Conservapedia - User contributions [en]

Conservapedia talk:Are atheists productive

2008-02-27T16:13:04Z

Nyflah: /* Google Searches are not a way to quantify data */

Statements like this require data. It would be a very interesting study, and not that hard to do, for a real researcher. As it stands, there is no data to support the assertion, although it may be right.[[User:KarlJ|KarlJ]] 23:41, 25 February 2008 (EST)

: I welcome more research. The [[Google]] search is a start, and speaks for itself.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 23:42, 25 February 2008 (EST)--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 23:42, 25 February 2008 (EST)
::Seeing as the phrase "second generation atheist" (in quotation marks) only yields 849 Google hits to begin with (a pretty meager number), I wonder if this isn't slightly begging the question. [[User:Aboganza|Aboganza]] 23:45, 25 February 2008 (EST)
:::Well, my personal anecdote is about as valid as andy's google search. Me and my sisters are all second generation atheists, and we are all successful professionals with great families.[[User:KarlJ|KarlJ]] 23:47, 25 February 2008 (EST)
::::I'll save Aschlafly the trip - see item 5 in [[Liberal logic]] [[User:Aboganza|Aboganza]] 23:52, 25 February 2008 (EST)

:::: You beat me to it by a matter of seconds! Also, KarlJ, your grammar is atrocious, rendering your claim somewhat dubious.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 23:53, 25 February 2008 (EST)
:::::Good point, sir. I will attempt to improve both my language and grammar. I will achieve heights of eloquence never before reached by man!![[User:KarlJ|KarlJ]] 23:55, 25 February 2008 (EST)
:::::And you still need to tell me how a search string that generates such a tiny number of hits can't be seen as a case of number 32 in [[Liberal style]] . [[User:Aboganza|Aboganza]] 23:57, 25 February 2008 (EST)
:::::: The tiny number of hits for the term reinforces the point rather than detracts from it.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 00:06, 26 February 2008 (EST)
::::::: Your point being, presumably, that because it is a term nobody uses it must mean that so-called second generation atheists are not doing notable things in the world. Genius. --[[User:GDewey|GDewey]] 00:11, 26 February 2008 (EST)

:::::::: No, you're clueless. The term is used, as in "second generation Christian." But when the set of accomplished subjects is virtually the null set, as in [[second generation atheists]], very little shows up.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 00:12, 26 February 2008 (EST)
:::::::::I ''told'' you he was smarter than you, Dewey. You shoulda believed me.[[User:KarlJ|KarlJ]] 00:13, 26 February 2008 (EST)
:::::::::: Well. I get 862 hits for "second generation atheist" and 2090 for "second generation christian". Looks like neither group are making much of an impression. --[[User:GDewey|GDewey]] 00:16, 26 February 2008 (EST)
:::::::::: Actually, according to Conservapedia atheists make up only 4% of the US population. Christians are at (I believe) about 80%. That puts the second generation atheists well ahead of the second generation Christians on a Google hit per capita basis, doesn't it? --[[User:GDewey|GDewey]] 00:32, 26 February 2008 (EST)

The only fair way to compare "second generation atheists" with "second generation Christians" is on a per-capita basis. The number of Google hits ''might'' reflect the relative numbers of the two groups, but says ''nothing'' about the relative per-capita productiveness of the two groups. As such, although it wouldn't surprise me to find the claims in the article to be true, as it stands the article is without any substantiation. I expect people making claims to me to be able to back them up, and in return I would not use an argument, such as this one, that I could not back up.

GDewey, your comparison is flawed if you are comparing ''American'' figures with ''world-wide'' Google hits.

Furthermore, a proper study could (in theory) be done, and the results might be quite interesting, but a proper study would need to have clear criteria. As the article stands, there is no clear definition of "productive" and "accomplishments".

[[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 03:30, 26 February 2008 (EST)

:: Actually Philip, it is misleading to say that Google returns a ''worldwide'' result. It returns an English speaking worldwide result which, I would have thought, is likely to be dominated by the US (and will include basically Christian countries anyway). --[[User:GDewey|GDewey]] 16:23, 26 February 2008 (EST)
::: Incorrect? No. Misleading? Yes, perhaps you are correct there. But I would question how dominant the U.S. would be in the results. It would certainly be a large part of the results, and ''might'' even be more than half the results, but I doubt that it would be enough to overwhelm the rest so that the "world-wide" figure is pretty much the same as the American figure. There are more English speakers outside America than there are in America, although admittedly a lot of them would be in India and China, the latter, and likely the former, would not have a large presence on the English part of the Internet. But as for "Christian" countries, if you are talking ''historically'' Christian, you'd be right (ignoring India and China), but if you are talking about the percentage of the population that is sufficiently "Christian" to regularly go to church being similar to America, then you would be quite wrong. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 21:21, 26 February 2008 (EST)

: My dear boy! Don't you know data is no substitute for faith? I mean, just look at the [[minister's son]] article. No attempt to examine or explain the supposed phenomenon, no definition of "success", no hard data, a quote that seems to suggest that the sons of dentists seem to outperform the sons of ministers in terms of success, and frequent appeal to hallowed antiquity where the clergy was a method whereby commoners could launder their caste origins and become essentially petty nobility whose offspring could indeed engage in scientific or philosophical enquiry while the serf had no such liberty. How indeed are we to know someone is a second generation atheist? It matters not. All that matters is that we have faith that atheists are intellectually inferior to the theist. --[[User:CabbageCrate|CabbageCrate]] 06:08, 26 February 2008 (EST)
:: Yet the [[minister's son]] article ''does'' have some substantiation, even if it's not a proper study. And the quote ''does'' indicate that sons of dentists outperform the sons of ''Presbyterian'' ministers, not ministers generally, and isn't the Presbyterian church in America pretty liberal? Your dismissal of the examples seems to be more misinformation than fact. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 06:56, 26 February 2008 (EST)

'''Applying the same logic:'''
A second-generation wingnut is one descended and raised in a wingnut environment by parents who are both wingnuts. It is difficult, if not impossible, to find accomplishments by second generation wingnuts ... As of Feb. 26, 2008, Google retrieves no sites referring to second generation wingnuts. In contrast, liberal Australians have been strikingly productive. [[User:Humblpi|Humblpi]] 06:14, 26 February 2008 (EST)

"Your search - "second generation theist" - did not match any documents."--[[User:KimSell|KimSell]] 06:22, 26 February 2008 (EST)

: You didn't apply the "same logic," because those terms are not used. The term [[second generation atheist]] obviously is used, but the problem is that so few productive examples exist. A formal study of that group might yield some tragic discoveries about depression, anxiety, loneliness, drug abuse and other unfortunately afflictions. Any suggestions on how to proceed with such a study?--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 08:45, 26 February 2008 (EST)
:: Might, yes. But since you havent done a study, we simply dont know. But hey, who needs studies, when you can can use Googlefu!--[[User:KimSell|KimSell]] 11:18, 26 February 2008 (EST)

::Well, for a start, don't base the research on a google search for one little-used phrase that you have dreamt up! Seriously, though, it is an interesting question - but I think defining the samples on which to base the research would be fraught with all sorts of biases. How do you in fact track down second-generation atheists, and a control group of atheists brought up by religious parents (I assume that would be the control group), without falling foul of biases inherent in the way people describe themselves, and in how others describe them? Offhand, I don't know - but I rather doubt that a few google-searches will come up with anything meaningful. Going away to think about it ... And in the meantime I would seriously question the value of an article like this, based purely on self-defined terms and speculation - unless of course the intent is to make Conservapedia a laughing stock by means of self-parody. [[User:Humblpi|Humblpi]] 08:56, 26 February 2008 (EST)

::: Folks, please pursue [[deliberate ignorance]] somewhere else. A study would increase our knowledge, and I'm considering doing that. But no one has to pretend to be totally ignorant in the absence of a study.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 12:02, 26 February 2008 (EST)

::::I hope that remark was not addressed to me. Where is the deliberate ignorance? I am trying to engage with your suggestion, and thinking about whether it is actually possible to carry out meaningful research on your hypothesis, and how one might gather useful data. But I do think that the article in its present state is pretty pointless. [[User:Humblpi|Humblpi]] 12:14, 26 February 2008 (EST)

== "The Minister's Son" ==

I wonder if you thought to exclude all the Google hits that were referring to the Prime "Minister's son" the Finance "Minister's son," and other similar "ministers" when you calculated how much "better" "Minister's sons" (Never mind their daughters, I guess...) were doing then "second-generation atheists." [[User:Aboganza|Aboganza]] 08:57, 26 February 2008 (EST)

==Google Searches are not a way to quantify data==

second generation mushroom=126,000 hits 
second generation marshmallow =22,400 hits

Does this tell you anything? No. It is utterly, utterly meaningless, like the 'data' presented as 'relevant' in the article. [[User:Misterlinx|Misterlinx]] 12:28, 26 February 2008 (EST)

:It tells me that second generation mushrooms are far far more productive that second generation Christians. --[[User:GDewey|GDewey]] 16:03, 26 February 2008 (EST)

:Searching for the ''phrases'' will tell you more than searching for any occurrence of those words. The Google hits I got on those two ''as phrases'' were four and zero respectively. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 21:23, 26 February 2008 (EST)

I agree completely Philip - searching for phrases is more important. However, the numbers are still irrelevant. Drawing conclusions based on a search for "second generation atheist" as a comparative exercise assumes:

#Others have referred to the exact phrase in an online article
#No-one refers to the same phenomenon in another way, e.g "second-generation atheist", "children of atheist parent", "children of atheistic parents", "offspring of atheists", etc
#the item you wish to compare to - children of Christians - are also consistently referred to.
#that such references are even on the internet to begin with

No serious research would ever include Google 'hits' as anything other than anecdotal. It's simply not quantifiable. [[User:Misterlinx|Misterlinx]] 21:33, 26 February 2008 (EST)
: I disagree just a little. Google searches can be useful as a rough guide, or a starting point, if you are careful to take into account the sorts of issues that you've listed above. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 21:47, 26 February 2008 (EST)

Oh come now, Mr.Rayment. Googling the phrase "first born son" yields 282,200 hits. Googling "first born daughter" yields 37,600 hits. Do you seriously believe this tells you that seven and a half times more often, the first born child is male rather than female?

I repeat, Google hits are utterly meaningless in this context. [[User:Misterlinx|Misterlinx]] 22:24, 26 February 2008 (EST)
: I guess that it depends on what you mean by "this context". I did say that they ''can'' be useful, not that they are ''always'' useful, so a single example (or even multiple examples) does not disprove that. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 04:39, 27 February 2008 (EST)
::Google hits are useful to quantify Google hits (and similar), there isn't much more than that. [[User:Nyflah|Nyflah]] 11:13, 27 February 2008 (EST)

== A research proposal ==

'''Hypothesis''': "second-generation atheists" are less productive than atheists raised in religious environments. 
'''Experimental group''': atheists raised by atheist parents. 
'''Control group''': atheists raised by religious parents (it must be atheists raised by religious parents, and must not include theists raised by religious parents, which would introduce a confounding bias). 
'''Outcome measure''': various possibilities. Publications in scholarly journals (maybe citation score from the ISI databases)? Board membership of leading corporations? Political office? 
'''Study design''': it has to be a '''retrospective''' study, unless we are prepared to wait for people currently being raised by the two types of parents to reach adulthood. Maybe a '''case-control study''', with "achievers" as cases and "non-achievers" as controls (maybe take graduates from university X in year Y, and classify them on the basis of what they have achieved since, then go and investigate their backgrounds?). Or a simple '''cross-sectional study''' of atheist achievers, setting out to investigate their backgrounds, and measuring the ratio of second-generation to first-generation atheists. 

But then, regardless of the details of the study design, we hit a problem. How do we define ''atheist'' and ''religious''? Do we base it only on what people say about themselves publicly, which would presumably bias the sample towards those with strong views of whatever sort? Do we make a judgment on each person in the sample? Do we rely on what others say about them? How do we deal with those (and it may be the overwhelming majority) whose religious stance we don't know? Do we have to interview them all? And if it's difficult to establish someone's religious stance with any certainty, it is going to be even harder to find out anything meaningful about the upbringing or the parents. Further thought required ... [[User:Humblpi|Humblpi]] 16:09, 26 February 2008 (EST)

Also, let's not forget that this needs to include all religions - sons of Imam's, sons of Saddhus (if there are any), sons of Rabbis. It's a tricky study to coordinate, thats for sure. [[User:Misterlinx|Misterlinx]] 16:38, 26 February 2008 (EST)

: I'm fine with including all religions. However, the control does not have to be [[atheistic]] children of [[atheists]]. Other control groups are possible, or perhaps simply use the general population (of comparable privilege) as a rough control.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 17:08, 26 February 2008 (EST)

:: He suggested the control group as atheist children of theists, not of atheists. Atheist children of theists are the appropriate control if you are comparing ''second-generation'' atheists with ''first-generation'' atheists. But it would also be interesting to compare both groups to first-generation Christians and second-generation Christians.
:: And although you could add as separate groups other religions, lumping all theistic religions into one group vs. atheists is making a huge, and invalid, assumption about how similar various theistic religions are. So after atheists, the first group you would compare against would be Christians, and preferably Christians from a reformed background.
:: All proper studies have to grapple with problems of definitions, avoiding hidden biases, etc., and the same applies here, but I don't see any exceptionally difficult problems with a study like this. Religion, at least, is already determined by many other studies. It can be done. Achievement would not be a particular problem, although one thing to be wary of is to avoid a reliance on academic achievement, as people who have achieved academically have, for the most part, gone through a system (i.e. university and the like) that is predominantly atheistic, and which would therefore cause a bias in the results.
:: But such a study is the sort of thing that you get a grant of tens of thousands of dollars for, and takes many months of work. I very much doubt that it would be within the capabilities of anyone here.
:: [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 21:39, 26 February 2008 (EST)
:::Trouble is, without a properly conducted study (either done by someone here or already done and tracked down), the article remains a blog-like opinion piece with no basis in demonstrable fact. Maybe it should be moved to the "essay" space. [[User:Humblpi|Humblpi]] 06:44, 27 February 2008 (EST)

Video games

2008-02-24T23:05:21Z

Nyflah: /* Popular Video games */

'''Video games''' are electronic games commonly played by [[children]] and [[teen]]s. A large number of young adults, having grown up in the era of video games, also play. Many video games such as [[sports]] games and educational games are harmless [[fun]] and can actually be beneficial to a child's development, especially if they allow more than one player. Some games though are violent and sexually explicit and have attracted the attention of family groups and [[Conservative]] [[Christian]]s. Games such as [[Grand Theft Auto]] and [[Mortal Kombat]] are very violent and sometimes sexually explicit. Laws have been passed to limit young people's access to these violent games but these laws are either rarely enforced{{fact}} or overturned by judges.<ref>http://gamepolitics.livejournal.com/148962.html</ref> Violent video games are believed to cause violent behaviour in some children, especially those under 16 whose mind is still not fully developed.{{fact}}

In the USA, the majority of games carry ESRB ratings.

== Various genres ==

Video games in the course of their existence have grown from the simple arcade style games, and have become more detailed and separated from one another. Genres can now include [[first person shooters]], [[racing]], [[Simulation]], [[Role-playing]], [[Sports]], and many others. Even then, games can combine genres, such as "Mass Effect" [[Role Playing and Third Person Shooting]], and some even create their own genre, like "Katamari Damacy".

== Popularity & Controversy ==

Games have risen in popularity over the years, as is shown in the rise of video games sales from the eighties until today. This has brought with it a various amount of controversy as the video game industry continues to grow with it's original player base.

Most of the controversy comes from the rising trend toward violence in video games, as pioneered by [[Doom]], [[Quake]], and the [[Grand Theft Auto]] series. One man in Particular, [[Jack Thompson]], has imposed a self-manned crusade against video games, which has made him a target of both the online gamer community and of the mainstream media.

== Video Games & Society ==

As video games become more popular, their impact on society becomes ever more present. A prime example of this is the massive ad campaigns for the [[Halo (game)|Halo]] series, as well as [[Grand Theft Auto]]. Advertising, merchandising, and even social pressures have changed in the ever-growing influence of video gaming.

Due to their popularity, various corporations have begun placing advertisements for their products within the context of the game. Players of [[Grand Theft Auto]] may notice real-world company ads on billboards. [[Second Life]], an Internet-based virtual world, has blurred the lines between real-world and virtual world. Companies such as Adidas Reebok and Dell have set up virtual stores selling real-world products within the game. [[Reuters]] also operates a news bureau reporting news in the game.

== Faith in Video Games ==

Faith in Video Gaming has, as a rule, either led to the creation of new and dynamic antagonists, or video games that are mediocre , such as ''Spiritual Warfare'' and ''Bible Adventure'' for the Nintendo, or ''The Bible Game'' for various systems.

The Bible, or other such religious texts, are rather used to tell a story spanning many different viewpoints. Turning these ideas into a video game, however, most often leads to games that tend to bore most video game audiences.

Religion has, however, taken a prominent place amongst the various heroes and villains in video games. The [[Breath of Fire Series]], in particular, uses God as a main antagonist in many of its incarnations. Other games to use religion include [[Final Fantasy]], [[Left Behind: Eternal Forces]], [[Xenogears]], and [[Okami]].

==Popular Video games==
*[[Final Fantasy]] - A very popular RPG series in both the United States and Japan. Most games contain violence, sexuality and [[occult|occultic]] themes, some contain references to [[homosexuality]], [[suicide]], teen pregnancy, transvestism and (although rarely) negativity towards [[religion]].
*[[Grand Theft Auto]] - Highly violent. 16-18 and up depending on country.
*[[Half-Life]] - First Person Shooter series about Gordon Freeman, a luckless scientist turned hero-from-desperation.
*[[Harvest Moon]] - Farm Life simulator, with many sequels spreading from various platforms. Character runs a farm, raises animals, and can eventually marry. Until recent incarnations, games had no violence. Rated E [6+] to T [13+].
*[[The Legend of Zelda]] - A popular series of fantasy action-adventure games.
*[[Mass Effect]] - A science fiction RPG rated "M" for blood, language, partial nudity, sexual themes, and violence.
*[[NHL]] Series - This series from EA Sports as well as other NHL series are very popular, especially in Canada.{{fact}} They are family friendly with less violence as seen on NHL hockey on television (which actually can get quite violent). There is, obviously, no sexuality.
*[[Pac-Man]]. An old maze game. It was very popular with kids and adults back in the eighties, and like most old video games it's a clean, fun game for everyone.
*[[Portal]] - A popular first person shooter/puzzle game based upon Half-Life involving teleportation.
*[[Resident Evil]] - Survival Horror video game series, revolving around viral zombies and the survivors of the zombie attacks. Copious blood, gore, and violence present. As of date, all games in series have been rated M [17+].
*[[The Sims]] - A light-hearted life simulator with mild violence and some sexuality. Recommended for 13 and up.
*[[Smash Brothers]] - Series of Nintendo Animated fighting games. Follows no specific story, mixing characters from different franchises in wide environments. Animated, no-blood violence.
*[[Soul Calibur]] - A weapon-based fighting game. Revolves around the tale of two weapons, Soul Edge [Cursed] and Soul Calibur [Blessed], and those who fight for control of the weapons.
*[[Street Fighter]] - One-on-one [[martial arts]] fighting game series, where a player selects one of various martial artists and battles other players or against computer-controlled characters. Since this game has mildly revealing dresses for the female fighters and sometimes a little blood during fights, though nowhere as over-the-top as Mortal Kombat, this game is recommended for teens.
*[[Super Mario Bros.]] - Side-scrolling platform game series by [[Nintendo]]. Players play as Mario and Luigi, two Italian-American plumber brothers from [[Brooklyn]], who explore the Mushroom Kingdom in order to rescue Princess Peach from the evil Bowser Koopa. This game has no strong violence and no sexual content, so it is suitable for all ages.

==See Also==
*[[Video game controversy]]
*[[Jack Thompson]]

==References==

<References/>

[[Category:Entertainment]]
[[Category:Video Games]]
[[Category:Computers]]

Toni Morrison

2008-02-23T18:21:30Z

Nyflah:

'''Toni Morrison''' (b. 1931) is a Nobel Prize-winning American author. Her best known novels are ''The Bluest Eye'', ''Song of Solomon'', and ''Beloved'', which won the Pulitzer Prize for Fiction in 1988. Her novels ''Beloved'' and ''The Bluest Eye'' are on the American Library Association's ten most challenged books of 2006<ref>http://www.ala.org/Template.cfm?Section=News&template=/ContentManagement/ContentDisplay.cfm&ContentID=151926<ref/>.

Video games

2008-02-08T05:15:44Z

Nyflah: /* Popular Video games */

'''Video games''' are electronic games commonly played by [[children]] and [[teen]]s. A large number of young adults, having grown up in the era of video games, also play. Many video games such as [[sports]] games and educational games are harmless [[fun]] and can actually be beneficial to a child's development especially if they allow more than one player. Some games though are violent and sexually explicit and have attracted the attention of family groups and [[Conservative]] [[Christian]]s. Games such as [[Grand Theft Auto]] and [[Mortal Kombat]] are very violent and sometimes sexually explicit. Laws have been passed to limit young people's access to these violent games but these laws are either rarely enforced{{fact}} or overturned by judges.<ref>http://gamepolitics.livejournal.com/148962.html</ref> Violent video games are believed to cause violent behaviour in some children, especially those under 16 whose mind is still not fully developed.{{fact}}

In the USA, the majority of games carry ESRB ratings.

== Various genres ==

Video games in the course of their existence have grown from the simple arcade style games, and have become more detailed and separated from one another. Genres can now include [[first person shooters]], [[racing]], [[Simulation]], [[Role-playing]], [[Sports]], and many others. Even then, games can combine genres, such as "Mass Effect" [[Role Playing and Third Person Shooting]], and some even create their own genre, like "Katamari Damacy".

== Popularity & Controversy ==

Games have risen in popularity over the years, as is shown in the rise of video games sales from the eighties until today. This has brought with it a various amount of controversy as the video game industry continues to grow with it's original player base.

Most of the controversy comes from the rising trend toward violence in video games, as pioneered by [[Doom]], [[Quake]], and the [[Grand Theft Auto]] series. One man in Particular, [[Jack Thompson]], has imposed a self-manned crusade against video games, which has made him a target of both the online gamer community and of the mainstream media.

== Video Games & Society ==

As video games become more popular, their impact on society becomes ever more present. A prime example of this is the massive ad campaigns for the [[Halo (game)|Halo]] series, as well as [[Grand Theft Auto]]. Advertising, merchandising, and even social pressures have changed in the ever-growing influence of video gaming.

Due to their popularity, various corporations have begun placing advertisements for their products within the context of the game. Players of [[Grand Theft Auto]] may notice real-world company ads on billboards. [[Second Life]], an Internet-based virtual world, has blurred the lines between real-world and virtual world. Companies such as Adidas Reebok and Dell have set up virtual stores selling real-world products within the game. [[Reuters]] also operates a news bureau reporting news in the game.

== Faith in Video Games ==

Faith in Video Gaming has, as a rule, either led to the creation of new and dynamic antagonists, or video games that are mediocre , such as ''Spiritual Warfare'' and ''Bible Adventure'' for the Nintendo, or ''The Bible Game'' for various systems.

The Bible, or other such religious texts, are rather used to tell a story spanning many different viewpoints. Turning these ideas into a video game, however, most often leads to games that tend to bore most video game audiences.

Religion has, however, taken a prominent place amongst the various heroes and villains in video games. The [[Breath of Fire Series]], in particular, uses God as a main antagonist in many of its incarnations. Other games to use religion include [[Final Fantasy]], [[Left Behind: Eternal Forces]], [[Xenogears]], and [[Okami]].

==Popular Video games==
*[[Final Fantasy]] - A very popular RPG series in both the United States and Japan. Some games contain violence, sexuality, references to [[homosexuality]], [[suicide]], teen pregnancy, transvestism, [[occult|occultic]] themes and (although rarely) negativity towards [[religion]].
*[[Grand Theft Auto]] - Highly violent. 16-18 and up depending on country.
*[[Half-Life]] - First Person Shooter series about Gordon Freeman, a luckless scientist turned hero-from-desperation.
*[[Harvest Moon]] - Farm Life simulator, with many sequels spreading from various platforms. Character runs a farm, raises animals, and can eventually marry. Until recent incarnations, games had no violence. Rated E [6+] to T [13+].
*[[The Legend of Zelda]] - A popular series of fantasy action-adventure games.
*[[Mass Effect]] - A science fiction RPG rated "M" for blood, language, partial nudity, sexual themes, and violence.
*[[NHL]] Series - This series from EA Sports as well as other NHL series are very popular, especially in Canada.{{fact}} They are family friendly with less violence as seen on NHL hockey on television (which actually can get quite violent). There is, obviously, no sexuality.
*[[Pac-Man]]. An old maze game. It was very popular with kids and adults back in the eighties, and like most old video games it's a clean, fun game for everyone.
*[[Portal]] - A popular first person shooter/puzzle game based upon Half-Life involving teleportation.
*[[Resident Evil]] - Survival Horror video game series, revolving around viral zombies and the survivors of the zombie attacks. Copious blood, gore, and violence present. As of date, all games in series have been rated M [17+].
*[[The Sims]] - A light-hearted life simulator with mild violence and some sexuality. Recommended for 13 and up.
*[[Smash Brothers]] - Series of Nintendo Animated fighting games. Follows no specific story, mixing characters from different franchises in wide environments. Animated, no-blood violence.
*[[Soul Calibur]] - A weapon-based fighting game. Revolves around the tale of two weapons, Soul Edge [Cursed] and Soul Calibur [Blessed], and those who fight for control of the weapons.
*[[Street Fighter]] - One-on-one [[martial arts]] fighting game series, where a player selects one of various martial artists and battles other players or against computer-controlled characters. Since this game has mildly revealing dresses for the female fighters and sometimes a little blood during fights, though nowhere as over-the-top as Mortal Kombat, this game is recommended for teens.
*[[Super Mario Bros.]] - Side-scrolling platform game series by [[Nintendo]]. Players play as Mario and Luigi, two Italian-American plumber brothers from [[Brooklyn]], who explore the Mushroom Kingdom in order to rescue Princess Peach from the evil Bowser Koopa. This game has no strong violence and no sexual content, so it is suitable for all ages.

==See Also==
*[[Video game controversy]]
*[[Jack Thompson]]

==References==

<References/>

[[Category:Entertainment]]
[[Category:Video Games]]
[[Category:Computers]]

Video games

2008-02-04T23:28:35Z

Nyflah:

'''Video games''' are electronic games commonly played by [[children]] and [[teen]]s. A large number of young adults, having grown up in the era of video games, also play. Many video games such as [[sports]] games and educational games are harmless [[fun]] and can actually be beneficial to a child's development especially if they allow more than one player. Some games though are violent and sexually explicit and have attracted the attention of family groups and [[Conservative]] [[Christian]]s. Games such as [[Grand Theft Auto]] and [[Mortal Kombat]] are very violent and sometimes sexually explicit. Laws have been passed to limit young people's access to these violent games but these laws are either rarely enforced{{fact}} or overturned by judges.<ref>http://gamepolitics.livejournal.com/148962.html</ref> Violent video games are believed to cause violent behaviour in some children, especially those under 16 whose mind is still not fully developed.{{fact}}

In the USA, the majority of games carry ESRB ratings.

== Various genres ==

Video games in the course of their existence have grown from the simple arcade style games, and have become more detailed and separated from one another. Genres can now include [[first person shooters]], [[racing]], [[Simulation]], [[Role-playing]], [[Sports]], and many others. Even then, games can combine genres, such as "Mass Effect" [[Role Playing and Third Person Shooting]], and some even create their own genre, like "Katamari Damacy".

== Popularity & Controversy ==

Games have risen in popularity over the years, as is shown in the rise of video games sales from the eighties until today. This has brought with it a various amount of controversy as the video game industry continues to grow with it's original player base.

Most of the controversy comes from the rising trend toward violence in video games, as pioneered by [[Doom]], [[Quake]], and the [[Grand Theft Auto]] series. One man in Particular, [[Jack Thompson]], has imposed a self-manned crusade against video games, which has made him a target of both the online gamer community and of the mainstream media.

== Video Games & Society ==

As video games become more popular, their impact on society becomes ever more present. A prime example of this is the massive ad campaigns for the [[Halo (game)|Halo]] series, as well as [[Grand Theft Auto]]. Advertising, merchandising, and even social pressures have changed in the ever-growing influence of video gaming.

Due to their popularity, various corporations have begun placing advertisements for their products within the context of the game. Players of [[Grand Theft Auto]] may notice real-world company ads on billboards. [[Second Life]], an Internet-based virtual world, has blurred the lines between real-world and virtual world. Companies such as Adidas Reebok and Dell have set up virtual stores selling real-world products within the game. [[Reuters]] also operates a news bureau reporting news in the game.

== Faith in Video Games ==

Faith in Video Gaming has, as a rule, either led to the creation of new and dynamic antagonists, or video games that are mediocre , such as ''Spiritual Warfare'' and ''Bible Adventure'' for the Nintendo, or ''The Bible Game'' for various systems.

The Bible, or other such religious texts, are rather used to tell a story spanning many different viewpoints. Turning these ideas into a video game, however, most often leads to games that tend to bore most video game audiences.

Religion has, however, taken a prominent place amongst the various heroes and villains in video games. The [[Breath of Fire Series]], in particular, uses God as a main antagonist in many of its incarnations. Other games to use religion include [[Final Fantasy]], [[Left Behind: Eternal Forces]], [[Xenogears]], and [[Okami]].

==Popular Video games==
*[[Final Fantasy]] - A very popular RPG series in both the United States and Japan. Some games contain violence, sexuality, references to homosexuality, suicide, teen pregnancy, transvestism and (although rarely) negativity towards religion.
*[[Grand Theft Auto]] - Highly violent. 16-18 and up depending on country.
*[[Half-Life]] - First Person Shooter series about Gordon Freeman, a luckless scientist turned hero-from-desperation.
*[[Harvest Moon]] - Farm Life simulator, with many sequels spreading from various platforms. Character runs a farm, raises animals, and can eventually marry. Until recent incarnations, games had no violence. Rated E [6+] to T [13+].
*[[The Legend of Zelda]] - A popular series of fantasy action-adventure games.
*[[NHL]] Series - This series from EA Sports as well as other NHL series are very popular, especially in Canada.{{fact}} They are family friendly with less violence as seen on NHL hockey on television (which actually can get quite violent). There is, obviously, no sexuality.
*[[Pac-Man]]. An old maze game. It was very popular with kids and adults back in the eighties, and like most old video games it's a clean, fun game for everyone.
*[[Portal]] - A popular first person shooter/puzzle game based upon Half-Life involving teleportation.
*[[Resident Evil]] - Survival Horror video game series, revolving around viral zombies and the survivors of the zombie attacks. Copious blood, gore, and violence present. As of date, all games in series have been rated M [17+].
*[[The Sims]] - A light-hearted life simulator with mild violence and some sexuality. Recommended for 13 and up.
*[[Smash Brothers]] - Series of Nintendo Animated fighting games. Follows no specific story, mixing characters from different franchises in wide environments. Animated, no-blood violence.
*[[Soul Calibur]] - A weapon-based fighting game. Revolves around the tale of two weapons, Soul Edge [Cursed] and Soul Calibur [Blessed], and those who fight for control of the weapons.
*[[Mass Effect]] - A science fiction RPG, claimed to be an in-depth sex simulator in response to a single showing of half of an alien female's breast. As it is rated M, it is clearly not suitable for minors.
*[[Street Fighter]] - One-on-one [[martial arts]] fighting game series, where a player selects one of various martial artists and battles other players or against computer-controlled characters. Since this game has mildly revealing dresses for the female fighters and sometimes a little blood during fights, though nowhere as over-the-top as Mortal Kombat, this game is recommended for teens.
*[[Super Mario Bros.]] - Side-scrolling platform game series by [[Nintendo]]. Players play as Mario and Luigi, two Italian-American plumber brothers from [[Brooklyn]], who explore the Mushroom Kingdom in order to rescue Princess Peach from the evil Bowser Koopa. This game has no strong violence and no sexual content, so it is suitable for all ages.

==See Also==
*[[Video game controversy]]
*[[Jack Thompson]]

==References==

<References/>

[[Category:Entertainment]]
[[Category:Video Games]]
[[Category:Computers]]

Talk:Gravitation

2008-01-29T19:34:13Z

Nyflah: /* General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics */

I am curious; what about the conventional definition of gravitation and the citations for it's history in Wikipedia is considered inappropriate?

Is it the intention of Conservapedia to supplant essentially all articles in Wikipedia, or only those that are deemed to be inconsistent with the stated objective(s) of this project?

----

I think it's very clear - we need to set up this stub article on gravity, so we can write the TRUE version of Gravity - one that comports with the TRUE facts of JESUS!!! And how GOD makes the universe work. Gravity works because GOD makes it work, because GOD MADE IT.

:If we take that stance, then why bother having an encyclopaedia at all? We could have just the one page with the words: "Because God Made It". Also, if you are going to stoop to such buffoonery, then at least have the self-belief to sign your buffoonery. [[User:dropkickmejesus|dropkickmejesus]] 18:04, 14 March 2007 (GMT)

This is the most disgusting edit I have ever seen in my life. I have no probs. with people refuting evolution, but GRAVITY?! Its a durn law, not a theory.--[[User:Elamdri|Elamdri]] 22:22, 12 March 2007 (EDT)

:All, and I do mean all, science is at best a theory. Science relies on induction, not deduction, and what is supported by induction is at best probably true, not certainly true (this goes for most human reasoning in general, but it is clearly true in science--and any good scientist will tell you that). At the moment, gravity, as understood by science, is very different from gravity as understood by Newton, and 100 years from now we will likely have a very different understanding of gravity than we do today. If by "Its a durn law, not a theory." you mean that it is proven beyond a bout, then you are simply wrong, the next piece of evidence we discover could disprove all we thought we knew about gravity. --[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 14:35, 14 March 2007 (EDT)

== Current Status of Gravity ==

I think it's worth pointing out that gravity is still a big grey area in modern physics. Gravitons are purely theoretical, no one has actually observed the mechanism of gravity directly.

:Well, the current working theory of gravity - the one actually in use today - doesn't involve gravitons at all. Gravitons are what you get when you try to quantize gravity, which I think is already covered by the need to reconcile GR and QM. Whether or not they are actually "'''the''' mechanism" of gravity is uncertain. But feel free to add something in if you like. [[User:Tsumetai|Tsumetai]] 07:50, 22 March 2007 (EDT)

:: I think the fact that we don't actually have the mechanism nailed down is pretty important to point out. It's as important to point out what we ''don't'' know as what we do. --[[User:Pacman|Pacman]] 08:00, 22 March 2007 (EDT)

:''This page is over '''gravity'''. Gravity is a theory, '''not a fact'''. Information presented in this article should be critically interpreted and taken with an open mind. There are true challenges to this debated theory including the [[intelligent falling]] theory''. . . comment by User:Garklieo

::Yeah, right Garlieko, alias Stephlieze...as in Steph lies. Man falling off an airplane is doing that in theory, according to your logic; he's reaching speeds of 160 miles per hour, in theory, according to your logic; he's going to hit the ground with a thud, in theory, according to your logic. So if this man gets killed because he violated the "theory" of gravity, are you going to tell his family that his death is just a theory as well? [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 19:29, 9 October 2007 (EDT)

:::Lieze would be pronounced like "leeze" and that argument makes no sense at all. On that note, I think that intelligent falling should recieve equal coverage, as Gravity is '''only''' a theory, and we should teach the controversy. [[User:Barikada|Barikada]] 19:53, 17 January 2008 (EST)

==General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics==
Please, don't add back the Big Bang clause, you're implying it's the only thing General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics disagree on. [[User:Nyflah|Nyflah]] 21:47, 19 October 2007 (EDT)

: Under what other circumstances do those theories disagree? [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 02:47, 20 October 2007 (EDT)
::Ask and [http://www.mtnmath.com/whatrh/node75.html ye] [http://www.astronomycafe.net/qadir/q1292.html shall] [http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/quantum-gravity/ receive]. [[User:Nyflah|Nyflah]] 14:34, 29 January 2008 (EST) Late, I know.

Video games

2008-01-29T15:36:35Z

Nyflah:

'''Video games''' are electronic games commonly played by [[children]] and [[teen]]s. A large number of young adults, having grown up in the era of video games, also play. Many video games such as [[sports]] games and educational games are harmless [[fun]] and can actually be beneficial to a child's development especially if they allow more than one player. Some games though are violent and sexually explicit and have attracted the attention of family groups and [[Conservative]] [[Christian]]s. Games such as [[Grand Theft Auto]] and [[Mortal Kombat]] are very violent and sometimes sexually explicit. Laws have been passed to limit young people's access to these violent games but these laws are either rarely enforced{{fact}} or overturned by judges.<ref>http://gamepolitics.livejournal.com/148962.html</ref> Violent video games are believed to cause violent behaviour in some children, especially those under 16 whose mind is still not fully developed.<ref>http://www.lionlamb.org/violence_vid_games_facts.htm</ref>

In the USA, the majority of games carry ESRB ratings.

== Various genres ==

Video games in the course of their existence have grown from the simple arcade style games, and have become more detailed and separated from one another. Genres can now include [[first person shooters]], [[racing]], [[Simulation]], [[Role-playing]], [[Sports]], and many others. Even then, games can combine genres, such as "Mass Effect" [[Role Playing and Third Person Shooting]], and some even create their own genre, like "Katamari Damacy".

== Popularity & Controversy ==

Games have risen in popularity over the years, as is shown in the rise of video games sales from the eighties until today. This has brought with it a various amount of controversy as the video game industry continues to grow with it's original player base.

Most of the controversy comes from the rising trend toward violence in video games, as pioneered by [[Doom]], [[Quake]], and the [[Grand Theft Auto]] series. One man in Particular, [[Jack Thompson]], has imposed a self-manned crusade against video games, which has made him a target of both the online gamer community and of the mainstream media.

== Video Games & Society ==

As video games become more popular, their impact on society becomes ever more present. A prime example of this is the massive ad campaigns for the [[Halo (game)|Halo]] series, as well as [[Grand Theft Auto]]. Advertising, merchandising, and even social pressures have changed in the ever-growing influence of video gaming.

Due to their popularity, various corporations have begun placing advertisements for their products within the context of the game. Players of [[Grand Theft Auto]] may notice real-world company ads on billboards. [[Second Life]], an Internet-based virtual world, has blurred the lines between real-world and virtual world. Companies such as Adidas Reebok and Dell have set up virtual stores selling real-world products within the game. [[Reuters]] also operates a news bureau reporting news in the game.

== Faith in Video Games ==

Faith in Video Gaming has, as a rule, either led to the creation of new and dynamic antagonists, or video games that are mediocre , such as ''Spiritual Warfare'' and ''Bible Adventure'' for the Nintendo, or ''The Bible Game'' for various systems.

The Bible, or other such religious texts, are rather used to tell a story spanning many different viewpoints. Turning these ideas into a video game, however, most often leads to games that tend to bore most video game audiences.

Religion has, however, taken a prominent place amongst the various heroes and villains in video games. The [[Breath of Fire Series]], in particular, uses God as a main antagonist in many of its incarnations. Other games to use religion include [[Final Fantasy]], [[Left Behind: Eternal Forces]], [[Xenogears]], and [[Okami]].

==Popular Video games==
*[[Final Fantasy]] - A very popular RPG series in both the United States and Japan. Some games contain violence, sexuality, references to homosexuality, suicide, teen pregnancy and transvestism (although rarely) negativity towards religion.
*[[Grand Theft Auto]] - Highly violent. 16-18 and up depending on country.
*[[Half-Life]] - First Person Shooter series about Gordon Freeman, a luckless scientist turned hero-from-desperation.
*[[Harvest Moon]] - Farm Life simulator, with many sequels spreading from various platforms. Character runs a farm, raises animals, and can eventually marry. Until recent incarnations, games had no violence. Rated E [6+] to T [13+].
*[[The Legend of Zelda]] - A popular series of fantasy action-adventure games.
*[[NHL]] Series - This series from EA Sports as well as other NHL series are very popular, especially in Canada.{{fact}} They are family friendly with less violence as seen on NHL hockey on television (which actually can get quite violent). There is, obviously, no sexuality.
*[[Pac-Man]]. An old maze game. It was very popular with kids and adults back in the eighties, and like most old video games it's a clean, fun game for everyone.
*[[Portal]] - A popular first person shooter/puzzle game based upon Half-Life involving teleportation.
*[[Resident Evil]] - Survival Horror video game series, revolving around viral zombies and the survivors of the zombie attacks. Copious blood, gore, and violence present. As of date, all games in series have been rated M [17+].
*[[The Sims]] - A light-hearted life simulator with mild violence and some sexuality. Recommended for 13 and up.
*[[Smash Brothers]] - Series of Nintendo Animated fighting games. Follows no specific story, mixing characters from different franchises in wide environments. Animated, no-blood violence.
*[[Soul Calibur]] - A weapon-based fighting game. Revolves around the tale of two swords, Soul Edge [Cursed] and Soul Calibur [Blessed], and those who fight for control of the swords.

==See Also==
*[[Video game controversy]]
*[[Jack Thompson]]

==References==

<References/>

[[Category:Entertainment]]
[[Category:Video Games]]
[[Category:Computers]]

Video games

2008-01-29T00:27:58Z

Nyflah: /* Popular Video games */

'''Video games''' are electronic games commonly played by [[children]] and [[teen]]s. A large number of young adults, having grown up in the era of video games, also play. Many video games such as [[sports]] games and educational games are harmless [[fun]] and can actually be beneficial to a child's development especially if they allow more than one player. Some games though are violent and sexually explicit and have attracted the attention of family groups and [[Conservative]] [[Christian]]s. Games such as [[Grand Theft Auto]] and [[Mortal Kombat]] are very violent and sometimes sexually explicit. Laws have been passed to limit young people's access to these violent games but these laws are either rarely enforced{{fact}} or overturned by judges.<ref>http://gamepolitics.livejournal.com/148962.html</ref> Violent video games are believed to cause violent behaviour in some children, especially those under 16 whose mind is still not fully developed.<ref>http://www.lionlamb.org/violence_vid_games_facts.htm</ref>

In the USA, the majority of games carry ESRB ratings.

== Various genres ==

Video games in the course of their existence have grown from the simple arcade style games, and have become more detailed and separated from one another. Genres can now include [[first person shooters]], [[racing]], [[Simulation]], [[Role-playing]], [[Sports]], and many others. Even then, games can combine genres, such as "Mass Effect" [[Role Playing and Third Person Shooting]], and some even create their own genre, like "Katamari Damacy".

== Popularity & Controversy ==

Games have risen in popularity over the years, as is shown in the rise of video games sales from the eighties until today. This has brought with it a various amount of controversy as the video game industry continues to grow with it's original player base.

Most of the controversy comes from the rising trend toward violence in video games, as pioneered by [[Doom]], [[Quake]], and the [[Grand Theft Auto]] series. One man in Particular, [[Jack Thompson]], has imposed a self-manned crusade against video games, which has made him a target of both the online gamer community and of the mainstream media.

== Video Games & Society ==

As video games become more popular, their impact on society becomes ever more present. A prime example of this is the massive ad campaigns for the [[Halo (game)|Halo]] series, as well as [[Grand Theft Auto]]. Advertising, merchandising, and even social pressures have changed in the ever-growing influence of video gaming.

Due to their popularity, various corporations have begun placing advertisements for their products within the context of the game. Players of [[Grand Theft Auto]] may notice real-world company ads on billboards. [[Second Life]], an Internet-based virtual world, has blurred the lines between real-world and virtual world. Companies such as Adidas Reebok and Dell have set up virtual stores selling real-world products within the game. [[Reuters]] also operates a news bureau reporting news in the game.

== Faith in Video Games ==

Faith in Video Gaming has, as a rule, either led to the creation of new and dynamic antagonists, or video games that are mediocre , such as ''Spiritual Warfare'' and ''Bible Adventure'' for the Nintendo, or ''The Bible Game'' for various systems.

The Bible, or other such religious texts, are rather used to tell a story spanning many different viewpoints. Turning these ideas into a video game, however, most often leads to games that tend to bore most video game audiences.

Religion has, however, taken a prominent place amongst the various heroes and villains in video games. The [[Breath of Fire Series]], in particular, uses God as a main antagonist in many of its incarnations. Other games to use religion include [[Final Fantasy]], [[Left Behind: Eternal Forces]], [[Xenogears]], and [[Okami]].

==Popular Video games==
*[[Half-Life]] - First Person Shooter series about Gordon Freeman, a luckless scientist turned hero-from-desperation.
*[[Grand Theft Auto]] - Highly violent. 16-18 and up depending on country
*[[The Sims]] - mild violence, some sexuality. Recommended for 13 and up.
*[[NHL]] Series - This series from EA Sports as well as other NHL series are very popular, especially in Canada.{{fact}} They are family friendly with less violence as seen on NHL hockey on television (which actually can get quite violent). There is, obviously, no sexuality.
*[[Final Fantasy]] - A very popular RPG series in both the United States and Japan. Some games contain violence, sexuality, references to suicide, teen pregnancy and transvestism but these are mostly considered appropriate for ages 13 and up.
*[[Pac-Man]]. An old maze game. It was very popular with kids and adults back in the eighties, and like most old video games it's a clean, fun game for everyone.
*[[The Legend of Zelda]] - A popular series of fantasy action-adventure games.
*[[Portal]] - A popular first person shooter/puzzle game, responsible for every reference to the cake being a lie.
*[[Soul Calibur]] - A weapon-based fighting game. Revolves around the tale of two swords, Soul Edge [Cursed] and Soul Calibur [Blessed], and those who fight for control of the swords.
*[[Smash Brothers]] - Series of Nintendo Animated fighting games. Follows no specific story, mixing characters from different franchises in wide environments. Animated, no-blood violence.
*[[Resident Evil]] - Survival Horror video game series, revolving around viral zombies and the survivors of the zombie attacks. Copious blood, gore, and violence present. As of date, all games in series have been rated M [17+].
*[[Harvest Moon]] - Farm Life simulator, with many sequels spreading from various platforms. Character runs a farm, raises animals, and can eventually marry. Until recent incarnations, games had no violence. Rated E [6+] to T [13+].

==See Also==
*[[Video game controversy]]
*[[Jack Thompson]]

==References==

<References/>

[[Category:Entertainment]]
[[Category:Video Games]]
[[Category:Computers]]

Talk:Negro

2008-01-28T18:40:27Z

Nyflah:

==Why delete?==

This is a perfectly valid topic? [[User:Flippin|Flippin]] 15:29, 23 March 2007 (EDT)

Not here. Not yet. [[User:Tmtoulouse|Tmtoulouse]] 15:32, 23 March 2007 (EDT)

:Ok, that's arcane. So you decide wether or not something is valid for people to look at? That sounds like censorship to me. I don't see why we can't have open discussions about topics that are uncomfortable "yet" [[User:Flippin|Flippin]] 15:34, 23 March 2007 (EDT)

::Okay, I will take it to AFD not speedy. And expand my reasons there. [[User:Tmtoulouse|Tmtoulouse]] 15:35, 23 March 2007 (EDT)

:::Thank you. [[User:Flippin|Flippin]] 15:35, 23 March 2007 (EDT)

== Deleting this term & changing the links ==

Apparently it's been deleted before. If the Admins agree that it should be deleted again, I'd be happy to change all the pages that link to it, so it won't show up as "wanted."-[[User:MexMax|MexMax]] 13:00, 3 December 2007 (EST)

Is this site now offering a one-word Spanish-English dictionary? Either allow for an entry that discusses what the word means and its rich and varied cultural history in the US, the Caribbean and elsewhere, from racist uses to the United Negro College Fund, or leave it blank. This current version is a cop-out. [[User:Claude|Claude]] 17:30, 5 December 2007 (EST)
:The entry says exactly "what the word means" even better than wikipedia does. [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 18:32, 5 December 2007 (EST)

I'm not familiar with Wikipedia's entry. Why does this one Spanish word warrant an entry? When are you going to get going on the rest of the language?[[User:Claude|Claude]] 18:38, 5 December 2007 (EST)
:This is educational. Negro is the Spanish word for black. [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 13:56, 6 December 2007 (EST)

Then I eagerly await the rest of your entries to the Spanish translations category I've started for you. I'd do it myself, but I don't speak Spanish.[[User:Claude|Claude]] 14:09, 6 December 2007 (EST)
:Beuno. Gracias. [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 14:54, 6 December 2007 (EST)

== Pronunciation ==

I apologize; I was wrong. Thanks for the citation. [[User:DanH|DanH]] 13:38, 28 January 2008 (EST)

:No problem. [[User:Nyflah|Nyflah]] 13:40, 28 January 2008 (EST)

Negro

2008-01-28T18:24:23Z

Nyflah: *sigh* Ref. contains the pronunciation.

'''Negro''' (pronounced '''ne-gro''') is the [[Spanish]] word for [[black]].<ref>http://www.wordreference.com/definicion/Negro</ref>

==References==
<references/>
[[Category: Spanish-English Translations]]

Negro

2008-01-28T17:00:43Z

Nyflah: Incorrect.

'''Negro''' (pronounced '''ne-gro''') is the [[Spanish]] word for [[black]].

[[Category: Spanish-English Translations]]

Negro

2008-01-28T04:36:50Z

Nyflah: Proper pronunciation.

'''Negro''' (pronounced '''ne-gro''') is the [[Spanish]] word for [[black]].

[[Category: Spanish-English Translations]]

Wind chill

2008-01-21T00:45:57Z

Nyflah: Changing to super index notation.

'''Wind chill''' is the term referring to the apparent temperature felt by the skin in cold [[weather]] (as opposed to the actual temperature). Where T is the temperature in degrees [[Fahrenheit]] and V is the wind speed in miles per hour, the formula for calculating the wind chill is as follows: 35.74 + 0.6215 T - 35.75 V 0.16 + 0.4275 T V 0.16 <ref>http://www.usatoday.com/weather/resources/basics/windchill/wind-chill-formulas.htm</ref> This formula, based on calculations by IUPUI professor Maurice Bleustein, was adopted by the United States Weather Service and the Meteorological Services of Canada in 2001 to replace a formula that had been found to be less accurate. One of the changes that was made was that the temperature used was that five feet from the ground rather than 33 feet from the ground. <ref>http://homepages.indiana.edu/101201/text/windchill.html</ref>

The term was coined by Antarctic explorer Paul Siple in 1939. Note that the term "[[heat index]]" is used instead when the apparent temperature is hotter than the actual temperature.

[[Category:Weather]]

==References==
{{reflist}}

==External Links==

[http://www.srh.noaa.gov/elp/wxcalc/windchill.html National Weather Service - Wind Chill Calculator]

Talk:Gravitation

2007-10-20T01:47:17Z

Nyflah:

I am curious; what about the conventional definition of gravitation and the citations for it's history in Wikipedia is considered inappropriate?

Is it the intention of Conservapedia to supplant essentially all articles in Wikipedia, or only those that are deemed to be inconsistent with the stated objective(s) of this project?

----

I think it's very clear - we need to set up this stub article on gravity, so we can write the TRUE version of Gravity - one that comports with the TRUE facts of JESUS!!! And how GOD makes the universe work. Gravity works because GOD makes it work, because GOD MADE IT.

:If we take that stance, then why bother having an encyclopaedia at all? We could have just the one page with the words: "Because God Made It". Also, if you are going to stoop to such buffoonery, then at least have the self-belief to sign your buffoonery. [[User:dropkickmejesus|dropkickmejesus]] 18:04, 14 March 2007 (GMT)

This is the most disgusting edit I have ever seen in my life. I have no probs. with people refuting evolution, but GRAVITY?! Its a durn law, not a theory.--[[User:Elamdri|Elamdri]] 22:22, 12 March 2007 (EDT)

:All, and I do mean all, science is at best a theory. Science relies on induction, not deduction, and what is supported by induction is at best probably true, not certainly true (this goes for most human reasoning in general, but it is clearly true in science--and any good scientist will tell you that). At the moment, gravity, as understood by science, is very different from gravity as understood by Newton, and 100 years from now we will likely have a very different understanding of gravity than we do today. If by "Its a durn law, not a theory." you mean that it is proven beyond a bout, then you are simply wrong, the next piece of evidence we discover could disprove all we thought we knew about gravity. --[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 14:35, 14 March 2007 (EDT)

== Current Status of Gravity ==

I think it's worth pointing out that gravity is still a big grey area in modern physics. Gravitons are purely theoretical, no one has actually observed the mechanism of gravity directly.

:Well, the current working theory of gravity - the one actually in use today - doesn't involve gravitons at all. Gravitons are what you get when you try to quantize gravity, which I think is already covered by the need to reconcile GR and QM. Whether or not they are actually "'''the''' mechanism" of gravity is uncertain. But feel free to add something in if you like. [[User:Tsumetai|Tsumetai]] 07:50, 22 March 2007 (EDT)

:: I think the fact that we don't actually have the mechanism nailed down is pretty important to point out. It's as important to point out what we ''don't'' know as what we do. --[[User:Pacman|Pacman]] 08:00, 22 March 2007 (EDT)

:''This page is over '''gravity'''. Gravity is a theory, '''not a fact'''. Information presented in this article should be critically interpreted and taken with an open mind. There are true challenges to this debated theory including the [[intelligent falling]] theory''. . . comment by User:Garklieo

::Yeah, right Garlieko, alias Stephlieze...as in Steph lies. Man falling off an airplane is doing that in theory, according to your logic; he's reaching speeds of 160 miles per hour, in theory, according to your logic; he's going to hit the ground with a thud, in theory, according to your logic. So if this man gets killed because he violated the "theory" of gravity, are you going to tell his family that his death is just a theory as well? [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 19:29, 9 October 2007 (EDT)

==General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics==

Please, don't add back the Big Bang clause, you're implying it's the only thing General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics disagree on. [[User:Nyflah|Nyflah]] 21:47, 19 October 2007 (EDT)

Gravitation

2007-10-20T01:42:21Z

Nyflah: Reverting, see talk page.

'''Gravitation''' is a [[phenomenon]] which attracts all objects within the [[universe]] to each other <ref>New Oxford American Dictionary, 2nd Edition</ref>. In modern [[physics]], it is explained by the [[Theory of relativity|General Theory of relativity]]. Before general relativity, gravitation was described by [[Sir Isaac Newton|Isaac Newton's]] law of universal gravitation in his [[Philosophiæ Naturalis Principia Mathematica|''Principia Mathematica'']], which is still useful in most situations.

Everything in the universe that has mass attracts every other thing that has mass. How much depends on the size of the masses and the distance between them. For normal objects, this pull is minute, but you can measure the pull between a very large object like the [[Earth]] and another object like you by standing on the scales. Your [[weight]] is the measure of the pull of gravity between you and the planet you are standing on. This [[force]] depends on your [[mass]] and the mass of that planet, but it also depends on your [[distance]] from the center of the planet. The further you are from the planet's center, the weaker the pull between it and your body. If you double your distance, the force is one quarter. At ten times the distance, the force is one hundredth. It drops off with the square of the distance. This is called the [[Inverse Square Law.]] <ref>http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/forces/isq.html</ref>The force never becomes zero, no matter how far you travel.

The law itself states that each particle in the universe attracts another particle with a force directly [[proportion|proportional]] to the product of their masses and inversely proportional to the [[exponentiation|square]] of the distance between them<ref>Serway and Beichner, ''Physics for Scientists and Engineers'', Fifth Edition</ref>, or:

:<math>F = G \frac{m_1 m_2}{r^2}</math>

Where:

''F'' is the magnitude of the gravitational force.

''m''1 and ''m''2 are the object's masses.

''r'' is the distance that separates the objects.

''G'' is the [[gravitational constant]]: 6.67428x10-11 N m2 Kg -2

Gravitation is responsible for making objects accelerate towards each other as well as for the formation of the [[Earth]] and [[Sun]], the [[stars]] and the [[planets]].

==Gravity and Modern Physics==
Newton's [[Theory of Gravity]] was one of the earliest triumphs of modern [[physics]]. It now stands as both one of the most successful and most mysterious areas of that field. On one hand, the [[Theory_of_Relativity|General theory of Relativity]] is one of the most successful [[Scientific_Theory|scientific theories]] to date. On the other hand, how General Relativity might be reconciled with [[Quantum_mechanics|quantum physics]]remains an open question, and is one of the hotly contested areas among modern theoretical physicists. In the 1980s [[string theory]] was seen by many physicists as a more likely path towards a particular unification of gravity with the other fundamental forces (electromagnetism, the strong and weak nuclear forces), but the theory has been a failure.

== References ==
<div class="references-small">
<references />
[[category:physics]]

Gravitation

2007-10-19T15:20:15Z

Nyflah: Defined the terms in the equation, removed a redundant paragraph, removed a misleading sentence.

'''Gravitation''' is a [[phenomenon]] which attracts all objects within the [[universe]] to each other <ref>New Oxford American Dictionary, 2nd Edition</ref>. In modern [[physics]], it is explained by the [[Theory of relativity|General Theory of relativity]]. Before general relativity, gravitation was described by [[Sir Isaac Newton|Isaac Newton's]] law of universal gravitation in his [[Philosophiæ Naturalis Principia Mathematica|''Principia Mathematica'']], which is still useful in most situations.

Everything in the universe that has mass attracts every other thing that has mass. How much depends on the size of the masses and the distance between them. For normal objects, this pull is minute, but you can measure the pull between a very large object like the [[Earth]] and another object like you by standing on the scales. Your [[weight]] is the measure of the pull of gravity between you and the planet you are standing on. This [[force]] depends on your [[mass]] and the mass of that planet, but it also depends on your [[distance]] from the center of the planet. The further you are from the planet's center, the weaker the pull between it and your body. If you double your distance, the force is one quarter. At ten times the distance, the force is one hundredth. It drops off with the square of the distance. This is called the [[Inverse Square Law.]] <ref>http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/forces/isq.html</ref>The force never becomes zero, no matter how far you travel.

The law itself states that each particle in the universe attracts another particle with a force directly [[proportion|proportional]] to the product of their masses and inversely proportional to the [[exponentiation|square]] of the distance between them<ref>Serway and Beichner, Physics for Scientists and Engineers, Fifth Edition</ref>, or:

:<math>F = G \frac{m_1 m_2}{r^2}</math>

Where:

''F'' is the magnitude of the gravitational force.

''m''1 and ''m''2 are the object's masses.

''r'' is the distance that separates the objects.

''G'' is the [[gravitational constant]]: 6.67428x10-11 N m2 Kg -2

Gravitation is responsible for making objects accelerate towards each other as well as for the formation of the [[Earth]] and [[Sun]], the [[stars]] and the [[planets]].

==Gravity and Modern Physics==
Newton's [[Theory of Gravity]] was one of the earliest triumphs of modern [[physics]]. It now stands as both one of the most successful and most mysterious areas of that field. On one hand, the [[Theory_of_Relativity|General theory of Relativity]] is one of the most successful [[Scientific_Theory|scientific theories]] to date. On the other hand, how General Relativity might be reconciled with [[Quantum_mechanics|quantum physics]] remains an open question, and is one of the hotly contested areas among modern theoretical physicists. In the 1980s [[string theory]] was seen by many physicists as a more likely path towards a particular unification of gravity with the other fundamental forces (electromagnetism, the strong and weak nuclear forces), but the theory has been a failure.

== References ==
<div class="references-small">
<references />
[[category:physics]]

Conservative force

2007-10-19T13:56:48Z

Nyflah: Format Error

Conservative [[force|forces]] are those that possess certain properties<ref>Serway and Beichner, ''Physics for Scientists and Engineers'', Fifth Edition</ref>:

1. The [[work]] it does on a particle is independent of its [[trajectory]].

2. The work done on a particle that moves along a closed trajectory (where the initial and final positions are the same, or di = df) = 0) is zero.

When the only forces present in a system are conservative, [[mechanical energy]] is conserved.

Examples of Conservative Forces:

[[Gravitation|Gravitational Force]].

[[Hooke's Law|Force performed by a spring]].

== References ==
<References/>

[[Category: Physics]]
[[Category: Mechanics]]

Power (Physics)

2007-10-19T02:56:08Z

Nyflah: Category:mechanics

In physics, power refers to the rate of [[Work|transfer of energy]] respect to [[time]]
<ref>Serway and Beichner, ''Physics For Scientists and Engineers'', Fifth Edition</ref>.

Mathematically, average power is expressed as:

P = ''W'' / Δt

Therefore, power at any instant can be determined by the equation:

P = limΔt->0 ''W'' / Δt = dW / dt

Since d''W'' = [[Force|F]] d[[distance|x]] and [[Velocity|v]] = dx / dt follows that:

P = F · dx / dt = F · v

The usual units for power are [[Watts]] ( W = [[Joule|J]]/[[seconds|s]] ) and [[horsepower]] ( hp = 746 W )

==References==
<references/>

[[Category:Physics]]
[[Category:mechanics]]

Work

2007-10-19T02:55:22Z

Nyflah: Category:Mechanics

In [[physics]], work refers to the product of [[force]] and [[distance]] vectors
<ref>Serway and Beichner, ''Physics for Scientists and Engineers'', Fifth Edition</ref>.

''W'' = F · d

Or:

''W'' = F d Cosθ

Where θ is the angle that separates the vectors.

Work is a transfer of [[energy]]; if ''W'' is positive, there is a transfer of energy ''to'' the system, and if ''W'' is negative there is a transfer of energy ''from'' the system.

Its units are that of force multiplied by distance, in SI this is [[newton (unit)|Newton]] · [[Meter]], or [[Joule]]

==References==
<references/>
[[category:physics]]
[[Category:Mechanics]]

Kinetic Energy

2007-10-19T02:54:05Z

Nyflah: Category: Mechanics

'''Kinetic energy''' represents the [[energy]] asociated with the [[motion]] of an object.<ref>Serway and Beichner, ''Physics for Scientists and Engineers'', Fifth Edition</ref> It is defined as:

K ≡ [[mass|m]][[velocity|v]]2 / 2

The change of kinetic energy in an object is equal to the total [[work]] done on it by a [[force]]. In the case of constant force, this can be expressed as:

Σ''W'' = ΔK = mvf2 / 2 - mvi2 / 2

Where vi is [[speed]] at t = 0 and vf is speed at [[time]] = t.

Kinetic energy is a scalar and has the same units as work (i.e. [[Joule]]).

==References==
<references/>
[[category:physics]]
[[Category:mechanics]]

Conservative force

2007-10-19T02:52:35Z

Nyflah: New page: Conservative forces are those that possess certain properties<ref>Serway and Beichner, ''Physics for Scientists and Engineers'', Fifth Edition</ref>: 1. The work it does on ...

Conservative [[force|forces]] are those that possess certain properties<ref>Serway and Beichner, ''Physics for Scientists and Engineers'', Fifth Edition</ref>:

1. The [[work]] it does on a particle is independent of it's [[trajectory]].

2. The work done on a particle that moves along a closed trajectory (where the initial and final positions are the same, or di = df) = 0) is zero.

When the only forces present in a system are conservative, [[mechanical energy]] is be conserved.

Examples of Conservative Forces:

[[Gravitation|Gravitational Force]].

[[Hooke's Law|Force performed by a spring]].

== References ==
<References/>

[[Category: Physics]]
[[Category: Mechanics]]

Moral relativity

2007-10-18T13:44:12Z

Nyflah: Removed improper citations.

The [[Theory of Relativity]] has generated a huge following by advocates of moral relativism[Citation needed]. The idea of moral relativity exist independent of (and substantially predates) the theory of relativity, but some moral relativists irrelevantly invoke the theory in attempts to lend legitimacy to this version of morality.[Citation needed]

Advocates of moral relativity seized on the theory of relativity to legitimize their views.[Citation needed] Historians such as Paul Johnson wrote about how the theory of relativity caused a sea change, justified or not, in 20th century thought.
[[category:philosophy]]

== References ==
<references/>

==See Also==
[[Nihilism]]

Talk:Moral relativity

2007-10-18T13:40:28Z

Nyflah: /* Let's look up "Metaphor" */

This topic should probably become a subsection of [[Moral relativism]], as that (short) article at least defines the term, whereas this article appears to be solely concerned with the relationship between moral relativism and the Theory of Relativity.Jesus Saves 19:51, 26 July 2007 (EDT)

== Let's look up "[[Metaphor]]" ==

The source "invokes" the Theory of Relativity in the same sense that Intelligent Design invokes watches: It doesn't. It gives a metaphor (from the CP article, emphasis mine: "A metaphor is a part of speech in which two objects are compared, but '''without directly comparing them'''") for moral relativism by showing how Relativity changed the way we look at the universe.

I read the linked article, and I cannot comprehend how the Theory of Relativity (1) "generated a huge following by advocates of moral relativism", (2) is invoked "in attempts to lend legitimacy to this version of morality", or (3) was seized by advocates "to legitimize their views".

You might as well insert any other example of how a relative model replaced an absolute one. As a matter of fact, the source does just that: Before it even touches things like the speed of light, it shows how people first thought the Earth to be the center of the universe before accepting the Sun as the center (and later on correcting that idea, too): "''Relativity precedes Einstein. Actually it is the heart of the theoretical revolution of Copernicus and Galileo.''"

I suggest we merely transform this article into a redirect to [[Moral relativism]] and maybe use the source to simply give examples of how relativism replaced absolute models in some areas of science. --[[User:Jenkins|Jenkins]] 14:40, 22 September 2007 (EDT)

Correct. Whoever linked to that article apparently didn't read it and didn't bother to comprehend the quoted part, I'll remove it and hopefully somebody will find a decent reference for this weird straw man. [[User:Nyflah|Nyflah]] 09:40, 18 October 2007 (EDT)

Kinetic Energy

2007-10-17T16:19:37Z

Nyflah: Fixed a bunch of typos and format errors.

Kinetic Energy

2007-10-17T16:14:49Z

Nyflah: Some fairly big changes. Could use some help with the format of definite integrals for the work-energy theorem in non-constant forces.

'''Kinetic energy''' represents the [[energy]] asociated with the [[motion]] of an object.<ref>Serway and Beichner, ''Physics for Scientists and Engineers'', Fifth Edition</ref> It is defined as:

K ≡ [[mass|m]][[velocity|v]]2 / 2

The change of kinetic energy in an object is equal to the total [[work]] done on it by a [[force]]. In the case of constant force, this can be expressed as:

Σ''W'' = ΔK = mvf2 / 2 - mvi2 / 2

Where vf is speed at t = 0 and i2 is speed at time = t.

Kinetic energy is a scalar and has the same units as work (i.e. [[Joule]]).

==References==
<references/>
[[category:physics]]

Work

2007-10-17T12:57:10Z

Nyflah: Some fairly big changes.

Work

2007-10-17T12:54:49Z

Nyflah:

In [[physics]], work refers to the product of [[force]] and [[distance]] vectors
<ref>Serway and Beichner, ''Physics for Scientists and Engineers'', Fifth Edition</ref>.

''W'' = F · d

Work is a transfer of [[energy]]; if ''W'' is positive, there is a transfer of energy ''to'' the system, and if ''W'' is negative there is a transfer of energy ''from'' the system.

Its units are that of force multiplied by distance, in SI this is [[newton (unit)|Newton]] · [[Meter]], or [[Joule]]

==References==
<references/>
[[category:physics]]

Speed

2007-10-17T04:28:10Z

Nyflah: Corrected some things and added units.

In Physics, speed refers to the magnitude of the [[velocity]] of an object.

'''Speed''' is the total [[distance]] traveled divided by the [[time]] it takes to travel it<ref>Serway and Beichner, ''Physics for Scientists and Engineers'', Fifth Edition</ref>.

<math>Speed=\frac{d D}{d t}</math>

Note that speed is a scalar, therefore it has no direction or sign.

Like velocity, units for it's measurement are [[meter]]/[[second]] and more commonly in informal circumstances [[kilometer]]/[[hour]] and [[mile]]/[[hour]]

==References==
<references/>

[[category:physics]]
[[category:mechanics]]

Power (Physics)

2007-10-17T03:47:50Z

Nyflah: Inserted dot product notation

Power (Physics)

2007-10-17T03:24:35Z

Nyflah:

In physics, power refers to the rate of [[Work|transfer of energy]] respect to [[time]]
<ref>Serway and Beichner, ''Physics For Scientists and Engineers'', Fifth Edition</ref>.

Mathematically, average power is expressed as:

P = ''W'' / Δt

Therefore, power at any instant can be determined by the equation:

P = limΔt->0 ''W'' / Δt = dW / dt

Since d''W'' = [[Force|F]] d[[distance|x]] and [[Velocity|v]] = dx / dt follows that:

P = F dx / dt = F v

The usual units for power are [[Watts]] ( W = [[Joule|J]]/[[seconds|s]] ) and [[horsepower]] ( hp = 746 W )

==References==
<references/>

[[Category:Physics]]

Power (Physics)

2007-10-17T02:51:11Z

Nyflah:

In physics, power refers to the rate of [[Work|transfer of energy]] respect to [[time]].

Mathematically, average power is expressed as:

P = ''W'' / Δt

Therefore, power at any instant can be determined by the equation:

P = limΔt->0 ''W'' / Δt = dW / dt

Since d''W'' = [[Force|F]] d[[distance|x]] and [[Velocity|v]] = dx / dt follows that:

P = F dx / dt = F v

The usual units for power are [[Watts]] ( W = [[Joule|J]]/[[seconds|s]] ) and [[horsepower]] ( hp = 746 W )

[[Category:Physics]]

Power

2007-10-17T02:12:35Z

Nyflah: Linked to Power (Physics)

'''Power''' is the ability or authority to take effective action or exercise control. Thus in a deliberative body such as Congress, the faction able to assemble a majority bloc of votes is the faction in power. Putting three aircraft carriers into the North Arabian Sea is an example of the projection of military power.

In [[physics]], [[Power (Physics)|power]] is the rate of [[work]] done per unit [[time]]. Power can be expressed in [[Watt]]s

In [[electricity]], power is the product of [[voltage]] and [[current]]. This is also expressed in [[Watt]]s.

In [[mathematics]], a power of a number is the result of [[exponentiation]] - multiplying a number by itself a specified number of times.

[[category:legal terms]]
[[category:physics]]
[[category:Electrical Engineering]]
[[category:mathematics]]

Power (Physics)

2007-10-17T02:10:19Z

Nyflah: New page: In physics, power refers to the rate of transfer of energy respect to time. Mathematically, average power is expressed as: P = W / Δt Therefore, power at any instant can b...

In physics, power refers to the rate of [[Work|transfer of energy]] respect to [[time]].

Mathematically, average power is expressed as:

P = W / Δt

Therefore, power at any instant can be determined by the equation:

P = limΔt->0 W / Δt = dW / dt

Since W = [[Force|F]] d[[distance|x]] and [[Velocity|v]] = dx / dt follows that:

P = F dx / dt = F v

The usual units for power are [[Watts]] ( W = [[Joule|J]]/[[seconds|s]] ) and [[horsepower]] ( hp = 746 W )

[[Category:Physics]]