Difference between revisions of "Talk:Main Page"

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search
(SamHB from Boston)
(SamHB from Boston: removed subarticle title inserted by SamHB with intent to interrupt the flow of the original reply and steal VargasMilan's thunder)
Line 275: Line 275:
===Sam: Water? You mean like from the toilet? Sam's equivocations===
===Sam: Water? You mean like from the toilet? Sam's equivocations===
===Vargas: Please get your mind out of the toilet.  It is indecorous.===
He never said it, but it's almost if you'd've expected him to, the way he equivocates, which means only using a word's definition in the sense that is convenient to him as a conveyance to different subjects as pleasing as they are irrelevant.  A vivid denunciation in a header and the lede, followed by interpretations that could mean almost anything and prove nothing. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Saturday, 09:45, 23 May 2020 (EDT)
He never said it, but it's almost if you'd've expected him to, the way he equivocates, which means only using a word's definition in the sense that is convenient to him as a conveyance to different subjects as pleasing as they are irrelevant.  A vivid denunciation in a header and the lede, followed by interpretations that could mean almost anything and prove nothing. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Saturday, 09:45, 23 May 2020 (EDT)

Revision as of 20:35, 23 May 2020

This page is for discussion only of Main Page content and feature items. For discussion of other issues relating to the Conservapedia community please see: Conservapedia:Community Portal. Please place new items at the bottom of the page.

Archive Index


Mika rips Biden a new one

There is no future for Biden after this interview: "How Mika REKT Joe Biden - Real Lawyer Explains - Viva Frei Vlawg." I am absolutely shocked. Where did this "no rape" standard come from? Bill Clinton could rape all he liked. Drudge and Norm McDonald were the only ones who ever gave him a hard time about it. PeterKa (talk) 02:28, 3 May 2020 (EDT)

20-25% of Bernie primary voters say they're not voting for Biden. VargasMilan (talk) Sunday, 02:48, 3 May 2020 (EDT)
In the most telling moment, Biden is helplessly unable to explain why he won't allow a search of the personnel records archived at University of Delaware. Mika lets us feel the awkward silence. Even the answers that sound fluent are actually full of evasive phrases and tactics, as Frei ably explains in the video above. Whether he is guilty or innocent is almost beside the point. A major party presidential candidate has to able to give a better interview than this. The superdelegates need to start thinking in terms of, "Who else can be the nominee?" PeterKa (talk) 03:39, 3 May 2020 (EDT)
I thought this affair might be part of a clever plot to replace Biden with someone Hillary might like more. According to The Week, there is no one with the authority to replace a nominee. Biden would have to drop out. But why would he? This is the only shot at the presidency he is ever going to get. If Biden dropped out before the convention, it would be Bernie Sanders' nomination. I don't think anyone wants that. So the window of opportunity is August and September. PeterKa (talk) 08:26, 3 May 2020 (EDT)

Mika, the great pretender and Biden ally. Mika intentionally does not bring up the corroborating witnesses

Mika (a friend of Joe Biden) pretended to rip Biden a new one: MSNBC finally confronts Joe Biden over Tara Reade allegations, but intentionally does it in a poor manner - leaves out corroborating witnesses and does not confront Biden over his past history of lying.[2][3]

Mika intentionally left out the corroborating evidence of Biden's purported sexual assault. But the progressives at The Hill did bring out the corroborating evidence. [4][5]

Sometimes the establishment does a weakened form of attack about a particular issue via the mainstream media in order to innoculate their followers. But once you bring up the corroborating evidence and Biden's long history of lying, then the weight of evidence goes against Biden.Conservative (talk) 04:36, 3 May 2020 (EDT)

Tara Reade’s Ex-Neighbor on Joe Biden Sexual Assault Allegation: I Believed Her Then & I Believe Her Now.[6][7]
That fact that Reade told family and friends at the time that she had problems with Biden certainly makes her more credible than Kavanaugh's accusers. All the same, it is now 27 years after the alleged incident. Why didn't she speak up in 2008 when Biden was nominated for vice president? Reade started talking to reporters a year ago, perhaps hoping that a reporter who supported a rival Democrat would be interested in her story. More recently, she cancelled a scheduled interview with Fox News. It's obviously important to her to be seen as a good Democrat.
The Anita Hill-Clarence Thomas hearing was in 1991. The hearing suggested to people at the time that if Thomas had in fact been guilty of telling a pubic hair joke to a female assistant, he'd have no defense. The Biden-Reade incident happened two years later. The "No Means No" movement was at high tide. PeterKa (talk) 22:14, 3 May 2020 (EDT)

It's a man's world. Sexual impropriety allegations against Joe Biden may not be a mortal blow

Bill Clinton, Brett Kavanaugh and Donald Trump all faced sexual impropriety allegations. All of them went on to hold office. Kavanaugh allegations were not credible, but he did have to admit to drinking to excess though.

It does seem as though post Me Too Movement that sexual assault allegations may have more punch - especially against a Democrat. For example, Al Franken threw in the towel and resigned. So the jury is still out on how damaging the sexual assault/impropriety allegations will be against Joe Biden.Conservative (talk) 05:00, 3 May 2020 (EDT)

Masks, coronavirus countermeasures and the culture war. Politicalization/political rigidity clouds judgment


More and more I see how becoming more ideological/political rather than being evidence-based and objective in one's decisions is detrimental to making sound decisions.

Wearing a mask vs. not wearing a mask is now part of the culture war.[8]

From an evidential/scientific point of view of tackling the coronavirus crisis, I see Republicans and right-wingers not stressing the utility of masks enough and are more likely to be anti-vaccine extremists. Furthermore, Republicans and conservatives are less likely to see the utility of social distancing (I realize there is a spectrum on the degree of social distancing). On the other hand, right-wingers are better at stressing the importance of taking responsibility via weight loss in order to reduce one's mortality rate and being a burden on the health care system (obese coronavirus require more intensive care usage for coronavirus patients). In addition, right-wingers are often more practical when it comes to border security as a means to keep coronavirus from infecting the native population. Also, Republicans and right-wingers stress how a recessionary/depressionary economy can increase mortality rates (suicide, etc.). Furthermore, right-wingers see the utility of Vladimir Zelenko's coronavirus treatment (Hydroxychloroquine).

I think Asians like Taiwanese, Singaporeans and Japanese are tackling the coronavirus pandemic better because they seem more practical and less ideological. They also seem to be more disciplined societies that also stress personal responsibility (keeping a healthy weight). There is a healthy balance between acting in a way for the common good and taking personal responsibility.

I asked a grocery clerk I know if she personally knew a family member or friend who died of coronavirus. Sure enough, it was a overweight family member in his 50s who was taken off a respirator and died shortly afterwards.Conservative (talk) 06:55, 3 May 2020 (EDT)

Liberals/leftists are more likely to be advocates of "fat acceptance" and to be more against "fat shaming". The Japanese are more practical and do not embrace "fat acceptance". I don't see Singaporeans embracing the "fat acceptance" movement anytime soon either.Conservative (talk) 07:04, 3 May 2020 (EDT)

Conservapedia stories converging: Business as usual crony medicine favoritism, top offenders of which not proven but with no explanation for behavior prematurely knocks away Bill Gates domino

Theory: the false models that forced Western governments into lockdown, made up by Neil Ferguson, a Bill Gates cutout. Trump has chance now in this month and next to pull curtain from the hysteria op by elevating rival scientists (Ioannidis etc.)

I'm not going to be citing sources at Twitter for a while. The slackers who moderate Twitter, as shown by James O'Keefe's reports, are activists, and now they think it's funny to play games with the operation of accounts that talk too much about (other) liberals who abuse their power. VargasMilan (talk) Monday, 00:18, 4 May 2020 (EDT)

Gilead Science can't give away their remdesivir drug. Or rather, they do, and it doesn't catch on. I think they gave out a million and a half free doses. Is "pirahna" marketing (payoffs?) the reason why Gov. Cuomo halted research on the Sean-Hannity-promoted hydroxychloroquine preventative regimen by Dr. Zelenko, and who then appealed to Donald Trump in a video, and then on behalf of whom Trump stepped in to allow?

The patent on hydroxychloroquine is expired, while Gilead Science's remdesivir is still current and potentially lucrative.


Remdesivir was rapidly pushed through clinical trials due to the West African Ebola virus epidemic of 2013-2016, eventually being used in people with the disease. Preliminary results were promising; it was used in the emergency setting during the Kivu Ebola epidemic that started in 2018, along with further clinical trials, until August 2019, when Congolese health officials announced that it was significantly less effective than monoclonal antibody treatments such as mAb114 and REGN-EB3. The trials, however, established its safety profile.
As of April 2020, remdesivir was viewed as the most likely promising treatment for COVID-19 by Johns Hopkins University. Data from one randomized controlled trial was released early in error and before peer review; it did not show improvement. Gilead Sciences stated that due to low enrollment the study was halted while a non-associated researcher stated it does mean if there is any benefit, then that benefit will be small. Other clinical trials were underway or planned.

Yet at the end of April (the 29th) it gets a new burst of publicity from a Trump enemy:

"Gilead’s remdesivir is likely to get speedy approval or expanded use after the company said the drug worked in coronavirus patients, Wall Street analysts say." —Bloomberg Business

This yielded some uncharitable comments:

"Didn't independent studies show it's basically useless
>the company said the drug worked
Oh ok then take my money
"Reminder this is a failed ebola drug which was hastily ghetto-rigged into a corona drug except all trials which say it works were done by Gilead, the manufacturer who stands to make a fortune off it, themselves[,] and the few independent trials there were[,] showed that it's useless"

The world doesn't begin with hydroxychloroquine and end with remdesivir, however. There are other drugs thought to be virus inhibitors whose best dosages seem to converge on an optimal level: amodiaquine, atazanavir, camostat, ciclesonide, dipyridamole, doxycycline, favipiravir, HTCC polymer, IFN-α 2b, indomethacin, itraconazole, mefloquine, nelfinavir, niclosamide, nitazoxanide, rimantidine, teicoplanin, tetrandrine.

Nevertheless, a poll showed that the most-used treatment for front-line doctors was hydroxychloroquine. VargasMilan (talk) Tuesday, 01:27, 5 May 2020 (EDT)

Bill Gates' foundation also invested close to a billion dollars in cell nodes capable of 5G technology in February. These are not cell towers but nodes along public throughfares!

VargasMilan (talk) Monday, 02:34, 4 May 2020 (EDT)

Yellow fever and partisan cures

!n 1793, yellow fever killed 10 percent of the population of Philadelphia, then the U.S. capital. Both Hamilton's Federalist Party and Jefferson's Republican Party had been organized the previous year, so partisan politics was new and exciting. Hamilton favored the quinine treatment of Dr. Edward Stevens while Jefferson preferred a bleed-and-purge regime developed by Dr. Benjamin Rush. (It sounds like more like torture than a treatment.) Quinine is of course a natural equivalent to the synthetic hydroxychloroquine used by Zelenko. Both medicines fight virus infection by increasing zinc uptake.[9] PeterKa (talk) 07:33, 4 May 2020 (EDT)

High page views for CP pages...

Did anyone else notice that the CP page for Abby Finkenauer got over 8,000 views, not to mention that the page for Abigail Spanberger got over 5,000 views? In fact, the latter page was only created three days ago. I'm not entirely sure why, and this does seem very interesting, as I've always been observing page view numbers. One speculation is, since I exposed some of these freshman Democrats for being fake "moderates", if their name is searched in a search engine along with the keyword "moderate", the CP page for the subject will show up in among the top results. --LiberaltearsYour reminder that Biden committed quid pro joe 00:07, 5 May 2020 (EDT)

My own personal impression is for certain controversial high-profile Democrat elected officials, CP is one of the first sites DNC operatives sometimes check in their efforts to control narratives. When negative information exists, they may check here first before waiting for Brietbart or someone else to write on a subject. For example in the Katie Hill episode, Hill was forced to resign by Pelosi before the neo-nazi narrative took root and they thus preserved her as a victim of homophobia. Again, I observed a discussion board in 2019 debating how to address some of the points raised about Cory Booker back here. I suggests watching for news items that in someway try to address or obfuscate the content of those two articles. RobSLive Free or Die 17:18, 6 May 2020 (EDT)
That's certainly an interesting analysis. --LiberaltearsYour reminder that Biden committed quid pro joe 17:56, 6 May 2020 (EDT)
It's also important to note that those pages have the Template:Democrat establishment transclusion, so your take does seem very likely, as they directly refute the narratives promoted by the DNC, DSCC, and DCCC. After all, for people who understand U.S. politics, who would've thought that establishment Democrats are actually left-wing deceitful bait-and-switch pulling politicians focused on impeaching Trump rather than keeping campaign promises? After all, it's totally not like they wanted to impeach Trump ever since the latter got elected in 2016... --LiberaltearsYour reminder that Biden committed quid pro joe 18:04, 6 May 2020 (EDT)
Alexa reports a growth of inbound links to CP. In the past month there have been at least three times where CP gained at least 20 inbound links overnight. These could be links from Democrat discussion boards to review the content. You need a good program to check for inbound links to those pages to confirm. RobSLive Free or Die 18:44, 6 May 2020 (EDT)
It could potentially be some idiots in Democratic Underground. --LiberaltearsYour reminder that Biden committed quid pro joe 19:43, 6 May 2020 (EDT)
Yes, them plus 20 other discussion boards. If I remember correct, it was this back link checker where I found a discussion board vetting information in the early days of the 2020 presidential election article. RobSLive Free or Die 19:59, 6 May 2020 (EDT)
Seems quite interesting... --LiberaltearsYour reminder that Biden committed quid pro joe 20:02, 6 May 2020 (EDT)
Alternatively, when negative information exists we may be one of the first sites they check to see if we got hold of it, which would generate traffic even if we don't have the information yet. That could be a telltale signs such information exists if there's high traffic to an otherwise mundane article. RobSLive Free or Die 20:13, 6 May 2020 (EDT)
@ Liberaltears said: "I'm not entirely sure why, and this does seem very interesting, as I've always been observing page view numbers." Unfortunately, we aren't going to know why. I asked for the ability to do full-scale metrics some time ago, but there didn't seem to be any interest in it. Now the time you are referencing has passed, and the metrics can't know the past unless they were in place during that time period. Conservapedia keeps losing a lot of opportunities such as this one due to not having a more comprehensive page metrics system in place. Progressingamerica (talk) 19:18, 17 May 2020 (EDT)
Are you referring to something like a line graph showing page views over time? --LiberaltearsJust say no to quid pro joe! | Free Roger Stone! 19:42, 17 May 2020 (EDT)
Yes, among other things. Full scale metrics would also provide a simple total page views, which we currently have(so that would not be lost), but in addition there should be line graphs, multiple page comparison, probably alerts, and most importantly 30-60-x day time period metrics. The ability to see what pages drop off or what pages suddenly become active would be a game changer for us. I say "should", because during implementation there would be discretion on which would be enabled. Right now we're just kinda coasting along blindly based on whims, without the ability to react and take control of our own destiny. Progressingamerica (talk) 00:22, 23 May 2020 (EDT)

Coronavirus, semi-serious Americans and tackling a solution

I have noticed that Americans are semi-serious about masks. Despite masks being mandatory in some areas of the USA in public areas, people's use of them is semi-serious. Like some might have a mask on their head, but it is not over their mouth/nose. Because many people are creatures of habit and do not like masks.

And many Americans are overweight and people who are overweight have much higher mortality risks when they get infected with coronavirus.

As far as the medical establishment, it appears as if they will not get serious about backing an effective treatment unless a profitable drug backed by well-funded research is done. And cheaper drugs do not have lots of research related to coronavirus treatment because the return on investment is not there. In short, in order to get medical establishment backing, the USA government would have to do the research and many times government is slow and ineffective.

After all is said and done, I don't think this coronavirus situation will be greatly resolved until there is a vaccine.Conservative (talk) 05:31, 5 May 2020 (EDT)

The warm weather may rapidly reduce the transmission rate in this country. But I think only college-age students and younger should go to the beach or park if there ought to be a lockdown like in New York City. For some reason they are neither prone to infection or transmitting the disease. VargasMilan (talk) Wednesday, 04:58, 6 May 2020 (EDT)

Ferguson, Obama break lockdown rules

The people responsible for the lockdown rules know that they are bogus. Why should they follow them? "Exclusive: Government scientist Neil Ferguson resigns after breaking lockdown rules to meet his married lover." The Wuhan virus hasn't interrupted Obama's golfing schedule. Unlike lockdowns, sunlight is a proven virus fighter. We should all go out and get more, just like Obama. Yet California's beaches remain closed. PeterKa (talk) 20:58, 5 May 2020 (EDT)

Well, can't say I'm surprised that the Democrats would pull something like that, seeing that they exempt themselves from the same rules they impose on everyone else and expect us to follow (the same kind of stunt pulled by Justin Trudeau up here in Canada). It's just another example of just how much a group of elitists liberal politicians and public officials really become any time they're able to get any measure of power. Northwest (talk) 02:44, 6 May 2020 (EDT)
I think RobS and Conservative agree with me that large cities that have a lot of potential sufferers with pre-existing conditions (hypertension, obesity, age) or put themselves at risk of non-compliance, might benefit from a lockdown, but I don't understand why the focus is not on the persons with pre-existing conditions to begin with instead of quarantining the healthy. Or rather, now that those pre-existing conditions are known, wouldn't it be good change strategies? No, because maybe someone will get the idea to assassinate the elderly? Or maybe someone will pretend to live with someone with pre-existing conditions and not go to work? Or maybe more realistically some kids couldn't go to school, and there'd be large populations out of sync?
Here's my speculation: many liberals actually wanted to condition non-socialist countries into shutting down longer and in more places than necessary each time a virus appears and provide dazzle camouflage for the faults of socialist countries and cities.
One last thing: Viral outbreaks like the flu are measured in seasons. The Wuhan virus infected about 3.6 million people worldwide, while a flu virus in a season can typically infect 4-5 million flu patients. So the Wuhan virus is both as fatal as flu and as contageous as well, as we're well into the start of a new season—and one where the flu typically dies out in the United States due to warm weather.
VargasMilan (talk) Wednesday, 04:44, 6 May 2020 (EDT)
We're walking a fine line here. Masks work. It's a question of arresting people for not wearing masks, and getting voluntary compliance. For this reason conservative and libertarian sites ought to be very careful about stirring up resistance and trash talking government and science experts.
The simple facts are: masks are not worn to prevent catching the virus, they are worn to prevent spreading the virus from asymptomatic individuals (a majority of the population) to vulnerable persons. It is a simple matter of publicly displaying respect for other human beings. Until this simple basic fact is understood by the general population, most people ought to just shut about lockdowns and other things they do not understand. RobSLive Free or Die 00:22, 7 May 2020 (EDT)
I agreed with your arguments that you made for wearing masks when you made them, which you have just now repeated, and you have my thanks for reinforcing the important information they contain. In fact, some counties have required that all citizens wear masks. But working citizens who live in small towns and rural areas shouldn't be made to suffer financially for the sins of big cities, which can be amplified by who's running them.
Let's talk about the advice of state and science experts when they come into conflict with each other. I think all hands agree lockdowns need to be flexible as infomation comes in. But in Florida, with a Republican governor, once it was learned that the virus affected the elderly, as was shown in a Washington state nursing home at the very beginning of the U.S. outbreak, the state government quarantined all elderly altogether above a certain age who happened to be in hospitals or nursing homes. But in the State of New York, Wuhan virus patients were required to be admittable in any nursing home. I still don't know why. To fight a non-existent sickness-stigma?
Maybe it was part of the virus being politicized by New York City officials to make Trump look bad by, for example, encouraging people to attend a Chinese parade in the city (while the contagion of the Wuhan virus passed undetected, ironically started by visitors from Europe). Consequently, New York has had nine times as many Wuhan virus cases as Florida, which also has large cities (though, true, it has a warmer climate).
One last thing to emphasize the danger of the virus that Rob brought forward (which I agree with): I mentioned the Wuhan virus infection was shown to have same contagion rate and fatality rate as the flu. But as someone said in an earlier section of this page, the duration is thought to be seventy days for those who succumb to a full infection and survive. That alone proves it can't be treated the same as the flu when comparisons are unknown, especially for those above the age of likely infection—which is yet another dangerous unknown in formulating public policy, because it's a matter of degrees after a certain point.
Does that mean I agree with the Michigan protestors? I only agree that a non-responsive Governor who was thought to have abondoned her constitutional role may have been more dangerous to the welfare of Michiganians than the virus—after all, look at Justin Trudeau's gun seizure edict and repression of the freedom of peaceful assembly afterward. VargasMilan (talk) Thursday, 03:23, 7 May 2020 (EDT)
What is needed is basic education. There is still much unknown about the virus. Statistics are becoming useless for two reasons (1) China lying about data (death's there may have exceeded a million already), and (2) because Congress in the U.S. has incentivized padding the numbers. Scientifically speaking, we're left with smaller sample populations, such as South Korea, Taiwan, Singapore, and Hong Kong to gather any meaningful scientific data and statistics. Key here also is an educated population about mitigation, masks, social distancing, lockdowns, etc.
When the U.S. committed to flattening the curve, we also committed to lengthening the time of exposure to the pandemic. But let me return to the original point - there is still much unknown about the novel virus. Conversely, South Korea, Taiwan, Singapore, and Hong Kong don't need an extended period time to educate the populace on mitigation efforts - the U.S. does. And yes, we have cultural resistance to learning those mitigation efforts our East Asian partners may not have.
What is known (so far) is some 30 strains of the virus, which presumably explains why some people who allegedly are recovered get sick again. and it complicates the need for some 30 vaccines.
Here's the point that is difficult to swallow - you can't avoid catching the virus. It will happen, unless you move to Antarctica or somewhere. So then people ask, "What's the point of preventative efforts" (lockdowns, masks, etc.). Like speaking to school children, you must explain the difference between "preventative" and "mitigation". Again, back to the problem of asymptomatic carriers, young, healthy, stupid, culturally resistant people (of whatever political stripe). Our best mitigation effort is to show compassion, respect, and tolerance for other people who may have weakened immune systems. It is a social phenomena that the heavy-hand of government will have difficulty imposing on a culturally resistant United States. In China, the threat of tossing you into a quarantine gulag for not wearing a mask is effective.
Do we have communist tyrant governors, mayors, and sheriffs in the United States? Yes. Does trash-talking mitigation efforts and building a resistance movement to wearing masks and social distancing an appropriate reaction? No.
A question comes to the fore: What about relief from liability to employers and business owners from lawsuits as employers recall employees and customers go shopping again, and someone contracts the illness? Here mitigation efforts, i.e. educating the populace, if we want to reopen America is essential. Ok, so a business won't let a customer in cause he's not wearing a mask, and the customer shoots and kills the security guard. What now?
This is why I warn about trash talking mitigation efforts. You will get sick sometime in the next two years. You have a responsibility to yourself, and to others, to educate yourself and understand what is happening. If you think Chinese Communism is superior to democracy and freedom, go ahead, be ignorant of the world. If you think the United States should not cower and you love your freedom, you have a responsibility to educate yourself on the facts that are known now, and a responsibility to strangers you pass on the street, in shops, your, friends, family, and co-workers. And there is no more time to debate this subject. RobSLive Free or Die 04:12, 7 May 2020 (EDT)

Biden's back; Me Too is dead

For a few days, it was touch and go. But today the Dems decisively rallied behind Biden. "It Would Be Completely Absurd to Force Biden Out of the Race," as Jonathan Chait puts it. It's not that I disagree. But Tara Reade's accusations are both more serious and more credible than those against Kavanaugh. Reade should obviously have gone to a therapist since liberal pundits all trot out the argument that Blasey Ford is credible on account of her "therapist notes." I have to say, Huh? For a more articulate refutation, see "Tara Reade's neighbor offers stronger corroboration than Christine Blasey Ford's therapist notes." If feminists still back Biden, perhaps its time to dump Me Too and revert to a traditional "innocent until proven guilty" standard. We've been around this racetrack before. Hillary Clinton killed the "No Means No" movement in 1998 when she announced that the women who accused her husband were pawns of a "vast right-wing conspiracy." PeterKa (talk) 10:18, 6 May 2020 (EDT)

Here is an interesting ngram for "No Means No." Guess what? Usage peaked in 1997. PeterKa (talk) 10:27, 6 May 2020 (EDT)
Peter, you're going to need lot more instruction and experience before you ever become a good statistician. Besides that, women are very mysterious, and you may learn more about what they think by what they don't say, than what they say. But then again I guess the chart shows that too. So never mind. VargasMilan (talk) Wednesday, 22:09, 6 May 2020 (EDT)
  • Chait argues that if Biden was forced out, his voters would be disinfranchised. But Dems also voted for Bernie and for other candidates. Were those voters "disinfranchised" when their candidates dropped out? The candidates that most people vote for end up dropping out. That's just the way the process is set up.The title "presumptive nominee" is bestowed by the pundits, not by divine right. The nomination process is all about what's best for the party. If Biden drops out before the convention, his delegates will vote their preference the old fashioned way. The problem is that they might vote for Bernie. Hillary won't stand for that. The party establishment is terrified of Hillary. PeterKa (talk) 20:31, 7 May 2020 (EDT)
It's still a man's world when it comes to U.S. presidential politics. Biden is not going to drop out due to Me Too Movement problems. Democrats want to beat Trump and Biden, despite all his problems, is their best shot because they are a pathetic party with a bench that is not deep. Once again, Democrat ladies are going to have to suck it up, hold their noses, and submissively do what the Democrat men tell them to do! Of course, the Democratic women/feminists are too proud to admit this!Conservative (talk) 21:29, 7 May 2020 (EDT)
The Biden campaign --> Battered Wife Syndrome on the Democrat Plantation. RobSLive Free or Die 21:46, 7 May 2020 (EDT)

Biden going down

"According to the poll, 45% of Americans said Trump was better suited to create jobs, while 32% said Biden was the better candidate for that. That pushed Trump's advantage over Biden in terms of job creation to 13 points, compared with the Republican president's 6-point edge in a similar poll that ran in mid-April.

Thirty-seven percent said Trump was better leading the country's coronavirus response, while 35% preferred Biden. A similar poll in mid-April showed Biden had a slight edge over Trump when it came to the nation's response to the disease." https://www.haaretz.com/us-news/biden-loses-edge-on-trump-in-latest-poll-1.8825310 —unsigned comment by NishanXavier (talk) Wednesday, 16:03, 6 May 2020 (EDT)

A week before Iowa, the polls told us Biden would win Iowa, come in a strong second in New Hampshire, and sweep his way to the nomination. He was fourth in Iowa with 15 percent of the vote. In New Hampshire he came in fifth with 8 percent. Nothing so dramatic will happen in a national election. But we can expect him to continue to underperform. PeterKa (talk) 06:43, 7 May 2020 (EDT)

Ann Coulter and the Neocon Lab

Interesting read from Ann Coulter here.

Personally, I believe the virus itself was cooked up in a neocon lab, not just the "Wuhan lab" theory. --Geopolitician (talk) 23:05, 6 May 2020 (EDT)

Are neocons really that awful or something? --LiberaltearsYour reminder that Biden committed quid pro joe 23:37, 6 May 2020 (EDT)
I'm a big Coulter fan, but I found this article disappointing. Lab leaks happen. They aren't a conspiracy theory. See "SARS escaped Beijing lab twice." In her last column, she pointed the finger at bat eating, the "primitive Chinese custom." Nobody eats bats in China. None of the bat-eating videos that made the rounds on the Internet were actually filmed in China. Most were from Cambodia. There is nothing unsanitary about eating a bat, provided you cook it first. Now Coulter is blaming pangolins. Here is the Journal of Medical Virology: "Interestingly, the coronavirus carried by pangolins did not have the RRAR motif. Therefore, we concluded that the human SARS‐CoV‐2 virus, which is responsible for the recent outbreak of COVID‐19, did not come directly from pangolins." PeterKa (talk) 01:56, 7 May 2020 (EDT)
LiberalTears, yes they are that awful. Actually, "evil" is a better term to use. --Geopolitician (talk) 12:04, 7 May 2020 (EDT)

U.S. is responsible for 32% of worldwide fatalities outside Italy and China, but 50% of them are overcounts, so it's 19%

The U.S. federal government sent out a directive to states to call deaths with a component of the Wuhan virus infection among other components to report the resulting cause of death as a Wuhan flu virus death. This was apparently because it would be easier and would be making use of a less easily disputable count to compensate medical facilities who had to deal with those infectious patients, especially if the medical system became overloaded. The directive explicitly said they only sought a 50% accuracy with regard to the actual number of those who succumbed to the disease, with health care providers financially motivated to err on the side of more victims.

A reporter looking for publicity (she had just published a book) said there were more fatalities in the United States due to the Wuhan flu than U.S. fatalities in the Vietnam War. But if the recording practice is correct, there have been 50% of 73,863 fatalities or about 37,000 Wuhan virus fatalities, which is less than the number of U.S. fatalities in the Vietnam War. VargasMilan (talk) Thursday, 04:01, 7 May 2020 (EDT)

This is fake news and pseudoscience. No one knows the number of deaths in China. The CCP is paying $420 in hush money to families of victims in Wuhan and threatening anybody who talks about it. RobSLive Free or Die 13:46, 9 May 2020 (EDT)
What? Pseudo-science? If your purpose here, among those who are trying to get a good picture of today's political environment, is to hurt my feelings, well, mission accomplished.
Let's take a more careful look: Worldwide Wuhan virus fatalities totalled without CHINA AND ITALY, as I described it, is 270,990 (world total without counting China) minus 30,201 in Italy brings world total fatalities minus those that were mentioned to 240,789, as of yesterday.
The U.S. recorded 77,661 fatalities and, by hypothesis, half are fake. The number of phantom fatalities would then be 38,830. Now subtract that from the world without China or Italy (240,789) and you get 201,959.
By the same token the number of actual U.S. Wuhan virus fatalities is 38,830, half of what was reported. Now just divide through, and you get 19.23%. VargasMilan (talk) Saturday, 19:15, 9 May 2020 (EDT)
Ok, my apologies. I'm sorry, I spoke too soon on the facts as the way you have explained them. My only hope is to qualify them as authoritive, either by disassociating these facts from the officially sanction WHO/CCP apparatus, or in the name of some other qualified organization, group, person or yourself. RobSLive Free or Die 19:55, 9 May 2020 (EDT)
I got the data from the website you passed along to me: "covid19info.live". It's run by a user named "shortbread". VargasMilan (talk) Wednesday, 19:44, 13 May 2020 (EDT)

Des conservateurs américains nient la relativité d'Einstein

Barthélémy, Pierre (April 3, 2013). "American conservatives deny Einstein's relativity." Le Monde website.
"Plusieurs de ces 48 pseudo-preuves n'ont pas de lien direct avec la relativité et elles montrent surtout que ceux qui les ont rassemblées – lesquels semblent vouloir se contenter de la théorie newtonienne de la gravitation – ne comprennent pas grand chose au sujet. Un constat que confirme l'examen de leurs sources. Pour ces 48 contre-exemples, on compte seulement 30 références et parmi ces 30 références, une seule est un article publié dans une revue scientifique à comité de lecture...."
Google translate:
Several of these 48 pseudo-proofs have no direct link with relativity and show above all that those who gathered them - who seem to want to be content with Newtonian theory of gravitation - do not understand much about the subject. A finding that confirms the examination of their sources. For these 48 counterexamples, there are only 30 references and among these 30 references, only one is an article published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal....
"So, Pierre, you called Conservapedia's Counterexamples to Relativity 'pseudo-proofs' and construed that only one of the list's referenced articles was 'published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal', a state of affairs which is 'confirmed' by your inspections that 'show above all that those who gathered them...do not understand much about the subject.'"
"That's right."
"Tell me, how many of Einstein's papers would you construe were peer-reviewed by the journals in which they appeared?"
"? Just a minute." [goes back inside]
[ten minutes later, comes out]
"I'm not supposed to talk to you."

VargasMilan (talk) Thursday, 09:48, 7 May 2020 (EDT)

"I'm not supposed to talk to you" - that sounds just like one of the rote replies that those confronted by Canada's Rebel News give in response when questioned about the illegal shenanigans of Justin Trudeau and his Liberals (or any other left-wing provincial party currently in power), their cronies and their liberal media (i.e. CBC, etc.) lapdogs, along with other liberal/leftist public officials (and the criminals they protect), corrupt police officers, Marxist college professors, leftist special interest groups and Communist professional protestors, and for the same exact reasons - like the groups I mentioned for their own reasons, those critical of the counterexamples to relativity, who dismissively call them "pseudo-proof" without giving any explanation why they make that claim, are extremely uncomfortable with the truth getting out and don't want it being exposed to the light of day for fear that their already-shaky and fragile narratives would be ripped to shreds. Northwest (talk) 03:40, 8 May 2020 (EDT)
This and the Jimmy Kimmel one are my favorite satires that I did. Could I have reached peak Milan? VargasMilan (talk) Friday, 10:51, 8 May 2020 (EDT)

SamHB from Boston

SamHB from Boston is apparently alive and well in hard-hit Massachusetts, his feelings still attached to Einstein's relativity. I wonder why Pierre Barthélémy didn't read SamHB's replies? With sounder arguments, he wouldn't have needed to contort himself into ridiculous positions to try and refute the counterexamples. Then again maybe he read an early draft where Sam said in the equation E=mc2, the "c" stands "constant" not "celerity" and gave up. VargasMilan (talk) Thursday, 23:31, 7 May 2020 (EDT)

I'm pretty sure I never wrote, in any draft anywhere, that "c" in E=mc2 stands for "constant". Can you cite the diff? I generally cite the diff when I am claiming that someone wrote something. Your reputation for accuracy, probity, and honesty would be enhanced if you did that. Now I probably did write that "c" stands for "constant" in a page on indefinite integration. SamHB (talk) 01:44, 23 May 2020 (EDT)
This is the smoking gun for the peculiar claim you made about "constants" that I described. No integration.
OK, thank you for clarifying that for me. The discussion was about whether the speed of light has changed measurably in cosmological time. Speculation on this subject (other than nonsense from creationists) involves calculation of the fine structure constant from spectroscopic examination of stars in deep cosmological time. (See C_decay for a discussion of this.) While the change, authored by me, does contain the word "constant", it does not relate that to the "c" of E=mc2. The change also contains these words: counterexample, century, causing, conserved, complete, concern, classical, collide, can, calibration, considered, correct, clear, course, correspondence, complex, core, collapse, cited, comes, Conservapedia, claim, and cable. None of them are suggested as the origin for the letter designating the speed of light. In fact, that designation long predates the speculation on whether the speed of light has changed. It very well may have been based on "celerity"; I don't know or care. And thank you for the song lyrics below, or whatever that is. SamHB (talk) 20:36, 23 May 2020 (EDT)
Pistol was still smoking/Man lay on the floor. Sam
HB said he had an understanding with the law
Your intellectual methods would be well-accredited outwardly to seize the first opportunity to learn to use the search engine.
Tangentially, I'd advise you tend to your own reputation to see if the virtues you describe haven't already escaped you in some way, remarkable as it may seem. To the point of this tangent: If the 1919 eclipse fakery didn't sway any physicist to reconsider, it's doubtful they'd change their mind on account of any future adverse exposure. After all, it's majority rule, and sometimes the majority is prejudicial. VargasMilan (talk) Saturday, 08:55, 23 May 2020 (EDT)
My goodness! I'm quite surprised by the reception I got for one tiny change to a number. I guess I'm a rather renowned person around here. I'm flattered, because I often get the idea that I'm not well liked. It's good to know that I have some fans. I'll have more to say on these issues soon, but I've been very busy of late. By the way, I'm not from Boston. SamHB (talk) 15:54, 12 May 2020 (EDT)
If facepalms are a sign of esteem, you're 100% correct. VargasMilan (talk) Thursday, 03:26, 14 May 2020 (EDT)
I strongly suspect that Einstein was right about relativity for the most part. I have a Christian friend who is a scientist and reasonable man and he told me that Einstein was probably right. After looking at one of my diagrams, my physics high school teacher said I might be a physicist some day, but I will never be an artist. :) So that is the expertise I bring to the table. :)
Greeting Cons! You say sensible things occasionally. But I'd suggest that you not couple relativity with religion. I'm sure you know lots of Christian friends, and I'd guess that every single one of them who is not a Conservapedia contributor accepts relativity. I also know lots of Christian friends (as well as Jewish, atheist, agnostic, and so on), and I'm sure they all accept relativity. Keep up the good work. SamHB (talk) 15:54, 12 May 2020 (EDT)
If you read the Irreligion and superstition article, it cites a Wall Street Journal article citing research that shows that evangelical Christians are less likely to believe pseudoscience and superstition. That is why I mentioned that my scientist friend is a Bible-believing Christian and is reasonable too. Sorry I did not make this more explicit.
You don't need to apologize for that; what you said is quite clear, to me at least. I would guess that essentially all of your acquaintances are Christian, scientifically literate, reasonable, and accepting of relativity. SamHB (talk) 01:44, 23 May 2020 (EDT)
With that being said, ultimately you have to run carefully designed experiments and duplicate results to achieve a high degree of scientific certainty. Conservative (talk) 16:56, 12 May 2020 (EDT)
Absolutely right. And the experiments that validate relativity have probably been run millions of times over the last 100 years. SamHB (talk) 01:44, 23 May 2020 (EDT)
I also know that force equals mass times acceleration. I did create a lot of weighty atheism articles with great alacrity so Conservapedia is a force to be reckoned with when it comes to the topic of atheism. :) Conservative (talk) 23:45, 7 May 2020 (EDT)
I do appreciate the humor, and the pun on "alacrity". SamHB (talk) 15:54, 12 May 2020 (EDT)
In that case, if I were to edit the Einstein article, you might be a bit surprised by what you found, beside his scientific papers never being peer reviewed by the journals in which they appear. I'm sure many good and decent men believe evolution is still a soundly established scientific theory. And some of them are just goobers who try to insult Conservapedia. VargasMilan (talk) Friday, 00:11, 8 May 2020 (EDT)
I'm not sure what you mean. Why don't you edit it, and then I'll tell you whether I am surprised.
I was talking to Conservative. VargasMilan (talk) Saturday, 10:36, 23 May 2020 (EDT)

Relativity Denial? Really? It's still around?

I had thought that relativity denial had died out here at Conservapedia. Andy Schlafly seems to have lost interest, just as he had earlier lost interest in Complex number denial, Axiom of Choice denial, and his strange definition of elementary proof. Of course, he can speak for himself.

But I had thought that relativity denial had truly died out, and that my job was finished, which is why I haven't been around for a few months. Now I've noticed that occasionally someone other than Andy gets on the relativity denial bandwagon, and I had generally assumed that these were just cases of sycophancy. And I had noticed that such people seem to disappear when asked serious questions about the subject. In fact, this phenomenon was described, quite some time ago, in my [10] section.

A great man once said, "he who asserts move prove"! He really meant something different, but with the typo, he gave the logical rule a pleasantly dramatic sense of urgency.
I'm not going respond to your little jabs, even though you don't grasp the concept of being able to argue both sides of the case or the concept of you and AugustO repeating stale arguments because you think they are game-changers. I won't respond because you serve up sycophancy sandwiches and hidden inside is the assumption that only someone showing personal favoritism to Andy could ever defend any of his ideas. Tough luck for you. VargasMilan (talk) Saturday, 09:18, 23 May 2020 (EDT)

I can't believe that I need to explain that Einstein's papers on relativity were peer-reviewed

The ignorance is utterly appalling. It has to be intentional.

But, since some people here seem to think that relativity, not to mention reality, is "fake news", let me spell it out for you.

Einstein's four main papers on relativity:

  • On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies (Zur Elektrodynamik Bewegter körper)
  • Does the Inertia of a Body Depend on its Energy-Content? (Ist die Trägheit eines Körpers von seinem Energieinhalt abhängig?)
  • On the Influence of Gravitation on the Propagation of Light (über den einfluß der schwerkraft auf die ausbreitung des lichtes)
  • The Foundation of the General Theory of Relativity (Die Grundlage der allgemeinen Relativitätstheorie)

were all published in Annalen der Physik, a renowned scientific journal that's been around for 220 years. Its submissions are peer-reviewed. While it's possible that the peer-review process might not have been as rigorous in 1905 as it is now, that is easily made up for by the fact that these papers have been world-famous for over 100 years, and the Theory of Relativity has been effectively peer-reviewed thousands of times over by thousands of scientists. Wikipedia ariticle on Annalen der Physik says that its articles are peer-reviewed. For people who don't accept reality, here's the information for people wishing to make submissions:

Only original papers not yet published and not simultaneously submitted for publication elsewhere can be accepted.
"When considering submission of an article to Annalen der Physik, read the General Information (see http://www.physik.uni-augsburg.de/annalen) carefully. In case of any questions, contact the Editor-in-Chief. Submit your paper as simple PDF document via our online submission system (ScholarOne) at http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/andp. Your submission must be accompanied by a statement that the paper has not been submitted simultaneously to another journal. A covering letter explaining briefly why you believe your article is appropriate for Annalen der Physik will be appreciated. Please also indicate in the cover letter the Editor to whom your paper should be forwarded. Annalen der Physik is a double peer-reviewed journal with a preceding editorial screening."

Anyone wishing to submit Conservapedia's Counterexamples to Relativity page to Annalen der Physik is welcome to do so. Let us now how it turns out. SamHB (talk) 01:44, 23 May 2020 (EDT)

Sam: Water? You mean like from the toilet? Sam's equivocations

He never said it, but it's almost if you'd've expected him to, the way he equivocates, which means only using a word's definition in the sense that is convenient to him as a conveyance to different subjects as pleasing as they are irrelevant. A vivid denunciation in a header and the lede, followed by interpretations that could mean almost anything and prove nothing. VargasMilan (talk) Saturday, 09:45, 23 May 2020 (EDT)

I'm sure SamHB knows nothing about embarrassment (see below), so he wouldn't understand why a peer reviewer would want to praise a paper of Einstein's, whether he believed it or not. Faking that 1919 paper is like winning the Heisman trophy and then later finding out the player had been taking steroids. To physicists on the "team", overturning the reputation of relativity scientists would have to be prevented at any cost! VargasMilan (talk) Saturday, 09:54, 23 May 2020 (EDT)

Peer review is overrated. Scientific fraud is relatively high now and peer review doesn't seem to be making an appreciable difference in stopping its uptick. And right now, academia is filled with corruption.
There is much truth to what you say. There is a lot of dishonesty in the scientific field, as there is in all fields. But Einstein's papers have been informally but effectively "peer reviewed" thousands of times over the last 115 years. SamHB (talk) 01:44, 23 May 2020 (EDT)
My friend said that GPSs and atomic clocks confirm that Einstein was right because the technology confirms and/or is based on Einstein's work.Conservative (talk) 02:34, 8 May 2020 (EDT)
Louis Essen invented the atomic clock, and he didn't agree. Food for thought. VargasMilan (talk) Friday, 03:13, 8 May 2020 (EDT)
People who cite Louis Essen against relativity ought to read his arguments on the subject. I have found them, archived on the "wayback machine", in this 1986 paper:
and, of course, this 1988 paper:
Many similar discussions from that era may be found in this archive:

Relativity deniers who want to take Essen seriously should read these papers and distill them down to brief explanations in the Counterexamples to Relativity page. I'll be watching, knives ready, for your additions. Until then, it is impossible to take people's reference to Essen seriously. SamHB (talk) 01:44, 23 May 2020 (EDT)

No wonder you think anyone who helps Andy is a sycophant; you can't bear the thought of ever disputing Einstein, so with your one-sided abilities, you get others to do it for you, so additionally you don't have to admit you sought out their arguments; they were brought to you.
Me, on the other hand, I often defend Andy's ideas whether they interest me less or more, as examples of the merits of his arguments, not in hopes of swaying his opinions simply because I can defend them, as could many other people if they were honest with themselves. It's none of your business which of Andy's articles I'm interested in, and those in which I have less interest. VargasMilan (talk) Saturday, 10:15, 23 May 2020 (EDT)
I had no idea. My high school algebra teacher was better than my physics teacher. One of the editors of the User: Conservative account went to a strict private school. I went to some good public schools, but frankly, most private, strict, religious schools are better than public schools in the USA. By strict, I mean they have higher standards including more homework.Conservative (talk) 03:50, 8 May 2020 (EDT)
Cons, I agree. A lot of schools have scandalously low standards, and many religious schools are bucking that trend. SamHB (talk) 01:44, 23 May 2020 (EDT)
The more you understand about this 1972 incident, the more embarrassing it gets. It's even worse than the 1919 star-bending fakery that made Einstein famous. The results were predicted from the theory of the nature of gravity as a field and motion path studies, but they used special relativity theory having to do with uniform relative velocity to solve the equations.
What are you referring to? To me, the phrase "1972 incident" refers to the Watergate break-in. SamHB (talk) 01:44, 23 May 2020 (EDT)
I'm not surprised you don't know! Just look how you messed up the heading hierarchy in your attempts to "be cool". VargasMilan (talk) Saturday, 10:51, 23 May 2020 (EDT)
The atomic clocks were de-synchronized in the experiment by as much as 300 nanoseconds. But they didn't use all the data, so they could have cherry-picked them. And they use a kind of statistical renormalization on the data, but they never give the details, and the de-synchronization may actually represent a place within the margin of precision that is statistically insignificant.
The journal Science apparently refused to make a retraction, and the journal Nature definitely wouldn't publish a report of the anomalies, but a Creationist journal did. VargasMilan (talk) Friday, 10:22, 8 May 2020 (EDT)
The embarrassment continues to this very day. The gravity wave detector project claimed to discover gravity waves, but why did they first leak the results to a non-scientist atheist activist that you profiled who couldn't authenticate it? VargasMilan (talk) Friday, 10:29, 8 May 2020 (EDT)
What "embarrassment" are you talking about. To whom was the discovery leaked? Was the leak improper? Does it invalidate the discovery of gravity waves? See Gravitational waves for our article on the subject, by the way. Is it significant that this person was an atheist? An "activist"? A "non-scientist"? SamHB (talk) 01:44, 23 May 2020 (EDT)
It's a pity that someone like you, from whom we see undeniable glimpses of genius, is so uneducated. You seem as though you know virtually nothing about creationist science. VargasMilan (talk) Saturday, 10:26, 23 May 2020 (EDT)

Antifragility, stress testing and silver linings

"Antifragility is beyond resilience or robustness. The resilient resists shocks and stays the same; the antifragile gets better."[11]

Stress testing "(sometimes called torture testing) is a form of deliberately intense or thorough testing used to determine the stability of a given system, critical infrastructure or entity. It involves testing beyond normal operational capacity, often to a breaking point, in order to observe the results."[12]

It was recently pointed out that evangelical Christianity thrives even under extreme economic/social instability/duress.[13]

On the other hand, it has been pointed out that the coronavirus pandemic showed the shortcomings of secular leftism/liberalism and that various secular leftists/liberal institutions got hammered during the pandemic.

Pointing these matters out triggered a blogger at the Friendly Atheist blog and triggered certain gentlemen at an atheist/agnostic wiki.

Gentlemen, it is not my fault that biblical Christianity is so robust and that secular leftism/liberalism is more fragile than vases and eggshells.

The prestigious Mayo Clinic found that that religious involvement and spirituality are associated with better physical health, mental health, health-related quality of life and other health outcomes.[1]

The Telegraph reported: "Patients with a strong “intrinsic faith” (a deep personal belief, not just a social inclination to go to a place of worship) recover 70 per cent faster from depression than those who are not deeply religious." (see also: Atheism and depression).[14] The prestigious Mayo Clinic found that that religious involvement and spirituality are associated with better physical health, mental health, health-related quality of life and other health outcomes.[15]

The Apostle Paul and the other disciples of Jesus Christ went through severe persecution and hardship without mentally breaking down (2 Corinthians 11:25-28). According to Dr. Ernest Liang at Houston Baptist University, resilience is a hallmark of Christian character.[16]

On the other hand, the election of Donald Trump upset many secular leftists to the degree that it caused them depression and mental illness (see: Secular leftists and psychogenic illness and Atheism and depression and Atheism and suicide).

On October 2, 2019, the atheist David Silverman indicated the experience of being accused of sexual harrassment, being fired from the American Atheists organization and losing many of his former atheist friends caused him a "horrific level of pain" that "damaged" him and that he now has textbook symptoms of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder.[17] In addition, he did have suicidal thoughts.[18] Furthermore, he says he now takes medication and he is still a damaged person.[19] Silverman formerly served as the president of the American Atheists organization. Silverman told atheist David Smalley in an interview that he suffers from depression and that he doubts his self-worth.[20]

When asked if he believes in God, Jordan Peterson responded: "I think the proper response to that is No, but I'm afraid He might exist".[21] In 2019, the New York Post published an article Jordan Peterson enters rehab after wife’s cancer diagnosis which indicated "The “12 Rules for Life” author has sought help trying to get off the anti-anxiety drug clonazepam".[22]

And it is not my fault, that many atheists/agnostics lack backbones and intestinal fortitude. See: Atheism and mental toughness and Atheism and cowardice.

I hope this clarifies matters.Conservative (talk) 10:36, 8 May 2020 (EDT)

To be fair, Peterson had a paradoxical reaction to the drug; it made him more anxious. VargasMilan (talk) Friday, 10:56, 8 May 2020 (EDT)
Like many atheists, Peterson is an oddball who is a bit nuts. He only eats meat for example.
None of the apostles, if they were alive today, would need to take drugs to cope with life's troubles. Neither would John Wayne for that matter! :) Secular liberals/leftists are not as resilient as Bible believers who God matures and gives strength to. The Telegraph reported: "Patients with a strong “intrinsic faith” (a deep personal belief, not just a social inclination to go to a place of worship) recover 70 per cent faster from depression than those who are not deeply religious." (see also: Atheism and depression).[23] 12:57, 8 May 2020 (EDT)
Even as the coronavirus crisis keeps Christians from churches, faith appears to be growing, while atheists continue to lose influence in the world.[24][25]
The data keeps pouring in! A tidal wave of confirming data. It's really an embarrassment of riches!Conservative (talk) 13:15, 8 May 2020 (EDT)

Deep state loses its allure, starts to appreciate civil rights more

Is it just me, or is Northwest not the only conservative that's being more aggressive?

I played these clowns and got them right where I wanted when they tried to set me up with the $10,000 in Israel. I gave it right to my lawyer. That money has tracks and they lead directly to the special counsel. —George Papadopoulos

If George would just come out of his shell and say what he really means, he could make a solid contribution to helping us all overcome our lack of confidence in confronting the deep state. He also said the $10,000 was the iceberg into which the Titanic deep state struck. VargasMilan (talk) Friday, 11:28, 8 May 2020 (EDT)

Another defeat for the Deep State as Trump begins to turn against Saudi Arabia and begins rolling back our military presence there.[26]--Geopolitician (talk) 17:48, 8 May 2020 (EDT)

Lesson of the Flynn case: Don't talk to the police

Thirty years from now, liberals will still be talking about the dropping the Flynn case as the Great Crime of the Trump administration. Obama himself is already laying the groundwork: "Exclusive: Obama says in private call that 'rule of law is at risk' in Michael Flynn case." Why do I say this? Because this fiction is only way liberals can avoid admitting the obvious, that Obama targeted Flynn as a political hit. None of the principles here -- Obama, Comey, and Strzok -- ever showed the slightest interest in enforcing the Logan Act against anyone other than Flynn. DOJ regulations require that the investigation of a cabinet officer must be approved by the attorney general. Yet it seems that Sally Yates was bypassed: "Sally Yates learned of Flynn targeting from Obama as Comey kept her in the dark, declassified documents show." The bottom line is "Never talk to the police." You have a right to remain silent. Use it. This is the advise that every lawyer gives, but Flynn didn't follow it. Flynn's case is remarkable because you'd expect that the FBI would respect due process when the suspect is such a prominent individual. But this video tells the tragic tales of lesser known suspects who made the same mistake. PeterKa (talk) 23:51, 8 May 2020 (EDT)

Joe Biden was present at the January 5, 2017 Oval Office meeting, too. [27] RobSLive Free or Die 00:17, 9 May 2020 (EDT)
Here is a classic video from Regents University in relation to the 5th Amendment of the US Constitution: Don't Talk to the Police.
I was called into a police department for questioning about a 2 year old incident in which a young man in his 20s came home and spit up blood and shortly died afterwards. It happened after he attended a high school graduation party which I attended. The police evidently suspected foul play.
A policeman became very aggravated at me after he asked me if I recalled someone wearing sunglasses at the graduation party which happened at night. My police interrogator said in a followup question, "Surely, you would remember someone wearing sunglasses at night?". I responded, "That was 2 years ago". The policeman gave me a disgusted and aggravated look. And that was pretty much the end of the interrogation.
Maybe it was foul play. I found out some negative things about the person giving the party in the neighborhood afterward.Conservative (talk) 01:17, 9 May 2020 (EDT)
The January 5, 2017 meeting shows Obama's complicity in both the illegal spying and coup. Obama was illegally getting the substance of conversations of transition members. The January 5 meeting was called because a day earlier the FBI cleared Flynn and the FISA warrant was due to expire January 12. The immediate problem was to extend the FBI's illegal surveillance beyond Obama's term of office by getting a FISA renewal. Obama is complicit in Deep State coup 1.0. RobSLive Free or Die 13:26, 9 May 2020 (EDT)
Obama claims that there is "no precedent that anybody can find for someone who has been charged with perjury just getting off scot-free." So it's all about the Justice Department's track record? Really, Obama should have thought of that before he charged Flynn. What about Bill Clinton's impeachment? The Democrat line was that the Clinton case was "just about sex." Whether or not it was right for him to get off "scot-free" on a perjury charge never even came up as an issue. PeterKa (talk) 18:53, 9 May 2020 (EDT)
Sit still. There are more revelations to come. We're only talking about the Flynn case. At minimum, prosecutorial misconduct of the Mueller team should result in disbarment if not criminal prosecutions. RobSLive Free or Die 20:02, 9 May 2020 (EDT)
Jonathan Turley looks up the record and finds that Obama is full of it. Eric Holder, Obama's own attorney general, dropped a perjury conviction for same reason Barr did in the Flynn case: prosecutorial misconduct. The problem is apparently common enough that there is a specific rule (FRCP 48(a)) and a Supreme Court opinion to cover it. PeterKa (talk) 02:18, 10 May 2020 (EDT)
Is that the Ted Stevens case? RobSLive Free or Die 05:11, 10 May 2020 (EDT)
Yes, U.S. Senator Ted Stevens' conviction was overturned in 2009.[28] PeterKa (talk) 11:31, 10 May 2020 (EDT)
Obama said "perjury"; first off, where are Flynn's FBI 302 interview notes? They were destroyed, evidence tampering on the part of the FBI (McCabe, Strzok, and Pientka). Secondly, "perjury" refers to a judicial proceeding, not an interview with executive branch officials. If Obama want's to litigate facts, let's do it. RobSLive Free or Die 20:08, 10 May 2020 (EDT)

Sad shape


Conservative once said that over time, the infection rate will increase and decrease in the shape of a bell curve.

But, for now at least, it is spreading like an oil slick (i.e. at a constant daily rate until it can't spread any more). VargasMilan (talk) Saturday, 00:10, 9 May 2020 (EDT)

Read A snapshot of coronavirus in the U.S.: A high plateau of new cases portends more spread.
Of course, the solution is self-evident. If people wear their masks around their neck or sloppily do not cover their nose with their masks, they need to be publicly hanged! And if someone tries to walk closer than 6 feet of you, shoot them! It's everyone man for himself! The Mad Max movie series gives mankind the solution to the coronavirus pandemic! Of course, I am being satirical. I hope you have an appreciation for dark humor.
Some gentlemen at an atheist wiki have let the silver linings posts concerning the coronavirus crisis get under their skin. Yet, I do think the coronavirus shows that some worldviews are robust and their adherents handle stresses/instability well, while others worldviews suffer under such stresses and so do their adherents.Conservative (talk) 01:42, 9 May 2020 (EDT)
"Shoot them dead": Philippine President Duterte threatens coronavirus lockdown violators.
"On Thursday, as often happens after Duterte makes these sorts of inflammatory public remarks, Filipino officials rushed to insist that the president was simply using hyperbole to communicate the gravity of the situation.
"Probably the president just overemphasized on implementing the law in this time of crisis," Philippine National Police Chief Archie Gamboa said, adding that officers understood that they were not actually being instructed to kill troublemakers."[29]Conservative (talk) 02:09, 9 May 2020 (EDT)
The psychiatric hospital Serbsky State Scientific Center for Social and Forensic Psychiatry, formerly called the Serbsky Institute, was used during the Soviet Union era to engage in “psychiatric terror” against political dissidents. See: Atheist hospitals.
Actually, I think much more humane approaches can be taken when it comes to rigorously enforcing the public wearing of masks and social distancing.
A puritanical approach could be used. Countries could bring back the use of pillories, public floggings and the wearing of scarlet letters for people who don't wear masks, wear their masks improperly (like around their necks or not covering their noses) or who don't practice social distancing for the prescribed 6ft.
For the Catholic portion of the populace, one could have nuns with very big rulers enforce the quarantine rules.
The Muslims could have caning and public flogging for those who flout quarantine rules.
The atheists could use atheist hospitals where "psychiatric terror" is used against people who flout the quarantine rules.
And because wimpy agnostics have no tradition of no-nonsense approaches to enforcing rules, they would have to be put in internment camps.
This approach would essentially be a very strict form of nanny statism. A hybrid of liberalism and no-nonsense religiosity/irreligion.
I hope this clarifies on how bell shaped curves could be accomplished in the absence of a vaccine. :)Conservative (talk) 06:36, 9 May 2020 (EDT)
The Texas woman who thumbed her nose at the $7,000 fine imposed on her for opening up her hair salon shows that mere wimpy, nanny state, liberalism is not effective and a hybrid form of liberalism and no-nonsense religiosity/irreligion has to be used. :) Conservative (talk) 06:49, 9 May 2020 (EDT)
Conservative: Here's some source material for the CCP's use of Psychiatric confinement of political dissidents (See page 3, Table I and footnote 14 which leads you to other source information). RobSLive Free or Die 13:38, 9 May 2020 (EDT)
The reason the coronavirus crisis is such a calamity is threefold: 1) The medical community is poor at recognizing/acknowledging non-drug/non-surgery elements of treatments out of greed/ignorance (zinc sulfate, see: Vladimir Zelenko's coronavirus treatment). 2) The mainstream news organizations are very poor at reporting the news (such as how effective Zelenko's treatment is) 3) Americans and many other nations have populations that are too overweight so there is a risk of ICUs being overwhelmed plus it raises the mortality rate of coronavirus infections. Conservative (talk) 15:38, 9 May 2020 (EDT)

Political profiling

Question: Demographically, what is the most determining factor of whether you show up at a picket line or mass demonstration to be a part of a mass protest? VargasMilan (talk) Saturday, 00:34, 9 May 2020 (EDT)

I'll take a shot in the dark: a white person between the ages of 35 and 55 who self-identifies as Progressive. RobSLive Free or Die 13:19, 9 May 2020 (EDT)
Contest ends 10p Eastern Time today. The winner gets 5$ worth of groceries. VargasMilan (talk) Saturday, 19:31, 9 May 2020 (EDT)
College educated white liberals below 35. RobSLive Free or Die 20:21, 9 May 2020 (EDT)
Nobody won the groceries. The surpising answer to what the most determining factor to being a sign-carrying protestor is...being an atheist. VargasMilan (talk) Saturday, 22:56, 9 May 2020 (EDT)
VargasMilan, may I see your source please?Conservative (talk) 00:09, 10 May 2020 (EDT)
I learned that over 30 years ago in college. No! Nobody may know my source! Next question! VargasMilan (talk) Sunday, 07:19, 10 May 2020 (EDT)

Missing Mifsud clue

In July 2018, George Papadopoulos's wife Simona Mangiante testified that deep state Joseph Mifsud was a member of the Clinton Foundation as well. VargasMilan (talk) Saturday, 20:11, 9 May 2020 (EDT)

In and of itself, that means nothing. Mangiante was quoting what Mifsud told an Italian language magazine about himself. Truth is, the Clinton Foundation doesn't have "members". It has donors, a board of directors, and employees. Mifsud has never been any. RobSLive Free or Die 20:24, 9 May 2020 (EDT)

Official election predictions from Conservapedia?

Just wondering, should Conservapedia make official election predictions for the 2020 U.S. elections (presidential, Senate, House, and gubernatorial)? --LiberaltearsYour reminder that Biden committed quid pro joe 00:13, 10 May 2020 (EDT)

You mean like create page? If so, how about 2020 unofficial election predictions just to put a little air between inevitability. RobSLive Free or Die 01:06, 10 May 2020 (EDT)
Is it okay if it's in the form of a Conservapedia project page? --LiberaltearsYour reminder that Biden committed quid pro joe 01:11, 10 May 2020 (EDT)
I guess it depends how you want to use it. Linking from the Main Page? It could also be titled 2020 CP unofficial election predictions. Consider it experimental; after the election, see how the predictions stack up against other forecasts. If it beats an average of some big name forecasters, next time maybe call it official. RobSLive Free or Die 05:07, 10 May 2020 (EDT)

I think it's a great idea, Liberaltears. If it gets really good, even the lamestream media may have to report on it. Of course, it's a work in progress and just beginning. But we can compile all the best polls and other information for each state. If it's anything like even 90% accurate, in comparison to final results, that'll be great and much, much better than what the liberal media was able to do. God Bless. NishantXavier (talk) 11:54, 10 May 2020 (EDT)

Obamagate trending on Google and Twitter


Obamagate is trending on Google and Twitter since President Trump tweeted it this morning. CP virtually owns the name ObamagateTM and definitive narrative. RobSLive Free or Die 23:23, 10 May 2020 (EDT)

Hashtag ObamaGate trending No. 4 on Twitter with 1.5 million tweets. [30] RobSLive Free or Die 23:49, 10 May 2020 (EDT)
Correction: 1.7 million hits 10 minutes later. RobSLive Free or Die 00:21, 11 May 2020 (EDT)



Just so you guys know, Japan's also locking down as well. I'd know because some of the games I'm playing are negatively affected by the COVID-19 aspects, including having livestreams being cancelled and having half-baked events, also extended events and even having blatant reruns of past events. Oh, and they're making TGS 2020 a digital-only event in large part thanks to COVID-19's outbreak, so it's not just us who's locking down. Not that it's a good thing that we're even engaging in a lockdown, though. Pokeria1 (talk) 05:53, 11 May 2020 (EDT)

Japan has an aging population. Oldest average population in the world. Italy is second. Coronavirus infections are especially bad for elderly people. Conservative (talk) 05:13, 13 May 2020 (EDT)

Relatively unimportant

"[C]ompared to this discovery that Newton's laws of motion were quite wrong in atoms, the theory of relativity was only a minor modification."—Richard Feynman, father of quantum electrodynamics.

VargasMilan (talk) Tuesday, 05:37, 12 May 2020 (EDT)

Employed workers in the U.S.

As I said earlier, in March 2020, 3.0 million people dropped out of the employed labor force. Now it's reported in April 2020, another 22.3 million people dropped out. The total popluation size of the employed is now 133.4 million. People are still hoping for a V-shaped recovery, though. VargasMilan (talk) Tuesday, 19:37, 12 May 2020 (EDT)

We have the birth of a whole knew industry - contact tracers. RobSLive Free or Die 19:47, 12 May 2020 (EDT)
I expect those that hold those jobs who pester innocent Americans will end up phoneless and broozed.
People have failed to take my advice to heart and are reporting ridiculous numbers of the unemployed. NumbersUSA apparently doesn't know their estimates are inaccurate enough to represent an irony to them that the whole goodwill caused by an attachment to the basics that their company name implies will turn into a negative should any of their rival population data-gathering services make an effort to point it out. Their count is 40 million (not 25.3 million). VargasMilan (talk) Wednesday, 02:55, 13 May 2020 (EDT)
"unemployed" is defined as actively seeking work in the past 30 days. Because of lockdown, the real unemployed rate is probably double what has been published. RobSLive Free or Die 21:34, 13 May 2020 (EDT)
Yes, and they are seeking work from businesses that are closed. It's not a good index during a pestilence. VargasMilan (talk) Wednesday, 23:32, 13 May 2020 (EDT)
If we have 30 million unemployed today, we'll be lucky to have 12 million unemployed by the end of the year. That's a lot of people that need to be mollified and shielded from DNC/CCP propaganda between now and the election. Pelosi is already pulling an Andrew Yang, promising them $2,000 to sit on their butts and claiming its the GOP standing between them, their monthly allowance, and their drugs. RobSLive Free or Die 03:49, 14 May 2020 (EDT)RobSLive Free or Die 03:46, 14 May 2020 (EDT)
I need a new word: There are 25.3 million disemployed. VargasMilan (talk) Thursday, 18:26, 14 May 2020 (EDT)

Jon McCray made a video about an "Atheist Church"

[31] Notice it has one of those "attention mass shooters, we're all unarmed in here, so come in and kill us" sign by the door. Then again, most mass shooters are Atheists or Muslims, and Christians are more often the targets. This "assembly" looks like one of the most depressing places in the world. Are there articles about this? Shobson20 (talk) 21:30, 12 May 2020 (EDT)

Jim Jones. VargasMilan (talk) Wednesday, 03:01, 13 May 2020 (EDT)

Russians could have taken screenshots, Crowdstrike president says

Since Crowdstrike refused to give the FBI access to the DNC servers, the "Russians hacked the DNC" narrative was always based on the Crowdstrike's unsupported claims. In recently declassified testimony, Crowdstrike President Shawn Henry admits that the FBI's tech people were not satisfied with the access they got, Comey's claims to the contrary notwithstanding. Furthermore, there is no record of hackers downloading DNC data, or "exfiltrating" it, as Henry puts it. Could they have access anyway? Well, they could if they took screenshots, according to Henry. No, I'm not kidding. This is 70 gigabytes of data: "[If] somebody was monitoring an email server, they could read all the email," Henry said. "And there might not be evidence of it being exfiltrated, but they would have knowledge of what was in the email. … There would be ways to copy it. You could take screenshots."[32] Just think of all of the years that were wasted because we assumed that the "experts" at Crowdstrike knew something that the rest of us didn't. PeterKa (talk) 20:56, 13 May 2020 (EDT)

The ghost of Seth Rich lives! NBC's Shawn Henry evidently colluded with Crowdstrike to hoax America. RobSLive Free or Die 21:37, 13 May 2020 (EDT)

New poll reveals Trump leading Biden in two critical 2020 states

"In Ohio, the poll showed Trump leading Biden 46 percent to 43 percent. It also found that 62 percent — a vast majority — of Ohio voters believe the president will be reelected.

Trump’s lead in Texas is even bigger, with the president leading Biden 47 percent to 41 percent.

In Texas, 61 percent said they believe Trump will win a second term in office." https://thedcpatriot.com/new-poll-reveals-trump-leading-joe-biden-in-two-critical-2020-states/ NishantXavierFor Christ the King 21:20, 13 May 2020 (EDT)

Even Obama's panicking

Apparently, even Obama's panicking at the walls closing in on him, based on his outburst to the New York Times, so this should be noted:

Pokeria1 (talk) 12:29, 14 May 2020 (EDT)

It's a delaying tactic. Obama and his totalitarian cohorts want a delay with this amicus hearing. Then Sullivan imposes a sentence and the alleged conviction stands to protect Obama and his corrupt administration. This of coarse can be thwarted with a presidential pardon before final sentencing.
Alternatively, without a pardon, Sullivan can sentence (even give a suspended sentence, but the conviction stands) and Flynn appeals, which drags the whole thing out past the election. Look for either (1) Durham indictments which then give cover to a presidential pardon, or (2) a presidential pardon before sentencing to end this nonsense. RobSLive Free or Die 12:56, 14 May 2020 (EDT)
Haven't the prosecution already dropped Flynn's case? VargasMilan (talk) Thursday, 18:42, 14 May 2020 (EDT)
Yah. So Obama says Flynn committed perjury when he pled guilty, lying to the court. Then the judge appoints Sally Yates and Andrew Weissmann's attorney to write a brief saying as much. The judge then can appoint somebody to prosecute. It's totally illegal of coarse, but we're dealing with the Obama machine that has no respect for law or human rights. RobSLive Free or Die 20:35, 14 May 2020 (EDT)
  • I am not so sure that Obama is panicking. Maybe he wants to be president again. What's holding him back, you ask? I'm thinking it's Michelle. Now he can now tell her, "I have to run for president or big bad Trump will put me in jail." Would the media give Tara Reade's accusations so much attention if Biden was in fact Obama's man? PeterKa (talk) 03:55, 17 May 2020 (EDT)
At this point it's almost a foregone conclusion Biden will be dumped. He needs to step back voluntarily. Health matters seems to be the best cover. An orderly transition is necessary, so it would seem Biden needs to anoint the successor, which presumably would be a woman (including, per Biden, the possibility of a transgender). He could announce on opening day of the convention, "Thanks, but no thanks. The doctors say blah blah blah. Here, take my illegitimate daughter in my place (insert female candidate)." RobSLive Free or Die 04:22, 17 May 2020 (EDT)
Rob, the futures markets haven't budged. You thought Biden would be gone after South Carolina. I don't think your memories of Biden match up with today's reality. But if I'm wrong, you stand to make a fortune by shorting Biden in the futures market. VargasMilan (talk) Monday, 11:40, 18 May 2020 (EDT)
Nominating Biden would be tantamount to throwing in the towel to another four years of Trump, as even most Democrats see it. Unless they have a foolproof method of stuffing the ballot box nationwide in key states. The absence of downballot candidates complaining makes it worrisome. RobSLive Free or Die 13:54, 18 May 2020 (EDT)

Wikipedia is adding back Niskanen predictions for their Senate elections page

Did anyone notice that Wikipedia recently added back the Niskanen predictions for their Senate elections page? I'm really not sure why their editors would view that as a good idea, given Niskanen's self-admitted bias against Republicans in claiming that they supposedly try to use voter ID laws to suppress minorities. And the predictions seem like hogwash. For Arizona, it's almost as if this mere RCP page says everything! And no, as of right now, the Colorado race for Sen. Gardner is not just going to be “Likely Democrat”. The latter would only be the case if Hickenlooper is the nominee, and he lost in the precinct caucuses to Romanoff (a far-left progressive) by a landslide. But come to think of it, it's really not like Wikipedia is full of liberal bias or anything... --LiberaltearsJust say no to quid pro joe! | Free Roger Stone! 01:17, 15 May 2020 (EDT)

Wuhan gets tested


The insanity of virus testing is on full display in Wuhan. China is in the process of testing the city's 11 million residents in ten days. The people of Wuhan have a lot on their plate these days, if this call recorded by the mayor's office is anything to go by: "Do you know that we don't normally go out? Then you suddenly asked us all to go out, get together and line up since 8 am. We still couldn't get tested. We've been waiting for three hours. Our kid hadn't been out for a few months. Now our kid has to get tested too. What on Earth are you thinking? During the testing process, you have to take off your mask and open your mouth. With so many people to see to, how can the medical staff have time to change gloves and disinfect? People there are coughing and sneezing. The air is contaminated."[33]

The propaganda department needs statistics. Perhaps the party will use the testing to claim that everything is fine in Wuhan, or perhaps they can no longer cover up how bad things have gotten and need a face saving way to let the truth out. Either way, it's hard to see how this operation is serving a public health purpose. PeterKa (talk) 21:14, 16 May 2020 (EDT)

It's a propaganda campaign. They reported six new cases, so they are going to test 11 million people in 10 days - logistically impossible. That won't stop American fake news media from reporting it as fact, in support of the Chinese Communist murderers game of one-ups-manship with Trump. RobSLive Free or Die 04:13, 17 May 2020 (EDT)
Yah right. Testers don't change gloves; swabs cross contaminated in jars, etc. [34] RobSLive Free or Die 08:58, 19 May 2020 (EDT)

2nd wave of Wuhan virus

The most probable hottest day of the year in the northern hemisphere will be about July 21, 2020. Likewise temperatures are most likely to become colder than average about October 21, 2020. By the second date, whatever infections that remain that don't lead to the infected to seeking medical attention and quarantine but make the infected ill enough to spread if they fail to take precautions, will seed the 2nd wave of the Wuhan virus. VargasMilan (talk) Monday, 09:51, 18 May 2020 (EDT)

An estimated 55 million Americans have contracted the Wuhan virus according to Bill Mitchell. VargasMilan (talk) Monday, 12:05, 18 May 2020 (EDT)
There's no reason to doubt that estimate, and seems pretty good. Texas is now just getting hit, and L.A. could have serious problems in the near future which could be more drawn out than the New York experience. But some things have been learned from New York.
A big unknown remains about reoccurrences. And a full range of identifying symptoms has yet to be fully developed. RobSLive Free or Die 13:50, 18 May 2020 (EDT)
If the virus comes back, I'll be ready with my "3-D" masks and hand sanitizer. I certainly hope that's what everyone else does. I don't think the economy can take a another lockdown. PeterKa (talk) 21:41, 18 May 2020 (EDT)

Trump and hydroxychloroquine

Trump is taking hydroxychloroquine and zinc, according to White House physician Sean Conley. The drug takes all the energy out of you, at least when you first start taking it. As Zelensky says, it is not candy. If he has been taking it for a week and a half, I am surprised nobody has noticed any side effects yet. The great part is that the liberal media is convinced he'll be dead in a week. They've certainly been shilling hard for remdesivir. I hope Gilead Sciences pays them a bonus. PeterKa (talk) 22:42, 18 May 2020 (EDT)

Trump has been a germophobe his entire life, and only started shaking hands in 2016 on the campaign trail. He may have low immunity to many common infections. RobSLive Free or Die 22:50, 18 May 2020 (EDT)
If Trump is worried about covid-19, he is taking the right drug: "Hydroxychloroquine rated 'most effective therapy' by doctors for coronavirus: Global survey." Use of the hydroxychloroquine is politically fraught in the U.S., but Spanish and Italian physicians are big on prescribing it. If the drug was actually dangerous, I'm sure we'd be seeing news stories about all the fatalities in those countries. PeterKa (talk) 23:25, 18 May 2020 (EDT)
I did not know that hydroxychloroquine takes all the energy out of you, at least when you first start taking it. Donald Trump can take hydroxychloroquine and zinc because unlike Jeb Bush he is not "low energy". Arriba, arriba! Andale, andale![35]Conservative (talk) 00:22, 19 May 2020 (EDT)
Please remember it's hydroxychloroquine SULFATE. RobS discovered the Chinese erroneously recommended hydroxychloroquine PHOSPHATE, the same fish tank cleaner that killed the Democratic woman's husband. VargasMilan (talk) Tuesday, 01:00, 19 May 2020 (EDT)
Trump's association with the HOCQ Sulfate treatment is a grand slam for Trump. It makes him look like Thomas Edison. Cynically speaking, Biden's best move is just to make a mess of that picture for horselaughs if the facts and Trump's judgment can't be disputed, even if it costs Biden support by those who respect scientific literacy, most of whom probably wouldn't ever vote for him anyway. VargasMilan (talk) Wednesday, 10:47, 20 May 2020 (EDT)
Bonus points: The chemical name of Clorox is sodium hypochlorite which sounds a little like hydroxychloroquine, so it's an easier chemical than most to entangle with it when you're sassing a Trump defender. VargasMilan (talk) Wednesday, 13:10, 20 May 2020 (EDT)

Who walks Pompeo's dog?

I may be going out on a limb here, but frankly I don't care who walks Pompeo's dog. Furthermore, I don't think the State Department should have an employee whose job it is to find out: "Fired State Dept. IG Was Probing Whether Pompeo Made Staffer Walk His Dog." Why should the department keep an Obama holdover as inspector general? This was the best answer Steve Linick could come up with. PeterKa (talk) 02:09, 19 May 2020 (EDT)

My God, did he cuss the staffer out and eat his salad with a comb, too? Did her digitally penetrate the staffer? RobSLive Free or Die 02:21, 19 May 2020 (EDT)
Here is the cute little pooch. Who wouldn't want to walk him? I bet he growls at the Chinese ambassador. PeterKa (talk) 02:47, 19 May 2020 (EDT)
Back in the "scandal-free" Obama administration, the mayor of Sacramento used federal funds to pay hush money to underage girls who accused him of sexual abuse. What did Obama do about it? He fired Inspector General Gerald Walpin for reporting it: "Obama Fired an Inspector General to Cover Up a Sex Scandal and No One Said Boo About It." PeterKa (talk) 18:12, 20 May 2020 (EDT)
If you practice cultural Marxism, especially if you belong to an identity group, you are immune to publicity if you commit a sexual offense. That "immunity" is why they are going down in flames. They never "opened a dialogue", but fantasized that everybody liked what they did. VargasMilan (talk) Wednesday, 18:59, 20 May 2020 (EDT)
Liberal commentators are arguing that Linick is non-partisan because he issued a report critical of Hillary's email usage in May 2016. But of course Democrats were involved in promoting the email story early on. Obama aide Valerie Jarrett leaked it to the New York Times in March 2015. Obama didn't get around to exonerating Hillary until an interview on Fox News on April 10, 2016. Perhaps he was hoping that someone other than Hillary would be the nominee. PeterKa (talk) 22:54, 20 May 2020 (EDT)

Trump embraces "Best of the public"

"Thank you to all of my great Keyboard Warriors. You are better, and far more brilliant, than anyone on Madison Avenue (Ad Agencies). There is nobody like you!" —Donald J. Trump (May 14, 2020).

VargasMilan (talk) Wednesday, 04:16, 20 May 2020 (EDT)


Yesterday, I made some sourced entries at the Pakistan page - only to find a day later that they had all been removed by a user named Bytemsbu who replaced it with some particularly opinionated and non-objective views. Going through the contributions of this account, I find that their edits are highly influenced by a pro-India slant, and have little to do with American conservative thought. Is there a place where one can discuss content disputes and edits? I am feeling highly discouraged after seeing this. RepublicanRichard (talk) 11:08, 20 May 2020 (EDT)

Yeah, I know what you're talking about. Bytemsbu was also edit warring in the Barack Hussein Obama page, as evident in the page history here. As for discussing disputes, that would be on the talk pages for the content pages being disputed over. --LiberaltearsJust say no to quid pro joe! | Free Roger Stone! 11:56, 20 May 2020 (EDT)
Also, if you have more issues like this one to inquire about in the future, it's better to do it in Conservapedia:Community Portal that's internally linked above, as this page is related to content for the Main Page. --LiberaltearsJust say no to quid pro joe! | Free Roger Stone! 11:59, 20 May 2020 (EDT)

Atheists in praise of Christianity! Is this a sign of things to come?!

I love this. Atheists are praising Christianity as the foundation of western civilizational values, and admitting atheism might not be able to have any substitute for it! "Holland’s passionate defense of Christianity is fascinating because it appears to be part of a trend. As the West becomes definitively post-Christian, many secularists are suddenly realizing that Christianity may have been more valuable than they thought. While many — including Holland — cannot quite bring themselves to believe Christianity is true, they are starting to believe that Christianity might be necessary.

Douglas Murray, the conservative author and columnist, is also an atheist. In recent years, however, he has started to warn that the decline of Christianity is a dangerous thing. Society now faces three options. First, Murray says, is to reject the idea that all human life is precious. “Another is to work furiously to nail down an atheist version of the sanctity of the individual.” And if that doesn’t work? “Then there is only one other place to go. Which is back to faith, whether we like it or not.”

Murray now occasionally refers to himself as a “Christian atheist.” Speaking with Esther O’Reilly on the Unbelievable podcast, Murray lauded the “revolutionary moral insights” of Christianity. He told her that while visiting the Sea of Galilee, he couldn’t shake the feeling that “something happened here.” And he admitted that as atheists consider morality, “the more we may have to accept that … the sanctity of human life is a Judeo-Christian notion which might very easily not survive [the disappearance of] Judeo-Christian civilization.” https://stream.org/atheists-in-praise-of-christianity/ NishantXavierFor Christ the King 11:47, 22 May 2020 (EDT)

Article 23 for Hong Kong


A bill to ban sedition and "external interference in Hong Kong" has been tabled at the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress, China's sham parliament. This type of "Article 23" law was proposed after the handover, but withdrawn in 2003 after massive protests in Hong Kong. See "Two Sessions 2020: Beijing ‘out of patience’ after long wait for Hong Kong national security law, plans to proscribe secession, foreign interference and terrorism in city." Current Chinese leader Xi Jinping is a protege of Zeng Qinghong, who was the chief sponsor of the 2003 proposal. When Hu Jintao was China's leader (2002-2012), money was the country's boss. But Xi is more focused on settling old scores. Just a few months ago, Xi and the hardliners were in retreat. A controversial extradition law was withdrawn in September and pro-democracy parties triumphed in local elections held in November. Since that time, the covid outbreak has strengthened the hand of the Chinese Communist Party. PeterKa (talk) 18:57, 21 May 2020 (EDT)

Why Trump will win

"America is a nation of believers, and together we are strengthened by the power of prayer." - President Donald Trump

If you worry about the matchup polls that show Biden ahead, Harry Enten has good news for you. For the last thirteen election cycles, there has been an average shift of 11 percentage points between the May matchups and the final results. So Biden's current lead of 5.5 points is not terribly impressive. In American politics, presidents generally get reelected. Trump's current job approval is pretty much where it has been all along. Judging from Biden's results in Iowa (15 percent) and New Hampshire (8 percent), many of the people who tell the pollsters that they will vote for him don't end up doing so. He is clearly a less formidable candidate than Hillary was. Based on the recent special elections in California and Wisconsin, there is reason to think that 2020 will be a Republican year. PeterKa (talk) 22:51, 21 May 2020 (EDT)

If Donald Trump wins, it will be the capstone of 2020 being the worst year in the history of atheism given the religious liberty policy of a Trump administration and its great relationship with the American evangelical Christian community (see: Donald Trump and American atheists).
And I agree with you that Trump is favored to win.Conservative (talk) 23:07, 21 May 2020 (EDT)

[Kamala] Harris introduces resolution condemning use of "Wuhan Virus" as racist

So says National Review—but I think it's okay, though: since she's a cultural Marxist who is praising the "right" form of socialism or communism (and belongs to more than one identity group!), she's immune...to criticisms of her sense of accountability, consistency, prejudice and even her racial favoritism (racism)! Isn't Lyme disease named after a place in Connecticut? What about Ebola, Zika, Rocky Mountain Spotted Fever, MERS, SARS... All named for where they originated. Don't "play doctor", though and search for a preventative vaccine for yourself, if you don't have a similar ideology and/or identity group profile—wherever the media monopoly is, they're not going to supply you with any antibodies of indulgence for those transgressions.

The only risk is if she becomes a contagious carrier of a painfully idiotic strain of oratory, even though she's not herself infected—the monopoly media will take care of that too by quarantining her for a few news cycles...of abusing the media-consuming public by means of other liberals.

As a typical example, the TV networks used to say "if you don't like it, turn it off." Now it's "chime in" (NBC, beginning January 2008), so we can see which misinformation from our narrative engineering is getting through your mental defenses." Or "if it's basic cable, you have to pay for it." Or "You know you might slip out of your identity group, and you know what can happen then. No protection. The thin line between love and hate. You need to prove your membership by only watching us and loading up on those talking points for your casual or election-time conversations."

So it turns out they're not too fond of American liberty, ever since it became the case that their own oxen were getting gored. Meanwhile, as we've just discovered, they've reconciled with America having a class system with grievance-class identities. So much for equality. And come to think of it, they're cool with single-sex parenting. That's really going to help fraternity. Especially if you admire French political values, you can cheer "A trifecta!" VargasMilan (talk) Friday, 03:40, 22 May 2020 (EDT) improved: 07:25, 22 May 2020 (EDT)

For liberals, 9/11 transformed Muslims from just another anti-choice group into the ultimate victims. Releasing a deadly virus has worked the same magic for China's standing in the world. Hong Kong used to be China's victim. After killing thousands of Americans, Beijing is ready to quash the city's pro-democracy movement. This time around, I expect the U.S. media to cheer them on. PeterKa (talk) 04:49, 22 May 2020 (EDT)
But they're so heartsick. Can't you tell? Kind of like Lenny from Of Mice and Men. VargasMilan (talk) Friday, 07:31, 22 May 2020 (EDT)
Biden to blacks: "You'd better get back into your identity group, if you know what's good for you. And the boundaries of your identity group are whatever we say they are." VargasMilan (talk) Friday, 13:17, 22 May 2020 (EDT)


I never knew the Conservative group wrote so many articles about atheism. There's over a thousand!

Titles of my own like: Unsung Giant or Unsung Genius come to mind.

VargasMilan (talk) Friday, 17:21, 22 May 2020 (EDT)

Thanks.Conservative (talk) 08:41, 23 May 2020 (EDT)

Study of hydroxychloroquine in The Lancet

The Lancet just published a study of "96 032 patients (mean age 53·8 years, 46·3% women) with COVID-19 [who] were hospitalised during the study period and met the inclusion criteria." Some 81,144 of these patients were in the control group while 3,016 received hydroxychloroquine and 6,221 received hydroxychloroquine with a macrolide. "Macrolide" means azithromycin or a similar drug. The findings: "Compared with the control group (9·3%), hydroxychloroquine alone (18·0%; HR 1·335, 95% CI 1·223–1·457), hydroxychloroquine with a macrolide (23·8%; 1·447, 1·368–1·531), chloroquine alone (16·4%; 1·365, 1·218–1·531), and chloroquine with a macrolide (22·2%; 1·368, 1·273–1·469) were independently associated with an increased risk of in-hospital mortality." See "Hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine with or without a macrolide for treatment of COVID-19: a multinational registry analysis." PeterKa (talk) 21:49, 22 May 2020 (EDT)

Some 65·9 percent of the patients studied are in North America, who would not have been given HCQ until they were in a very late stage of covid. So this is basically the VA study on a larger scale. PeterKa (talk) 23:14, 22 May 2020 (EDT)
Right. This is fake anti-Trump, politics-masquerading-as-science junk. HCQ, like Tamiflu, is effective when given early. Wait until a patient is near death and nothing is learned by the reaction to medication.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 23:55, 22 May 2020 (EDT)
According to the study, the higher death rate for patients on HCQ is most likely because the drug can "result in electrical instability and predispose patients to ventricular arrhythmias." So taking the drug certainly involves risk. To learn what effect HCQ has on covid, we will have to wait for a clinical study that administers it at an earlier stage of the disease. PeterKa (talk) 00:19, 23 May 2020 (EDT)
Hydroxychloroquine makes the cells have a higher zinc uptake. Zinc is an antiviral. But the key point is that Dr. Zelenko also gives his patients zinc sulfate. I think that is why he gets such great results (see: Vladimir Zelenko's coronavirus treatment). Most doctors and medical researchers are not very receptive to supplements though and are very drug/surgery oriented and that is why zinc sulfate will be left out of all or most studies.Conservative (talk) 01:07, 23 May 2020 (EDT)
I don't think we should dismiss the study itself as political. It's a study of the drug's effectiveness when it is used in the way doctors are currently prescribing it. The problem is that doctors wait too long to prescribe it because of all the uproar. On Louder with Crowder they talk about how pharmacists are calling doctors to question HCQ prescriptions. That is to say, prescribing it someone who isn't already in the hospital results in immediate blowback. PeterKa (talk) 02:01, 23 May 2020 (EDT)

Dr. Fauci says we can reopen

We finally have Dr. Anthony Fauci's permission to reopen the country. Fauci's title is head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Who ever heard of this group? It is ridiculous how powerful this quack is. "Dave Portnoy unloads on Fauci in blistering rant on ‘Tucker Carlson Tonight’" PeterKa (talk) 07:25, 23 May 2020 (EDT)

Wow, that's big of him! VargasMilan (talk) Saturday, 12:00, 23 May 2020 (EDT)

40,000 British healthcare workers are taking hydroxychloroquine

This should go on MPR: "Hydroxychloroquine: NHS staff to take drug as part of global trial." I guess we will soon have answers as to whether HCQ works or not. The Telegraph's headline is more amusing: "Donald Trump drug to be tested on NHS staff with hopes it could prevent coronavirus." PeterKa (talk) 10:54, 23 May 2020 (EDT)

ShockofGod right again: Einstein had Santa Claus syndrome!

Except Einstein's animus was toward Bible stories. The Bible was written mostly so that people of every age in Israel could find interest and benefit from it. But somehow he couldn't seem to grasp there were lessons in those same stories about spiritual realities only adults could understand and about whom in the community these spiritual laws were important. Strangely, he never discovered them or appreciated how God helped leaders and members of a vulnerable people face the threat of national disaster or the threat of the fruits of their own sins.

"Through the reading of popular scientific books I soon reached the conviction that much in the stories of the Bible could not be true. The consequence was a fanatic freethinking coupled with the impression that youth is intentionally being deceived by the state through lies; it was a crushing impression. Mistrust of every kind of authority grew out of this experience, a skeptical attitude toward the convictions that were alive in any specific social environment—an attitude that has never again left me, even though, later on, it has been tempered by a better insight into the causal connections." —Albert Einstein, 1945.

VargasMilan (talk) Saturday, 12:00, 23 May 2020 (EDT)

The philosophical procedure of syntopical reading

Syntopical reading should follow elementary, inspectional then analytical reading, but sometimes a given list of readings is so small that there's some profit in going right to syntopical and stepping down to the other levels as needed.

Here are the rules a philosopher with an emphasis in dialectical studies came up with:

I. Surveying the Field Preparatory to Syntopical Reading
  1. Create a tentative bibliography of your subject by recourse to library catalogues, advisors, and bibliographies in books.
  2. Inspect all of the books on the tentative bibliography to ascertain which are germane to your subject and also to acquire a clearer idea of the subject.

Note omitted to prevent excess copying to maintain copyright fair use.

II. Syntopical Reading of the Bibliography Amassed in Stage I
  1. Inspect the books already identified as relevant to your subject in Stage I in order to find the most relevant passages.
  2. Bring the authors to terms by constructing a neutral terminology of the subject that all, or the great majority, of the authors can be interpreted as employing, whether they actually employ the words or not.
  3. Establish a set of neutral propositions for all of the authors by framing a set of questions to which all or most of the authors can be interpreted as giving answers, whether they actually treat the questions explicitly or not.
  4. Define the issues, both major and minor ones, by ranging the opposing answers of authors to the various questions on one side of an issue or another. You should remember that an issue does not always exist explicitly between or among authors, but that it sometimes has to be constructed by interpretation of the author's views on matters that may not have been their primary concern.
  5. Analyze the discussion by ordering the questions and issues in such a way as to throw maximum light on the subject. More general issues should precede less general ones, and relations among issues should be clearly indicated.

Note omitted to prevent excess copying to maintain copyright fair use.

I'd just like to add that in Biblical studies, unlike other books, the Bible isn't something to weigh, but the way to approach is to choose the interpretation that reads as much truth as possible, as when we approach the Holy Book with faith, that is our expectation. But Thomas Aquinas tells us, that not only are there the presence of multiple readings in the Bible, but that we can expect to see them virtually everywhere.

Secondly, it's not necessary that the books be considered to have the same authority. When there is opposition in interpretation that can't be resolved, there can be a hierarchy of authorities with which to settle it, with Sacred Scripture at the highest, of course.

VargasMilan (talk) Saturday, 16:06, 23 May 2020 (EDT)