Difference between revisions of "Conservapedia proven right"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(a start, pleaes add to it) |
(added first one) |
||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
!Date | !Date | ||
!''Conservapedia'' statement | !''Conservapedia'' statement | ||
| + | ![[liberal]] claptrap | ||
!Result | !Result | ||
!Date of result | !Date of result | ||
|- | |- | ||
| − | | | + | |Nov. 28, 2009 |
| − | | | + | |"the theory fails": [[Counterexamples to Relativity]]: |
| − | | | + | |clueless liberals insisted the theory must be true regardless of counterexamples |
| − | | | + | |the basic assumption of the theory -- that nothing can go faster than the speed of light -- is disproved repeatedly by an experiment |
| + | |November 2011 | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | | ||
Revision as of 00:18, November 20, 2011
Conservapedia content has often been proven right, even with respect to statements that dimwitted liberals have ridiculed. Examples ininclude:
| Date | Conservapedia statement | liberal claptrap | Result | Date of result |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov. 28, 2009 | "the theory fails": Counterexamples to Relativity: | clueless liberals insisted the theory must be true regardless of counterexamples | the basic assumption of the theory -- that nothing can go faster than the speed of light -- is disproved repeatedly by an experiment | November 2011 |