Difference between revisions of "User talk:Aschlafly"

Revision as of 20:44, October 19, 2023

Request on behalf of another person. Update: Please ignore this request

Andy, I am canceling this request. The person does not want to read classic conservative books and articles.

Correct, my only main reading list is the Holy Scriptures.

Andy, could you please share with me a list of books that you would recommend for someone who wants to know more about conservativism.

Below is the reading list, I came up with so far.

Essays/articles:

1. Ten Conservative Principles by Russell Kirk

2. The Fate of the State by MARTIN VAN CREVELD, a historian (The article is on big government and how it is losing power and/or effectiveness).

Books:

1. A Philosophical Enquiry into the Origin of Our Ideas of the Sublime and Beautiful (1757) by Edmund Burke, Complete text of the book online

2. Russell Kirk's book: The Conservative Mind from Burke to Santayana (1953), put Burke in the mainstream of American conservatism. Copy of book: online edition

3. Wealth, Poverty, and Politics by Thomas Sowell; Video: Wealth, Poverty, and Politics by Thomas Sowell

4. Equality: The Impossible Quest by the historian Martin van Creveld

5. A Choice Not an Echo by Phyllis Schlafly

Thanks in advance.

By the way, if Conservapedians come up with a list of articles and books, a recommended reading page could be created called Classic conservative books and articles or Conservapedia: Recommended conservative books and articles reading list or some other name for the page. Conservative (talk) 09:03, September 19, 2023 (EDT)

I'd recommend the classic, Essay: 7 reasons the godless British have become the most pathetic sissies in the world for a survey of conservative values. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 09:37, September 19, 2023 (EDT)

Fantastic idea. I just restored the essay at: 7 reasons the godless British have become the most pathetic sissies in the world

I always thought the essay should not have been deleted, but I errantly chose not to stand my ground on principle. Conservative (talk) 10:19, September 19, 2023 (EDT)

"I errantly chose not to backdown". Keep going. I need more material for Essay: Does ignorance, stubbornness, and stupidity define conservativism?. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 10:29, September 19, 2023 (EDT)

I have learned that you should never back down to non-conservatives because they never can be placated. In other words, appeasement is not a valid strategy. So never back down.

And given how much Andy is against the homosexual agenda, I am sure that he will never allow the essay to be deleted in order to placate a non-conservative.

And the timing is perfect. Now only Andy can delete web pages with more than 25 edits. Conservative (talk) 10:40, September 19, 2023 (EDT)

Interestig theory; the problem is you need the powers of discernment to recognize who or what is conservative. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 10:45, September 19, 2023 (EDT)

After allowing the essay to be deleted, I subsequently read a classic best-selling book on assertiveness. It is a classic book on that topic. Never back down!

At the same time, wisely choosing your battles is wise too. "Move not unless you see an advantage; use not your troops unless there is something to be gained; fight not unless the position is critical." - Sun Tzu.

In retrospect, it was not a matter of appeasement. I just thought at the time that the battle was not worth it at the time. But now it is much harder to people to delete essays/articles. In addition, Andy has given a higher priority to conservatives fighting the homosexual agenda so I have an ally who places a higher priority on Conservapedia keeping such essays. Conservative (talk) 11:06, September 19, 2023 (EDT)

Oh, wait. The essay has been preserved. I merely retitled the essay. The essay is at: Essay: 7 reasons the godless British have become the most pathetic pantywaists in the world. So I will ask Andy to delete the essay because it is a duplicative essay. Conservative (talk) 11:11, September 19, 2023 (EDT)

See, I don't understand this. You spent hundreds of hours reporting on decrepit UK infrastructure and potholes. Now that we have two reports in the past few days,

• Decrepit Britain… schools collapsing and Challenger tanks blown to smithereens. [2]
• As British schools crumble [3]

about 1,000 British concrete school structures crumbling and being a life hazard to school children, you ignore the evidence.

You might actually have something to add to Conservapedia proven right. 17:43, September 18, 2023 (EDT)

In the current state of this world, no one truly needs all those books by Phyllis Schlafly, Russell Kirk, or whoever. All we need is the Bible to warn of what is to come so we are ready for the perilous times. What does it matter how "conservative" you are by pointless "right-wing populist" standards if you end up on the wrong side of Judgment?

By the way, Phyllis Schlafly supported Moderate Republican Nixon over right-wing populist Reagan in 1968. Also, her effort to tie the Goldwater wing of the GOP to the Taft wing is an ahistorical, hasty generalization—Taft led the isolationist Old Right, while Goldwater Republicanism was an outgrowth of the Eisenhower-affiliated New Right. Rothbard breaks it down perfectly. —LT ^{Rev. 22:13} Tuesday, 11:28, September 19, 2023 (EDT)

We do not have a spirit of fear, but of power, and of love, and of a sound mind.

RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 11:31, September 19, 2023 (EDT)

"We go to Paradise, but they won't have time to repent."

RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 11:34, September 19, 2023 (EDT)

If Jesus wrote Hebrews, how would you explain this?

"Know ye that our brother Timothy is set at liberty; with whom, if he come shortly, I will see you." (Hebrews 13:23) This doesn't sound like it would make sense under the theory that the Epistle to the Hebrews was Jesus's sermon on the road to Emmaus. Timothy is mentioned nowhere in the Gospels and his name only first shows up in Acts chapter 16.

Also, in the King James Bible, the last verse of Hebrews contains the additional: "(Written to the Hebrews from Italy, by Timothy.)" While I earlier believed your assertion that Jesus could've wrote Hebrews, I'm now mostly convinced of Pauline authorship. What are your thoughts on this, Andy? —LT ^{Rev. 22:13} Wednesday, 21:46, September 19, 2023 (EDT)

The original Epistle to the Hebrews ends with 13:21, where there is a final "Amen". The subsequent verses are later additions, perhaps to support the incorrect attribution to Paul. Linguistic analysis is very scientific today and almost no expert today clings to the view that Paul wrote this letter.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 22:34, September 19, 2023 (EDT)

Evidence? As far as I'm concerned with manuscripts, the Gnostic-corrupted Codex Vaticanus simply ends Hebrews after verse 9:13 (probably because the subsequent passages contradict pagan Roman and Alexandrian doctrines), and if other early manuscripts ended in verse 13:21, how come 13:22–25 are in modern translations, especially in comparison to the excluding of countless other "disputed verses"? —LT ^{Rev. 22:13} Wednesday, 23:33, September 19, 2023 (EDT)

Modern translations add notes about disputed verses when they are not in the oldest extant versions, but there are additional ways to identify disputed versions. This is a flaw in modern versions in not using all the logical means available today for spotting the vandalism to the Bible.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 12:13, September 21, 2023 (EDT)

Hmm... interesting analysis. —LT ^{Rev. 22:13} Thursday, 12:25, September 21, 2023 (EDT)

Also, on a side note, did you notice my post slightly above about the Mosaic law? —LT ^{Rev. 22:13} Wednesday, 23:34, September 19, 2023 (EDT)

I'll take a look!--Andy Schlafly (talk) 12:13, September 21, 2023 (EDT)

Awesome; after a long time of me not fully understanding the New Covenant and "the law," more recently I came to these new conclusions while prayerfully reading Hebrews one morning. —LT ^{Rev. 22:13} Thursday, 12:25, September 21, 2023 (EDT)

Mission accomplished!

Take a look at THIS and THIS and THIS.

I became an editor of Conservapedia with the goal of assisting Christendom to help cause the atheist movement to die (See: Decline of the atheist movement).

Mission accomplished!

On behalf of all Christians on the internet, I hereby declare victory! Olé! Olé! Olé!

Have you read Conservapedia's Future of Christianity article?

And take a look at these articles: Internet evangelism: Christians vs. atheists and Internet outreach and the Matthew effect: Atheist websites vs. religious websites and Large list of atheist websites that have lost web traffic - with supporting data and Internet atheism has a small audience and an insignificant influence on the world

Christendom will be going from one glorious victory to another glorious victory on the information superhighway! Deus vult! Conservative (talk) 10:13, September 20, 2023 (EDT)

Make up your mind, Christendom or demonology. Seems to me you're more an expert on the later. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 10:38, September 20, 2023 (EDT)

Only now you're looking into faith /works?

"I think I may have to understand the Greek better, do more Bible exegesis, etc." bla bla bla.

if you read James, you would have read, If any of you lacks wisdom, let him ask God, who gives generously to all without reproach, and it will be given him, but maybe you don't believe what God says, and would rather keep trolling us with this incessant nonsense. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 10:46, September 20, 2023 (EDT).

[EC] One think that irked me is that Conservative has more than once told me I need to study according to man-made "Bible exegesis" in order to understand the word better. Wow, because the Holy Spirit is just too incompetent, eh? —LT ^{Rev. 22:13} Wednesday, 10:49, September 20, 2023 (EDT)

Oh c'mon, I told you repeatedly: the "atheist movement" at this point means nothing because it only represents a tiny fraction of atheists, many of whom fell away from Christianity because of insufficiently faithful parents. If you're trying to smash atheism, it hasn't worked in terms of influencing the younger generations. Women in the past were more devoutly Christian than men were (I think Phyllis Schlafly wrote about this on Eagle Forum I read years ago about how older generations of women were more socially conservative? Hopefully my memory isn't failing me.); women nowadays are more inclined towards neo-Marxist cultural insanity like the notion that they have the right to sacrifice their unborn children to Moloch. Hardly among my peers in my teenage years have I ever found girls who are pro-life, a position more often men take because they have better capability to grasp basic logic and not let third-rate, emotionally driven propaganda get in the way of.

If atheism was defeated, its fruits would likewise diminish. Since, you know, atheism is clearly linked to things like homosexuality (see: Atheism and homosexuality), violence (see: Atheism and violence), and mass murder (see: Atheism and Mass Murder), the fact that homosexuality, general violence/crime, and mass murder rapidly increase in society nowadays probably is a sign that your declared "victory" is bogus. I'm really sorry to say all this, Conservative, and please don't take this personally; it's the plain simple truth you need to face sooner than later. —LT ^{Rev. 22:13} Wednesday, 10:12, September 20, 2023 (EDT)

Atheist defeat after atheist defeat after atheist defeat! That's ok. Atheists are used to losing! Conservative (talk) 10:32, September 20, 2023 (EDT)

Did you read anything I said? —LT ^{Rev. 22:13} Wednesday, 10:34, September 20, 2023 (EDT)

My graph was a Google Trends graph for the world. The United States population is equivalent to 4.23% of the total world population. Furthermore, post 2050 or sooner, a trend of desecularization is expected to occur in the United States (See: United States, irreligion vs. religion and demographics). Conservative (talk) 10:42, September 20, 2023 (EDT)

In the name of Richard Dawkins's long-lost machismo, will you please pay attention to my larger emphasis? —LT ^{Rev. 22:13} Wednesday, 10:44, September 20, 2023 (EDT)

One more time (as I told User:Conservative on the phone in 2007):

Preaching anti-atheism is not preaching the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

It does nothing to bring souls to salvation. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 10:52, September 20, 2023 (EDT)

There is no connection, whatsoever, between defeating atheism or internet atheism and furthering Christianity or the Gospel of Jesus Christ. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 10:56, September 20, 2023 (EDT)

Exactly. At the end of the day, the Antichrist will be anti-atheism as well because atheism also denies Lucifer/Satan as "supreme lightbearing god of the universe" or whatever. "Anti-atheist" does not automatically equal pro-God. —LT ^{Rev. 22:13} Wednesday, 10:58, September 20, 2023 (EDT)

Of course. Satanists are theists who believe in a supreme divine spiritual being. They're just confused who that being is. User:Conservative never makes that distinction. He preaches believing in a divine spiritual being is the end of all your problems. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 11:10, September 20, 2023 (EDT)

Exactly. Anti-atheism is like "anti-Communism"; just because you oppose one form of what's bad does not automatically make you good. —LT ^{Rev. 22:13} Wednesday, 11:12, September 20, 2023 (EDT)

LT, I addressed your arguments concerning anti-atheism content at: Talk:Internet atheism. Conservative (talk) 11:36, September 20, 2023 (EDT)

Alright, I responded. Hopefully my reply will clarify matters. —LT ^{Rev. 22:13} Wednesday, 11:40, September 20, 2023 (EDT)

For the benefit of others (Not the person who is fond of using huge print instead of cogent arguments).

Atheism and its retention rate in individuals

Next, internet evangelism works. Study Reveals Internet Evangelism Is Effective, Christian Post

Given the low retention rate of atheists historically, anti-atheism content and internet evangelism is likely going to have an effect. Irenaeus spent time arguing against Gnosticism. So Christians engaging in Christian apologetics relative to criticizing another worldview is nothing new. Conservative (talk) 12:06, September 20, 2023 (EDT)

Good answer. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 12:13, September 20, 2023 (EDT)

Then why don't you focus on fighting neo-Gnosticism in modern society? It's all around us; you just need to realize it. —LT ^{Rev. 22:13} Wednesday, 16:51, September 20, 2023 (EDT)

Denial of Pauline authorship of Hebrews is linked to modern translations, it appears

In the KJV, the term "Christ Jesus," almost entirely Pauline-associated, is used once in Hebrews. However, modern translations in verse 3:1 omit the "Christ" part. Coincidence? —LT ^{Rev. 22:13} Thursday, 01:33, September 21, 2023 (EDT)

Fascinating! The KJV translation did not have access to the oldest texts, which had not yet been discovered. I wonder if the Christ in "Christ Jesus" was, like the ending added later after "Amen", a subsequent addition to Hebrews 3:1.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 12:10, September 21, 2023 (EDT)

Andy, the supposed "oldest texts," codices Vaticanus and Sinaiticus, are merely the oldest manuscripts out of what remains today. The actual oldest manuscripts are long gone, and the real question is whether codices B and ℵ derive, to its core, from the oldest documents or not. Although copies of manuscripts compiled after the 4th century are indeed "younger" than those two in a literal sense, they are copied from manuscripts that trace to apostolic times long predating Vaticanus and Sinaiticus.

For example, the Johannine Comma, excluded in most manuscripts and especially Vaticanus, was in the Vaudois (early Waldensian) Bible in 157 A.D., and that was translated from manuscripts given by Antiochian missionaries in the 120s A.D.—Antioch was the hometown of one of John the Apostle's disciples, Ignatius. In addition, as I've mentioned before, Mark 16:19, while gone from Vaticanus, was plainly quoted by Irenaeus in Against Heresies.

Vaticanus omits the entirety of the Pastoral Epistles. Why? Because in the early church era, the Pastorals posed a problem to occultist infiltration of the church, evident in the subversive Gnostic influencer Marcion also omitting them from his own compilation of "canon." Do you think it's a coincidence that the same modern-day liberal deniers who claim the Pastorals were forgeries gloat upon its absence from Codex Vaticanus and Marcion's compilation? I hope you'll see the larger picture here. —LT ^{Rev. 22:13} Thursday, 12:21, September 21, 2023 (EDT)

Another argument against Jesus writing the Book of Hebrews

Conservapedia does have a page titled Conservapedia:Principles of evaluating historical claims and evidence.

It does quote the historian David Hackett Fischer who wrote: "Evidence must always be affirmative. Negative evidence is no evidence at all. In other words, Fischer is saying that an absence of evidence is not necessarily evidence of absence." But even so, if God Himself wrote Hebrews through Jesus, one would expect the book to have much excitement and fanfare surrounding it.

But here is a stronger principle. There is the principle of letting others sing your praises. I just don't see God personally writing a book where He praises Himself. For example, the book of Hebrews starts out: "In the past God spoke to our ancestors through the prophets at many times and in various ways, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom also he made the universe. The Son is the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word. After he had provided purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty in heaven. So he became as much superior to the angels as the name he has inherited is superior to theirs." Conservative (talk) 12:27, September 21, 2023 (EDT)

Waaa! Boo Hoo!

Moved to : Conservapedia:User_complaints#User:Conservative redux

Reminder: Conservapedia Guidelines say Doxing is Inappropriate Behavior

"Engaging in doxxing. Doxxing is the criminal practice of releasing private or sensitive information about someone online for the purposes of harassment, intimidation and/or malicious intent." https://www.conservapedia.com/Conservapedia:Guidelines#Inappropriate.2Ftrolling_behavior:_Examples

Lets make sure we never release personal or private information about others online. NishantXavier^{For Christ the King} 19:20, September 22, 2023 (EDT)

"for the purposes of harassment, intimidation and/or malicious intent", where did that occur? RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 19:24, September 22, 2023 (EDT)

Absolutely agreed, NishantXavier. Leaking emails is a ☭liberal☭ trait. —LT ^{Rev. 22:13} Friday, 19:33, September 22, 2023 (EDT)

Agreed, LT. I got doxed too on an Atheist forum: https://atheistforums.org/thread-65196.html Nothing major, I preached the Gospel to the 1000s there (https://atheistforums.org/thread-65094.html), gave various Apologetic Evidences for God and Christianity, then got doxed about my One Peter Five and other stuff, with malicious intent, then got banned from that Atheist Forum for complaining. Lol, but anyway, I did my duty to the Lord there, so I'm happy. But yeah, I would just say in general, we should never mention personal or private information about others here. Still at work, and will sign off shortly, haven't read all the details here yet. I signed the CP pledge recently and intend to abide by it. I hope we all do. Whatever the past, let's make sure, in future, we never share anything personal or private about others. NishantXavier^{For Christ the King} 19:41, September 22, 2023 (EDT)

"let's make sure, in future, we never share anything personal or private about others" ... just like we would not want others to do to us.

Our Lord Jesus Christ said: "Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you: do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets." (Mat 7:12). God Bless. NishantXavier^{For Christ the King} 19:44, September 22, 2023 (EDT)

ok. Nobody wants to answer my question. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 19:50, September 22, 2023 (EDT)

The internal squabbling needs to end. It would be very easy for a more peaceful and courteous atmosphere to begin. I will do my part in this.

As far as Team CP, it is a good concept. Hopefully, we will start fully implementing it as quickly as possible and we won't move backwards. Conservative (talk) 05:41, September 23, 2023 (EDT)

I know it's a good concept. You are the one who refuses to take the pledge to abide by CP Guidelines and treat you fellow editors with deference and respect.

And don't think by adding your name now will change things. It will be a mockery of the whole concept. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 21:11, September 23, 2023 (EDT)

Waaa! Boo Hoo! Part 2

Andy, User:Conservative is invading my User space and violating the Castle Rule. You have previously ruled several times this a taboo. Please tell him to cease and desist. Thank you. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 10:46, September 23, 2023 (EDT)

• User Conservative withdrew his accusations of "gossip" this morning. No apology. No admission of error. Instead, he began a whispering campaign, "5 people bla bla bla" he posted dozens of times throughout CP. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 21:07, September 23, 2023 (EDT)

Please delete this

Please delete this page: LGM.

Thanks. Conservative (talk) 17:27, September 23, 2023 (EDT)

Let's work together and help ensure Conservapedia cross 1 Billion Page Views - perhaps by Christmas/December 2024

Let's work together as CP editors to the Common Cause of boosting Conservapedia's page views to a Billion if possible by end of next year. Keeping personal/private non-Conservapedia stuff of the Wiki and focusing on contributing articles on our areas of interest/strength would be the best way to do this imo. If another user told you something private in an email, it really doesn't belong on Conservapedia. God Bless. NishantXavier^{For Christ the King} 17:47, September 23, 2023 (EDT)

I've lost three whole days of work this week because of trolling; I was trying to use the lull in the Ukraine war to begin the Niger & Armenia fronts, and cover the India-Canada dispute. Readers need background information in articles as these stories gain prominence and get distorted in MSM. But an editor who refuses to take the Cooperative Editing pledge won't let me get anything done. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 17:51, September 23, 2023 (EDT)

The attacks by a Conservapedia Admin on a current Admin needs to stop completely and if he persists there need to be consequences

Moved to: Conservapedia:User complaints

Delete request

Can you please delete this file: User:Conservative/XYZ. Thank you. Conservative (talk) 19:36, September 24, 2023 (EDT)

By the way, the Apostle Paul taught: "Do not be deceived:‘Bad company ruins good morals.’" (1 Corinthians 15:33). Sometimes it is good to "excommunicate" someone out of your life. Conservative (talk) 19:56, September 24, 2023 (EDT)

Take a look at it first. It's his brilliant magnum opus Essay:Cutting off a gangrenous limb in your life can be quite freeing and enable you to do much more.

He's been out trolling other editors to help cut off a gangrenous limb in his life. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 19:43, September 24, 2023 (EDT)

Why modern Bible translations, and almost certainly codices Vaticanus and Sinaiticus, cannot be trusted

Some time ago, I figured out the puzzle to Revelation 19:20, which states, "And the beast was taken, and with him the false prophet that wrought miracles before him, with which he deceived them that had received the mark of the beast, and them that worshipped his image. These both were cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone." (KJV)

Note that the King James Bible says "a lake of fire" and not "the lake of fire" as modern translations use. (see comparison here) Since Revelation 20:10, talking of Satan's final demise and punishment, uses the term "the lake of fire," modern translations essentially are saying that the same lake of fire that the beast and false prophet are thrown into before the Millennium in Rev. 19:20 is the same lake of fire in verse 20:10.

Contrary to popular belief, the final lake of fire for the wicked will not be in another separate realm. The wicked are resurrected on the Earth, and fire rains down out of Heaven and devours them (Rev. 20:9), which means the final lake of fire at the end of time forms on the surface of the Earth. However, consider the problem with modern translations rendering verse 19:20 as "the lake of fire": by using the word "the" for lake of fire in both verses, this implies that the same lake of fire at Jesus's second return stays around for a thousand years, and Satan, along the wicked, get thrown there afterwards following Final Judgment. But if this is the case, then how can the lake of fire be on the Earth? Whether you believe that the Millennium is in Heaven under historicism (which holds that the Earth is desolate during the Millennium, not perpetually burning; I hold to this school of eschatological thought, just so you know) or that the Millennium is on Earth under standard theology, it makes no sense either way and results in a contradiction.

This is why the King James Bible is the only reliable version between Revelation verses 19:20 and 20:10: it distinguishes between two different lakes of fire, one that's generically referred to as "a lake of fire" which the beast and false prophet get thrown into before the Millennium, and a final lake of fire ("the lake of fire") that forms after the Millennium, following Final Judgment, when Satan and the wicked are destroyed once and for all.

Also, in the King James Bible for verse 20:10, there is no "they" added. It simply says, "And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever." The insertion of the word "they" in there, added by modern translations (even the NKJV, which distorts both verses and is not consistently faithful to the KJV), implies that the beast and false prophet have been burning for a thousand years during the Millennium and are still burning. On a side note, the KJV puts "are" in italics, indicating it's not in the original manuscripts. The Tyndale Bible, which almost completely concurs the KJV with most of what I emphasized on those two verses, accurately renders "were" instead of "are in 20:10.

Hopefully you find this information interesting, Andy. —LT ^{Rev. 22:13} Monday, 21:08, September 24, 2023 (EDT)

Request for unprotection of Stephen

Would you please be able to unprotect Stephen? It seems to have been protected back in 2010 for no apparent reason. There are a few edits I would like to make to that page (for instance, saying he was the second Christian martyr, because the article rightly points out that the first was Our Lord Jesus). MayGodBless (talk) 20:37, September 25, 2023 (EDT)

Done. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 20:39, September 25, 2023 (EDT)

An indication that Evangelist Mark was Jewish

Hi Andy, upon extra reconsideration and analysis, I think the usage of the term "Herodians" in the Gospel of Mark actually proves that its author was a Jew. Simply put, using Occam's razor, it makes sense that the derogatory reference towards one specific sect of Judaism that plunged into apostasy (since "the Herodians" were Hellenistic Jews) exemplifies a manifestation of intra-Jewish tension where Mark indirectly asserts his own Jewish background and personal adherence to Jewry by excoriating the "traitor" faction(s), IOWs establishing Christianity as the true sect of Judaism and not the other factions (Pharisees, Sadducees, Herodians, etc.). Any cultural renegade within just about any ethnic background can affirm this inherent sentiment, me included.

If Mark was a Roman Gentile, why would he go to lengths to single out one particular Jewish sect to castigate, if he supposedly, based off your hypothesis, didn't care as much about Jewish culture compared to, say, Matthew? If Mark was a Gentile and cared about Judaism and Jewry less than other New Testament authors did, this occurrence would be harder to explain. —LT ^{Rev. 22:13} Friday, 21:04, September 28, 2023 (EDT)

I don't see anything religious about the term "Herodians", which plainly appears to be a blunt, pejorative reference to those who followed or even respected Herod. The term seems comparable to the "Clintonista", which is explained here.

But thanks for your interesting point about Herodians!--Andy Schlafly (talk) 12:03, September 29, 2023 (EDT)

Yeah, no problem; while it's possible that the thought process of an early gentile Roman Christian could likewise creatively conjure up such a clever pejorative, my argument more or less rests on an implied premise that the circumstantial application is better explained as the outgrowth of a devout Jewish-Christian perspective. This is my general impression on the expressed "Jewishness" of the New Testament authors:

• Matthew places a strong emphasis on the Jewish origins of Jesus and His teachings from the very first verse; while verse 27:25 serves as a harsh rebuke of the Judean crowd roused up into inciting the crucifixion, his Gospel account broadly encapsulates the Jewish foundation of the Christian faith
• Mark's Jewishness (which, of course, assumes that he was a Jew after all, which I'm about 90% certain though not absolutely sure, seeing your arguments to the contrary) is exemplified differently, more bluntly "reclaiming Judaism from the Judeans" by denouncing the ultra-Hellenized "Herodians"; if one trusts the KJV as reliable and believes that verse 15:28 belongs, then a case for him being a Jew is much easier to substantiate
• Luke, while likely not a Jew, notably emphasizes the disciples' adherence to keeping the Sabbath (Luke 23:56)
• John likewise establishes that Christianity is the true outgrowth of Judaism and not the other Judean sects; what is commonly translated as "the Jews" almost certainly means "the Judeans" in his Gospel account, which is filled with mentions of Jewish feasts and described by some Jews as "the most Jewish out of the four"; and since the early church tradition that the same Apostle John wrote the Johannine Gospel and the Book of Revelation, that indicates that he was indeed a devout Jew
• Paul almost certainly understood Judaism better than any of his contemporaries, and his Epistles are written with clear indications that he considers himself a devout Jew (2 Corinthians 11:22, Philippians 3:4–5) when addressing to gentile audiences, emphasizing faith in Christ Jesus as the true completion of "Jewishness" (Romans 2:28–29)
• both Peter and Jude in their Epistles echo the essence of traditional Jewish apocalyptic literature
• James in his Epistle describes the church as the "twelve tribes of Israel" (James 1:1)

—LT ^{Rev. 22:13} Friday, 13:42, September 29, 2023 (EDT)

Personally, I think this encapsulates my emphasis well:

Converts to Christianity, who, say, grew up in Eastern cultures (myself, for example), often end up differing in outlook on life and moral values greatly because they see biblical principles as morally superior to the backwards dogmas they grew up instilled upon by their parents. In essence, those who understand "both worlds" have a complex perspective that presumably most out there who've held the same cultural mindset throughout their life would find difficult to grasp. And in those Eastern cultures, similar to Judaism 2,000 years ago, there are caste-like hierarchical norms set in place which discriminate in some way, for example in East Asian culture often on the basis of age. And I suppose it would be fair to say that some converts from those ethnocultural backgrounds to Christianity, from a new standpoint of biblical values, see (and validly so) their newly shaped mindset as much more compassionate towards the "lower" grades of their ethnocultural group than their older generational counterparts of "tradition adherents" to be. Especially when it comes to women's rights, notably, it is Christianity that liberates women from the condescending attitudes present in the most backwards elements of atheistic, godless East Asian cultures I for one, have grown up experiencing and can largely attest to. —LT ^{Rev. 22:13} Friday, 13:59, September 29, 2023 (EDT)

The names Mark, Luke, and John are not Jewish names, and they appear nowhere in the Old Testament. Their writings in the New Testament are not Jewish as Matthew's is.

Christianity is good for women but so are some other religions in their own ways. Atheism is terrible towards women, in contrast. Christianity is particularly good in rejecting mistreatment of the less fortunate in society.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 15:02, September 29, 2023 (EDT)

Yeah, biblical Jewish-Christian values emphasize uplifting women in a way that respects traditional femininity which is under attack by modern-day "feminism." Women who are virtuous and refrain from the vulgarity of degenerate neo-Marxist culture seem to be unfortunately in decline nowadays.

"Mark" is not a Semitic name, though "John" is, however. The other "John" in the New Testament, John the Baptist, was a Jew born to devout Jews. Likewise, John the Apostle clearly was a Galilean Jew like Peter, since the sons of Zebedee were fishing partners of Simon and Andrew. (Luke 5:10) (and while "John" may not be entirely rooted in Jewish linguistics, the name is known in their dialect as "Yochanan"; Messianic Jewish Bibles, for example, use the deanglicized, Hebrew-transliterated "Yochanan" instead of "John") And the only speculation of Luke possibly being Jewish comes from the preface to a book suggesting Lukan authorship of Hebrews; I'm skeptical of either points concerning Luke, who most likely was a Gentile.

And I suppose the question of whether Mark was Jewish boils down to whether Evangelist Mark was the same individual as John Mark in the Acts of the Apostles. I believe the early church record solidly states that they were the same person; if you disagree, Andy, what evidence can you point to that disproves an authorship assertion concurred by the majority of the ECFs? —LT ^{Rev. 22:13} Friday, 15:14, September 29, 2023 (EDT)

John's Gospel account is "not Jewish as Matthew's is"? I strongly differ on this. If you take into consideration all the Jewish feasts John records, his Gospel can be designated more Jewish than Matthew's, and his emphasis on personal connections within the early Jewish sect which Christianity sprang from is noteworthy. (John 4:45) And to add on to the fact that John was a fishing partner of Peter and Andrew—remember that Peter had to receive a vision (Acts 10:9–16) to understand that Jews should not discriminate against gentiles, and even then was stuck in his old ways until Paul's rebuke. (Galatians 2:11–14) With this in mind, it would be illogical to assume that the sons of Zebedee were gentiles, as then Peter would've considered them "unclean" and highly unlikely to fish alongside them in their youthful years. —LT ^{Rev. 22:13} Friday, 15:28, September 29, 2023 (EDT)

Also, if I'm correct in my speculation here, I presume one major reason you personally refuse to accept Johannine authorship of Revelation is because the book belongs to the category of Jewish apocalyptic literature, while you consider the Apostle John to have been a gentile and thus couldn't have understood such nuanced depths of Old Testament Scripture? —LT ^{Rev. 22:13} Saturday, 22:03, September 29, 2023 (EDT)

I respectfully disagree. "John" is not a Jewish name, and is nowhere mentioned in the Old Testament. The Book of Revelation may not have been written by John the Apostle, and rarely quotes the Old Testament anyway. Some find similarities between the Old Testament and the Book of Revelation, but those are debatable. I think the Gospel of John has almost no quotations of the Old Testament.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 00:50, September 30, 2023 (EDT)

Okay, I see where you're coming from. However, I'd strongly contend that there are countless allusions in Revelation to bits and pieces of the Old Testament, even if not whole verses; the underlying importance is thematic connections. For example:

• the seven trumpets of Joshua 6 appear to be a typology for the seven trumpets of Revelation: the blowing of all seven trumpets is a declaration of impending executive judgment upon the wicked; in Joshua, it was pronounced against one particular group of unrepentant gentiles, where Rahab the harlot and her family were brought out into safety when everyone else was slain; at Christ's Second Return, the redeemed will be raptured into safety as the remaining wicked are slain with the sword proceeding out of the Lamb's mouth (Rev. 19:21)
• the description of "eagles' wings" in Exodus 19:4 serves as a typology for Revelation 12:14: the same "eagles' wings" that saved literal Israel in Old Testament times later saves spiritual Israel in the New Testament era

—LT ^{Rev. 22:13} Saturday, 01:12, September 30, 2023 (EDT)

And to sort of reemphasize and expand upon an earlier point, the fact alone that Mark and John quotes the Old Testament less doesn't automatically indicate they were non-Jews, because the "Jewishness" of their Gospels is simply expressed in a different, how should I put it, format. The complexities of early Jewish-Christian outlooks clearly transcended beyond the depths of just about any modern-day thought, and the outgrowth of those ancient intra-Jewish disputes shouldn't be interpreted in a one-dimensional fashion as standard modern dogmas go. —LT ^{Rev. 22:13} Saturday, 12:25, September 30, 2023 (EDT)

Sun Tzu and Douglas Mac Arthur

I have a history of contributing to the Sun Tzu related articles and I have made them better and they have about 20,000 and 6,000 page views respectively. Also, I am a fan of Douglas MacArthur.

I am going to contribute to those articles.

And I never said I would not contribute to history articles for a period of time. I like history. And so do many of our readers.

For example, here are the page view counts of a few of my history articles:

• Atheism and mass murder - 409,120 page views

• History of Atheism - 120,489 page views

So I don't see why I shouldn't create or update my history articles. It makes no sense because one of the big things people go to encyclopedias for is history articles. Conservative (talk) 23:58, September 29, 2023 (EDT)

History, yes. Fake history, no. For example, that George Soros did not fund many of his sources in his Geopolitical Essays, or that Vladimir Putin was spewing Russian propaganda when Putin said the SMO was to denazify Ukraine.

Look at our Geopolitics article: it has not been edited since 2013 and I have never edited it; it reads:

Geopolitics is an noun meaning:[1]

1. the study or the application of the influence of political and economic geography on the politics, national power, foreign policy, etc., of a state.
2. the combination of geographic and political factors influencing or delineating a country or region.
3. a national policy based on the interrelation of politics and geography.
4. a Nazi doctrine that a combination of political, geographic, historical, racial, and economic factors substantiated Germany's right to expand its borders and control various strategic land masses and natural resources."

Recently I was accused of personal attacks for merely citing the flaws in User:Conservative's_essays#Geopolitics series which draw heavily on inferences from #4 in the above list. He has been warned dozens of times over the past year and a half about that specific problem, and has either reverted or deleted the warnings, complained to Andy, and gone on whispering/gossip campaigns against me. His research on those subjects is sloppy and faulty, and in my opinion, is not motivated by a desire to educate conservative students. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 02:29, September 30, 2023 (EDT)

NATO & EU expansion into Ukraine is the same program of Lebensraum and the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk. He has demonstrated no qualification to write on this subject. Rather, he has used Conservapedia Essay space to attack his own personal "enemies", as he puts it. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 02:44, September 30, 2023 (EDT)

There is nothing I put in the Sun Tzu articles or Douglas MacArthur article that is not historical. I have nothing further to say about this matter. Conservative (talk) 07:18, September 30, 2023 (EDT)

It is your Geopolitical Essays. They are nothing but neo-Nazi crap. I have nothing further to say about this matter. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 10:43, September 30, 2023 (EDT)

Add this to your Geopolitical series: Exporting Hate - American White Supremacists and Far Right Militants Fighting For the Kiev Regime in Ukraine. 11:46, September 30, 2023 (EDT)

You falsely and redundantly calling people white supremacists, Nazis and Russophobes is trolling. Simon Wiesenthal is a real Nazi hunter. You are not. And Vladimir Putin is not the fourth person of the Godhead. He is just a man. Conservative (talk) 13:13, September 30, 2023 (EDT)

You broke your pledge to cease trolling. You are back to your Sun Tsu psyop against you imaginary "enemies". Just drop it. I embarrassed you one year into the SMO by highlighting your trolling comment on April 15, 2022, and you've been on a relentless jihad, spewing neo-Nazi agitprop ever since. Just drop it. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 13:40, September 30, 2023 (EDT)

Wow, so Conservative has been a globalist-shilling, neo–National Socialist backing, Islamofascistic jihadist this whole time, eh? What astounding new revelations I can't believe I didn't know this whole time. —LT ^{Rev. 22:13} Sunday, 01:15, October 1, 2023 (EDT)

At best, the content is jingoism, at worst neo-nazi propaganda. Due to the way he's handled this matter for 19 months, there's little good will. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 01:19, October 1, 2023 (EDT)

User:Conservative had no cause to delete World Naval Powers without discussion after my good faith contributions. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 14:36, September 30, 2023 (EDT)

Everything you need to know about User:Conservative's naiveté in these issues on geopolitics he posted right here on February 27, 2022:

Why Russia invaded Ukraine. Putin underestimated Ukrainian nationalism.

This was posted on MPR talk 3 days after the start of the SMO. Vladimir Putin had made it clear the purpose was to de-nazify militant Ukrainian Nationalists. Yet User:Conservative made it clear his only source of information was the globalist mainstream media propaganda network (just as he had done with "coronavirus comes from eating bats").

If Putin "underestimated" Ukrainian nationalism, Putin would have had to underestimate the Ukrainian nazis. Yet it took another two months senselessly arguing with User:Conservative whether Nazis existed in Ukraine (in doing so, it become obvious User:Conservative did not know what Nazism, or a Nazi, was). The information about nazis in Ukraine was easily available to him from numerous mainstream sources published years in advance, but he chose to ignore it.

Then, to refute me in his pointless arguments, User:Conservative turned to numerous globalist and Soros-funded think tanks for "scholarly" rebuttals in his neocon-inspired Geopolitical Essay series. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 15:34, September 30, 2023 (EDT)

Redux

Andy, he's trolling again on subjects he knows nothing about. [4][5]

RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 11:12, September 30, 2023 (EDT)

Yep, he's trolling again. He's using deletion to hide his glaring errors rather than engaging in discussion. I've wasted one full hour this morning already with this nonsense. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 11:32, September 30, 2023 (EDT)

The Military history article was bland with no pictures in it. I put some pictures in the article.

I tried to create a few navy articles, but cooperative editing with RobSmith appeared to be impossible so I moved on. Conservative (talk) 11:35, September 30, 2023 (EDT)

Why did you delete the talk page here: Talk:World naval powers? RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 11:37, September 30, 2023 (EDT)

Because there is no point in having a talk page with no World naval powers article. I tried to do cooperative editing with you, but it didn't work out. So I moved on. But feel free to create your own World naval powers article without me. Conservative (talk) 11:43, September 30, 2023 (EDT)

Now you're being redundant, which is trolling. Deleting the talk page without answering good faith questions was incivil conduct. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 11:48, September 30, 2023 (EDT)

RobSmith, over the past month I have realized that it is Why-Oh-You that is completely and utterly mentally incompetent with regard to the NATO war in Ukraine. You have been wrong about the war at every turn. A year ago, you said at Talk:Main Page/Archive index/222#Why are the referendums being held now that after Russia annexes Donetsk firing a shell will result in a nuke. You have now been proved wrong how many times? Once for every shell fired. The Biden junta has been arming the Ukonazis for a year and a half, and your disinformation has cost valuable lives. It is okay to admit you are in over your head and have no clue what you are talking about. Just stop before you embarrass yourself further. It is completely okay to be mentally incompetent in areas; except for one man we all are. You just need to realize that by misinforming voters, you are actively causing people to turn around and support additional funding for the NATO war in Ukraine. I am praying to the Lord that you realize this and stop before more harm is caused. Please, I beg you. MayGodBless (talk) 00:30, October 1, 2023 (EDT)

If I could make sense out of what you are saying, I could respond. But feel free to troll some more. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 00:34, October 1, 2023 (EDT)

Oh, I think I get now; you're talking about all the Red Lines NATO/Ukraine has crossed.

You need to be specific in your arguments, and refrain from trolling. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 00:37, October 1, 2023 (EDT)

RobSmith, I truly want to help you. You have said so many things are Red Lines, but they never come to pass. MayGodBless (talk) 00:40, October 1, 2023 (EDT)

That's a mystery. If you think the Russians are bluffing, go ahead. You sound like Blinken and Biden. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 00:48, October 1, 2023 (EDT)

I do not think the Russians are bluffing. I think you misunderstand what their Red Lines are. MayGodBless (talk) 00:53, October 1, 2023 (EDT)

There are only two possibilities. Either a red line was crossed, in which case they were bluffing. Or a red line was not crossed, and you simply misunderstand what their red lines are. MayGodBless (talk) 00:55, October 1, 2023 (EDT)

Question about the founders of the modern conservative movement

I saw you contributing to the Phyllis Schlafly article. It says she was one of the founders of the modern conservative movement.

Who were the other key founders of the modern conservative movement in your estimation? Conservative (talk) 00:13, September 30, 2023 (EDT)

I'd refer to the movement conservative entry for a list of others. The first, Edmund Burke, is not quite modern.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 00:43, September 30, 2023 (EDT)

I loved the CNN show Crossfire which was a debate show that Patrick Buchanan and Robert Novak were on. Buchanan was especially good on the show. Conservative (talk) 00:55, September 30, 2023 (EDT)

I would like to see you or someone else create a Modern conservative movement article. I would suggest that the article not be an orphan article by having the article be linked to from our conservative article, some of the founders of the modern conservative movement and our New Deal article (In part, the modern conservative movement was a reaction to the New Deal). Conservative (talk) 07:06, September 30, 2023 (EDT)

The Evangelist Mark and the Sabbath

Hi again, Andy, and happy Sabbath. Speaking of the topic, I of course remember that you've stated, at least twice, that Mark was more or less "bluntly critical" of the Sabbath in Mark 2:27. So, if he was a non-Jew and critic of Sabbath observance, that more or less would imply he promulgated Sunday observance in the Christian church.

However, the testimonial evidence of the early church indicates otherwise. The Coptic Orthodox Church venerates him (identified as John Mark) as their founder; rejection of the seventh-day Sabbath in the Coptic Church was reportedly at a "late date." Of course, if they had to reject the Sabbath much later, that means they kept it until then. The two earliest centers of Christianity to plunge into first-day worship were Rome and Alexandria; a 5th-century historian put it this way:

Just as an FYI, all the "earliest and most reliable manuscripts" are linked to those same cities: Rome and Alexandria... anyways: regarding St. Mark's Coptic Orthodox Church, let's connect the dots: since we know that they trace apostolic lineage to St. John Mark the Evangelist and kept the seventh-day Bible Sabbath faithfully for several centuries until eventual pagan, Constantine-influenced subversion into first-day observance at a relative "late date," that means they were taught by none other than the Evangelist Mark to keep the seventh-day Sabbath. I know you may disagree with this analysis, but hopefully it's interesting to you nonetheless. —LT ^{Rev. 22:13} Saturday, 12:09, September 30, 2023 (EDT)

Your info is very interesting, LT. Thank you! But Mark's rejection of the Jewish Sabbath does not imply that he wanted a 7th-day Sabbath. The stronger implication is that he rejected the concept of a Sabbath, period, as most Gentiles would have.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 17:33, September 30, 2023 (EDT)

P.S. I think your history of Sabbath-observance in Alexandria is fascinating but difficult to draw conclusions from.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 17:36, September 30, 2023 (EDT)

Oh, awesome to hear that you appreciate my points above, Andy! When I first read the New Testament last year, I thought that Mark was just a shorter version of Matthew, but upon seeing your insights, my mind was truly opened in a way it wasn't before. I think in the case of Mark 2:27 as it concerns Mark's view of the Sabbath, it always helps to observe the full context once again:

Now, first of all, Mark was just quoting Jesus. Note that He said "for man," not "for the Jews"; the Sabbath was established at creation (Genesis 2:2–3, Exodus 20:11), long before the Jews (descendants of Noah's son Shem, and hence part of the broad ethnic "Semite" group) ever existed. IOWs, the term "Jewish Sabbath," while convenient to summarize its general association with Judaism, isn't entirely precise.

Remember, the Pharisees turned the Sabbath, a great blessing for humanity, into a legalized burden for Jews. Why does Jesus add, "the Son of man is Lord also of the sabbath"? Because the Judean leaders acted as if they, not God, determined how to properly keep the Sabbath, usurping the authority of the very Son of God who established it! So Christ's famous phrase "the Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath" was not to downgrade the Sabbath's objective importance, but to emphasize it as a blessing not to be rendered a legalized burden whereby a few entitled bureaucrats use decrees to ruin others' lives. And since the Gospel of Mark bluntly emphasizes, in more or less your style of phrasing, "conservative populism" against the liberal elites, verses 2:27–28 was to assert Jesus as the ultimate authority on what it meant to keep the Sabbath.

Okay, concerning the broad history of Sabbath and Sunday observance, I don't want to implode your head with too much information at once, so I'll summarize what I can with limited points in the meantime: the early apostolic churches and Apostolic Fathers started off in Sabbath observance. Now, some may ask, "what about the the term Lord's day in the Didache and Revelation 1:10?" The Lord's Day until the late second century did not yet refer to Sunday, and therefore referred to the Sabbath.

And a valid question arises: how can I, for one, know with great certainty that the Lord's Day initially was in reference to the Sabbath? Because the first notable proponent of Sunday observance, Justin Martyr (influenced by Alexandrian thought, by the way), from my knowledge (and if I happen to be wrong here, do correct me), never referred to the first day of the week as the "Lord's Day"! If the apostolic churches already observed Sunday as the "Lord's Day" since New Testament times, it would be utterly bizarre why an open proponent of first-day observance never uses that term in reference to the first day of the week.

Another argument for Sunday observance is that Jesus rose on the first day of the week, and often implied that this basis was supposedly used by the early church proponents of first-day worship. Of course, Justin Martyr's argument for Sunday worship was connected to the circumcision of newborns in the Old Testament on the eighth day. So when you put all the pieces together in both cases, concerning the Lord's Day and Resurrection arguments, Justin's own form of first-day worship advocacy ends up being a testimony against the common arguments presented by modern defenders of Sunday observance! —LT ^{Rev. 22:13} Saturday, 18:08, September 30, 2023 (EDT)

Please delete this page please

Please delete this page please: User:Conservative/Political news and articles. Conservative (talk) 18:34, September 30, 2023 (EDT)

The return of Karajou soon? If so, this is awesome!

I just noticed this. This is awesome!

People of Conservapedia I have returned. The hour of your redemption from China/Russia cheerleading is here. USA! USA! USA!

U.S. Navy

"Though they may hate me, I will force them to esteem me as well." - John Paul Jones

Key point: Perhaps, Karajou noticed User: RobSmith reverting my edit saying the U.S. Navy is the most powerful navy in the world. This may have caused him to consider returning to Conservapedia. See RobSmith's EDIT of the article World naval powers.

I Karajou's return occurs soon. Conservative (talk) 00:17, October 1, 2023 (EDT)

Key point: He's trolling again, Andy. User:Conservative refused discussion on what measure defines "the most powerful Navy", [6] fleet size or nuclear capability (China already has a larger fleet size). Then he Deleted the page without discussion. He only responded after I recreated the page. Look at the timestamps. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 00:25, October 1, 2023 (EDT)

Professor John Joseph Mearsheimer believes in balance of power politics. Is the return of Karajou nigh? Conservapedia could use some balancing. Conservative (talk) 00:30, October 1, 2023 (EDT)

No RobSmith. You reverted me once I put the U.S. Navy seal back into the article. You definitely didn't like that. Well, I am sure Karajou disagrees! Conservative (talk) 00:32, October 1, 2023 (EDT)

The US Navy seal did not belong in a subheading about the 10 largest navies in the world. (A) It is not the largest by fleet size; (2) the list was in error anyway cause the Japanese navy is bigger than Russia's.

You refused discussion and Deleted the page and its talk page. Period. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 00:40, October 1, 2023 (EDT)

It was nothing but jingoism, false, and misleading (without proper discussion). RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 00:44, October 1, 2023 (EDT)

Which country has the most aircraft carriers? I'll give you a hint: it is the same country that has the most nuclear subs. MayGodBless (talk) 00:49, October 1, 2023 (EDT)

So the score is 64 to 58. But Russia builds them for 1/3 the cost. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 00:59, October 1, 2023 (EDT)

That is relevant only for what the future capacities will be. A ship is a ship, regardless of if I spent $100 or $1,000 buying them. MayGodBless (talk) 01:03, October 1, 2023 (EDT)

Carriers are vulnerable to hypersonics. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 00:56, October 1, 2023 (EDT)

Everything is vulnerable to hypersonics. MayGodBless (talk) 00:57, October 1, 2023 (EDT)

Bingo. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 00:59, October 1, 2023 (EDT)

It's a whole new ballgame - which will influence global politics for the next 30 years.

Now, the US can continue building air carriers at the cost of billions - that are destroyed in 10 minutes in combat like the rest of the junk they sent to Ukraine - but that should ultimately be a decision made by the taxpayers, not the idiots in the Deep state who got us into this mess. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 01:06, October 1, 2023 (EDT)

A supercarrier is defenseless - it will not make it to Hawaii from San Diego before being taken out by a Chinese hypersonic. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 02:44, October 1, 2023 (EDT)

Fleet size is a terrible measure. Would you rather have a modern destroyer or 1,000 16th-century pirate ships? MayGodBless (talk) 00:51, October 1, 2023 (EDT)

[EC] I don't understand why RobSmith feels the need to complain to Andy when he can just pray the following to the fourth member of the Godhead he so reveres in absolute veneration: "Our ☭Putin☭ which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name. Thy glorious Communist paradise come, workers of the world unite!" (Levi-Putin 6:9–10) —LT ^{Rev. 22:13} Sunday, 00:35, October 1, 2023 (EDT)

It's Andy's decision. If he wants all this incivility and trolling each other among Admin & editors, that's his decision. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 11:45, October 1, 2023 (EDT)

Conservapedia needs another America first and very pro-capitalism admin. Come back soon Karajou!

Key quotes of RobSmith:

IOWs, if you don't have anything positive to say about socialists and communists, just shut up, at least for the duration of the war. Read the bios of Bill Donovan, Frank Knox, and Henry Stimson. And if you don't know what I'm talking about, you especially need to just shut up. RobSGive Peace a chance 17:54, January 21, 2023 (EST)

It won't happen until China and Russia break the back of US domination, first. RobSGive Peace a Chance! 21:53, August 14, 2023 (EDT)

I hope Karajou returns soon. Conservative (talk) 05:58, October 1, 2023 (EDT)

Andy's not dumb, he knows who Knox, Stimson & Donovon were, Stalinist collaborators. They weren't Nazi sympathizers. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 11:41, October 1, 2023 (EDT)

Now that a former Admin is back, I feel more at liberty to discuss geopolitics at Conservapedia. And....

Although I am amping up my pursuits outside of politics, now that Karajou is back, I feel more at liberty to discuss geopolitics at the website. After all, who wants to have unpleasant and inane discussions with a rude man who unjustly calls every Tom, Dick and Harry Nazis and incessantly spouts Russian propaganda rather than objective analysis.

However, given my focus on areas outside of geopolitics in terms of my goals and my desire to not provide further commentary until the dust settles in terms of geopolitics, I still don't plan on commenting on geopolitics until around 2030 or later (Unless of course, China sees a big economic collapse instead of a decline over time in the upcoming years).

But I am going to enjoy posting some content about geopolitics at that time. I suspect that a certain China/Russia cheerleader will have to eat some crow or perform some significant mental gymnastics or remain silent. Conservative (talk) 08:04, October 1, 2023 (EDT)

This is just for you: Zerohedge: European Union Leadership Announced New Lebensraum Expansion Policy.

Get used to the new vocabulary, dialogue, and rhetoric - it's gone mainstream. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 08:11, October 1, 2023 (EDT)

Putin is not a strategic thinker (See: Essay: There is no evidence that Vladimir Putin plays chess).

There is a Newtonian aspect to politics/geopolitics - namely, for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. So we see Europe expanding its energy options; NATO expanding, EU is preparing for a potential wave of expansion; NATO increasing its military budget, etc.

And more importantly, Russian demography has long been an existential issue to Vladimir Putin. In 2021, he declared “saving the people of Russia is our top national priority".[7] And this war is making Russia's demographic crisis worse (See: Essay: Russia is dying out. The war in Ukraine is making Russia's demographic crisis even worse).

As far as Russia's long game on the geopolitics chess board, Putin's strategic thinking is terrible because he is not thinking enough moves ahead. Conservative (talk) 13:52, October 2, 2023 (EDT)

Well, long-term prospects aren't going well for Ukraine anyways. It's the thesis/antithesis game at play here: create the war and misery to incite right-wing populist backlash. —LT ^{Rev. 22:13} Monday, 13:56, October 2, 2023 (EDT)

LT, the Russian demographer Salavat Abylkalikov says the main consequences of Russia's demographic crisis will be the following:

"According to the average version of the UN forecast, Russia's population by 2050 may be about 133.4 million people, which is 14th in the world and below countries such as Egypt, the Philippines, and Mexico. But if Russia goes not according to the average, but according to the low option that is quite likely at the present time, then with a population of 123.2 million people we will drop to 16th place and will already be neighbors with Tanzania and Vietnam. Thus, the price of switching to the low scenario could be -10 million people, as well as a decrease in the place in the top countries in terms of population. Moreover, the low version of the UN forecast did not include too low or even negative migration growth.

"A smaller population means a country's lower economic potential, a shrinking domestic market, worsening demographic problems and an aging population, as well as a decrease in the country's geopolitical power. The population size still correlates with the weight in international relations, the ability to promote their interests on the world stage. And the declining population for the largest country in the world may cause some neighbors on the continent, especially the eastern ones, to be tempted to solve their internal growing problems by some external adventures. But will Russia find anyone and how to fight back, will there be allies?"[8]

Question: Is Putin a master of the geopolitics chessboard? Nyet! Conservative (talk) 14:01, October 2, 2023 (EDT)

You got Nazigate wrapped around your neck, and you keep preaching the Haushofer School of Realism. It's not like I didn't say 'told you so'. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 14:04, October 2, 2023 (EDT)

The Nazi party was the gay rights movement of the 1920s, 1930s, 1940s, and 1950s until it was stamped out by Western Christian culture. It re-emerged on the so-called "left" to claim it was somehow a victim of Nazism instead of one of its perps. User:Conservative has fallen right into line with Western fascism and the LGBT+ movement. User:Conservative denies Eastern Christendom from defending itself from Western, secular, globalist attacks. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 14:13, October 2, 2023 (EDT)

So you're saying Conservative is really a fascist-shilling, Nazi-supporting, globalist-entrenched, and now homosexual-backing anti-Orthodox jihadist bigot? Wow, what astounding new revelations that carry no factual substantiation. —LT ^{Rev. 22:13} Monday, 14:22, October 2, 2023 (EDT)

Click the links at Nazigate and Haushofer School of Realism. What more factual evidence do you want added to that text? RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 14:36, October 2, 2023 (EDT)

Your blather is difficult to make sense of, and I have better usages for my critical thinking skills than trying to sort through the conglomerate hegemony of monotonous paradialectic deception you commonly spout. —LT ^{Rev. 22:13} Monday, 14:41, October 2, 2023 (EDT)

So you're too lazy to think and read. No wonder you haven't signed up at Team CP. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 14:55, October 2, 2023 (EDT)

I hereby present all my critics the prestigious NATO/LGBT award for heroic service in the global war on Putinism.

[EC] Conservative, there is no way the world as we know it is lasting until 2050. By then, the Millennium would almost certainly have already begun, because there are good reasons to believe Jesus will return in 2027. —LT ^{Rev. 22:13} Monday, 14:04, October 2, 2023 (EDT)

RobSmith is not a master of politics. He messed around with my World naval powers article which may have caused the ire of Ex-Navy man Karajou which might have caused him to come back to Conservapedia. The Navy's motto is "Honor, courage and commitment". Let's hope that Karajou starts creating content and becomes a Conservapedia admin again. Commitment! Hooyah! Conservative (talk) 14:22, October 2, 2023 (EDT)

Yep, agreed. —LT ^{Rev. 22:13} Monday, 14:23, October 2, 2023 (EDT)

Question: Was my World naval powers article bait to cause RobSmith to disrespect the U.S. Navy and thus prompt Karajou to come back to Conservapedia or was it merely unplanned serendipity? User: Conservative is so inscrutable, Conservapedia's readership may never know the answer to this question!

"Indirect tactics, efficiently applied, are inexhaustible as Heaven and Earth, unending as the flow of rivers and streams; like the sun and moon, they end but to begin anew; like the four seasons, they pass away to return once more." - Sun Tzu.

One thing I do know is that good chess players think several moves ahead and are not impulsive. Conservative (talk) 14:52, October 2, 2023 (EDT)

Andy, they're plotting an off-wiki cyberattack from your user page ("Indirect tactics, efficiently applied, are inexhaustible as Heaven and Earth"). RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 14:57, October 2, 2023 (EDT)

RobSmith, since when did you start one-upping Stacey Abrams to spout the craziest conspiracy theories? —LT ^{Rev. 22:13} Monday, 15:06, October 2, 2023 (EDT)

Need I remind RobSmith and Mr. Schafly that Mao Zedong, Fidel Castro, Joseph Stalin and Xi Jinping also have opposed homosexuality so that moral bar isn't exceedingly high - especially for societies that currently have a demographic crisis due to low fertility rates and people leaving their countries! See: Atheism and the suppression of homosexuality

And Xi Jinping's administration currently persecutes Christians.[9] Conservative (talk) 15:44, October 2, 2023 (EDT)

More of the Houshofer School. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 15:49, October 2, 2023 (EDT)

Yeah, merely opposing one form of evil doesn't make one a good person. —LT ^{Rev. 22:13} Monday, 15:50, October 2, 2023 (EDT)

Yes, last time I checked Moses descended from Mount Sinai with 10 commandments and the Sermon on the Mount was big on morality too. What we have here is a classic case of the fallacy of exclusion. Conservative (talk) 15:52, October 2, 2023 (EDT)

When David Gerard was teaching you laws of logic in argument, you didn't pay close enough attention. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 15:56, October 2, 2023 (EDT)

Oh, I see: you, who accused Conservative and/or I in various times of being "in bed" with RationalWikians or "learning from their bad example," are now reproving him for not sufficiently listening to one of their goon leaders. Like I said iterated above, you're full of paradialectic deception. And I'll tell you something plain and clear: you think you're the center? You certainly are when it comes to hypocrisy, because I've just about never seen anyone embody the depths of double standards to the extent you have. —LT ^{Rev. 22:13} Monday, 16:00, October 2, 2023 (EDT)

a prophet is never welcome in his hometown.... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by RobSmith (talk)

Yes, RobSmith, you're indeed a prophet—a false one. —LT ^{Rev. 22:13} Monday, 16:06, October 2, 2023 (EDT)

User:Conservative, your buddy Bill Browder appears in this video. [10] (2,000 views in 31 minutes; I think we see a viral video in the making. It exposes who all spews globalist uniparty talking points). RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 16:26, October 2, 2023 (EDT)

I tried to brand him a totalitarian but you insisted he was an honorable capitalist. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 16:34, October 2, 2023 (EDT)

Please read: The anti-Christianity Mao Zedong, Fidel Castro, Joseph Stalin and Xi Jinping have opposed homosexuality so this isn't a very high moral bar for China and Russia to clear

I trust this clarifies matters. Conservative (talk) 16:57, October 2, 2023 (EDT)

Without reading it, it certainly does. You're still espousing the Haushopfer School of Geopolitics. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 16:59, October 2, 2023 (EDT)

Search results for Haushofer School of Geopolitcs. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 17:04, October 2, 2023 (EDT)

Random question

Hi Andy, just curious: do you have a solid understanding of thematic chiastic structures in the Bible? —LT ^{Rev. 22:13} Monday, 13:12, October 2, 2023 (EDT)

Impressive! I had to look up the word "chasiatic". :) Recently, User: ConwayII caused me to look up the word "eejit".  :)

If you keep this up, soon you will be the William F. Buckley Jr. of Conservapedia with your vocabulary prowess! I recall Rush Limbaugh advertising a "Verbal Advantage" program on his popular conservative radio show. Conservative (talk)

Thanks, Conservative! I do like to use complex adjectives sometimes. —LT ^{Rev. 22:13} Monday, 13:45, October 2, 2023 (EDT)

A certain Admin is wasting our time again and not acting in good faith

Andy, I sent DavidB4 and you this email a few minutes ago:

Andy and DavidB4,

Less than a month ago, we had an "Articles for Deletion" vote against RobSmith being able to delete one of my essays and RobSmith lost the vote 3 to 1 and if memory serves DavidB4 voted in favor of the essay not being deleted.

With Karajou aboard, it will be a 4-1 vote. And I am sure I could get other Conservapedians to vote my way also.

Now RobSmith wants to revote. This is unreasonable. He's wasting our time and should be creating content.

Sincerely,

User: Conservative

I am referring to this article: Essay: Russian war crimes in Ukraine. Conservative (talk) 04:29, October 3, 2023 (EDT)

Conservapedia:AFD Essay:Russian war crimes in Ukraine. For brevities sake, the problem could be fixed by retitling the Essay.

There is nothing to fix. You are not the dictator of Conservapedia. Conservative (talk) 07:29, October 3, 2023 (EDT)

• Delete or Move to new Title. Innocent until proven guilty. We Americans are not going to throw our constitutional values away to promote xenophobia against an entire nation and people.
• The title of this Essay promotes hate and bigotry against 150 million Russian people.

• Even Wikipedia has enough sense not to jeopardize their reputation promoting xenophobic content. They do have a Mainspace article entitled, War crimes in the Russian invasion of Ukraine, while not pointing a finger at any one specific party in its title.

• Would we permit an Essay:Jewish war crimes in Palestine?

Essay:American war crimes in Iraq?

Essay:Police murder of Blacks? etc. The Title could be easily moved to "Essay: Alleged Russian war crimes in Ukraine". RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 04:54, October 3, 2023 (EDT)

All the facts are above; below is just more trolling

RobSmith, if you have some essays that you want to write, then write them. I have asked you several times to write counter essays to my essays, but you failed to do so. Instead you want to whine, complain and create drama. Conservative (talk) 05:05, October 3, 2023 (EDT)

Essays are not my genre. You've been told that before. Essay's are about opinion. I write historical narrative. It's quite different. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 05:18, October 3, 2023 (EDT)

I have seen your historical narratives and I wasn't impressed. You purposefully put a falsehood in the Bill Browder article and in the Karen Dawisha article too which I documented (See the talk pages of those articles). —The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:Conservative|Conservative]]]] User talk:Conservative|(talk)]]

You know, me and a group of other editors from Wikipedia have been writing on Communism for almost two decades now. We focused on the untold stories, the historical questions that lingered, etc. Listening to you, LT, and Nishant, I almost think we either did too good a job, or were unbalanced in our perspective. When I hear you regurgitate as fact stuff I helped bring out that was unknown, considered fascist or conspiratorial just 20 years ago, it's kind of surprising. It was a hard fought battle for many many years to get the information out, but the internet finally made it possible. I guess not having a fascist threat at the time we were collecting research materials and writing narratives might have warped our perspectives a bit, but there's few of us left now who can tell the story from both the fascist and communist sides. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 06:27, October 3, 2023 (EDT)

Oh, and Dawisha is just a paid prostitute for global fascists. The difference between her and you is, she's getting paid. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!}

Global national syndicalists with a philosophy of Hegelian, neo-Gnostic actualism? Very interesting. —LT ^{Rev. 22:13} Tuesday, 08:50, October 3, 2023 (EDT)

I hope you decide to change your behavior. I have done my best to convince you to do so. The ball is in your court now. Conservative (talk) 05:42, October 3, 2023 (EDT)

My geopolitics essays work is done until 2030. I put the icing on the cake of my geopolitics essays.

Now that I have finished putting the icing on the cake of my geopolitics essays by quoting RobSmith's #1 hero Douglas Mcgregor (Who RobSmith wanted to make Conservapedia's "Conservative of the year for 2022") agreeing with me about the financial/social wobbliness of China and its navy, I am going on a geopolitics essays sabattical until 2030.

Colonel Douglas MacGregor said about China in the video Why China's Navy is a JOKE: "China has huge problems just holding itself together. So I think we should set China aside and understand that."[11] See: Skepticism about China remaining a global power

I want the geopolitics dust to settle some more plus I want to pursue some other pursuits.

For example, here is what the pastor who RobSmith gossiped about wrote to me:

"Thank you, for inviting XXX to church yesterday. You made quite an impact on the congregation as several people were talking about who they might invite!

Sorry, I didn’t get to spend much time with XXX, but, perhaps if he comes again I can get to know him.

You provided a great example of what we all can do.

Pastor"

While RobSmith is gossiping and bearing false witness, I am doing the endeavoring to do the right thing. Conservative (talk) 05:23, October 3, 2023 (EDT)

Oh, so you admit to engaging in malicious editing. "The icing on the cake". Just as I said, Andy, he has no interest or understanding of geopolitics. He's just engaged in malicious editing and trolling. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 05:39, October 3, 2023 (EDT)

No RobSmith. Colonel MacGregor and I have a greater understanding of geopolitics than you. Conservative (talk) 05:44, October 3, 2023 (EDT)

You have no understanding - better yet - regard, for the moral issues in play in war. You think it's a game with cheerleaders. That's sick, and it's sickening. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 06:41, October 3, 2023 (EDT)

You are the one who wishes to deny that there are Russian war crimes in Ukraine. Conservative (talk) 07:20, October 3, 2023 (EDT)

Yeah, according to RobSmith, Putin did nothing wrong, the Russian side of the war absolutely has no significant presence of neo-Nazi supporters, and now Communism is good, apparently. He's gone off the deep end. —LT ^{Rev. 22:13} Tuesday, 08:52, October 3, 2023 (EDT)

No. According to Article 51 of the UN Charter. What law supersedes this? RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 10:27, October 6, 2023 (EDT)

Can you explain to me how Article 51 gives Putin the right to commit war crimes? MayGodBless (talk) 13:14, October 6, 2023 (EDT)

Can you explain how Article 51 gives NATO the right to commit war crimes, or what law supersedes the UN Charter? RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 13:24, October 6, 2023 (EDT)

Since the UN Charter, which all party member states agreed to, the United States arrogated to itself the role of maker and enforcer of the rules based order, which no one outside the collective West agreed to. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 13:29, October 6, 2023 (EDT)

I asked first, so please answer the question. But I will still answer yours: NATO cannot and should not commit war crimes. War crimes have been committed by both sides in this conflict. Both sides should be condemned. MayGodBless (talk) 15:10, October 6, 2023 (EDT)

NATO first committed war crimes in the Kosovo war, then again in Iraq, Libya, and Syria. It threw the UN Charter, which all parties had agreed to, in the trash more than 20 years ago in favor of its diktats of what international law is. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 16:52, October 6, 2023 (EDT)

The big screw up here in recent times is when the Obama administration and Hillary took the bait with UN Security Council Resolution for NATO intervention in the Libyan war, over Russia & China abstentions. Two of the five permanent Security Council members gave the collective West enough rope to hang themselves. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 17:08, October 6, 2023 (EDT)

Woah woah woah. "NATO first committed war crimes"? So war crimes are okay as long as you are not the first one to commit them?? MayGodBless (talk) 21:31, October 6, 2023 (EDT)

NATO is not a defensive alliance, as the NATO war of aggression against Serbia proves. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 21:45, October 6, 2023 (EDT)

Since 1991, the United States has committed 215 foreign interventions, per the Congressional Research Service (odd considering there are only 195 member states of the UN). The Russian Federation has committed only 4. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 21:49, October 6, 2023 (EDT)

That has exactly zero to do with what I just said. Answer the question: are war crimes okay if someone else did it first? MayGodBless (talk) 21:51, October 6, 2023 (EDT)

Of course not. It is the US that has violated international law and international norms of conduct. Brown University estimates the US has killed more than 4.5 million people in wars since 9/11. A boon for the MIC, but the American people will be held to account. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 21:57, October 6, 2023 (EDT)

The Unted States has been illegally - even under US law - occupying significant territory of Syria for almost a decade. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 22:00, October 6, 2023 (EDT)

I agree that the US has been illegally occupying Syria for almost a decade. Can we also agree that both the Russians and the Ukrainians have committed war crimes in Ukraine since February 2022? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by MayGodBless (talk)

Ukraine and NATO since 2014; Ukraine, NATO, and Russia since 2022. Now there are two different types of war crimes - those that happen on orders from higher up the chain of command, and those that occur on the ground in a moment of heat and emotion by combatants without orders or instructions from their commanders. I dare say you'd be hard pressed to prove war crimes committed by the Russian Federation from the top, on the other hand, beginning with the illegal Maidan coup in 2014, and following through with events like the Bucha massacre planned by MI6, Western terrorist attacks on the Crimean bridge and Nordstream pipeline, the targeting of schools and hospitals, etc, have been almost exclusively on the NATO/Ukraine side. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 22:11, October 6, 2023 (EDT)

Then we have to deal with the subject of cross border assassination of civilian non-combatants which Ukraine has admitted too. Are they war crimes or acts of terrorism? RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 22:20, October 6, 2023 (EDT)

It is a war crime what Biden, Sullivan, Milley and Zelensky have committed - sending men to their death in what they know is a lost cause. Gen Zaluzhnyi could perhaps escape the hangman's rope for registering protests, but he still would be condemned to some hard time. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 00:53, October 7, 2023 (EDT)

They are both – war crime and terrorism are not distinct concepts. War crimes are, well, crimes of war. Terrorism is violence to incite terror for a political reason. MayGodBless (talk) 23:40, October 7, 2023 (EDT)

And where is your evidence that the Bucha massacre was planned by MI6? Last time I checked, satellite imaging had proven it was the Russians. See the UN report: [12]. And the Human Rights Watch report: [13]. MayGodBless (talk) 23:40, October 7, 2023 (EDT)

That discussion is for the Bucca massacre or fake news page. We're getting off track here. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 23:58, October 7, 2023 (EDT)

And the US is far and away the most powerful member of the UN. Russia does not come close.

When the US was founded, the Constitution made clear that the capital would not be part of any state, and thus Washington, DC was created. When the UN was founded, the members unanimously approved putting its permanent seat of government in – you guessed it – the United States. MayGodBless (talk) 15:14, October 6, 2023 (EDT)

The US was just defeated on the battlefield, again. The US is the renegade party from what was previous international agreements to keep the peace and maintain international order. 16:52, October 6, 2023 (EDT)RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!}

I have no understanding of geopolitics? "We are not in a multipolar world." - International Relations and Security Analyst Mark Sleboda on Brian Berlectic's pro-Russia New Atlas YouTube channel. [14] See: The myth of multipolarity. What do the terms unipolar, bipolar and multipolar mean as far as international relations?

This quote is from a video you posted on main page talk. So one of your own favorite sources debunks your claim that I don't understand geopolitics. It's also one additional piece of evidence that debunks your errant claim that we live in multipolar world. Checkmate, RobSmith! Conservative (talk) 04:02, October 6, 2023 (EDT)

Nowhere did I make the claim you allege. Your views are essentially jingoistic, and you never even heard the terms "unipolar", "bipolar", or "multipolar" until a few months ago when I introduced them to you. Since then, you made yourself an "expert" on the subject.

What we have here is an adult savant, a child diagnosed as an idiot who couldn't tie his shoelaces, but showed the ability to excel in certain areas (kinda like in the film Rainman). Due to his isolation as a child, he never learned proper social interaction with other people, and his tendency to personalize everything (for example, his ability to make 150k next year will help his pastor get married and increase Conservapedia's Google rankings). RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!}

You did not introduce the terms unipolar, bipolar or multipolar to me. Just because you mentioned them at Conservapedia doesn't mean I pay attention to what you write at Conservapedia. There are plenty of sources of information besides you on the information superhighway and they are far more reliable.

In addition, you have stated at this website that you are at best a novice at psychology so your psychological diagnosis of someone whose childhood you are ignorant of is laughable. But it is less laughable that your high school girl like gossip. Conservative (talk) 09:01, October 6, 2023 (EDT)

If Conservative's mild assertions of American military strength superiority in objective terms is to be designated "jingoistic," how much more manifesting of chauvinistic jingoism is it to boast of Putin as the great (false) messiah who is to subjugate the "neoliberal fascist-globalist West"? Do you have any self-awareness remaining, RobSmith? —LT ^{Rev. 22:13} Friday, 09:00, October 6, 2023 (EDT)

By the way, my atheism and bestiality article is ranked #1 for that term at Google and it has over 115,000 page views. That is pretty good for someone who at first thought the word bestiality was spelled "beastiality"!

Let's contrast this with RobSmith's flagship article NATO war in Ukraine which has under 75,000 views despite the fact that he has edited it quite a bit and it has over 380 footnotes. It must be his flagship article considering the fact that he insists the following: Essay: April 2022 was a pivotal moment in the future of global politics for decades to come. Of course, the SPECIFIC MONTH OF APRIL 2020 has no such significance as can be seen at: Essay: The SPECIFIC MONTH OF APRIL 2022 was not a pivotal point in geopolitics that will affect geopolitics for 30 years.

Bingo. "my atheism and bestiality article is ranked #1 for that term at Google", sounds like Putin propaganda. I can picture some kid in Irkutsk or Outer Mongolia reading it and volunteering for the armed forces of the Russian Federation to take up arms against the invasion of Western cultural hegemony. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 09:46, October 6, 2023 (EDT)

And to my knowledge, none of RobSmith's articles at Conservapedia has over 7,000,000 page views at Conservapedia. The view counter for Conservapedia's atheism article is over 7,000,000 page views. Conservative (talk)

And speaking of people who can't tie their shoelaces, inferior thinkers often engage in hyperpartisan white hat vs. black hat type thinking. Superior thinking looks at the world more objectively, probabilistically and integrates divergent or seemingly contradictory views/possibilities. In addition, it often sees tradeoffs in various positions and sees the unintended consequences of various positions. For example, why isn't it plausible that Russia and Ukraine are BOTH corrupt and authoritarian in terms of their leadership? This certainly seems to be the case. Conservative (talk) 09:42, October 6, 2023 (EDT)

"unintended consequences" = doggie doo-doo. Perhaps we should list it at Newspeak? bet yet, at Dogwhistle: List of common dogwhistles . RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 10:08, October 6, 2023 (EDT)

By the way, Conservative, here's some more recent news to add to your Essay: Russian war crimes in Ukraine: Zelensky calls attack that killed 52 ‘absolute evil’ —LT ^{Rev. 22:13} Friday, 09:37, October 6, 2023 (EDT)

Thanks LT. I appreciate your feedback and suggestion. Conservative (talk) 09:52, October 6, 2023 (EDT)

Yep, no problem. —LT ^{Rev. 22:13} Friday, 18:06, October 6, 2023 (EDT)

I am a patient man. Much will be revealed by 2030 if Jesus should tarry. And I may update a few of my geopolitics essays every 5 years from 2030. Conservative (talk) 19:32, October 6, 2023 (EDT)

Question about conservative content

Hi Andy, since you're a top expert on conservative values, I'd be happy to get more of your input: what type of content here on Conservapedia would you think best exemplifies a promotion of conservatism? Currently I'm doing some edits here and there, mainly with creating/expanding a few pages that I will extensively link to from popular articles, to expose the connections between Leftism and racism, since I've done a considerable amount of history research to be able to prove these links.

For example, at the moment I'm expanding the Bull Connor article with information that's difficult to find elsewhere on the internet; any thoughts so far? I know you were skeptical of many of my mainspace contributions in the past, so it'd be helpful for me to know just exactly how to write, in your views at least, quality content for this conservative encyclopedia. —LT ^{Rev. 22:13} Wednesday, 23:02, October 3, 2023 (EDT)

My two cents: All your efforts get wiped away in your vocal justification for the NATO war in Ukraine and anti-Putinism. It's a retrenchment to the "Republicans and conservatives are Nazis" trope. Here, for the first time, you get to confront actual Nazis, and you slink away into the neocon globalist perspective. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 14:30, October 6, 2023 (EDT)

My man, you're literally the quisling cheering on Russian extraction of Lebensraum. ConwayIII (talk) 14:50, October 6, 2023 (EDT)

It can't be. Russians already live there. The Western/NATO push for lebensraum in Eastern Europe is failing again. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 14:56, October 6, 2023 (EDT)

Even Medea Benjamin is explaining to her followers that not all Republicans are Nazis, and MTG is willing to take a stand with Code Pink against contemporary Nazism. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 15:08, October 6, 2023 (EDT)

A sensitive man once used exactly the same excuse re. protecting German speakers in the Sudetenland, but please do feel free to keep going. ConwayIII (talk) 15:14, October 6, 2023 (EDT)

RobSmith, you always complain about how people interrupt discussions by "peeing all over the carpet". Please be consistent – is this a place ofdiscussion and freedom of speech, or a place of censorship? MayGodBless (talk) 15:16, October 6, 2023 (EDT)

MayGodBless, rules for thee, but not for me! How many people signed up for Team CP? Conservative (talk) 16:15, October 6, 2023 (EDT)

Okay, pardon my interruption. Let Andy decide if he wants to throw in with the Nazi/LGBT movement, per User:Conservative, LT, and Conway. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 16:32, October 6, 2023 (EDT)

User:Conservative has become the biggest pusher of Gleichschaltung#LGBTI_Gleichschaltung with his anti-Putin rhetoric. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 16:43, October 6, 2023 (EDT)

Yeah, man. Let's all pipe down and let Andy ponder your deep & abiding love for Putin's Anschluss adventure. ConwayIII (talk) 17:30, October 6, 2023 (EDT)

It is the United States that threw out the rules of the established international order regarding acceptable means of changing international borders in Kosovo 25 years ago. Clinton returned us to Hitlerism, Might makes right, in the international arena. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 17:34, October 6, 2023 (EDT)

Hahaha. Clinton was the sensitive type, too, eh? Great stuff, Captain. Let's all raise a glass for poor old Milošević dying in prison. ConwayIII (talk) 17:57, October 6, 2023 (EDT)

Maybe you should read our Milosevic entry. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 19:59, October 6, 2023 (EDT)

Well, if it's official, I'll have a redirect for First Black Hitler, please. ConwayIII (talk) 20:41, October 6, 2023 (EDT)

RobSmith, you said: "Hitler railing against Marxism, socialism" here. Until you acknowledge that Hitler was a socialist and that the Holocaust happened because the Nazis tried to create a "socialist utopia" by killing the Jews, you're a Holocaust denier. Now stop calling the rest of us Nazis—unlike you, we're not socialists. —LT ^{Rev. 22:13} Friday, 18:00, October 6, 2023 (EDT)

What the heck are you talking about now? RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 19:59, October 6, 2023 (EDT)

Go back and read a few CP discussion pages on Socialism and National Socialism from 2007. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 20:01, October 6, 2023 (EDT)

And this ain't rocket science: as long as you support the global fascist war on Putin, you're a Nazi. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 20:06, October 6, 2023 (EDT)

Afterward, you'll be remembered as a Nazi apologist or Nazi sympathizer. NATO has already lost on the battlefield. History is written by the victors. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 20:11, October 6, 2023 (EDT)

Nancy Mace

Hello Andy! I just wanted to let you know that I slightly changed your edit to U.S. House Speaker election, October 2023. Nancy Mace is certainly a never-Trumper, but even she did not vote for the sham impeachment. Source: [15] (you can use the "search" function for "Mace"). MayGodBless (talk) 21:41, October 4, 2023 (EDT)

Great correction!!! I was mistaken. You're absolutely right. Thank you!--Andy Schlafly (talk) 23:35, October 4, 2023 (EDT)

Do you know anything about Samuel Igra?

He was the author of the brilliant book Germany's National Vice which exposed, in his words, "homosexualism," as the driving force behind Nazism. Just thought you might be interested in this topic since you're an adamant opponent of the Homosexual Agenda (much as I am). —LT ^{Rev. 22:13} Thursday, 00:07, October 5, 2023 (EDT)

(cont.) Why I think the social conservative movement failed

Hi Andy, I'm exceedingly glad to hear that you're open-minded to consider my point further as it concerns the failure of the pro-life movement for decades to educate the youth into respecting the dignity of human life. Now, my theory here concerns a much broader, larger scale:

Let's suppose for a moment that a group of theocrats have long conspired to seize power in a country, nay, the whole world, to force the globe to bend to its strict religious decrees. However, there is a problem: in a Protestant Western society, citizens uphold separation of church and state, believing in religious freedom. How can the masses be manipulated into allowing a theocracy to take power?

The answer is very simple: induce cultural moral degeneracy into the Western society—let's say you first start off sounding mainstream, calling for increased "awareness" of "civil rights" problems, and exploit that to rabble-rouse one collective against another, endlessly assailing a scapegoat to fuel massive divisions, creating mobs upon mobs who in their demand for supposed "equality" will propagate the most horrid of moral degradation, eventually even the sexualization of young children.

And when the degeneracy is complete, the masses, horrified at what a small band of revolutionary degenerates did to their once-peaceful and orderly society, will be desperate to support any counter-movement that vows to overturn the mess created by the cultural revolutionary activists. Yes, they will even support the insurgent band of theocratic goons who want a "Christian Nationalist" order, a New World Order—if only it will repress those degenerates and their influence out of society!

But you see, this was the trick all along: manufacture artificial chaos, so you can create the false solution that accomplishes the sinister goal you wanted from the beginning. In order to create the theocracy, you first need to create the moral degeneracy that the theocrats campaign against on the tide to power. But to create the moral degeneracy, the social conservative movement must not be allowed to succeed in the early stages of degeneracy, lest they, rather than the cultural revolutionaries, influence the youth.

Does this make sense? I know this is a bit to read through, but I very much hope you deeply ponder what I'm implying here with this brief summary, Andy. I, like you, very much am a conservative at heart who opposes what the Leftists have done to the United States. And still, there remains a larger pernicious plot—that impacts the whole world—which you and I must grasp before it's too late, when the masses are deceived into the final perdition and are lost for all eternity.

There are people I know from throughout my life who I grieve over, because I fear that they are too closed-minded and will likely be deceived amidst the great falling away (see 2 Thess. 2:3) that is to come; some of them, I've tried convincing, and because of their hard hearts in lack of humanly compassion, I will not bother anymore. But it would terribly grieve my heart more to see someone like you, who out of good faith fought for righteousness your entire life, to be deceived into perdition along with the rest of the world that prepares to face condemnation for their ungodliness. —LT ^{Rev. 22:13} Sunday, 21:24, October 7, 2023 (EDT)

"Does this make sense?" No. "artificial chaos". It's either artificial or it's real. And if it's not real, you're just confused. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 21:36, October 7, 2023 (EDT)

By the way, how come my citations were removed here? —LT ^{Rev. 22:13} Sunday, 23:37, October 7, 2023 (EDT)

Math, Bible, Harvard University graduate analysis and Harvard University staff attempting to debunk him

Watch these videos: Mathematical Fingerprints of God Genesis 1:1 and THE AMAZING FIRST VERSE OF THE BIBLE. It has to do with Math and Genesis 1:1 by someone who graduated from Harvard University whose name was Ivan Panin. At the age of 22 he emigrated to the United States and entered Harvard University, where he spent four years, learning Greek and Hebrew, and graduating in 1882 with a Master of Literary Criticism.

Also, read this: Panin : The Astonishing Pattern of SEVENS in Genesis 1:1

Here is one of his books for free: The Inspiration of the Scriptures Scientifically Demonstrated by Ivan Panin

Here is info on his first book with an audio file and some free PDFs: Bibliology Session 11-Complexity of the Bible

Here is his first book: The New Testament in the Original Greek. Text established by Ivan Panin by means of Bible numerics

Here is a copy of his complete works, but it is a bit cumbersome to access: Internet Archive - Ivan Panin

There are a number of video's at YouTube on Ivan Panin at: Ivan Panin videos.

Here is Ivan Panin's bio at Wikipedia and it takes a skeptical slant, but it does list all of his books: Ivan Panin

Other than Panin's commentary on Genesis 1:1, I am not familiar with Panin's work. However, I thought you might be interested in his work. Conservative (talk) 08:46, October 8, 2023 (EDT)

Page move request

Hello again! I made a small mistake when I created a new page on OOP. I titled the page Object-oriented, but it should really be titled Object-oriented programming. Would you please move the page for me? Sorry about my mistake! MayGodBless (talk) 11:26, October 10, 2023 (EDT)

Done. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 11:37, October 10, 2023 (EDT)

Numbers and the Bible

I found this today: Meaning of numbers in the Bible. The resource also covers the topic of infinity in the Bible. Conservative (talk) 17:10, October 17, 2023 (EDT)

Thanks!--Andy Schlafly (talk) 20:22, October 17, 2023 (EDT)

Another reason why it's not a good idea to move to Russia.

Here is another reason why it's not a good idea to move to Russia:

• Essay: Are the Russians as unhappy as they claim they are?

Am I moving to Russia? Nyet! MarkLM8 (talk) 13:57, October 18, 2023 (EDT)

Russia and family values

A counter-argument to the position that Russia is a leader in family values:

• Whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery. The Bible says adulterers will not inherit the kingdom of God. Russia has the 3rd highest rate of divorce in the world. Is Russia a beacon of family values in the world? Nyet!

If you want to provide feedback, it would be most welcome. Conservative (talk) 21:44, October 18, 2023 (EDT)

Russia has only about 1 more divorce per 1000 people than the U.S. That doesn't seem to be a big difference. Meanwhile, Russia reduced the number of its abortions by 39% between 2016 and 2021, and has been trying to reduce it further. See here.

Ukraine Human Rights Ombudsman Lyudmila Denisova was actually fired in an unprecedented move for manufacturing fake news reports about alleged Russian rapes and bringing disrepute on the Ukrainian regime.[1]

Russia had a fertility rate of 1.50 births per woman in 2020. But it's probably much lower now that so many Russian young men are in Ukraine and some will become casualties. The USA had a fertility rate of 1.64 births per woman in 2020. But given the massive amount of illegal immigration into the USA from Latin America it should go higher. The current fertility rate for Latin America And The Caribbean in 2023 is 1.958 births per woman.[16] The replacement level of births for a society is 2.1 babies per women due to infant mortality and other deaths.

Futhermore, Vladimir Putin is divorced and hardly a leader for family values in the world. The best form of leadership is by example.

Also, I just added the information in the essay about Russian soldiers raping Ukrainian women and stripping people naked which is definitely not practicing family values.

With that being said, I am definitely not for illegal immigration. In addition, making criticisms of Russia doesn't mean that I believe that the USA should fund the corrupt and authoritarian country of Ukraine. Conservative (talk) 22:28, October 18, 2023 (EDT)

Also, it was reported in 2018, "The church has been pushing for a ban on abortion. The Kremlin isn’t interested."[17] Conservative (talk) 22:31, October 18, 2023 (EDT)

I made a small error above. Just because the USA received a wave of illegal immigration from Latin America which has a higher fertility rate that doesn't necesarily mean that the USA fertility rate will climb. But it might drop more slowly. Conservative (talk) 22:52, October 18, 2023 (EDT)

Is there a purpose behind your xenophobic crusade, other than to justify neocon warmongering? You have a hard time painting Russia as atheistic or queer. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 10:15, October 19, 2023 (EDT)

RobSmith, given your obsession with Ukraine, and its caustic nature, you are hardly in a position to accuse someone of xenophobia. It's so laughable that you think your lame accusations of racism, xenophobia, Russophobia and Nazism have any effectiveness whatsoever. Frankly, they don't - especially since they are coming from a gossiper. Your other lame accusations are just as ineffective and nobody but yourself thinks they are effective. Your inability to make actual counterarguments via counteressays is so lame. I have far more respect for Andy Schlafly who makes actual counterarguments rather than lightweight responses. Conservative (talk) 10:51, October 19, 2023 (EDT)

You've been on this xenophobic crusade long before you were exposed as a student of the Haushofer school of geopolitics. And going around to every talk page and user talk page changing "geopolitics" to "international relations" to hide the racial theories you've been peddling hides nothing. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 11:09, October 19, 2023 (EDT)

More unconvincing rhetoric from a known gossiper. Andy Schlafly is very aware that you are gossiper and he had to step in. Conservative (talk) 11:22, October 19, 2023 (EDT)

Why are you gossiping about me being a gossiper? Wasn't it your gossiping that I allegedly was a Ratwikian that got me desysoped years ago? RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 11:37, October 19, 2023 (EDT)

Andy Schlafly is a graduate of Harvard Law School. You floating the idea that he doesn't know how to weigh evidence and cannot distinguish hearsay from actual evidence is preposterous. Your prior desyoping was entirely just and you should be more grateful that he took you back as an Admin! Conservative (talk) 11:43, October 19, 2023 (EDT)

So you just admitted to gossiping about me for the past 10 years.

Andy wants to end the ceaseless strife between editors, and I don't blame him. I simply think there are other ways to handle editor disputes than constantly turning to the ban hammer. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 12:05, October 19, 2023 (EDT)

You trying to position yourself as some kind of just and uncontentious arbiter is a total failure. You only had one person sign up for Team CP - namely User: NishantXavier. And in the one dispute between you and I that he voted on, User: NishantXavier took my side. Conservative (talk) 12:23, October 19, 2023 (EDT)

All the postings you've done to active user talk pages in the past two weeks is nothing but gossip, intending to stir up controversy and strife between editors.

Your editing is not focused on ideas and issues. You have a documented habit of targeting people you meet online, whom you then gossip about to slander reputations. You have no personal interest in slandering Russia and Russians other than to carry out some personal vendetta towards me, whom you perceive as an "enemy" for exposing some of your sloppy research habits. Rather than fix the errors in some of your Essays, you aim to destroy your critics by creating another inane Essay with titles such as Whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery. The Bible says adulterers will not inherit the kingdom of God. Russia has the 3rd highest rate of divorce in the world. Is Russia a beacon of family values in the world? Nyet! . RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 12:40, October 19, 2023 (EDT)

I love the title of the essay. And I will also point out that my political essays get far more traffic than yours. The view counter for Essay: The United States will be the leading power in the world for the foreseeable future has over 10,000 page views. USA! USA! USA! Conservative (talk) 12:51, October 19, 2023 (EDT)

Your Essays add fuel to the fire of the charge that conservatives are inherently racist. I however, understand the motivations for you creating such sick garbage. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 12:59, October 19, 2023 (EDT)

(ec) In that title alone, it is quite a leap in logic to go from divorce to remarriage. What percentage of divorced people ever remarry? As Andy pointed out, your premise is meaningless. And you only wrote the Essay, devoted time to it, in a vindictive attitude toward another editor, not by an interest in Russia's social problems or intending to spread the gospel of Jesus Christ. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 12:55, October 19, 2023 (EDT)

Instead of whining about my essays that disagree with some of your ill-informed opinions about Russia/China and other matters, feel free to create counter essays to my essays. Godspeed. Conservative (talk) 12:58, October 19, 2023 (EDT)

(A) I've explained dozens of times your error in assuming I have some emotional attachment to Russia; (B) You lie, exaggerate, and gossip about me assuming I have some emotional attachment to China, which is indicative of the how much neocon brainwashing you've absorbed.

The China article, such that it exists now, is probably 80% written by me, as well as subsidiary articles on PRC, PLA, etc. And I will formally ask Andy right now to instruct you to stop lying and gossiping about me to other editors about my views on China on their talk pages and other talk pages. RobS^{[[User t}

Here is the xenophobic crap I had to remove from the China article:

Still waiting for your next Essay: Essay: Russians eat sewage. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 13:14, October 19, 2023 (EDT)

Deny that the Chinese ate gutter oil made from ingredients from processed sewage and lose all credibility.

Consuming gutter oil can have negative consequences on people's health. According to experts, gutter oil is extremely toxic and riddled with carcinogens, like aflatoxin and benzopyrene. Consuming gutter oil can also lead to diabetes, heart disease, Alzheimer's and developmental problems in children.[18]

In 2015, Yeh Wen-hsiang, who was the chairman of a Taiwanese company, was sentenced to 22 years imprisonment and fined the equivalent of $1.6 million for selling 243 tonnes of gutter oil. And the mainland Chinese have begun to crack down on gutter oil sales more post 2010 too. However, "Food safety articles funded by PRC provincial science grants attribute continued difficulties in regulatory enforcement to the decentralized nature of the logistics chain, inadequate national infrastructure for disposal/recycling, and frequent innovations in visually and chemically disguising gutter oil."[19] Conservative (talk) 13:35, October 19, 2023 (EDT)

Oh wow. (a) So the rule of law exists in China; (b) you take credit for posting that racist garbage in the China mainspace; (c) it would not be too difficult to Google an equivalent horror story in Western civilization or the United States to stir up animosity and prejudice between groups; (d) for a whataboutism, what about normalizing sex between men? Are you onboard for that? RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 13:47, October 19, 2023 (EDT)

If you believe that the rule of law in China is exemplary and fairly applied, then create the essay: Essay: The rule of law in China is excemplary and fairly applied. Godspeed. Conservative (talk) 13:50, October 19, 2023 (EDT)

Ronald Reagan is a divorced man. He is definitely not the world's foremost leader when it comes to family values.

If you believe that the rule of law in the United States is exemplary and fairly applied, then create the essay: Essay: The rule of law in the United States is exemplary and fairly applied to Donald Trump and the J6 prisoners. Godspeed. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 14:21, October 19, 2023 (EDT)

Here is a good example of O'Sullivan's First Law at work in Conservapedia:

Vladimir Putin is a divorced man.citing the New Yorker. He is definitely not the world's foremost leader when it comes to family values.

According to User:Conservative, King David is going to hell, which of course is anti-biblical. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 16:09, October 19, 2023 (EDT)

RobSmith, feel free to write a counteressay at Essay: Vladimir Putin is NOT divorced. Godspeed. Conservative (talk) 16:32, October 19, 2023 (EDT)

I realize you have not got the message yet that planet earth has moved past Russia and Ukraine (where NATO got its butt kicked) and onto Israel/Hamas, so you can stop trolling on Russia and Putin now. You can now move onto promoting neocon talking points advocating for a US-Iran war. I mean, why wait for me to spell out opposition to a US-Iran war when you can jump the gun now for your promotion of neocon warmongering? RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 16:36, October 19, 2023 (EDT)

Oh, I understand why. You really have no interest or understanding or User:Conservative#General_international_politics_essays, and just like using Conservapedia as a platform to troll your imaginary internet enemies. Too bad I'm not obese or like French Fries, you probably wouldn't have to devote 90 hours a week working on such inanity. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 16:44, October 19, 2023 (EDT)