Difference between revisions of "Conservapedia proven right"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(second example: Newt as the most likely to win presidential nomination) |
|||
| Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
|November 2011 | |November 2011 | ||
|- | |- | ||
| − | | | + | |Sept. 19. 2010 |
| − | | | + | |[[Newt Gingrich]] is the most likely to win the Republican nomination for President<ref>http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Presidential_Election_2012&oldid=819261</ref> |
| − | | | + | |[[Mitt Romney]] is the presumptive nominee |
| − | | | + | |Newt leads in national polls and severawl key primary states |
| + | |November 2011 | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | | ||
Revision as of 00:25, November 20, 2011
Conservapedia content has often been proven right, even with respect to statements that dimwitted liberals have ridiculed. Examples include:
| Date | Conservapedia statement | liberal claptrap | Result | Date of Result |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov. 28, 2009 | Counterexamples to Relativity: "the theory fails" | 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 |
| Sept. 19. 2010 | Newt Gingrich is the most likely to win the Republican nomination for President[1] | Mitt Romney is the presumptive nominee | Newt leads in national polls and severawl key primary states | November 2011 |