Anyone heard of Conservapedia, "The Trustworthy Encyclopedia"?

[JonLP24]

I just now ran into it after finding out the created it to counter the 'liberal' bias of wikipedia. To find out if it was more reliable then wiki I looked at Barack Obama's page and it is so laughably bias much like Fox News counter to the 'liberal media'. Right from the top it shows it's bias.

Barack Hussein Obama II (allegedly<1><2><3><4><5> born in Honolulu Aug. 4, 1961)

:rofl:

or this section
Obama is likely the first Muslim President

http://www.conservapedia.com/Barack_Obama

So I went over to the talk page to get a look at the edit wars and saw this gem.

The Obama article has no family section. Neither does Clinton's or Carter's. However, Reagan's, Bush the elder's and W.Bush's articles have them. Why none on the democratic presidents'? JohnKite 11:42, 28 January 2009 (EST)

There's a simple answer: Obama, Clinton, and Carter are Democrats. They belong to an anti-family party, therefore their family is irrelevant to their political existence. Family is central to Republican policy, and so it is impossible to understand President Bush without mentioning his family. User:LatinScholar 1:36, 30 January 2009 (EST)

He has a family though, doesn't he? JohnKite 13:47, 30 January 2009 (EST)

Yes, but a Democrat family, which is something entirely different. LatinScholar 2:22, 30 January 2009 (EST)

:rofl:
http://www.conservapedia.com/Talk:Barack_Hussein_Obama#Why_no_family_section.3F

It is funny when conservatives try to counter bias with incredible out right bias and lies. I always wonder why anyone takes them seriously.

[Fumesucker]

1. Oh yes..

I'm not sure how I found it but the first time I saw Conservapedia was their entry on Operation Barbarossa, at the time it was ONE FUCKING SENTENCE.. :rofl:

[JonLP24]

3. I also noticed the middle name 'Hussein' is included in the URL

Which doesn't bother me because it is his name but they don't include full names of John Sidney McCain or other republicans. They have W include in George Bush but that is because to seperate the link from his father. I looked at Barbaroosa and they included a couple of paragraphs. I'm unfamiliar with what it is to say whether or not it is accurate.

[Fumesucker]

8. What they have now is reasonably accurate.. as far as it goes..

Operation Barbarossa was one of the critical turning points of history, the outcome of WWII depended on it, to try and cover it in once sentence is so far beyond pathetic that the light from pathetic wouldn't reach it for ten billion years.

Compare and contrast Wiki and Conservapedia..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Barbarossa

Edited to add quote: "Operation Barbarossa remains the largest military operation, in terms of manpower, area traversed, and casualties, in human history. Its failure is considered a turning point in the fortunes of the Third Reich."

[muriel_volestrangler]

2. It's a standing joke; very difficult to tell what's real conservatives, and what is satire

If it were just a place for the loony right to spout their BS to each other, it'd just be a laugh; but if it is being used for its stated purpose, ie providing 'information' for home-schooled kids, then it's ruining their education.

[JonLP24]

5. Oh definately

Even wikipedia shouldn't be used as a lone source of information.

[NewJeffCT]

4. They aren't countering bias, though

they're countering facts.

[JonLP24]

6. I know

I meant to say countering percieved bias or whatever bias that might exist with even more outright bias. I know what you're saying that is exactly what I meant. The reason I came across Conservapedia was due to the fact of belief in a liberal bias led to the creation of Conservapedia.

[NoPasaran]

7. It's amazing they would say that about Carter

Between his do-gooder mother, bible-thumping sister and redneck brother, Jimmy Carter's family had enough characters for a situation comedy.

[Ian David]

9. So, if Obama's father was a terrorist, it would be irrelevant to his political existence.

They're really ready to concede that?

[WeDidIt]

10. Conservapedia Was CreatedTo Counter The Left Wing Bias Of Facts.

Note that they buy into the Birther nonsense which ahs been so debunked as to make them bigger tinfoilhat nuts than 9/11 truthers.

[JonLP24]

11. I know

I was trying to explain how I came across the site which is a belief of a liberal bias on wikipedia led to the creation of Conservapedia. Then I was trying to express how conservatives attempts to counter a belief in a liberal bias with actually real bias and outright lies such as dinosaurs and humans co-existed. I know they are countering facts with bias and lies.

[Old and In the Way]

12. So they are alledging he was born...with citations?

idjits.

[Yukari Yakumo]

13. Here's another choice morsel into their mindset...

http://www.conservapedia.com/Adolf_Hitler

The Holocaust is mentioned in only one sentence in the entire article with the total number slaughtered skewed towards the lowest number presently accepted.

also...

http://www.conservapedia.com/Gloria_Steinem

A two sentence entry. No images.

elsewhere...

http://www.conservapedia.com/Phyllis_Schlafly

A more extensive entry, with images, including a full bibliography.