User talk:Cptstubing

And your sources to prove we have a bias? Plus, your sources that proves the liberal side of the fence is all lollipops and cuddly animals. I would love to see them. Karajou 05:48, 26 February 2015 (EST)

It seems to be absurd to claim that Conservapedia has no bias! Karajou, you yourself wrote about the Conservapedia Bible Project:

"It's already proven in all walks of life that liberals are either liars or lunatics, so any percentage of liberalism in the project just isn't going to happen. Karajou 14:19, 14 October 2009 (EDT) "

So, if there is a conservative claim and a liberal claim, Conservapedia will side with the conservative position, as the liberal position is compromised per se. That's pretty much a textbook example of bias. --AugustO 07:17, 26 February 2015 (EST)

August, you have been around here long enough to see the lies, the half-truths, the vandalism, and the attacks that come from libs. We post facts and truth here, and both hurt as far as they're concerned. This website will remain conservative. Karajou 06:48, 27 February 2015 (EST)

So, why did you even bother to ask "Cptstubing" to prove the obvious? It doesn't make sense to start an argument about facts all of us agree on. --AugustO 07:01, 27 February 2015 (EST)

Because if he's going to edit in a wiki - in any wiki - he's going to respect the website and the people in it first. If he sees something wrong, he can be sensible in identifying it, then offering a solution to fix it. Comments such as "this article is so flawed it makes my head spin" does nothing to help at all. Karajou 08:36, 27 February 2015 (EST)

Yes, we will side with the conservative position (read "bias") because we will not side with liars or lunatics who have a severe bias towards liberalism. Do you have a problem with that? Karajou 09:36, 26 February 2015 (EST)

Bias on itself isn't problematic. It just seems to be superfluous to ask for sources for the obvious. --AugustO 06:39, 27 February 2015 (EST)

Throwing down the gauntlet

Cptstubing, please point out a single factual error in the Conservapedia atheism and homosexuality articles. Conservative 10:19, 26 February 2015 (EST)

Oh, this really stands out. Under the heading "Atheism and pornography" in the topic Atheism. I just glanced at this topic for a minute and saw this. Sources for this? Are there studies that show that atheism and pornography are correlated?