain the second step. In fact, under general relativity, the curvature of spacetime (that is, Riemann's tensor) can be shown by direct application of mathematics to cause ''both'' time dilation ''and'' gravity.

::You also mentioned, somewhere on the "counterexamples to relativity" talk page, something about the metric tensor being unsymmetrical. You shouldn't use the term "metric tensor" to mean something other than what the rest of the world takes it to be. Or, if you actually believe that it isn't symmetric, you must have reformulated linear algebra and Riemannian geometry, in which case you should indicate where we can find your new textbooks.

::[[User:SamHB|SamHB]] 23:02, 18 August 2011 (EDT)

:::Hi Sam, Again shifted your message to the right to make it better readible (and hope you don't mind). Since you didn't sign your message I thought it is from MM87, but it's OK, except that you probably didn't know what I'm talking about when I talked about "Ricci".

:::I don't like using established terms in different sense but I didn't know that Ricci is considered to be symmetric. That's why I told MM87 (as I thought I'm talking to him) that for me the name means nothing and changed the name to "Hubble" which I used already before. So in our communication we may use "H" which we may assume non symmetric. I know from our mathematicians that 4-dimensional metric tensor can be non symmetric (symmetry goes only up to 3-D) and I know from a "relativist" that he actually doesn't know anything about the symmetry of Ricci.
:::[[User:JimJast|JimJast]] 14:52, 19 August 2011 (EDT)

:::: Metric tensors are by definition symmetric, regardless of the number of dimensions. --[[User:MatthewQ|MatthewQ]] 19:12, 21 August 2011 (EDT)

:::::Hi MatthewQ, Are you sure about non Riemannian as well (degenerate, meaning vanishing determinant)? How do you diagonalize it then? Mine is degenerate just to avoid possibility of diagonalization, according to Einstein's demand of non symmetric metric that Misner, Thorne, and Wheeler forgot to put into their bibliography and also to discuss it while talking about Einstein's ideas <ref>Einstein, A., ''"On the Generalized Theory of Gravitation"'', ''"Scientific American"'', April 1950.</ref>. [[User:JimJast|JimJast]] 19:59, 21 August 2011 (EDT)

:::::: Metrics on psudeo-Riemannian manifolds are symmetric. Just think about the Minkowski metric: diag(-1,+1,+1,+1). These metrics satisfy all the usual axioms of a metrics except for positive definite. That is, it can be negative or zero for non-identical points. They also have to be non-degenerate, so whatever it is you're defining isn't a metric or even a pseudo-metric.
:::::: I don't have access to the article you mentioned, but I really doubt Einstein demanded a non symmetric metric. Can you provide a quote? Regardless, do you know what a metric is? Roughly speaking, it's something to measure distance between points A and B. So when you say your "metric" is not symmetric you're saying that the distance from A to B is not the same as the distance from B to A. --[[User:MatthewQ|MatthewQ]] 22:04, 21 August 2011 (EDT)

==References==
<References/>

== Your articles ==

You shouldn't be creating articles with statements like "according to my calculations" etc. That is what essays are for. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 17:34, 21 August 2011 (EDT)

:Hi Max, how do I create an essay? [[User:JimJast|JimJast]] 17:51, 21 August 2011 (EDT)
::By creating a page with "Essay:" as the prefix. Like [[Essay:Example]]. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 17:59, 21 August 2011 (EDT)

== Duplicate articles ==

Please stop creating [[Cosmological_redshift|duplicate articles]]. Add anything new to [[redshift]] instead of creating new articles explaining the same thing with a slightly different name. thanks, [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 17:06, 24 August 2011 (EDT)

:Hi Max, It is not a slightly different name, and it is not a name invented by me. It is used as such ([[cosmological redshift]]) in cosmology. The name "cosmological" makes it different from any other redshift that is not "cosmological". E.g. "recessional redshift" may be also "cosmological" but not necessarily. Opinions of cosmologists are divided in this since cosmology is not a finished science in which there are no doubts what is what. I'd like to explain every shade of meaninf to the readres who are interested in the details, and not just shrtchange them as other people may do not caring too much about what readers understand.

:If you think that I explained it already and just invent another name for the same thing (which I never do since I feel there are too many names for the same thing) let me know and if this is relly the case I gladly follow your suggestions. If your suggestion is improper for some reason I'll explain what are the differences in meaning. Do we have an agreement?

:In cosmology there are really two main theories: the [[Big Bang]] and [[Einsteinian gravitation]] (as I call it) since it is built on Einstein's understanding of physics. I don't call it "Einstein's" since Einstein didn't know many things that got discovered later but are predicted by his theory and not by the [[Big Bang]]. E.g. "[[dark energy]]" which is pure invention of the [[Big Bang]] proponents who don't understand the universe. Have you read my [[relativists]] article?

:[[Einsteinian gravitation]] predicts observations leading the [[Big Bang]] proponents to assuming [[dark energy]] but those predictions are not published since the [[Big Bang]] proponents hope that Einsteinian explanation will get not noticed.

:I write in conservapedia for the sole purpose to explain all cosmology to people who don't understand it and might think that the [[Big Bang]] is a theory of the universe, while it is [[Einsteinian gravitation]] that I propagate since Einstein is already dead and can't speak. E.g. contemporary students don't even know that Einstein said that spacetime metric '''''must be non symmetric''''' while the [[Big Bang]] metric is assumed as symmetric and Einstein's paper not mentioned in bibliografy from which those students learn creationism instead of physics as they should.
:I'd appreciate your answering this message. [[User:JimJast|JimJast]] 19:33, 24 August 2011 (EDT)

::I don't pretend to understand cosmology but please add things to the [[redshift]] article we already have. Also if you're creating articles on things that are your personal opinion or ideas then an Essay is more appropriate. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 18:38, 24 August 2011 (EDT)

:::OK Max, if you think it is better for understanding the [[redshift]]s then I put it there.
:::I thought that a short explanations, when a new idea is encountered are better for understanding the subject since a big articles might discourage people from trying to understand real simple things as cosmology, or astronomy (the tough part is astrophysics), but then we would have two styles of explaining things which might be even worse. So let's keep related things together. [[User:JimJast|JimJast]] 19:33, 24 August 2011 (EDT)
::::Thank you for your understanding. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 19:36, 24 August 2011 (EDT)
:::::Max, how do I remove [[cosmological redshift]] which aproximate contents I merged with [[redshift]]? [[User:JimJast|JimJast]] 21:06, 24 August 2011 (EDT)
::::::i have advised Andy who can delete the page when the info has been moved. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 21:25, 24 August 2011 (EDT)

== Articles ==

I hope you don't mind, but I ran some of them through a spellchecker.--[[User:JamesWilson|JamesWilson]] 09:41, 26 August 2011 (EDT)</nowiki>

User:JimJast

2011-08-26T16:52:21Z

InflamedFanny:

<nowiki>I'm a sculptor who by a strange twist of fate consisting of proving mathematically in February 1985 that the universe is [http://www.fuw.edu.pl/~wjast/160.htm not expanding], got involved in math and physics of gravitation. The above implies that the Big Bang has never happened and the universe is eternal (as assumed before me by astronomer Carl Sagan). I'm presently doing my [[PhD]] work in it at the Institute of Physics of University of Warsaw, Poland, which prevents me from persuing my other interests as the mentioned sculpting and making electronic gadgets, which is my other profession (electronic engineering in which I have [[MS]] degree from Warsaw Politechnic). Still my another profession is software engineering in which I had been working for about 30 years, mostly in Denmark and the US, creating ''real time'' software, for [[CNC]] operating systems for controlling ''milling machines'' and before that for ''street traffic'' control systems for cities: Poenix, AZ, Tucson, AZ, and Colorado Springs, CO. My most difficult project designed singlehandely was hardware and software for an IBM PC based machine reading "on the fly", and comparing it with expected, numbers of lottery tickets printed at speed 120"/s on over 40" wide paper sheets for some lottery in Providence, RI. The most interesting project designed singlehandely was one of the first worldwide, alphanumerical displays, which likes of, are now used with every computer but then were considered good for nothing since ''"what good for is a computer without printed output?"'' as was standard complaint of prospective investors in the project after they had seen a model of it working with the Warsaw University computer.

{{Useful links}}</nowiki>