Conservapedia - User contributions [en]

Talk:The Simpsons

2007-10-02T20:53:21Z

Conservateur: /* Fox News */

What is the definition of true Christians? Because on the show the Simpson family are Christians.--[[User:Penguin|Penguin]] 00:43, 19 June 2007 (EDT)

::Eh, I'm gonna tread lightly on this topic. There is a notion among some evangelicals, that there are certain things that people must do to become TRUE Christians. Most involve a process known as becoming "saved" in where you must ask Jesus to be your Lord and Savior. Its a very literal interpretation of the Bible. Different sects of evangelism use this idea to discredit different sects of Christianity, ranging from Mormonism to Catholicism.--[[User:Elamdri|Elamdri]] 03:09, 19 June 2007 (EDT)

The description of the characters seems a bit selective. Does "Bart...makes a horrible role model" need to be included? Bart's character should not be described in terms of how good a role model he is; it's irrelevant and opinionated. And why is Lisa
described as simply a "Buddhist Liberal?" If I had to describe her to someone who had never seen the show, I might touch on her
main attributes first such as being very studious, idealistic, achievement-oriented girl with an appreciation for jazz music and the baritone saxophone. Her being Buddhist and liberal may be true, but does little to describe her character. It provides an underlying tone of bias against 'The Simpsons.'--[[User:Xenophobia|Xenophobia]] 7:41 P.M., 6 August 2007 (EDT)
:feel free to make factual edits to improve the article. [[User:Bohdan|Bohdan]] 19:41, 6 August 2007 (EDT)

==Fox News==

I cited a source. Did the person who removed this cite one? [[User:Maestro|Maestro]] 16:23, 1 October 2007 (EDT)

:Did you even read your source? The story only cited Groening - a known joker and mischief-maker who writes fiction for a living - as the source of the claim; Fox News denied there was ever a threat of a lawsuit. Either you were duped by Groening or you intentionally presented the story as serious and true in an attempt to [[deceit|deceive]] people.--[[User:Conservateur|Conservateur]] 11:15, 2 October 2007 (EDT)
::Then it should be quite easy to find a quote from Fox News denying the rumor. The only cite here is Conservateur. [[User:Maestro|Maestro]] 12:42, 2 October 2007 (EDT)

:::You're right. Took me two seconds.[http://media.guardian.co.uk/broadcast/story/0,7493,1073216,00.html]--[[User:Conservateur|Conservateur]] 13:16, 2 October 2007 (EDT)
:::And also, your own original citation stated that Fox News denied the threat.--[[User:Conservateur|Conservateur]] 13:19, 2 October 2007 (EDT)
::::So Groening says yea, and Fox says nay. Still seems up in the air to me. I can see a 'joker' lying, as well as a corporation denying they did something that looked foolish in retrospect. Let's agree to disagree. [[User:Maestro|Maestro]] 13:43, 2 October 2007 (EDT)
:::::I don't agree to that.--[[User:Conservateur|Conservateur]] 13:45, 2 October 2007 (EDT)
::::::Straight from an episode of the Simpsons! (the one where the teachers went on strike). I love it! [[User:Maestro|Maestro]] 16:35, 2 October 2007 (EDT)
:::::::Nice ;-) Was hoping you'd catch that one.--[[User:Conservateur|Conservateur]] 16:52, 2 October 2007 (EDT)
*Someone message (IM or email) me about this. --[[User:TK|şŷŝôρ-₮K]][[User_Talk:TK|Ṣρёаќǃ]] 16:48, 2 October 2007 (EDT)

Talk:The Simpsons

2007-10-02T20:52:50Z

Conservateur: /* Fox News */

What is the definition of true Christians? Because on the show the Simpson family are Christians.--[[User:Penguin|Penguin]] 00:43, 19 June 2007 (EDT)

::Eh, I'm gonna tread lightly on this topic. There is a notion among some evangelicals, that there are certain things that people must do to become TRUE Christians. Most involve a process known as becoming "saved" in where you must ask Jesus to be your Lord and Savior. Its a very literal interpretation of the Bible. Different sects of evangelism use this idea to discredit different sects of Christianity, ranging from Mormonism to Catholicism.--[[User:Elamdri|Elamdri]] 03:09, 19 June 2007 (EDT)

The description of the characters seems a bit selective. Does "Bart...makes a horrible role model" need to be included? Bart's character should not be described in terms of how good a role model he is; it's irrelevant and opinionated. And why is Lisa
described as simply a "Buddhist Liberal?" If I had to describe her to someone who had never seen the show, I might touch on her
main attributes first such as being very studious, idealistic, achievement-oriented girl with an appreciation for jazz music and the baritone saxophone. Her being Buddhist and liberal may be true, but does little to describe her character. It provides an underlying tone of bias against 'The Simpsons.'--[[User:Xenophobia|Xenophobia]] 7:41 P.M., 6 August 2007 (EDT)
:feel free to make factual edits to improve the article. [[User:Bohdan|Bohdan]] 19:41, 6 August 2007 (EDT)

==Fox News==

I cited a source. Did the person who removed this cite one? [[User:Maestro|Maestro]] 16:23, 1 October 2007 (EDT)

:Did you even read your source? The story only cited Groening - a known joker and mischief-maker who writes fiction for a living - as the source of the claim; Fox News denied there was ever a threat of a lawsuit. Either you were duped by Groening or you intentionally presented the story as serious and true in an attempt to [[deceit|deceive]] people.--[[User:Conservateur|Conservateur]] 11:15, 2 October 2007 (EDT)
::Then it should be quite easy to find a quote from Fox News denying the rumor. The only cite here is Conservateur. [[User:Maestro|Maestro]] 12:42, 2 October 2007 (EDT)

:::You're right. Took me two seconds.[http://media.guardian.co.uk/broadcast/story/0,7493,1073216,00.html]--[[User:Conservateur|Conservateur]] 13:16, 2 October 2007 (EDT)
:::And also, your own original citation stated that Fox News denied the threat.--[[User:Conservateur|Conservateur]] 13:19, 2 October 2007 (EDT)
::::So Groening says yea, and Fox says nay. Still seems up in the air to me. I can see a 'joker' lying, as well as a corporation denying they did something that looked foolish in retrospect. Let's agree to disagree. [[User:Maestro|Maestro]] 13:43, 2 October 2007 (EDT)
:::::I don't agree to that.--[[User:Conservateur|Conservateur]] 13:45, 2 October 2007 (EDT)
::::::Straight from an episode of the Simpsons! (the one where the teachers went on strike). I love it! [[User:Maestro|Maestro]] 16:35, 2 October 2007 (EDT)
:::::::Nice. Wasn't sure if you'd catch that one ;-) --[[User:Conservateur|Conservateur]] 16:52, 2 October 2007 (EDT)
*Someone message (IM or email) me about this. --[[User:TK|şŷŝôρ-₮K]][[User_Talk:TK|Ṣρёаќǃ]] 16:48, 2 October 2007 (EDT)

Talk:The Simpsons

2007-10-02T17:45:02Z

Conservateur: /* Fox News */

Talk:The Simpsons

2007-10-02T17:19:39Z

Conservateur: /* Fox News */

Talk:The Simpsons

2007-10-02T17:16:51Z

Conservateur: /* Fox News */

Talk:The Simpsons

2007-10-02T15:15:09Z

Conservateur: /* Fox News */

Neolithic Age

2007-10-01T04:21:17Z

Conservateur: De-satirized

The '''Neolithic Age''' was the second part of the [[Stone age]]. The [[Paleolithic Age]] was the first. Farming became popular during the Neolithic Age as opposed to the hunting and gathering which were favored in the Paleolithic age.

According to some scientists, the first two Neolithic stages allegedly took place around 8500BC to 7000BC, which would have been before the universe was [[Young Earth Creationism|created]].
[[category:anthropology]]
[[Category:Archaeology]]

The Simpsons

2007-09-30T16:35:54Z

Conservateur: Removing the Fox News thing since it was made up by Groening as a joke and didn't actually happen

'''The Simpsons''' is a satirical animated comedy series created by "Life Is Hell" cartoonist [[Matt Groening]]. The Simpsons started on the [[The Tracey Ullman]] show in 1987. In December 1989 the show debuted on the [[Fox Network]]. The show was also made into a feature length movie which was released on July 27th 2007.

''The Simpsons'' is the longest running animated television series in the [[United States]] and is viewed all over the world.

Family:
The show revolves around the fictional Simpsons family.

Homer Simpson is the overweight, balding father of the family. Homer works as a safety inspector in the local nuclear power plant, and enjoys a diet mostly centered around eating donuts and drinking Duff beer. Homer is by choice quite lazy but does get pushed into occasionally performing heroic acts for his family.

Marge Simpson is the mother of the family. Instantly recognizable thanks to her unfeasibly large blue beehive hairdo, Marge provides the foundation for the family. Her relationship with Homer is portrayed as a loving one but frequently exasperating due mostly to Homer's buffoonery. Marge is in many respects a classical American mother, as she stays at home while Homer works and she takes care of the family. On a few occasions Marge has gotten a job which was met with horrible results.

Bart, the son, is a troublemaker and self-proclaimed underachiever. Bart has a mixed relationship with his father. While sometimes harboring a very close relationship with his father, Bart's opinion of Homer is all over the radar, ranging from very affectionate love to deep frustration.

Lisa is the older daughter. Lisa is mostly concerned with being a good student and protecting the environment. Lisa also plays the saxophone.

Maggie is a baby who doesn't talk.

==References==

<references/>

[[category:television shows]]

The Simpsons

2007-09-30T16:35:12Z

Conservateur:

'''The Simpsons''' is a satirical animated comedy series created by "Life Is Hell" cartoonist [[Matt Groening]]. The Simpsons started on the [[The Tracey Ullman]] show in 1987. In December 1989 the show debuted on the [[Fox Network]]. The show was also made into a feature length movie which was released on July 27th 2007.

''The Simpsons'' is the longest running animated television series in the [[United States]] and is viewed all over the world.

Family:
The show revolves around the fictional Simpsons family.

Homer Simpson is the overweight, balding father of the family. Homer works as a safety inspector in the local nuclear power plant, and enjoys a diet mostly centered around eating donuts and drinking Duff beer. Homer is by choice quite lazy but does get pushed into occasionally performing heroic acts for his family.

Marge Simpson is the mother of the family. Instantly recognizable thanks to her unfeasibly large blue beehive hairdo, Marge provides the foundation for the family. Her relationship with Homer is portrayed as a loving one but frequently exasperating due mostly to Homer's buffoonery. Marge is in many respects a classical American mother, as she stays at home while Homer works and she takes care of the family. On a few occasions Marge has gotten a job which was met with horrible results.

Bart, the son, is a troublemaker and self-proclaimed underachiever. Bart has a mixed relationship with his father. While sometimes harboring a very close relationship with his father, Bart's opinion of Homer is all over the radar, ranging from very affectionate love to deep frustration.

Lisa is the older daughter. Lisa is mostly concerned with being a good student and protecting the environment. Lisa also plays the saxophone.

Maggie is a baby who doesn't talk.

In 2003, [[Fox News]] threatened to sue the show, due to a satiric [[news crawl]] in one episode. Fox News eventually backed down, since Fox News and the Fox Network are owned by the same parent company, they would essentially be sueing themselves. Fox News made the Simpsons promise never to air another fake Fox news crawl out of fear that viewers might confuse it with the real thing.<ref>[http://tv.zap2it.com/tveditorial/tve_main/1,1002,271%7C84353%7C1%7C,00.html Fox News Threatens to Sue 'The Simpsons]</ref>

==References==

<references/>

[[category:television shows]]

Prosecute

2007-09-27T21:17:45Z

Conservateur:

To charge someone with a [[crime]]. A prosecutor tries a [[criminal case]] on behalf of the [[government]].[[category:legal terms]]

List of bodily organs

2007-09-27T21:00:30Z

Conservateur: The radius is an arm bone, not an organ

*[[Adrenal gland]]
*[[Bladder]]
*[[Brain]]
*[[Ear]]
*[[Esophagus]]
*[[Eye]]
*[[Gall bladder]]
*[[Heart]]
*[[Kidney]]
*[[Large intestine]]
*[[Liver]]
*[[Lung]]
*[[Mouth]]
*[[Muscle]]
*[[Nose]]
*[[Pancreas]]
*[[Pituitary gland]]
*[[Skin]]
*[[Small intestine]]
*[[Spleen]]
*[[Stomach]]
*[[Thymus]]
*[[Thyroid gland]]
*[[Trachea]]
*[[Uterus]]
*[[Vermiform appendix]]

[[category:homeschool curriculum]]
[[category:anatomy]]

Hyperbola

2007-09-25T16:54:53Z

Conservateur: /* Applications */

A '''hyperbola''' is a curve produced by the intersection of a plane with both nappes of a [[conic section]].
== Mathematical definition ==
A hyperbola may be more formally defined as the locus of all points the difference of whose distances from two fixed points (the foci) is constant. The [[Cartesian]] equation for a hyperbola with a semimajor axis about the x-axis is
:<math>x^2/a^2 - y^2/b^2 = 1 </math>
== Applications ==
[[Nuclear reactor]] cooling towers are an example of a hyperbolic-shaped structure. This form allows for maximum structural strength with minimum use of building materials.

When two [[rock]]s are thrown simultaneously into a pool of still [[water]], ripples move outward in concentric [[circle]]s. These circles intersect in points which form a curve known as the hyperbola. The same phenomenon is used in [[radio]] tracking stations. Objects are located by sending out signals from two sources to a receiving station, such as one found on a [[ship|boat]] or [[airplane]]. The constant time difference between the signals from the two stations is represented by a hyperbola.

[[category:geometry]]

Pro-abortion

2007-09-20T22:27:53Z

Conservateur: Adding deceit category - the term 'pro-choice' is deceitful since it really means 'pro-abortion'

'''Pro-choice''' is the euphemism preferred by people or organizations who are in favor of permitting or promoting [[abortion]], under some or all circumstances; some believe that a woman should have the right to terminate her pregnancy for any reason, including as a method of [[contraception]], while others maintain that it should only be used in special cases.

[[Planned Parenthood]] performs nearly 200 abortions for every referral for adoption, making the term "pro-abortion" more appropriate than "pro-choice."

==See Also==
* [[Pro-life]]
* [[Abortion controversy]]
* [[Planned Parenthood]]

==External Links==
* [http://www.ippf.org/ Planned Parenthood]
* [http://www.bpas.org British Pregnancy Advisory Service]

[[Category:Abortion]]
[[category:deceit]]

Pro-life

2007-09-20T02:23:28Z

Conservateur:

'''Pro-life''' is the name given to people or organizations who defend the rights of the unborn child, and who oppose [[abortion]].

While pro-[[abortion]] would be an accurate term for those who profit from [[abortion]] and support taxpayer funding of [[abortion]], [[pro-choice]] is the term preferred by [[liberals]].

Due to rulings by the [[U.S. Supreme Court]], the [[United States]] allows [[abortion]]s at virtually any time in pregnancy. Many state [[government]]s even pay for [[abortion]]s using taxpayer dollars.

In [[America]]n politics, the [[Republican Party|Republican]] and [[Constitution Party|Constitution]] Parties are strongly opposed to abortion and believe it should be illegal. The [[Democrat Party|Democrat]] and [[Libertarian Party|Libertarian]] Parties both support abortion and don't want any legal restrictions whatsoever.

==See Also==
*[[Abortion controversy]]
*[[National Right to Life Committee]]

[[Category:Abortion]]

First Amendment

2007-09-19T20:42:45Z

Conservateur: /* Conservative Interpretation */

Amendments -- [[First Amendment|1]]-[[Second Amendment|2]]-[[Third Amendment|3]]-[[Fourth Amendment|4]]-[[Fifth Amendment|5]]-[[Sixth Amendment|6]]-[[Seventh Amendment|7]]-[[Eighth Amendment|8]]-[[Ninth Amendment|9]]-[[Tenth Amendment|10]]-[[Eleventh Amendment|11]]-[[Twelfth Amendment|12]]-[[Thirteenth Amendment|13]]-[[Fourteenth Amendment|14]]-[[Fifteenth Amendment|15]]-[[Sixteenth Amendment|16]]-[[Seventeenth Amendment|17]]-[[Eighteenth Amendment|18]]-[[Nineteenth Amendment|19]]-[[Twentieth Amendment|20]]-[[Twenty-First Amendment|21]]-[[Twenty-Second Amendment|22]]-[[Twenty-Third Amendment|23]]-[[Twenty-Fourth Amendment|24]]-[[Twenty-Fifth Amendment|25]]-[[Twenty-Sixth Amendment|26]]-[[Twenty-Seventh Amendment|27]]

The First Amendment to the [[Constitution]] of the [[United States of America]] says:

:[[Congress]] shall make no law respecting an establishment of [[religion]], or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the [[freedom of speech]], or of the [[press]]; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the [[government]] for a redress of grievances.

This is generally taken as a limitation on the power of the federal goverment with respect to:
#[[freedom of religion]]
#[[free speech]]
#[[freedom of the press]]
#[[peaceful assembly]]
#[[political activism]]

== Conservative Interpretation ==
Liberals often focus on the so-called "[[establishment clause]]", in noting that the federal government cannot endorse or establish a church. However, liberals often overlook the clause explicitly allowing for the free exercise of religion. Conservatives argue that this clause can be interpreted to allow much more leeway to the majority of religious Americans than liberals currently allow.

[[Category: Constitution]]

Exotheology

2007-09-19T20:32:32Z

Conservateur:

Exotheology, or UFO religion, refers to the (imaginary) theology of (imaginary) extraterrestrial beings. This requires a strong form of belief in life in outer space: it implies not only that life in outer space somehow exists, but that it is intelligent and even has a theology of its own.

Exotheology was pursued by [[liberals]] in the 1960s through 1970s. Most scientists in the late 1970s, such as President [[Jimmy Carter]]'s [[Carl Sagan]], believed in intelligent life in outer space. "Scientists today generally assume, and the mathematical probabilities favor, the existence of intelligent life among the myriad planets wheeling through the cosmos."<ref>[http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,916129,00.html Time magazine Apr. 24, 1978]</ref>

== References ==

<references/>

[[category:religion]]
[[category:deceit]]

King Hrothgar

2007-09-19T20:26:24Z

Conservateur:

'''Hrothgar''' is the King of the Dwarves. He rules [[Tronjheim]] and the other twelve dwarf clans.

[[category:royalty]]
[[category:literary figures]]

King Hrothgar

2007-09-19T20:25:59Z

Conservateur:

'''Hrothgar''' is the King of the Dwarves. He rules [[Tronjheim]] and the other twelve dwarf clans.

[[category:royalty]]
[[category:dwarves]]

William Tecumseh Sherman

2007-09-19T16:53:18Z

Conservateur: Redirecting to William T. Sherman

#REDIRECT [[William T. Sherman]]

William Sherman

2007-09-19T16:52:57Z

Conservateur: Redirecting to William T. Sherman

#REDIRECT [[William T. Sherman]]

William T. Sherman

2007-09-18T16:52:39Z

Conservateur: New page: '''William Tecumseh Sherman''' was a Union Civil War general known for his daring and aggressive military tactics. His "scorched earth" policy of total warfare was designed to ens...

'''William Tecumseh Sherman''' was a Union [[Civil War]] [[general]] known for his daring and aggressive military tactics. His "scorched earth" policy of total warfare was designed to ensure the economic, strategic, and psychological collapse of the [[Confederacy]] by destroying civilian infrastructure and supplies.

Notable campaigns in which Sherman was involved were [[Vicksburg]], [[Tennessee]], the siege of [[Atlanta]], his [[March to the Sea]] from Atlanta to [[Savannah]], and the eventual surrender of all Confederate armies in [[Florida]], [[Georgia]], and the [[Carolina]]s.

List of bodily organs

2007-09-17T21:52:48Z

Conservateur:

*[[Adrenal gland]]
*[[Bladder]]
*[[Brain]]
*[[Ear]]
*[[Esophagus]]
*[[Eye]]
*[[Gall bladder]]
*[[Heart]]
*[[Kidney]]
*[[Large intestine]]
*[[Liver]]
*[[Lung]]
*[[Mouth]]
*[[Muscle]]
*[[Nose]]
*[[Pancreas]]
*[[Pituitary gland]]
*[[Radius]]
*[[Skeleton]]
*[[Skin]]
*[[Small intestine]]
*[[Spleen]]
*[[Stomach]]
*[[Thymus]]
*[[Thyroid gland]]
*[[Trachea]]
*[[Uterus]]
*[[Vermiform appendix]]

[[category:homeschool curriculum]]
[[category:anatomy]]

List of bodily organs

2007-09-17T21:52:10Z

Conservateur: A sphincter is not an organ, it is a type of muscle. I think that entry was vandalism

*[[Adrenal gland]]
*[[Bladder]]
*[[Brain]]
*[[Ear]]
*[[Esophagus]]
*[[Eye]]
*[[Gall bladder]]
*[[Heart]]
*[[Kidney]]
*[[Large intestine]]
*[[Liver]]
*[[Lung]]
*[[Mouth]]
*[[Muscle]]
*[[Nose]]
*[[Pancreas]]
*[[Pituitary gland]]
*[[Radius]]
*[[Skeleton]]
*[[Skin]]
*[[Small intestine]]
*[[Spleen]]
*[[Stomach]]
*[[Thymus]]
*[[Thyroid gland]]
*[[Trachea]]
*[[Uterus]]
*[[Vermiform appendix]]

[[category:homeschool curriculum]]

Wine

2007-09-15T19:10:12Z

Conservateur: /* Types of wines */

[[Image:wine.jpg|thumb|300px|Red and white wines in traditional wine glasses]]
'''Wine''' is an [[alcoholic beverage]] made by fermenting [[grape]]s. Although most wines are made from grapes, other [[fruit]]s can be used. Grains can be used to produce wine, for example, barley wine, but this tends to be very rare and technically, barley wine has more in common with [[beer]].

Wines are categorized by color. Red wine, white wine and rose (pink) wine are the three main types and are given their characteristic color by the types of grapes used in their production. Red wine tends to be served at room temperature whereas the others are served chilled.

==Production==

Traditionally grapes were trampled by barefooted vineyard workers to produce a pulp, which was fermented to produce a rich, fruity alcoholic drink. Today this process in most commercial vineyards is mechanized although many "fine wine" producers such as the D'Arenberg vintners in [[Australia]] still proudly claim their wines are 100% foot pressed.

Once pressed, wines are left to mature in vats (large containers). Vats tend to add flavor to the wine and are traditionally made from [[oak]]. Fine wine tends to be given longer to mature to develop the flavor. Cheaper wines may have oak chippings added to give a similar flavor without the need to mature for as long.

==Alcohol Content==

Wines tend to range from 10% to 14% [[ABV]]. Stronger wines such as [[port]] and [[sherry]] are classed as fortified wines. These require further refinement and are sold as such.

==Production==

Wine is produced throughout the world. The top twenty leading wine-producing countries in order of total production are:<ref>[http://www.wineinstitute.org/communications/statistics/keyfacts_worldwineproduction02.htm]</ref> [[France]], [[Italy]], [[Spain]], [[United States of America|USA]], [[Argentina]], [[China]], [[Australia]], [[Germany]], [[Portugal]], [[South Africa]], [[Chile]], [[Hungary]], [[Romania]], [[Greece]], [[Russia]], [[Brazil]], [[Austria]], [[Bulgaria]], and [[Croatia]].

Many of the best-known vineyards are in France but recent competitions place California wine, particularly the vivid reds from the San Bernardino Valley, alongside French wine in quality. Traditional winemaking is centred in the Languedoc region of Southern [[France]] and La Mancha in [[Spain]]. Kentish [[Pinot Noir]] and Welsh [[Riesling]] are also world-renowned wines.

===Wine and Christianity===
Wine has an important role in the Christian religion, reflecting the central role it played in society at the times of Jesus's ministry on [[Earth]]. Plain water was generally not potable at that time and wine was often mixed with water, so that the alcohol in the wine killed some of the harmful microorganisms in the water. (It should be noted, however, that some Christians, primarily fundamentalist Protestants, hold that none of the references in the Bible to "wine" should be understood as referring to an alcoholic beverage, but rather to unfermented grape juice. Such view is held by only a small minority of Biblical scholars.)

Christ's first miracle, performed at the wedding feast at Cana, was to turn six [[amphora]] filled with water into wine. (John 2:7-10.) At the [[Last Supper]], Christ commands the [[Apostles]] to eat bread and drink wine, which he calls His Body and Blood, and commands the Apostles to do this "in remembrance of me." (Matthew 26::26-29; Mark 14:23-24; Luke 22:20-23.) This is preserved in the liturgy of the Christian Church as [[Holy Communion]]. The different denominations of Christianity have various teachings and doctrines about the place and significance of the wine in the communion service, which are roughly separable into [[memorialism]] and a belief in the [[Real Presence]] of Christ in the [[Eucharist|Eucharistic]] hosts.

Many of the orders of [[Eastern Orthodox]] and [[Roman Catholic]] religious (monks and nuns) established their own wineries in Europe and, in the case of Catholic orders, in the Americas.

===Wine and Judaism===
Wine is an important part of the Jewish Passover seder meal.

==Types of wines==

Wines in the Americas, Australia, South Africa and, in certain places, Germany, are typically named after the varieties of [[grape]] that go into the production. Some of the most popular types are:

:Chardonnay - a popular white wine produced worldwide; Chardonnay can be paired with different kinds of food.

:Merlot - a pleasant, soft red wine with a mild flavor; it is one of the few red wines that can be drunk by itself, without food.

:Cabernet Sauvignon - A very heavy, astringent wine that should ideally be served with fatty red meats; the classic pairing is with lamb.

:Gewurztraminer - sometimes called GWT or GTR for short. A [[German]] varietal now produced worldwide; it has a quirky flavor and goes well with Chinese food.

:Pinot Noir - a red wine commonly grown in Northern California; also used in most varieties of [[Burgundy]].

:Reisling - a white wine grape commonly used in plonk, such as Piesporter or Liebfraumilch (commonly sold in the United States under the trade name ''Blue Nun'').

Other wines are named after the region in which they are produced.

:Rioja - traditional [[Spanish]] red wine.
:Bordeaux - traditional [[French]] red and white wines.
:[[Burgundy]] - French red wine

Quality of Wines

:Fine Wines - These are generally regarded as higher quality wines. But the name "Fine Wine" is derived from the Fining process of a wine rather than quality. Fining is the cleaning process which filters out impurities in the wine after fermentation. Cheaper wines were not fined and so were not regarded as "Fined Wines" later "Fine Wines"

:Beverage Wines - Everyday drinking wines

== Champagne ==

Champagne can either mean sparkling wines produced in the Champagne region of northeastern [[France]] or it may be used to describe such wines, no matter where produced. European Union rules restrict the use of the "Champagne" names to wines fitting the former description. For a wine to be considered "champagne", it must ferment in the bottle: this is what gives champagne its "fizz", [[carbon dioxide|CO2]] dissolved in the wine. However, it is common to see wines in the United States sold as champagne, even if they were produced domestically. The French have protested this, to no avail. Some excellent sparkling wines are produced in [[Australia]] but are not permitted to be sold under the name "champagne". The production of sparkling wines outside France has had the effect of making excellent "champagne" type wines available at far less cost than the French varieties and further diversifying the market.

Sparkling wines that are made by artificially dissolving CO2 are labeled "Brut."<ref>[http://www.wineinstitute.org/industry/consumer/champagne_sparkling_wine.php</ref>

==References==

http://www.winespectator.com/

[[Category:Alcoholic Beverages]]

Talk:Neanderthal

2007-09-15T04:43:20Z

Conservateur: /* Homo sapiens neanderthalensis is incorrect */

''Thought by evolutionists to represent some sort of "caveman". In fact, fits well within the normal height-weight ratios of modern humans''

How does the fact that they were physically similar to modern humans in some characteristics preclude them from having lived in caves? [[User:Chrysogonus|Chrysogonus]] 07:47, 1 April 2007 (EDT)

:You need to consider the connotation of ''caveman'', not just its denotation.
:*denotation: a human being who lives in a cave : cave-dweller
:*connotation: a primitive (practical subhuman) creature having the appearance of ''homo sapiens'' and yet not really a person

:This is rough, of course, or I'd simply add it to the article. Do you get my drift? --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 07:50, 1 April 2007 (EDT)

So why use the term "caveman" in the article? In what way does the height/weight ratio of the neanderthals have a bearing on whether they were modern humans or not? Can you link to some evolutionist researh in which neanderthals are described as subhuman? [[User:Chrysogonus|Chrysogonus]] 08:10, 1 April 2007 (EDT)

:No, I can't. I don't know enough about [[human origins]] to do that. You sound like you know more about this than I do. May I offer you some writing tasks to volunteer for? ;-) --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 08:58, 1 April 2007 (EDT)

Good job on this, too bad it isn't going to last long.[[User:Prof0705|Prof0705]] 14:29, 14 May 2007 (EDT)

==Don't mess with this article!==

I wrote 90% of this article and it now falls under my protection:

* I will only allow additions with credible references:

: Good: accredited news agencies, science journals, university websites and research papers

: Bad: blogs, 100 year old books, AiG, CMI,...

* I will not allow creationist material in this article: this one's for science, if you're a YEC, go to a debate page or go vandalize the [[Dinosaur]] article

[[User:MiddleMan|MiddleMan]]

:95%? Give me a bit more credit thatn that, it took me a while to get this article properly started. Your work on the article is superb, but I claim th eright to assist with this project. Your work is excellent though, in transforming my text to a full article and I wonder if you would be interested in doing the same for [[Homo]] [[User:stevendavy|stevendavy]]

Is 90% ok?
But, yeah, of course you can edit, anyone can edit this, as long as it's properly sourced.

[[User:MiddleMan|MiddleMan]]
:: 90%, Ah, go on then, but I am only letting you off on account of the funky photos. [[User:stevendavy|stevendavy]]

Here goes your article. I hope you have the strength and power to defend your version. [[User:Leopeo|Leopeo]] 10:20, 14 May 2007 (EDT)

:What's this about it being under ''your'' protection? All articles on Conservapedia are subject to being edited by others. And what's wrong with AiG and CMI as sources? Just because they have a different worldview to you is no reason to malign them.
:And what's with the (offensive) distinction between "science" and "creationist material"? Since when does the atheistic worldview have a monopoly on science?
:[[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 10:28, 14 May 2007 (EDT)

::I think his claim of "Under his protection" is based on user:conservative's protecting the articles that he writes, the majority of, without allowing other editors, non sysops, to make changes.--[[User:Tims|TimS]] 10:32, 14 May 2007 (EDT)

:::TimS has it right, I guess. And definitely not "All articles" are open to being edited.
:::P.S. Fortunately, science is not monopolized by a religious or areligious group/worldview. Many scientists are Christians. But they do science, not religion. [[User:Leopeo|Leopeo]] 10:37, 14 May 2007 (EDT)

::::Some articles (too many) are locked to prevent vandalism or liberal edits, but none are limited to a single author (some essays excepted).
::::[[physical science|Origins science]] does tend to be monopolised by one religion: atheism. Even many of the Christians working in science have been bluffed into thinking atheistically.
::::[[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 10:52, 14 May 2007 (EDT)

:::::Obviously not. And not. But this is not the place for that kind of discussion. [[User:Leopeo|Leopeo]] 10:56, 14 May 2007 (EDT)

::::::Then why start it here? [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 10:59, 14 May 2007 (EDT)
:::::::Good question, only you know the answer. [[User:Leopeo|Leopeo]] 04:01, 15 May 2007 (EDT)

Why did someone change the opening to this article? It was well written and factual. The reference to Mousterian tool tradition is accurate. Shouldn't the editor give some explanation as to why parts have been removed?[[User:Prof0705|Prof0705]] 11:32, 14 May 2007 (EDT)

== Society in anatomy ==

I see alot of items concerning society being included in the anatomy section. Could someone more wiki-savvy than I clear that up? [[User:Prof0705|Prof0705]] 10:50, 14 May 2007 (EDT)

:Minor fix...all done[[User:JoyousOne|JoyousOne]] 10:50, 14 May 2007 (EDT)

== Copyright of images ==

What is the copyright status of the images in the article? A quick glance would suggest to me that they have simply been copied from a web-site. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 11:02, 14 May 2007 (EDT)

==Homo sapiens neanderthalensis is incorrect==
CPWebmaster, the Homo sapiens neanderthalensis is not the correct name for the neanderthal. It is Homo neanderthalensis. Neanderthalensis and Sapiens are different species. Please correct.--[[User:Tims|TimS]] 11:04, 14 May 2007 (EDT)

This article really should be renamed Homo neanderthalensis. The Homo sapien neanderthalensis classification was largely based on Willian King's 1864 observations and conclusions that Neanderthals were very closely related to modern humans. Current research into Neanderthal DNA has revealed no evolutionary link between the two species, therefore many anthropologists tend to classfy Neanderthals as a seperate species. [[User:Prof0705|Prof0705]] 11:14, 14 May 2007 (EDT)

The Smithsonian Institution classifies neanderthal as Homo neanderthalensis http://www.mnh.si.edu/anthro/humanorigins/ha/neand.htm.--[[User:Tims|TimS]] 11:35, 14 May 2007 (EDT)

:I wasn't going to comment because I should be in bed by now, but would an acceptable compromise be to name the article either "Neanderthal Man" or "Neandertal Man" (there's justification for both) and then explain the scientific name(s) in the body of the article? [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 11:45, 14 May 2007 (EDT)

::Perhaps but it does sidestep the scientific naming of the organism. --[[User:Tims|TimS]] 11:46, 14 May 2007 (EDT)

:::How does it "sidestep" it? It would still be included, and in more detail; it just wouldn't be in the title. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 10:03, 15 May 2007 (EDT)

:::The issue is what the correct naming is. When you are using a scientific name for an organism like Homo sapiens, you list it as genius then species. The title here is incorrect, if we remove it then continue to use Homo sapiens neanderthalensis we would still be wrong. What CPWebmaster did was basically reclassify that species Neanderthal is. He has placed it on the same level as Asian, White, Black ect. If this were true then the extinction of Neanderthal would have also provided the extinction of the whites in the same areas.--[[User:Tims|TimS]] 11:00, 15 May 2007 (EDT)

:::: You think that Homo sapiens is a genius?
:::: Seriously, I haven't checked the references, but I think I'm correct in saying that secular scientists have at some time in the past classified Neanderthal Man as fully human (i.e. Homo sapiens Neanderthalis), also that some people still consider him that, and ''possibly'' even that some of that second group are secular scientists.
:::: So wouldn't it be better to explain all that (or whatever the precise story is) in the body of the article, and not "take sides" by choosing one of the titles for the article title?
:::: [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 11:23, 15 May 2007 (EDT)

:::::He meant "genus", not "genius".--[[User:Conservateur|Conservateur]] 00:43, 15 September 2007 (EDT)

::::Homo is the genius, sapiens is the species. The way this article reads is Homo (genius) Sapiens (species), Neanderthalis (subspecies). That classification was changes upon DNA evidence and more understanding of physiological data. Look at my link to the Smithsonian's classification.--[[User:Tims|TimS]] 11:31, 15 May 2007 (EDT)

[[Homo neanderthalensis]] already exists here, and is protected. I suggest the articles be merged (I couldn't figure out the tag). [[User:Human|Human]] 19:12, 15 May 2007 (EDT)

And I have a suggestion re:nomenclature. Since things are still being discovered and debated in the scientific community, why not call the article something like "neanderthal man" and address the naming issues there? [[User:Human|Human]] 19:16, 15 May 2007 (EDT)

==History according to Creationists==
"Malnutrition and longer life spans could cause features similar to those seen in Neanderthal skeletons." If malnutrition was a cause of features then the features would not be passed down to their offspring. Only genetic mutation would cause this, thus speciation. Please explain this stance for as of now it A. shows that neanderthal was speciated B. that the statement is incorrect about nutrition causing the features and that they were homo sapians if they had the same nutritional avaliblity as the rest of man kind.--[[User:Tims|TimS]] 11:46, 14 May 2007 (EDT)

The claims that Neanderthals could speak exactly as modern humans is still hotly debated by physical anthropologists. Stating this as a fact is grossly misleading. In addition, many of the cranial features of neanderthals are NOT seen in modern humans. Mainly the abscence of a chin, the extreme prognathic midface, the larger brows, and the much lower cranial vault. The occipital bones protrude alot, and sport a depression caled the suprainiac fossa for the attachment of much larger neck muscles. There also exists a retromolar gap. [[User:Prof0705|Prof0705]] 12:01, 14 May 2007 (EDT)

I agree. CPWebmaster is pulling from the AIG website which has trouble finding empirical evidence for their claims on Neanderthal. Their mtDNA claim is refuted by what I posted below. They have not even updated to the new science evidence.--[[User:Tims|TimS]] 12:03, 14 May 2007 (EDT)

OK, how do fossils prove the use of complex syntax in spoken language? Also the claim that Neanerthals used tools to create complex tools is kinda misleading as well. Neanderthals didn't make complex tools. Almost all Neanderthal lithics are in the form of scrapers, flakes, and retouch points. None of these are "complex" tools.[[User:Prof0705|Prof0705]] 12:30, 14 May 2007 (EDT)

===mtDNA===
In 1999, scientists successfully extracted a 345 base pair sequence of mtDNA from a second Neandertal, a 29,000 year-old fossil of a baby recently discovered in Mesmaiskaya cave in south-western Russia. (Ovchinnikov et al. 2000, Höss 2000) The results of this study were similar to the previous ones, putting the Mezmaiskaya specimen outside the range of modern human mtDNA.

In addition, the two Neandertals are fairly similar, differing from each other in 12 base pairs. The difference is greater than that usually found between pairs of modern Europeans or Asians (only 1% of whom differ in 12 or more places), but comparable to the differences between modern Africans (37% of whom differ by 12 or more).

The distance between Mezmaiskaya and a particular modern human sequence known as the reference sequence (Anderson et al. 1981) was 22, compared to 27 for the first Neandertal. (However, no figures are given for the minimum, average and maximum distances between Mezmaiskaya and modern humans; it is unclear whether Mezmaiskaya is in general closer to modern humans than Feldhofer is.)

The phylogenetic analyses of Ovchinnikov et al. show the two Neandertals grouped together, and separated from all modern humans. As with the first specimen, Mezmaiskaya also appears to be equidistant from all groups of modern humans, strengthening the conclusion that Neandertals are not closely related to modern Europeans.

Because this second individual was discovered about 2,500 km (1,500 miles) from the first, it provides very strong confirmation of the previous results.

The fact that its mtDNA was also fairly close to that of the first Neandertal makes it much less likely that Neandertals and the ancestors of modern humans were both part of an interbreeding population with a large amount of mtDNA genetic variation that has been mostly lost:

"In particular, these data reduce the likelihood that Neanderthals contained enough mtDNA sequence diversity to encompass modern human diversity" (Ovchinnikov et al. 2000)

Interestingly, the preservation of the Mezmaiskaya specimen appears to be much better than that of the Feldhofer specimen. It is so good, in fact, that there is a possibility that its entire mtDNA genome may be able to be sequenced, and there is even a possibility that some of its nuclear DNA may be retrievable.

mtDNA from a third Neandertal
In 2000, scientists announced the sequencing of a third Neandertal mtDNA specimen from a cave at Vindija, Croatia (Krings et al. 2000). When the three Neandertals are compared with modern humans, all three of them cluster together, and apart from all modern humans. This conclusion is reinforced by a study by Knight (2003). Knight excluded from the comparison sites in the mtDNA genome which are known to have mutated more than once, and which are therefore poor indicators of phylogenetic relationships. His study strongly confirmed earlier ones showing deeply divergent histories for modern human mtDNA lineages and the known Neandertal ones.

Like modern humans, Neandertals had low genetic diversity compared to apes. The diversity of the three Neandertal mtDNA sequences (3.73%) is lower than that of chimpanzees (14.82+/-5.7%) and gorillas (18.57+/-5.26%), and similar to that of modern humans worldwide (3.43+/-1.22%). If modern humans are sorted into continental groups, the diversity of the three Neandertals is similar to (within one standard deviation of) that for Africans, Asians, native Americans and Australian aboriginals, and Oceanians. Modern Europeans, who live in approximately the same region as the Neandertals, have less diversity than the Neandertals.

Still more Neandertal mtDNA
Schmitz et al. (2002) reported on a fourth Neandertal mtDNA sequence from the second Neandertal fossil found at Feldhofer, the site in Germany at which the first Neandertal fossil was found. It was closely related to the previous Neandertal mtDNA sequences.
Serre et al. (2004) were able to sequence mtDNA from four other Neandertal fossils, along with mtDNA from five early modern humans. The four Neandertals all had mtDNA similar to those found in the previous Neandertals. Serre and his colleagues found no evidence of mtDNA gene flow between modern humans and Neandertals in either direction, but could not rule out the possibility of limited gene flow. Interestingly, the mtDNA sequences from the Vindija Neandertals, which have a less extreme Neandertal anatomy than the classic Neandertals, and are considered transitional between modern humans and classic Neandertals by some scientists, were no closer to modern humans than the rest of the Neandertal fossils.

Is the Neandertal outside the human range?
Yes.

Note that because two modern human sequences are 24 bases apart, while the smallest Neandertal/human difference is only 22, does not mean the Neandertal sequence is within the range of modern humans. To use an analogy, suppose we measured the height of 994 adult humans, and they varied from 4'8" to 6'8" (a difference of 24 inches). Suppose we then found a skeleton which was 8'6" in height. No one would claim that it fell within the modern human range because it was closer to the nearest human (22 inches) than the tallest human was from the shortest human (24 inches).

Note also that the two figures (22 and 24) are measuring very different things, making it invalid to compare the two figures. Just as the Neandertal was compared against 994 modern humans, any of those humans could be similarly compared against the other 993 humans. We could compute the minimum, average, and maximum distance from that human to the other humans, just as was done for the Neandertal. If we calculated those values for all the humans, we could then calculate minimum, average and maximum values of all the individual minima, averages and maxima, and compare those values against the equivalent values for the Neandertal.

We do not know from the Krings et al. 1997 paper the distribution of minimum distances of humans from other humans. The smallest such value is 1. The largest such value might, I suspect, be as much as 5. The same value for the Neandertal is 22, well outside the human range.

For average distances of humans to other humans, we know the average value is 8.0. The minimum average distance will be a little less; the maximum average value must be at least 12 (this can be deduced from the fact that there are two humans 24 apart) and less than 24; I would guess it might be about 16 for a highly atypical human. For the Neandertal, the value is 27, again well outside the human range.

For maximum distances, the maximum such value is 24, but for most humans, the maximum distance to any other human will be less than that. The value of 24 is highly atypical, because it is taken between the two individuals who have indepently diverged farthest from mitochondrial Eve, and is the maximum of nearly half a million (994 * 993 / 2) comparisons among modern humans. For the Neandertal, the value is 36, again well outside the human range.

In other words, for all three measurements (minimum, average and maximum distances to other humans), the Neandertal measurement is much larger than the maximum value of the same measurement from a sample of 994 modern humans, and even further from the average value. The Neandertal is not merely outside the human range, but well outside it.
:--[[User:Tims|TimS]] 11:53, 14 May 2007 (EDT)

Respect!
[[User:MiddleMan|MiddleMan]]

==Logic==
From CPWebmaster's talk page
:<blockquote>
When it comes to origins, AIG is obviously more valid than the Smithsonian. I am aware that Homo neanderthalensis is the "accepted" species, but this is merely hopeful thinking by evolutionists. In reality, Homo neanderthalensis is HUMAN. I placed it under a sub-species because I did not want it to conflict with the human article. CPWebmaster 11:49, 14 May 2007 (EDT)
</blockquote>
:If homo neanderthalensis is human as you said above, then why not list it with Homo sapiens? CPWebmaster, I can not understand why you would perceive AIG as more valid than the Smithsonian. There are thousands more scientists working and submitting to the Smithsonian than AIG. This provides a more critical environment for research. AIG struggles to have PhDs write articles within the scope of their discipline. How many times have you seen a physicist write about biology at AIG? The point is that if you plan to use taxonomy to describe an organism then you must follow taxonomy rules to describe the organism. Meaning if you wish to say that Neanderthal was a subspecies of Homo sapiens then you need to list Neanderthal as Homo sapiens. Otherwise you need to place it back with homo neanderthalensis.--TimS 12:01, 14 May 2007 (EDT)

I don't know why I'm even trying to correct this article. You cannot use logic against religious conviction. No matter what we say he is still going to put a creationist slant on the article. [[User:Prof0705|Prof0705]] 12:23, 14 May 2007 (EDT)

Do I even have to mention that based on a taxonomy the way this article is listed Neanderthal is of the same level as European, African, Asian, ect. If this is the case then why did they die out while Europeans thrived? If you place any of the other sub races of Homo sapiens into the environment they survive. (This is assuming that Neanderthal came about due to the tower of Babel, like the other races of man according to YECs)--[[User:Tims|TimS]] 13:22, 14 May 2007 (EDT)

:I'm not sure that I follow this point, but one answer is that they did survive. There is evidence of similarities with modern humans which suggests that modern humans are, in part, descended from Neanderthals. Also, one YEC idea is that their distinctive features were due to diet and conditions, not genetics, which would suggest that they were not a separate group that died out, but are humans, and humans are still here. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 10:07, 15 May 2007 (EDT)

:There is an issue about the YEC diet claim, If we are to follow the YEC timeline then Humans lived in the same areas as Neanderthals at the same time so we would show a difference among all of the remains instead of a particular group. If it was based on diet and not genetics than how is what I posted above with mtDNA found in Neanderthal remains explained? Their physiology is much different than a human, not something that could come from diet (You do not get eyebrow ridges, or extra length of ribs from diet)--[[User:Tims|TimS]] 11:17, 15 May 2007 (EDT)

::Just to add if you and CPWebmaster claim that Neanderthal were humans then you should add them to the races article.--[[User:Tims|TimS]] 11:26, 15 May 2007 (EDT)

:::You mean the [[Race]] article I presume? No, I wouldn't add them there, for the following reason. Creationists don't recognise that there are different races. We are all one race—the human race. So Neanderthals were not a different race. The article does list some "races", as they were formerly believed to be, but first, it doesn't say who believed this (I suspect an evolutionary basis), and second, for whatever reason, Neanderthals were, as far as I know, never considered as separate race, so it wouldn't be appropriate to add them to a list of what is actually a historical record. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 11:38, 15 May 2007 (EDT)

:::That is the point I am making Philip. If this were the case then CPWebmaster is wrong in labeling this page as Homo Sapiens Neaderthalensis. This is why it should either be Homo Neaderthalensis or just Homo Sapiens. To add the other delineator would mean that it would be a race of human.--[[User:Tims|TimS]] 11:47, 15 May 2007 (EDT)

== editing ==
By-the-by, going in and pulling the creationist part above the evolutionist part is kinda pathetic and childish.[[User:Prof0705|Prof0705]] 12:28, 14 May 2007 (EDT)

I would have to agree, it is a bit sophomoric. Not to mention the statement of taxonomic labeling.--[[User:Tims|TimS]] 12:32, 14 May 2007 (EDT)

Somebody found some talking fossils apparently.

==Remind me not to spend hours on an article ever again! P.S. please don't <s>stone</s> ban me for expressing my opinion (see [[First amendment]])==

Just 2 days after I wrote this article, using only reliable sources, it's already been vandalized beyond recognition, look! It even has quotes of questionable origin already!

Do we really have to have this "but creationist assert this and quote <s>mine</s> that, and the flood ..." thingy in every article, there's plenty of that on other pages.

I did not claim this article for myself, I just set some guidelines for other editors to keep it factual and respectable (most people out there aren't YECs you know!)

Why the f*ck are there no dates in the intro anymore? Do they threaten the emotional comfort of your little <s>medieval</s> sheltered world? You think you're making Jesus proud through ignorance?

And yes, of course that picture of neanderthal men came from a website: I can't exactly go take a picture of a living neanderthal myself, now can I?

And it's "Homo neanderthlalensis", not "Homo sapiens neanderthalensis" as in separate species, Tims is a molecular biologist, what are you?

What's wrong with writing an article according to the current scientific consensus? Sure I could make something up too, maybe even twist the facts just enough to make everything fit in with Egyptian mythology! But I chose to follow the experts instead.

If the reader is a YEC he's not gonna believe this article anyway!

AiG more credible than the Smithsonian?
Yeah, of course <s>a bunch of uneducated hillbillies</s> AiG's YECs are more credible than the Smithsonian's accredited biologists and archaeologists when it comes to science!
[[User:MiddleMan|MiddleMan]]

Middleman, I agree with you. I thought this was conservapedia not YECpedia. No one has said that being a conservative means rejecting science as a whole. What CPWebmaster did would be considered vandalism if the POV was change.--[[User:Tims|TimS]] 13:39, 14 May 2007 (EDT)

I tried to add some stuff and keep it scientific, but I was reverted by the ConservativeChristianYoungEarthAntiScience Aganda. Just give up, this site is a joke anyway. The only reason I know about it is a student of mine actually used it as a source in writing a paper. [[User:Prof0705|Prof0705]] 13:45, 14 May 2007 (EDT)

Is it that your information has been removed or merely that creationist viewpoints have been added as well? I hope both viewpoints are allowed to stand and I hope it is done in a way that is respectful to the work that each of you has put into the article. [[User:Learn together|Learn together]] 14:24, 14 May 2007 (EDT)

Unfortunatly, no, the overlords have erased information that is scientific in nature and replaced it with their own ideas.[[User:Prof0705|Prof0705]] 14:27, 14 May 2007 (EDT)

I have created separate articles now, with links to one another at the bottom: one for YECs and one for science, I will revert all creationist material on the evolutionary version, however I don't care about what's being written in the creationist version, feel free to add whatever "alternative worldviews" you want to that one!

YEC: [[Homo neanderthalensis (Creationist's view)|here]].

Evo: [[Homo neanderthalensis|here]]

:::stick with one article please. --[[User:CPAdmin1|Tim (CPAdmin1)]][[User talk:CPAdmin1|talk]] 15:42, 14 May 2007 (EDT)

But this one's too crappy.
And that one page would have to be called Homo neanderthalensis.
[[User:MiddleMan|MiddleMan]]

P.S. this particular page (Homo sapiens neanderthalensis) should be deleted for this to avoid confusion.

[[User:MiddleMan|MiddleMan]]

:Your naming will never survive based upon how you have constructed it. You'll need to have separate sections with 'Creationist' in one title and 'Evolutionist' in the other. Also the article called 'Creationist' view appears to be merely a copy of the current article and is replete with information that does not match Creationist thought. You may wish to consider a different strategy if you wish to have any chance of success. [[User:Learn together|Learn together]] 15:08, 14 May 2007 (EDT)

If you don't like it (the creationist version) in its current form you can always edit it.

Evolution is the dominant theory, the default setting, creationism is an alternative for a minority.
[[User:MiddleMan|MiddleMan]]

I am still wanting to see what CPWebmaster's logic is based on what I listed above for the genius and species of Homo Neanderthalensis.--[[User:Tims|TimS]] 14:44, 14 May 2007 (EDT)

Don't worry, these 3 pages seem to act like coupled photons: whatever you type on one talk page, instantaneously appears on the other two as well!
[[User:MiddleMan|MiddleMan]]

"No other organisms, either living or fossil, made tools to make other complex tools, buried their dead, had controlled use of fire, practiced religious ceremonies, used complex syntax in their spoken grammar, and played musical instruments, yet we know from their fossils that Neanderthal engaged in all."
I still want to know how a fossilized piece of bone can tell you about complex syntax. Last time I checked fossils don't talk.[[User:Prof0705|Prof0705]] 17:25, 14 May 2007 (EDT)

Just a quick note, nobody will come to an "encyclopedia" like this and search for [[Homo neanderthalensis]] or [[Homo sapiens neanderthalensis]]. Instead, they'll look for [[Neanderthal]] or [[Neandertal]]. They both redirect to the 'creationist' [[Homo sapiens neanderthalensis]]. Thus, MiddleMan's 'scientific' version will only be seen by a) who reads this talk page or b) from the Hominid category. [[User:Leopeo|Leopeo]] 04:12, 15 May 2007 (EDT)

"''And yes, of course that picture of neanderthal men came from a website: I can't exactly go take a picture of a living neanderthal myself, now can I?''". You appear to be justifying using a presumably-copyright photograph on the basis that you are unable to take your own photograph of real Neanderthals. That is not justification for using copyright photographs. And my question also pertained to the map. If the images are copyright and used without permission, they will have to go, regardless of your inability to supply an alternative. Will you do the right thing or will I delete them? [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 10:13, 15 May 2007 (EDT)

There are lots of pics without sources on this website, yet only one the ones that hits a sore spot among YECs is removed, besides the sysop who removed it didn't say anything about copyrighting, he stated "This is nothing like Neanderthals would have looked like. in reality they looks a LOT more like aps, with curved, bent hands, etc."

Interestingly, I addressed this (sadly widespread) myth in the article itself (it's also the reason why I said 100 year old books are bad sources), so if he would just have taken the time to actually read the article...
[[User:MiddleMan|MiddleMan]]

:Response in point form:
:* There being other such pictures doesn't justify these.
:* If you had brought others to my attention, I would have done the same to them. I'd invite you to now except that I gather that you are no longer around.
:* It was not because of the pictures themselves that I started questioning this; it was solely because of the copyright issue.
:* I don't know where CPWebmaster made that comment that you attribute to him; I haven't seen it, and it certainly wasn't in the edit comment for the deletion.
:As no evidence was forthcoming that there was permission to use the images, I have now deleted them from the article.
:[[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 09:38, 16 May 2007 (EDT)

== transitional fossil? ==

<blockquote>"Neanderthal Man is not considered to be a direct ancestor of modern humans, but their remains are examples of [[transitional fossil]]s along a subsidiary branch, an evolutionary dead end."{{fact}}</blockquote>

A transitional fossil to what? Extinction? Somehow this seems an incorrect usage. There is no linkage from one form to another. Perhaps the following wording should be employed?

<blockquote>"Neanderthal Man is not considered to be a direct ancestor of modern humans, but formed along a subsidiary branch that ended in extinction."{{fact}}</blockquote>

[[User:Learn together|Learn together]] 02:51, 15 May 2007 (EDT)

You're quit right, I changed it accordingly.
[[User:MiddleMan|MiddleMan]]

== Advice to evolutionists ==

I was going to write a piece here with the title above, but because this sort of issue has come up so often, I decided to create a sub-page of my user page to hold it instead. It relates particularly to this dispute, so I urge editors here to read my comments at [[User:Philip J. Rayment/Advice to evolutionists]]. I will, however, make some further comments on this page to some specific points. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 10:01, 15 May 2007 (EDT)

:Philip I read and understood your points in your article. The issue I think that has to be presented is that this website claims that it is Conservative in nature not exclusively YEC. Therefore to edit strictly in a YEC POV would be falsifying the claim of the website. Even Andy has stated that this website is not specifically YEC.
::No, Conservapedia does not have a specifically YEC agenda. But our rules do not allow the kind of speculation-as-fact claims that are found on Wikipedia and other sites concerning an old earth or evolution or any other predominantly liberal ideology. Thanks.--Aschlafly 08:03, 5 May 2007 (EDT)
:So to claim that it is would be misleading. My issue with this page is the incorrect naming style used. If you are going to use scientific terminology then you need to get it right. If what CPWebmaster is true then this article should be moved under Homo sapiens. If not then he needs to correct it.--[[User:Tims|TimS]] 11:09, 15 May 2007 (EDT)

::Thanks for reading it.
::I wasn't suggesting editing in a YEC POV. I was pointing out that despite the YEC point of view that will not allow articles to be edited in an evolutionary POV, evolutionary editors continue to edit in an evolutionary POV rather than a more neutral POV that should (hopefully) be acceptable to both sides.
:: [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 11:28, 15 May 2007 (EDT)

::You know that timelines of the earth are geological based not evolutionary based. If we were to edit on a neutral POV then the edits that CPWebmaster did would have been reverted since they strictly removed scientific data to cause the article a more creationsit POV.--[[User:Tims|TimS]] 11:33, 15 May 2007 (EDT)

==Advice to Young Earth Creationists==
You've got your YEC box in my article (Homo Neanderhalensis, without the sapiens), don't you prefer it's clear presentation of creationist objections over the usual chaotic torrent of out-of-context quotes, unsound "facts" and numerous AiG links that make up most YEC sections on this site?
You yourself linked to Dr. John Hartnett once, who actually has a Ph. D (I still think he's nutts though), don't you understand that that single link, has, to me (and other "evolutionists"), far more value than all the quotes and AiG links in the [[Dinosaur]] article combined?

Just look at the Dinosaur article, it's a complete mess composed of contradicting sections and contradictions within sections, out-of-context-quotes, and the kind of "scientific facts" that any college freshman can debunk on a spare afternoon.
And in the end the article reads like a debate and doesn't really tell the reader anything about actual dinosaurs.
That's what I meant by "go vandalize the Dinosaur article".

If you're going to add YEC stuff, then keep it separated from the rest of the article (don't make one sentence contradict the next one), don't use quotes (no scientist uses quotes), and only add points which have a reasonable chance of surviving the debunk attempts of a college freshman, you have to know what you're talking about before posting it, if necessary, do some research on the math or the science behind it.

Don't question every scientific theory down to the very laws of physics, and don't say every theory is just a theory (you trust science when you fly on an airplane, use GPS, watch tv, and you trust scientist's calculations regarding the highly explosive chemical processes that take place under the hood of your car, don't you?)

And if you're going to question a scientific theory then be consistent, meaning you can't use other science, related to that theory, somewhere else:

- if you question carbon half lives, you also question
nuclear physic, meaning you question nuclear power, and A-bombs as well, and even question highschool chemistry.

- if you question the value of the speed of light, you question relativity and thus you can't trust your GPS system either, you'd also question quantum mechanics.

Finally, try to link to non-creationist websites and accredited scientists (like John Hartnett, for example), and never, ever use the Bible as a reference: if your theories are correct you should be able to find evidence outside of the Bible.

Then, maybe YECs won't be ridiculed all the time...
[[User:MiddleMan|MiddleMan]]

:What I have seen too many times is evolutionary baseed information being removed because it isn't "factual" and at the same time the YEC sections getting bigger and bigger. As far as I know YEC isn't a "fact" either, but I rarely see any of that stuff being edited out.[[User:Prof0705|Prof0705]] 12:16, 15 May 2007 (EDT)

::There are a number of articles with creationist views that I'm not happy with, but would have a fight on my hands if I tried altering them, so I'm not going to defend everything, but parts of your message still warrants a response.
::"''You yourself linked to Dr. John Hartnett once, who actually has a Ph. D''". As do lots of creationists. This sort of anti-creationist loaded language is part of the problem.
::Despite my comments above, I think the [[Dinosaur]] article is actually quite reasonable (apart from needing more information about the dinosaurs themselves). If you were still around, I'd invite you to point out ''specific'' problems, because all you've done so far is throw mud.
::"''(no scientist uses quotes)''". Incorrect.
::"''...don't say every theory is just a theory...''" I haven't seen anyone do that.
::Much of your comment on science ignores the difference between [[Physical science|operational science and origins science]].
::"''Finally, try to link to non-creationist websites and accredited scientists... ''". What's wrong with linking to creationist web-sites with accredited scientists?
::"''never, ever use the Bible as a reference: if your theories are correct you should be able to find evidence outside of the Bible''". We can't use the Bible as a reference for what Christians believe? And often the best evidence is documented eye-witness testimony, which is what the Bible is, so it is often the only available evidence; why overlook it just because bibliosceptics don't like it?
::[[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 10:34, 16 May 2007 (EDT)

== There is no evidence to suggest that Neanderthals could not speak like modern humans. ==

This seems a bit of a lame quote. There's no evidence to suggest that T Rex could not speak like modern humans either, should we therefore conclude that they ''could'' talk? [[User:Chrysogonus|Chrysogonus]] 17:44, 16 May 2007 (EDT)

:I'm guessing that came from a suggestion that I made [[User:Philip J. Rayment/Advice to evolutionists|here]], and if you read that, you might have a better understanding of why it's worded that way. But yes, it was only an off-the-cuff suggestion on my part, and it could be improved. Do you have a suggestion that does justice to what it's trying to say? [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 22:35, 16 May 2007 (EDT)

== Still trying.... ==

Why cannot I access and view the previous versions of the articles? How big of a fit am I going to have to have? --[[User:TK|Sysop-TK]] [[User_talk:TK|/MyTalk]] 07:18, 17 May 2007 (EDT)

:I don't know, I'm not having a similar problem. What exactly are you doing and what exactly are you getting? [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 07:21, 17 May 2007 (EDT)

*Check my user talk. I had requested of CPAdmin1 to have a chance to review the materials he deleted before the fact. He wasn't having a bit of it. The lack of cooperation around here should be gone now, due to the example of the past two days. Evidently not. --[[User:TK|Sysop-TK]] [[User_talk:TK|/MyTalk]] 07:29, 17 May 2007 (EDT)

:*Never mind...I got it. I wanted to see this [[http://www.conservapedia.com/Homo_neanderthalensis]] since it got deleted and redirected without any notice or discussion. Since I don't know much of what I am doing with the technical wiki, I had to fumble around removing redirects and un-deleting pages, etc. There should be a nicer way to accommodate everyone. But then some people, they don't want to be nice. --[[User:TK|Sysop-TK]] [[User_talk:TK|/MyTalk]] 07:33, 17 May 2007 (EDT)
::There ''is'' a nicer way. As long as the article is not actually deleted, but just has the content removed, you can look at any old version from the edit history; you don't have to remove redirects or anything to do that. If you need to know ''how'' to do that, I can explain further. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 07:37, 17 May 2007 (EDT)

*Unfortunately, what I found was deleted and blanked pages, which I had to restore once I removed all the re-directs, and still the discussion seems to have been lost. I know how to blank and protect pages, Philip. I am just peeved because some other Sysop took it upon himself to delete and merge without any discussion whatsoever. Maybe I am wrong in thinking such things shouldn't happen under cover, and unilaterally, but I don't think so. Hopefully whilst I am at the office, the whole process won't be repeated, and the other pages deleted! --[[User:TK|Sysop-TK]] [[User_talk:TK|/MyTalk]] 07:50, 17 May 2007 (EDT)

::I don't see why you had to remove the redirects and restore them just to see what was on them, but moving on, what discussion seems to have been lost? [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 08:04, 17 May 2007 (EDT)

Fidelity

2007-09-14T18:57:44Z

Conservateur:

'''Fidelity''' is [[faith]], trust and allegiance, particularly in [[marriage]]. It has religious, emotional, social and medical benefits.

[[Category:Religion]]

Consumption

2007-09-14T18:55:09Z

Conservateur: Redirecting to Tuberculosis

#REDIRECT [[Tuberculosis]]

Diet

2007-09-14T17:13:42Z

Conservateur: New page: A '''diet''' is the food and drink regularly consumed by an animal. It also refers to when someone changes their eating habits for health reasons, such as a fat person who...

A '''diet''' is the [[food]] and [[drink]] regularly consumed by an [[animal]]. It also refers to when someone changes their eating habits for health reasons, such as a [[fat]] person who eats less food, or a [[diabetes|diabetic]] who must avoid [[sugar]].

[[category:Health]]

Atomic Energy Commission

2007-09-14T17:09:44Z

Conservateur: New page: The '''Atomic Energy Commission''' was a federal United States civilian agency in charge of overseeing the research, development, production, and use of nuclear energy and [[nuclea...

The '''Atomic Energy Commission''' was a federal [[United States]] civilian agency in charge of overseeing the research, development, production, and use of [[nuclear energy]] and [[nuclear weapon]]s.

Established by President [[Harry Truman]] in 1946, the agency was headed by a five member board of commissioners, with one board member acting as chairman. The role of the AEC is now being performed by two separate agencies, the [[Nuclear Regulatory Commission]] and the United States [[Department of Energy]].

== References ==
http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9010129/Atomic-Energy-Commission#244246.hook

[[category:Government Agencies]]

Warren Burger

2007-09-14T17:00:41Z

Conservateur:

'''Warren Earl Burger''' was born in St. Paul [[Minnesota]] on September 17, 1907. In a family of seven children, Burger earned his way through [[college]] and law school. He practiced law for more than twenty years, but during this period he was active in the Minnesota state [[Republican Party]]. Burger worked for the [[Justice Department]] under [[Dwight Eisenhower|President Eisenhower]], who nominated Burger in 1956 to the [[United States Court of Appeals]] for the [[District of Columbia]] Circuit.

Burger was appointed by President [[Richard Nixon]] in 1969 to replace [[Earl Warren]] as Chief Justice to the [[United States Supreme Court]]. He was a strong advocate of "strict constructionism", a philosophy whereby one attempts to base one's decisions upon the literal text of the [[Constitution]]. Burger identified with the Court's [[conservative]] wing and frequently voted to limit the [[liberal]] decisions of the Warren period. Burger was not one-dimensional, however. He authored the Court's opinion upholding the right of trial judges to order busing as a remedy for school [[segregation]] and he spoke for a unanimous Court upholding a subpeona for the [[Watergate]] tapes which resulted in President Nixon's resignation.

== References ==
http://www.oyez.org/justices/warren_e_burger/

[[Category:Supreme Court Justices]]

Warren Burger

2007-09-14T17:00:09Z

Conservateur: New page: '''Warren Earl Burger''' was born in St. Paul Minnesota on September 17, 1907. In a family of seven children, Burger earned his way through college and law school. He practiced law...

Harriet Miers

2007-09-14T15:02:46Z

Conservateur:

[[Image:Miers.jpg|right]]'''Harriet Miers''' served as White House Counsel under [[George W. Bush]] from 2004 to 2007. In 2005, despite never having served as a judge, she was nominated by President [[George W. Bush]] to replace retiring Associate Justice of the Supreme Court [[Sandra Day O'Connor]]. However, when conservative interest groups made their opposition to Ms. Miers clear, she was forced to withdraw her nomination. Bush went on to nominate [[Samuel Alito]], whose nomination succeeded.
Ms. Miers has recently refused to appear before the Senate Judiciary Committee, in response to a subpoena, because President Bush ordered her not to go. She now risks the possibility of imprisonment, should the Senate Judiciary Committee send the [[Sergeant at Arms]] to arrest her.
[[category:biographies]]
{{DEFAULTSORT:Miers, Harriet}}

King Hrothgar

2007-09-14T07:43:44Z

Conservateur:

'''Hrothgar''' is the King of the Dwarves. He rules [[Tronjheim]] and the other twelve dwarf clans.

[[category:royalty]]

Godless liberal

2007-09-12T22:32:11Z

Conservateur:

'''Godless Liberal''' is a term describing [[liberal]]s who are [[atheists]], or who believe in purging spirituality and all references to [[God]] from public life, typical of Liberal [[Deceit]].

[[George Clooney]] regularly describes himself as a 'Godless Liberal' in a joking manner, trying to marginalize the true nature of the term.
[[category:politics]]
[[category:deceit]]

Massachusetts liberal

2007-09-12T22:28:16Z

Conservateur: Added info on low marriage rate

{{merge|Massachusetts}}
A [[liberal]] from [[Massachusetts]], in many ways the most liberal state in the [[United States of America|United States]]. It is the only state where it is a crime, with a mandatory prison sentence of at least one year, to transport a lawfully owned gun for a lawful purpose in an automobile without a special permit. Out-of-state drivers traveling to hunting or gun competitions in the Northeast have to choose between going hours out of their way to avoid Massachusetts, or spending hours attempting to obtain a permit.{{fact}}

Massachusetts is also the only state that has [[same-sex marriage]]. Two of the most liberal senators in the entire [[U.S. Senate]], [[Ted Kennedy|Teddy Kennedy]] and [[John Kerry]]<ref>http://nationaljournal.com/voteratings/sen/lib.htmM</ref>, represent Massachusetts. Massachusetts has the lowest [[divorce]] rate in the country at 2.4 divorces per 1,000 people per annum, according to the Barna Research Group, however this is due to the fact that Massachusetts has the lowest marriage rate, with many couples simply choosing to cohabitate together.

[[John Kerry]] lost by nearly three million votes nationwide in the 2004 election against [[George W. Bush]], yet Kerry won Massachusetts by a margin of about 62-38%. Massachusetts was the only state in which a majority voted for George McGovern instead of Richard Nixon in the [[United States presidential election of 1972]].

==References==
<references/>

[[Category:Politics]]

School

2007-09-11T19:12:08Z

Conservateur: Reverting changes made by troll

A '''school''' is an educational institution. Schools can be either publicly- or privately-owned, funded by public or private sources or a combination of both, and may have a secular or a religious mandate.

The increasingly popular alternative to school is [[homeschooling]].{{fact}}

== Types of schools ==

Terms used to describe schools vary from place to place. Some of the following descriptions overlap with each other.

=== State school ===

A '''state school''' is one that is owned and funded by the state.

In the United States, government-controlled schools are supported by taxpayers, often in the form of a school tax on property. Prior to the 20th century, school attendance was only part-time, consuming only about half or less of the year.

In some states of [[Australia]], although the curriculum is secular, religious education by volunteers associated with the Council for Christian Education is permitted. This takes place in class time, but parents can choose that their children not attend this class.

In [[Nordic countries]] there are virtually no schools other than government schools.{{fact}}

=== Private school ===

A '''private school''' is one that is owned by some body other than the state. Private schools are generally funded by fees levied on the parents of the students, which usually means that the parents are paying twice, once in direct fees, and once in taxes for state schools.

In Australia, the Federal government provides some funding to private schools, although the parents of the students provide most of the income of the school.

Some private schools aspire to very high standards, some specialize in certain modes and topics of instruction (such as a military school), and yet others provide a place for children who need curricula not available in the state systems.

=== Public school ===

In America, a '''public school''' is a ''state school''. In some Commonwealth countries, a '''public school''' is a church-run (i.e. run by a church denomination) school that is open to the general public.

In America, the curriculum in public schools is dictated by state governments and increasingly by the federal government under the "No Child Left Behind" legislation. Federal courts generally prohibit any type of prayer led by school officials, and even forbid the display and teaching of the [[Ten Commandments]]. As a result, morality has virtually disappeared from public school education, and public school students almost never hear that something is morally wrong, which is one reason for the rise in incidents of public school violence and drug abuse.{{fact}}

Compulsory 5-days a week, nearly 8-hours a day attendance at public school only began nationwide in the [[United States]] during the 20th century. Compulsory schooling laws were not universal throughout the [[United States]] until 1917, and even then the school year was often less than a half year.<ref>http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/kellmeyer/050428</ref> There have been few, if any, long-term studies on the effects of the modern approach of full-time attendance at school from age 6 and younger to age 21 and older.

=== Faith school ===

A '''faith school''' in the [[United Kingdom]] is partially controlled by religious groups and have a predominance of pupils from that religious group. The government funds or partially funds faith schools.

=== Parent-controlled schools ===

'''Parent-controlled schools''' (in Australia) are private schools usually owned by churches, but with control being in the hands of a parent-appointed board.

=== Church schools ===

'''Church schools''' (in Australia) are the older denominationally-owned and run public schools which generally provide a secular education.

=== Christian schools, Muslim schools, etc. ===

What are known as ''Faith schools'' in the United Kingdom are known as '''Christian schools''', '''Catholic schools''', or similar in Australia.

== Alternatives ==

For most parents, [[homeschooling]] is the primary alternative education to schools. Increasing numbers of parents choose homeschooling due to a declining quality and culture in traditional schools and their hostility to religion and morality.{{fact}}

==See also==
*[[Homeschooling]]

[[Category:Education]]

Carbon offset

2007-09-11T19:03:17Z

Conservateur:

A '''carbon offset''' is a practice held to reduce the "polluting" effects of [[carbon dioxide]] emissions, with the supposed aim of reducing [[global warming]].

Since carbon dioxide is not actually a pollutant, carbon offsetting has no beneficial effect on the environment. Its only actual use is to make politicians and activists like [[Al Gore]] look good.

==See also==
*[[Carbon sequestration]] - the removal of [[carbon dioxide]] from the [[atmosphere]]

[[category:climate change]]
[[category:deceit]]

Europe

2007-09-11T05:57:57Z

Conservateur:

[[Image:Europe_Map.gif|thumb|300 px|Europe is shown here in green]]

'''Europe''' comprises a large peninsula at the west of the Eurasian land mass.

It stretches from the [[Ural Mountains]] in [[Siberia]] on the east, to the western coast of Spain and Portugal and the islands of [[Ireland]] and [[Iceland]]. It is bounded to the north by the [[Arctic]] Ocean, and to the south by the [[Mediterranean]] Sea.

It is home to more than 10% of the worlds population (Around 600,000,000) yet covers only 2% of the land.
Europe is geographically and culturally very diverse.

The [[European Union]] comprises 27 separate states and has the highest GDP of any political entity in the world.

Major countries include [[France]], [[Germany]], [[Spain]], [[Italy]], [[Russia]], [[Poland]], [[Ukraine]], and the [[United Kingdom]].

== History ==

Europe has a long and rich history. [[World War I]] and [[World War II]] started in Europe, and large battles took place in Europe. During the [[Cold War]] Europe was split into a democratic western part and communist eastern part. [[European integration]] has been a theme in European relations since the Cold War ended, see the [[European Union]].

[[France]] and [[Germany]] remained neutral in the US led Operation Iraqi Freedom, while some European states, notably the [[United Kingdom]] and [[Poland]], have sent troops as members of the coalition.

[[Category:Continents]]

Europe

2007-09-10T22:31:22Z

Conservateur: Europe is not a European country

[[Image:Europe_Map.gif|thumb|300 px|Europe is shown here in green]]

'''Europe''' comprises a large peninsula at the west of the Eurasian land mass.

It stretches from the [[Ural]] Mountains in [[Siberia]] on the east, to the western coast of Spain and Portugal and the islands of [[Ireland]] and [[Iceland]]. It is bounded to the north by the [[Arctic]] Ocean, and to the south by the [[Mediterranean]] Sea.

It is home to more than 10% of the worlds population (Around 600,000,000) yet covers only 2% of the land.
Europe is geographically and culturally very diverse.

The [[European Union]] comprises 27 separate states and has the highest GDP of any political entity in the world.

Major countries include [[France]], [[Germany]], [[Spain]], [[Italy]], [[Russia]], [[Poland]], [[Ukraine]], and the [[United Kingdom]].

== History ==

Europe has a long and rich history. [[World War I]] and [[World War II]] started in Europe, and large battles took place in Europe. During the [[Cold War]] Europe was split into a democratic western part and communist eastern part. [[European integration]] has been a theme in European relations since the Cold War ended, see the [[European Union]].

[[France]] and [[Germany]] remained neutral in the US led Operation Iraqi Freedom, while some European states, notably the [[United Kingdom]] and [[Poland]], have sent troops as members of the coalition.

[[Category:Continents]]

Talk:Chrysler Building

2007-09-10T17:16:39Z

Conservateur: Changing voice from passive to active

Good point Samwell, thank you.-[[User:RichardParker|RichardParker]] 22:38, 9 September 2007 (EDT)
:I always think of pink/black "marbeline" when someone mentions art deco. Incidentally, in ''Hardware Wars'', (the delightful ''Star Wars'' spoof trailer by Ernie Fosselius) one of the droids was named Artie Deco, (Obiwan Kenobi became Auggie ben Doggie). [[User Talk:Samwell|Samwell]] 22:45, 9 September 2007 (EDT)

A known frequent vandal created this [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk%3AMain_Page&diff=289733&oldid=289725 pathetic] article, and it should probably be removed.--[[User:Conservateur|Conservateur]] 13:14, 10 September 2007 (EDT)

Talk:Chrysler Building

2007-09-10T17:14:04Z

Conservateur:

Good point Samwell, thank you.-[[User:RichardParker|RichardParker]] 22:38, 9 September 2007 (EDT)
:I always think of pink/black "marbeline" when someone mentions art deco. Incidentally, in ''Hardware Wars'', (the delightful ''Star Wars'' spoof trailer by Ernie Fosselius) one of the droids was named Artie Deco, (Obiwan Kenobi became Auggie ben Doggie). [[User Talk:Samwell|Samwell]] 22:45, 9 September 2007 (EDT)

This [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk%3AMain_Page&diff=289733&oldid=289725 pathetic] article was created by a known and frequent vandal and should probably be removed.--[[User:Conservateur|Conservateur]] 13:14, 10 September 2007 (EDT)

Essay:Greatest Conservative Movies

2007-09-09T17:51:46Z

Conservateur:

Conservative movies exist, and some are immensely popular. Here is our growing list (in no particular order):

#The first Spider-Man (2002), which praises moral virtue (hard-working teenager, devout aunt and well-meaning uncle) and pokes fun at assumed [[liberals]] (entertainers and journalist). Hero chooses [[abstinence]]. This was one of the most profitable films ever made.
#[[Gone With the Wind]]
#[[Ben-Hur]]
#[[Shawshank Redemption]] (about an innocent man who is convicted of murder and later escapes from prison)
#[[The Sound of Music]]
#[[It's a Wonderful Life]]
#[[The Ten Commandments]]
#[[Mr. Smith Goes To Washington]]
#[[The Passion of the Christ]]
#[[Star Wars]] and its sequels - simple truths about the triumph of good over evil
#[[King of Kings]]
#[[On The Waterfront]] - a simple but hardworking longshoreman takes on his Mafia-controlled union
#[[Sergeant York]]
#[[Knute Rockne: All-American]]
#[[Ninotchka]]
#[[Forbidden Planet]]
#[[Rudy]]
#[[The Prince of Egypt]]
#[[Red Dawn]]
#[[Harry's War]]
#[[The Patriot]] (2000) (the one starring Mel Gibson, there are several other movies with this name)
#[[Ladder 49]]
#[[Rocky]] (perseverance and God-given talent can overcome all odds)
#[[October Sky]]
#[[Amazing Grace (film)]]
#[[Bruce Almighty]]
#[[Home Alone]]
#[[World Trade Center]] (highlights the bravery of the firemen and police in [[9/11]])
#[[A Man For All Seasons]]
#[[Chariots of Fire]]
#[[One Foot In Heaven]]
#[[Quo Vadis?]]
#[[Three Godfathers]]
#[[Reefer Madness]] (emphasizes the dangers of drugs)
#[[The Lost Weekend]] (dangers of alcohol)
#[[Little Miss Sunshine]] (importance of family)
#[[The Manchurian Candidate]] (anti-communist in general, but with a swipe at [[Joseph McCarthy]])
#[[The Green Berets]] Vivid defense of our troops' conduct in the Vietnam War.
#[[My Son John]] (1952). A small-town couple's world is turned upside-down by the discovery that their adult son is a Communist.
#[[True Lies]], starring the future Republican governor of California, [[Arnold Schwarzenegger]]. Teaches conservative values like marital loyalty, and political incorrect facts such as the fact that most terrorists are Middle Eastern Arabic speakers who don't value human life.
#The Island (2005) Pro-life statement against cloning to harvest organs.
#Ghostbusters (1984) EPA bureaucrat lets evil escape.
#Evelyn (2002) True story of Irish father's legal struggle to recover his kids from an orphanage.
#Shane (1953) Western about defending a homesteading family.
#Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1956) Man peacefully stands up to an invasion by unloving, Godless aliens who had taken over key government positions.
#Hero (1992) Even those with character flaws can do good.

== References ==
<references/>

Please add your best conservative picks.

[[category:essay]]

Europe

2007-09-08T04:41:04Z

Conservateur: /* History */

[[Image:Europe_Map.gif|thumb|300 px|Europe is shown here in green]]

'''Europe''' comprises a large peninsula at the west of the Eurasian land mass.

It stretches from the [[Ural]] Mountains in [[Siberia]] on the east, to the western coast of Spain and Portugal and the islands of [[Ireland]] and [[Iceland]]. It is bounded to the north by the [[Arctic]] Ocean, and to the south by the [[Mediterranean]] Sea.

It is home to more than 10% of the worlds population (Around 600,000,000) yet covers only 2% of the land.
Europe is geographically and culturally very diverse.

The [[European Union]] comprises 27 separate states and has the highest GDP of any political entity in the world.

Major countries include [[France]], [[Germany]], [[Spain]], [[Italy]], [[Russia]], [[Poland]], [[Ukraine]], and the [[United Kingdom]].

== History ==

Europe has a long and rich history. [[World War I]] and [[World War II]] started in Europe, and large battles took place in Europe. During the [[Cold War]] Europe was split into a democratic western part and communist eastern part. [[European integration]] has been a theme in European relations since the Cold War ended, see the [[European Union]].

[[France]] and [[Germany]] remained neutral in the US led Operation Iraqi Freedom, while some European states, notably the [[United Kingdom]] and [[Poland]], have sent troops as members of the coalition.

[[Category:Continents]]
[[Category:European Countries ]]

Europe

2007-09-08T04:39:55Z

Conservateur: /* History */

[[Image:Europe_Map.gif|thumb|300 px|Europe is shown here in green]]

'''Europe''' comprises a large peninsula at the west of the Eurasian land mass.

It stretches from the [[Ural]] Mountains in [[Siberia]] on the east, to the western coast of Spain and Portugal and the islands of [[Ireland]] and [[Iceland]]. It is bounded to the north by the [[Arctic]] Ocean, and to the south by the [[Mediterranean]] Sea.

It is home to more than 10% of the worlds population (Around 600,000,000) yet covers only 2% of the land.
Europe is geographically and culturally very diverse.

The [[European Union]] comprises 27 separate states and has the highest GDP of any political entity in the world.

Major countries include [[France]], [[Germany]], [[Spain]], [[Italy]], [[Russia]], [[Poland]], [[Ukraine]], and the [[United Kingdom]].

== History ==

[[World War I]] and [[World War II]] started in Europe, and large battles took place in Europe. During the [[Cold War]] Europe was split into a democratic western part and communist eastern part. [[European integration]] has been a theme in European relations since the Cold War ended, see the [[European Union]].

[[France]] and [[Germany]] remained neutral in the US led Operation Iraqi Freedom, while some European states, notably the [[United Kingdom]] and [[Poland]], have sent troops as members of the coalition.

[[Category:Continents]]
[[Category:European Countries ]]

George Washington Carver

2007-09-08T04:33:31Z

Conservateur:

'''George Washington Carver''' (1864–1943) was a devout Christian and leading African American scientist in the South after the Civil War. Born into slavery near Diamond Grove, [[Missouri]], Carver was raised by German immigrants, Moses and Susan Carver, but left home when he was eleven years old and later worked his own way through college at Iowa State, where he also earned a Master's degree. He spent the last 46 years of his life as a faculty member as [[Booker T. Washington]]'s Tuskegee Institute.

He is known for introducing and developing hundreds of uses for the peanut, sweet potato and soybean in the South. He did not seek a patent for peanut butter, in part because he believed that it was a gift from [[God]]. [http://inventors.about.com/library/inventors/blpeanutbutter.htm] But mostly it was because he did not invent it.[http://www33.brinkster.com/iiiii/inventions/]

George Washington Carver once declared, "Human need is really a great spiritual vacuum which God seeks to fill... With one hand in the hand of a fellow man in need and the other in the hand of Christ, He could get across the vacuum... Then the passage, 'I can do all things through Christ which strengthens me,' came to have real meaning." (1928)

[[Category:Inventors|Carver, George Washington]]

Essay:Greatest Conservative Movies

2007-09-08T04:24:03Z

Conservateur:

Conservative movies exist, and some are immensely popular. Here is our growing list (in no particular order):

#The first Spider-Man (2002), which praises moral virtue (hard-working teenager, devout aunt and well-meaning uncle) and pokes fun at assumed [[liberals]] (entertainers and journalist). Hero chooses [[abstinence]]. This was one of the most profitable films ever made.
#[[Gone With the Wind]]
#[[Ben-Hur]]
#[[Shawshank Redemption]] (about a wrongly-convicted murderer who escapes from prison)
#[[The Sound of Music]]
#[[It's a Wonderful Life]]
#[[The Ten Commandments]]
#[[Mr. Smith Goes To Washington]]
#[[The Passion of the Christ]]
#[[Star Wars]] and its sequels - simple truths about the triumph of good over evil
#[[King of Kings]]
#[[On The Waterfront]] - a simple but hardworking longshoreman takes on his Mafia-controlled union
#[[Sergeant York]]
#[[Knute Rockne: All-American]]
#[[Ninotchka]]
#[[Forbidden Planet]]
#[[Rudy]]
#[[The Prince of Egypt]]
#[[Red Dawn]]
#[[Harry's War]]
#[[The Patriot]] (2000) (the one starring Mel Gibson, there are several other movies with this name)
#[[Ladder 49]]
#[[Rocky]] (perseverance and God-given talent can overcome all odds)
#[[October Sky]]
#[[Amazing Grace (film)]]
#[[Bruce Almighty]]
#[[Home Alone]]
#[[World Trade Center]] (highlights the bravery of the firemen and police in [[9/11]])
#[[A Man For All Seasons]]
#[[Chariots of Fire]]
#[[One Foot In Heaven]]
#[[Quo Vadis?]]
#[[Three Godfathers]]
#[[Reefer Madness]] (emphasizes the dangers of drugs)
#[[The Lost Weekend]] (dangers of alcohol)
#[[Little Miss Sunshine]] (importance of family)
#[[The Manchurian Candidate]] (anti-communist in general, but with a swipe at [[Joseph McCarthy]])
#[[The Green Berets]] Vivid defense of our troops' conduct in the Vietnam War.
#[[My Son John]] (1952). A small-town couple's world is turned upside-down by the discovery that their adult son is a Communist.
#[[True Lies]], starring the future Republican governor of California, [[Arnold Schwarzenegger]]. Teaches conservative values like marital loyalty, and political incorrect facts such as the fact that most terrorists are Middle Eastern Arabic speakers who don't value human life.
#The Island (2005) Pro-life statement against cloning to harvest organs.
#Ghostbusters (1984) EPA bureaucrat lets evil escape.
#Evelyn (2002) True story of Irish father's legal struggle to recover his kids from an orphanage.
#Shane (1953) Western about defending a homesteading family.
#Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1956) Man peacefully stands up to an invasion by unloving, Godless aliens who had taken over key government positions.
#Hero (1992) Even those with character flaws can do good.

== References ==
<references/>

Please add your best conservative picks.

[[category:essay]]

Template:Examples of Liberal Bias

2007-09-04T19:02:14Z

Conservateur: revert vandalism

==Examples of liberal style==

The style of a [[liberal]] often includes these characteristics:

#calling conservative free speech "hate" speech <ref>http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Conservapedia_talk:Deletion_Policy&rcid=279869 Before the article was deleted, it said "New page: American Taliban You site is nothing but a Democratic hate site".</ref>
#pretending to know more than he does; [[Isaac Newton]] admitted that he knew almost nothing, yet a [[liberal]] rarely admits that and often pretends to know more than he does
#resistance to quantifying things, such as [[liberal bias]] or [[Essay:Quantifying Openmindedness|openmindedness]]
#preference for obscenity and profanity <ref> [http://newsbusters.org/node/11171 When It Comes to Profanity, the Left Can't Help Itself] by [[Matthew Sheffield]] at [[NewsBusters]] </ref>
#insistence on having the last word in a discussion or debate
#over-reliance on mockery
#over-reliance on accusations of hypocrisy
#hostility to [[faith]]
#insistence on censoring certain speech, such as a description of [[The Flood]] or even teaching children about a massive flood, despite its acceptance by a majority of Americans
#believing that the education of children is for [[liberals]] to control
#believing that [[conservatives]] will fail, and refusing to accept when they succeed, as when [[George W. Bush]] won in 2000
#reluctance to admit that anything is morally wrong
#bullying conservatives who disagree with [[liberal]] views
#draw an analogy between opponents and racists, no matter how illogical
#claim that science supports their position, and ignore any evidence that shows their position to be false
#often declare that an adversary should be "ashamed of himself," while never saying that about a fellow [[liberal]] (such as [[Ted Kennedy]] or [[Bill Clinton]])
#willing to give away everything held dear by the majority to avoid serious conflict (such as the [[appeasement]] of Prime Minister [[Neville Chamberlain]], or those [[liberal]]s who wish to pull our troops out of Iraq, and embolden the [[terrorist]]s).
#using [[hyperbole]] instead of fact-based logic in an attempt to tug at people's emotions rather than appealing to their sense of reason.
#often long-winded and verbose, and in debates [[liberals]] often consume more than their fair share of the alloted time, leaving less time for the other side.
#attempting to control the rules of evidence used in a debate. For example, claiming that [[Young Earth Creationism]] is false, and then refusing to allow supporting evidence by claiming that the scientists are religiously motivated.
#attempting to control the definitions of words through [[political correctness]]. For example, referring to [[Israel]] as "occupied territories" or suggesting that Al-Qaeda terrorists in Iraq are not part of Al-Qaeda.
#Dismissing legitimate criticism as "a joke" <ref>http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk:Essay:Liberal_Style&oldid=266960]</ref>
#Denying something widely known to be true but difficult to prove, such as observing that men are far more likely to work in gas stations than women.
#Will often deny being a liberal, or will claim to be a "true conservative", while spouting liberal and democratic talking points and criticizing basic conservative beliefs and principles.
#using non sequiturs in argument, such as responding to the point above that [[liberals]] over-rely on accusations of hypocrisy by citing an example of conservatives' observing [[liberal hypocrisy]]. But their example does not help their argument. Quite the contrary, use of that example tends to prove that [[liberals]] do over-rely on accusations of hypocrisy (relativism). Think about that.

==References==
<references/>

[[category:essay]]
[[category:deceit]]

Cigarette

2007-08-28T15:50:53Z

Conservateur:

A '''cigarette''' is a product typically comprised of cured [[tobacco]] leaves rolled in paper into a cylinder shape.

Cigarettes are [[addiction|addictive]] and even occasional use carries a high risk of causing [[asthma]], [[emphysema]], [[heart attack]], [[stroke]], [[brain damage]], [[cancer]] of the [[lung]] and [[mouth]], and severe damage to the [[fetus]] of a [[pregnancy|pregnant woman]]. Cigarettes also contain unusually high levels of [[radiation]] due to the presence of [[radium]] and [[polonium]], further exacerbating health problems. Numerous studies have shown that on average, nonsmokers live 10 years longer than smokers. However, this is a free country, so if you are of age and want to damage your health just to "look cool" smoking, that is your right.

A cigarette works as follows: The tobacco is lit and the resulting smoke is inhaled by sucking it through the cigarette. This encourages the rest of the tobacco to burn. Cigarettes often have a filter on the mouth end, to provide a smoother and cleaner smoke, for increased ease of inhaling and often also for improved taste. Cigarettes have been allegedly spiked with addictive substances to hook the consumer on buying more of them and making it more difficult to kick the habit.

[[Category:Drugs]]
[[Category:Health]]

Cigarette

2007-08-27T17:11:59Z

Conservateur:

A '''cigarette''' is a product typically comprised of cured [[tobacco]] leaves rolled in paper into a cylinder shape.

Cigarettes are [[addiction|addictive]] and even occasional use carries a high risk of causing [[asthma]], [[emphysema]], [[heart attack]], [[stroke]], [[brain damage]], [[cancer]] of the [[lung]] and [[mouth]], and severe damage to the [[fetus]] of a [[pregnancy|pregnant woman]]. Cigarettes also contain unusually high levels of [[radiation]] due to the presence of [[radium]] and [[polonium]], further exacerbating health problems. Numerous studies have shown that on average, nonsmokers live 10 years longer than smokers.

A cigarette works as follows: The tobacco is lit and the resulting smoke is inhaled by sucking it through the cigarette. This encourages the rest of the tobacco to burn. Cigarettes often have a filter on the mouth end, to provide a smoother and cleaner smoke, for increased ease of inhaling and often also for improved taste. Cigarettes have been allegedly spiked with addictive substances to hook the consumer on buying more of them and making it more difficult to kick the habit.

[[Category:Drugs]]
[[Category:Health]]

Cigarette

2007-08-27T14:55:52Z

Conservateur: Added more health information

A '''cigarette''' is a product typically comprised of cured [[tobacco]] leaves rolled in paper into a cylinder shape.

Cigarettes are [[addiction|addictive]] and even occasional use carries a high risk of causing [[asthma]], [[emphysema]], heart attack, stroke, brain damage, [[cancer]] of the [[lung]] and [[mouth]], and severe damage to the [[fetus]] of a pregnant woman. Cigarettes also contain unusually high levels of [[radiation]] due to the presence of [[radium]] and [[polonium]], further exacerbating health problems. Numerous studies have shown that on average, nonsmokers live 10 years longer than smokers.

A cigarette works as follows: The tobacco is lit and the resulting smoke is inhaled by sucking it through the cigarette. This encourages the rest of the tobacco to burn. Cigarettes often have a filter on the mouth end, to provide a smoother and cleaner smoke, for increased ease of inhaling and often also for improved taste. Cigarettes have been allegedly spiked with addictive substances to hook the consumer on buying more of them and making it more difficult to kick the habit.

[[Category:Drugs]]
[[Category:Health]]