Conservapedia - User contributions [en]

User talk:AugustO

2018-02-24T06:15:55Z

DaveSG: You’re Cool.

{{useful links}}

==User:PetyrB has been blocked ==

User:PetyrB has been blocked. He was Markman. It will be much harder for him to give a repeat performance. And if he manages to give a repeat performance, it will be very short lived. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 17:14, 7 July 2014 (EDT)
:He blocked everyone except me. I feel left out. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] 22:23, 7 July 2014 (EDT)
::I wasn't blocked either. [[User:GregG|GregG]] 22:58, 7 July 2014 (EDT)
:::I notice that he blocked you three times last year. Perhaps he's mellowed. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] 00:09, 8 July 2014 (EDT)

Becoming an editor of good standing may become harder for someone like him, but I fear that it will be next to impossible for an honest newcomer! Without a strong motivation (for me, it is the my outrage about the disservice the CBP does to the Bible - and a bewilderment when reading about physics), you won't have the dedication to overcome the obstacles into which you are running here at Conservapedia: It took me quite an effort to find a way to appeal my first blocks!

It's at Catch-22 situation: If you make errors - as any newbie will do - you get blocked, and most probably just quit. Newcomers who don't make errors are most probably reincarnations who learned the ropes in a couple of earlier lives. --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 17:41, 23 July 2014 (EDT)

== Short note ==

If you ever get banned again, let me know at [[User:Conservative/mail|HERE]] and I will unblock you. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 13:57, 11 July 2014 (EDT)
:If he is blocked he will not be able to notify you. He will have been blocked surely? There really does need to be a better way to contact admins here in the case of parodists like markman blocking people imo. [[User:Davidspencer|Davidspencer]] 14:27, 11 July 2014 (EDT)
::He can create another user account solely for the purpose of contacting me at another IP address.
:::Ok, I will remember that in case markman comes back. He previously banned me several times as well [[User:Davidspencer|Davidspencer]] 14:41, 11 July 2014 (EDT)
::::Fine, just be patient. I am not sure how often the mailbox will be checked, but it will definitely be checked from time to time. And you can always contact other admins too. It makes sense to mitigate any damage caused by a rogue blocker whose blocking privileges are short lived. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 14:50, 11 July 2014 (EDT)
::From the Conservapedia commandments page: "Administrators have discretion to act on matters not specifically mentioned here, such as vandalism and sockpuppets."[http://www.conservapedia.com/Conservapedia:Commandments] Common sense discretion can be exercised by Conservapedia administrators. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 14:39, 11 July 2014 (EDT)

==''Has hope he will be more amiable should he return''==

User:Conservative, you blocked me arbitrarily for three days ("''needlessly being quarrelsome''"), and then you unblocked me, equally arbitrarily. Are you really thinking that this leads to ''amiability''? No, it stirred my curiosity. I reread our exchange at [[Talk:Generalized linear model]] and digged a little deeper into the matters discussed:

<div style="margin: 10px; padding: 10px; background-color: #CCC">
''content created by User:Conservative User:AugustO and subject to Conservapedia's copyright policy''
Why was this page deleted? From my personal files:
:AugustO, I thought you were merely whining. You said you wanted the article improved, yet were unwilling to do the work to improve it. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 18:42, 23 July 2014 (EDT)
::How does your petty insult ("whining") justify the deletion of this talk page? Below I showed my willingness to improve the sorry state of this article by collaborating with you! --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 07:46, 24 July 2014 (EDT)
:::I may write articles on [[Correlation and dependence]] and [[Spearman's rank correlation coefficient]] and [[Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient]] in the future. By the way, [[Vox Day]] wrote an interesting article entitled [http://voxday.blogspot.ca/2014/02/statistical-misleadings.html Statistical misleadings]. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 13:51, 24 July 2014 (EDT)

*"I may write articles on [[Correlation and dependence]] and [[Spearman's rank correlation coefficient]] and [[Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient]] in the future." Given your history of announcements (Project 200+, Question Evolution brochure for high-school-pupils, etc.), I'll be very surprised when this happens!
*Regina Nuzzo's [http://www.nature.com/news/scientific-method-statistical-errors-1.14700 "Scientific method: Statistical errors"] is indeed an interesting article.
*Still no explanation for the deletion.
--[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 16:34, 24 July 2014 (EDT)
</div>

While you still haven't answer my question about the deletion of the talk-page, I came to the conclusion that my mentioning of the ''Question evolution! book for middle school students'' triggered the deletion of the revisions and my block. You seem to be on an Orwellian campaign to erase this book from memory, a campaign which bodes ill for the trustworthiness of Conservapedia. --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 18:42, 27 July 2014 (EDT)

This is too complicated for an outsider to follow. The important point is that AugustO, who earned the respect of many CP editors is back, and I welcome his contributions. I hope that we can all learn to live together in content-creation-harmony. [[User:Wschact|Wschact]] 19:38, 27 July 2014 (EDT)

:Harmony is important, but honesty, too - especially at a ''trustworthy encyclopedia''. --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 19:45, 27 July 2014 (EDT)

== Project ==

Would you like to collaborate with other editors on a wiki project to help Conservapedia be a strong resource for a given topic.

The topic could be decided by the editors participating.

If you are interested, please go to: [http://www.conservapedia.com/Conservapedia:Community_Portal#A_project_for_active_editors_to_collaborate_on The collaborative project]. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 22:02, 25 December 2014 (EST)

:I'm a little surprised by this "project". A wiki should ''per se'' be a collaborative project: I tend to jump on subjects which pique my interest (without an additional layer of administration.) Major obstacles for collaboration on Conservapedia's articles are for me:
:*Some sysops think they own certain articles, and will keep up their preferred version without engaging in a meaningful discussion on the talk-page (see e.g., [[E=mc²]]). Some sysops even prevent editing of their pet articles by locking them - I think that you, User:Conservative, are the main culprit when it comes to this tactic!
:*Collaboration prerequisites a certain degree of maturity and honesty. You, User:Conservative, don't have at least one of these characteristics: for example, the "we are many" - charade is just infantile. And how do I know that you won't create new dummy accounts to manipulate discussions? You haven't come clean about [[User:Historybuff]], therefore I don't know whether you will take such crooked steps again.
:--[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 08:11, 28 December 2014 (EST)
::Are you claiming that merely one person is editing using the User: Conservative account? If so, considering your insistence that merely one person is editing using the account, what proof and evidence do you have for this claim? Your little tirade here is not impressive. Also, if you are such a big fan of collaboration, why can't the totality of "User: Conservative"'s edits be a team effort? If "User:Conservative" allows a conservative friend or friends to also use the account, what is that to you? None of the Conservapedia Commandments forbids the sharing of an account.

::Next, a very small percentage of my/our articles are locked in terms of editing them.

::Furthermore, the Conservapedia wiki article protect tab was created to be used! [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 00:12, 31 December 2014 (EST)

:::It's just common sense:
:::*If you are many, your ''manual of style'' must be epic: your way of writing is quite unique. Furthermore, it is quite inconceivable that there is more than one editor who shows such a consistent inability to use the preview button (''it was created to be used'').
:::*In your interactions with your fellow sysops, you are treated as a single person.
:::*Your medical history: every time you excuse your actions with a lack of sleep, etc., it is the story of a single person.
:::Hey, it is the internet: You could be a group of medically enhanced Rottweilers, and until your account is closed by your local dog-catcher, we cannot be sure... But for me, you failed the [[Turing test]] on multi-personality.
:::All of the above is not very important: what counts is that you (and your friends/sysops) know how many you are. You know whether you wish to try to deceive your fellow editors.
:::It is the same as with your dummy account of [[User:Historybuff]]: you know whether you acted immorally. For me, it just seems so - and in the internet, appearance is quite important, as we are not able to prove much.
:::--[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 02:40, 31 December 2014 (EST)
AugustO, as far as the inconceivability of User: Conservative being multiple editors, your lack of imagination and [http://schnitzelrepublic.blogspot.com/2010/07/seven-personality-traits-of-german.html germanic stubbornness] is not a serious objection.

Second, how would you know if one person or persons using the User: Conservative was using the preview button? Have you done an analysis of the edits concerning this matter? How would you know if persons using the User: Conservative do not use the preview account? How would you know the reason or reasons why "User: Conservativedom" sometimes does not use the preview button?

"User: Conservative" has edited during the day and night. And the illness affecting one of the editors of the User: Conservative account has largely been conquered. For example, a full eight hours of sleep occurred today for the person affected.

Do you believe that one person largely wrote the [[homosexuality]] and the [[Atheist actions against homosexuals]] article (the title of the article was originally Atheist persecution against homosexuals" if memory serves, but one editor within "User: Conservativedom" objected to this title) and that one person wrote both articles. The article [[Atheist actions against homosexuals]] was a shock to those obsessed with the User: Conservative account and the footnoting style is different than the [[homosexuality]] article as well. What are your thoughts on this matter?

Have you read C.S. Lewis's article entitled [http://textualcriticism.scienceontheweb.net/SUPLEM/CSLewis.html Modern Theology and Biblical Criticism]? It should give you pause on psychologically analyzing a writer/writers and his/her/their intentions, etc. etc.

Why don't you ask User: Karajou if User: Conservative is merely one editor? We can guarantee you that User: Karajou will not claim that User: Conservative is merely one editor. Why? Because User: Karajou was informed that more than one person has edited using the User: Conservative account. And User: Karajou has checkuser and could certainly verify this matter.

In addition, we know you were successfully rebuffed about the "historybuff" matter and that you most certainly do not have the moral high ground. You did not prove the identity/identities of the mysterious historybuff. And you acknowledged (after you shown to be acting in an unbecoming manner) that no Conservapedia rule was broken if a person using the historybuff account was an Conservapedia admin (Of course, the same would apply if persons using the account were admins) so you failed again!

Furthermore, has the User: Conservative account edited the [[Sun Tzu]] article? If so, then at least one editor with User: Conservativedom understands the strategy/tactic of stealth and keeping the opposition guessing (User: Conservativedom does not agree with all of Sun Tzu's actions/writings by the way). And we know that the left/liberals such as Alinsky use the tactic of attacking individuals before attacking institutions/groups (Rule #12 of [http://www.bestofbeck.com/wp/activism/saul-alinskys-12-rules-for-radicals Alinsky's rules for radicals]). But, User: Conservative is more than one editor! [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 15:04, 31 December 2014 (EST)
:By the way, German evolutionists did not think that American creationists would land on the beaches of Normandy. But that is exactly what happened!!! (And [[Dwight D. Eisenhower|Dwight D. Eisenhower]] appears to have been a creationist [http://www.icr.org/article/presidential-support-for-creationism/]).

::''"We can guarantee you that User: Karajou will not claim that User: Conservative is merely one editor. Why? Because User: Karajou was informed that more than one person has edited using the User: Conservative account."''
::When did this happen? In the first months of your membership? I doubt it, as it seems unlikely that Andy would bestow such extensive rights as "checkuser" and "administrator" on a communal account.
::Even when I started editing in 2011, you hadn't come out as a multitude, that happened during the last one or two years. So, assuming that there is more than one user at your account, he/she/them were invited to do so somewhat after 2011. Am I right?
::This is quite troubling: your weren't even able to lobby for upload-rights for [[User:TheAmericanRedoubt]] until now, but you gave some person access to "checkuser", "administrator" and "oversight" rights! Either this person never had an account here at Conservapedia, or it had an account before, but wasn't seen worthy to get these rights which you decided to share.
::I would call this ''nepotism'', and it is impossible to square it with Conservapedia's claim of being a ''meritocracy'':
::::'''''Conservapedia is a meritocracy. Administrators are selected as needed from the best of the best contributors, there is no popularity contest to determine promotion, and nominations not accepted. By your own work shall you be known. '''''
::But that is just a [[Conservapedia:Guidelines|guideline]] - and you are not so awfully keen of them, like:
::::'''''Conservapedia does not allow "sockpuppet" accounts or unaccountable anonymous proxy use. '''''
::''In addition, we know you were successfully rebuffed about the "historybuff" matter and that you most certainly do not have the moral high ground. You did not prove the identity/identities of the mysterious historybuff. And you acknowledged (after you shown to be acting in an unbecoming manner) that no Conservapedia rule was broken if a person using the historybuff account was an Conservapedia admin (Of course, the same would apply if persons using the account were admins) so you failed again! ''
::You were [[User:Historybuff]]. The little incident of your intermingled comments at the main talk page made this obvious. [[User:Karajou]] could prove it. Thereby '''you broke a rule (or do you claim that it is just a ''guideline'' and doesn't apply to you?)'''
::--[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 03:39, 2 January 2015 (EST)
:::Why are you assuming that User: Conservative may be merely two persons? Why not more?

:::The User: Conservative account will continue to be shrouded in mystery to you - a black box of conservatism!

:::As far as the meritocracy issue, the User: Conservative account produces articles that are useful and of interest to the public, well-researched, accurate and scrupulously footnoted. The articles are some of the most popular articles at Conservapedia. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 04:27, 2 January 2015 (EST)

::::*The problems which I mentioned above just increase if there are more than two editors
::::*So, you decided what merits being "administrator" or having "checkuser" rights? Isn't that the kind of ''nomination'' which is explicitly frowned upon in the guidelines?
::::*How many socks are there for your account? I repeat, running User:Historybuff was against Conservapedia's guidelines, and the smokescreen which you put up here won't change this fact.
::::--[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 08:19, 2 January 2015 (EST)
高深莫測 [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 21:29, 2 January 2015 (EST)
:There is nothing ''inscrutable'' (?) about it. You are just unwilling to take responsibility for your actions. --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 01:53, 3 January 2015 (EST)
::The User: Conservative account was given admin status before the guidelines page was created. The puts a spanner in your germanic stubbornness, your germanic argumentativeness and your germanic obsession with tradition/rules, Herr O![http://schnitzelrepublic.blogspot.com/2010/07/seven-personality-traits-of-german.html] Secondly, Conservapedia's policies/rules were not broken. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 02:10, 3 January 2015 (EST)

:::You created your sock [[User:Historybuff]] on Aug 2, 2014, violating the guideline which is in place since years:
::::'''''Conservapedia does not allow "sockpuppet" accounts or unaccountable anonymous proxy use. '''''
:::--[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 02:54, 3 January 2015 (EST)
First socks, then shoes. Have you ever examined Conservapedia's logo? In America, one is presumed innocent until proven guilty. You never demonstrated that an editor (or editors) of the User: Conservative account edited using the historybuff account.

Second, the point is moot as the former Admin Rob Smith made an appellation to a guideline which affects matters as can be seen [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Conservapedia:Sockpuppet&diff=892529&oldid=890286 HERE]. And Admin Joaquin Martinez has edited Conservapedia using various accounts and Aschlafly has never once expressed displeasure about this matter. So your quest to prevail in this matter is futile. It is quite impossible that a guideline was broken in this matter!

Feel free to engage in [[last wordism]] at juncture. :)[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 03:09, 3 January 2015 (EST)

:*Do you deny that [[User:Historybuff]] was your sock?
:*Joaquín Martínez doesn't try to hide his identity by using various accounts.
:*I stick to the commandments and guidelines, thank you.
:Feel free to run away. --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 03:15, 3 January 2015 (EST)
::AugustO, you remind me of the person who became upset with me when I performed the en passant move in a chess game and captured his pawn. He was not familiar with the en passant rule and claimed a rule was being broken by me. Prove your allegation and ignorance of Conservapedia's rules is no excuse. Checkmate, Herr O!!! Once again, you battled against the User: Conservative account and was easily and effortlessly defeated! [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 03:32, 3 January 2015 (EST)
:::At least you admit that [[User:Historybuff]] was your pawn. Using it was just not a ''clever move'', but an act of deceit. --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 03:37, 3 January 2015 (EST)
No admission was made. Prove your allegation and know the rules before you claim a rule was broken! [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 03:41, 3 January 2015 (EST)

== Happy New Year ==

The editors of the User: Conservative account wish you a happy new year. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 01:06, 2 January 2015 (EST)
==Unblock==
Dear AugustO,
Thank you for unblocking me. At the same time, TAR also blocked my IP address. If you have access to the block log, could you please unblock that IP as well? Many thanks. Cheers, [[User:Wschact|Wschact]] 15:59, 11 January 2015 (EST)
:Thanks, [[User:Wschact|Wschact]] 17:43, 11 January 2015 (EST)
:: "Cheers?" I lived and worked in England and France for 4 years. I very rarely hear Americans say "Cheers". In my limited experience, usually Brits and Australians say it. You Wschact have said it a lot here on CP. Of course, nothing at all wrong with having British or Australian editors here -- on the contrary, the diversity is wonderful. However, you perhaps being from one of those two rather liberal [[gun free zone]] countries would explain your frequent anti-American [[liberal bias]] in your frequent deletions of strong conservative American and especially firearms/Second Amendment related materials. Now it makes more sense. When I lived over there I frequently heard [[NRA]] Second Amendment bashing. I guess you and other self-described, so-called "moderate" ([[RINO]] or actual [[liberal]]) [[gun control|anti-self defense]] CP editors perhaps have never seen this flyer. Please examine this [[World War II]] flyer: https://cdn2-b.examiner.com/sites/default/files/styles/image_content_width/hash/b4/c5/b4c52576c5d83bde287c5f26a41b9ba5.jpg?itok=wQk-jVj6
::http://www.examiner.com/article/would-you-send-a-gun-to-defend-a-british-home

::Perhaps [[User:Conservative]], Karajou or JPatt, when you get a chance would please upload this picture to CP under the file name "Send a gun to defend a British home.jpg"? I would like to use it in both an article and an Pro Second Amendment essay such as [[Essay:France Pays Dearly - Liberal Gun Control Laws and Gun Free Zones that Welcome Terrorists]]. Some of my essays ([[Conservapedia:Essays#Firearms_and_the_Second_Amendment]]) will be good conservative American Patriot "[[Essay:Sheepdogs_for_the_sheeple|sheepdog]]" responses to AugustO and Wshacts deletion of Second Amendment, Tenth Amendment States' rights and other firearms related conservative content. Thanks.
::[[User:TheAmericanRedoubt|TheAmericanRedoubt]] 09:38, 13 January 2015 (EST)

:::If you wish to talk with [[User:Wschact]] about your time in England, perhaps you should unblock him... --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 10:31, 13 January 2015 (EST)

== On cats and lives ==

[[User:Conservative]], please stand by your threats:
<p style="background-color:yellow">A cat only has so many lives. I think you are on your 8th. But in all of the excitement lately, maybe its your 9th. Do you fell lucky?<br>Don't count on me bailing you out if you go against Karajou and TheAmericanRedoubt. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 09:10, 13 January 2015 (EST)</p>
Well, [[User:Conservative]], I don't intend to "go against Karajou and TheAmericanRedoubt". But if anything happens to my current live, I just hope that you will do the right thing - one can dream. --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 10:30, 13 January 2015 (EST)
:Glad to hear. Good faith editors should not be pestered. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 03:20, 14 January 2015 (EST)
::I promise to do the right thing. If you are blocked unfairly, I will unblock you.

::Second, have you seen [http://www.iwebtool.com/alexa_traffic_rank?domain=creation.com&data=p&range=2y THIS]? It looks like 2015 could easily be the WORST year in the history of Darwinism! 2014 was a TERRIBLE year for evolutionism.

::Who knows what surprises [[Creation Ministries International]] and the [[Discovery Institute]] will unleash on Darwinism in 2015?!!!![[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 06:17, 15 January 2015 (EST)

:::''"I promise to do the right thing. If you are blocked unfairly, I will unblock you."'' I couldn't ask for more. Unfortunately, our view about unfair blocks differ: I think that my last block - two days for reinserting a section to [[User talk:Aschlafly]] (because ''A talk page is a user's castle!'') - was unfair, seen that deleting [[User talk:SamHB]] against the explicit wishes of the user stayed unsanctioned: see [[User_talk:Aschlafly#Deuteronomy_25:13-15]] --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 10:05, 15 January 2015 (EST)
::::You carp about others breaking rule or supposedly breaking rules. You are not above the rules! As a German, one would think you would thank me for my germanic insistence that you obey the rules also! [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 16:18, 15 January 2015 (EST)
:::::I'm sure that I'll be admonished every time I break a rule or violate a guideline of this site! What about you? --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 16:22, 15 January 2015 (EST)
::::::I don't detect a thankfulness for my correction. You still have a rebellious spirit! :) [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 16:36, 15 January 2015 (EST)

===In 19 Months AugustO submits 2 New 1 Paragraph Articles, 13 New Talk Pages; in 2 weeks 83 Related to TheAmericanRedoubt===
Since the 22nd of May 2013 ([[Special:Contributions&limit=500&target=AugustO]]) Mr. O has written 2 new 1 paragraph long articles: [[Sleswick-Holsatia]] and [[Ceslas Spicq]]. Also 1 new redirect page "article" ([[Amu]]). He has created 13 new Talk Page articles. 83 of his edits in only 2 weeks have been of my work or related to my work.
Perhaps he might want to please consider paying more attention to this [[Conservapedia:Guidelines#90.2F10_Rule]] instead of to every detail of my numerous new article and essay contributions.
The gentleman "doth protest too much, methinks". :-)
[[Patience]] is a [[virtue]] Mr. O seem to be still attempting to master.
[[User:TheAmericanRedoubt|TheAmericanRedoubt]] 18:08, 15 January 2015 (EST)

:Yes, I'm annoyed, too, by the effort it takes to get you to make the slightest corrections, like: [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Attack_on_Pearl_Harbor&curid=2830&diff=1132468&oldid=1132467 the category at Attack on Pearl Harbor]. You are still producing a plethora of red links - though you have promised otherwise - and I won't ignore this. --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 18:19, 15 January 2015 (EST)

:: I just now gave temporary 1 day block since he is ignoring numerous advice from Admin [[User:Conservative]] and continues to violate the 90/10 rule. [[User:TheAmericanRedoubt|TheAmericanRedoubt]] 18:25, 15 January 2015 (EST)

----
Well, [[User:Conservative]], time to think what the right thing to do is... Will you support this abuse of the 90/10 rule? --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 18:34, 15 January 2015 (EST)
:I receive a report that you are blocking the good faith efforts of someone who wants to create content.

:I think you are on your way to having your blocking rights removed. If that happens, a long block against you could last quite a long time. Due to my reduced activity level, I might not even notice if you are blocked for some time even if I was going to undo the block.

:I have some projects I am tackling plus I expect to be tacking two more soon so I need to catch up on things. I had an accident happen to me recently and was temporarily injured which set me behind on things. But I recovered recently so I am moving forward. So I told the editor that I cannot referee this one and to refer the matter to Karajou. Try not to pick any unnecessary fights with other editors. That is my advice. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 19:15, 15 January 2015 (EST)

::So, you would always do the right thing, if not all members of your collective were to busy... --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 19:23, 15 January 2015 (EST)
::(EC) Sorry to hear about your accident, I wish you a speedy recovery! --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 19:25, 15 January 2015 (EST)
:::Thanks on wishes for a recovery.

:::Second, User: ConservativeS (plural) fought an ideological [http://www.thefreedictionary.com/delaying+action delaying action] as far as evangelical/militant atheism caused by the fad of [[New Atheism]], but as you can see [http://www.google.com/trends/explore#q=atheist%2C%20atheism%2C%20New%20atheism%2C%20richard%20dawkins&cmpt=q&tz= HERE] and the articles [[global atheism|decline of global atheism]] and [[atheist movement|decline of the atheist movement]], the cavalry of Christian apologists, atheists shooting themselves in the foot and circumstances has arrived!!!

:::To a large degree, our work is done. Like the proverbial and mysterious, [http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0068699/ high plains drifter/gunslinger], we will be less active and largely ride off into the sunset. :) It's time to tackle new challenges. :) [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 20:09, 15 January 2015 (EST)

@AugustO: I would recommend that you accept what Conservapedia has become, and stop trying to change that. You are in great danger. User TAR, who doesn't seem to be well-versed in how this place operates, has been making extremely thinly-veiled threats against you, with the reference to 8 lives or whatever. A phrase that he seems to have picked up from Cons. Stay away. That's what I'm doing.

@Cons: (1) You might want to remind TAR that a few days ago he made an edit with the word "insidious" in the comment, referring to what he was reverting. You might want to remind him that people have gotten into a lot of trouble for using inflammatory words in edit comments. Like "hideous", if I recall correctly. (2) Perhaps you ought to be careful about saying that your work is done and that you might "ride off into the sunset" and "tackle new challenges". Someone might come along and delete your user and talk pages :-) :-) :-).

@both of you: I was delighted to see you two having a conversation on my talk page recently, and I have joined in the conversation. Feel free to come and visit me. I can't really go "outside" when my home state is described as treasonous, so I have to stay at home. I get lonely at times.

[[User:SamHB|SamHB]] 22:21, 15 January 2015 (EST)

:I'm aware of the - rather unveiled - threads, both by [[User:Conservative]] and [[User:TheAmericanRecoubt]]. Conservapedia stands at a croosroad at this moment, and for me, it is just irresponsible not to show the pitfalls of the way which is likely to be chosen.... --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 04:34, 16 January 2015 (EST)
::AugustO, if you get blocked by someone, don't count on me to look into the matter or to notice. I am less active on the wiki now and plan on being less active as well.

::In addition, lately you have become so petty and contentious, I cannot say it would trouble me if you no longer edited the wiki. No hard feelings, but that's just the way it is. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 08:26, 16 January 2015 (EST)

== FFAF is not a sock account ==

FFAF is not a sock account. Didn't the Facebook category tag for [[Freedom from Atheism Foundation]] which I removed tell you that it was not a sock? I don't think Aschalfly account will be creating a Facebook category tag anytime soon. :) [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 03:23, 14 January 2015 (EST)

:*How did [[User:Karajou]] deduce that it is in fact a sock-account? He has "checkuser"-rights, hasn't he?
:*You pride yourself with stealth and subterfuge, therefore I cannot take the things you say at face value. --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 15:57, 14 January 2015 (EST)
::Stealth is not telling untruths. A stealth fighter pilot is not lying to the radar operators of an opposing country. :)

::Karajou probably blocked the person because there was overlap with another person using the same IP for some reason.

::Third, people often think reciprocity is deserved when they do something for others. The Freedom from Atheism Foundation (FFAF) has plugged several CP atheism articles. So it is natural that someone would create an article on their foundation at CP. Given that CP covers the atheism topic with some depth, a volunteer/fan of theirs adding an article on FFAF is not unreasonable. Social media plays a significant role in social movements and they have a notable and growing social media presence. They are also financially backed by a large foundation I have been told. Furthermore, they are taking steps to grow into a much larger organization. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 16:31, 14 January 2015 (EST)

:::August0 why do you say that I am a 'sock' of Conservative ? I don't even know that that means ? [[User:FFAF|FFAF]] 09:37, 15 January 2015 (EST)
::::A sock is a sockpuppet. A sockpuppet is a duplicate user account. Don't worry about it. I am an admin and I straightened out the misunderstanding. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 16:33, 15 January 2015 (EST)
:::::This is indeed troubling. If FFAF is unduly blocked, Conservative may not notice due to time/commitments and having largely ridden off into the sunset like the Lone/Many Ranger(s). Then who will revert FFAF's unfair block? Perhaps one of the other admins should keep a particular eye out for FFAF being harassed or blocked. Incidentally, I have changed a section heading in [[Essay:Worst Liberal Movies]]. Somebody please check it; I believe it is an improvement as mentioned in [[Talk:Essay:Worst Liberal Movies]]. :) [[User:ConsMovies|ConsMovies]] 09:56, 20 January 2015 (EST)

== My Approach to the Categorization Problem ==

<div style="margin: 10px; padding: 10px; background-color: #CCC">
<small>'''''content created by User:Conservative and User:AugustO - subject to Conservapedia's copyright policy'''''</small>

Here is what I'll do when I encounter nonsensical categories:
*I will delete them - once.
*I will explain the deletion on the talk-page.
If the categories are reintroduced, so be it.

In this case, I deleted [[:Category : Science Fiction]] (already covered by [[:Category:Science Fiction Authors]]), [[:Category : Dystopian Fiction]] (covered by [[:Category : Dystopian Fiction Authors]], and [[:Category : Libertarianism]] (covered by [[:Category : Libertarian Authors]]). --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 05:41, 16 January 2015 (EST)
:Enjoy your preoccupation with category tags and your blocking powers while you can. Because they are both coming to an end! You were warned Category Tag Nazi! Your blitzkreig of category tag complaints will soon be kaput! [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 07:00, 16 January 2015 (EST)
::[[User:Conservative]], you are insulting me. --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 07:04, 16 January 2015 (EST)
:::You are being inhospitable to new editors and needlessly contentious. I have had it. I asked the owner of the website to strip you of your blocking powers. I believe Karajou agrees with me on this matter. I am not going to discuss this matter with you anymore because it is obvious that I am talking to a brick wall. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 07:32, 16 January 2015 (EST)

It will be very ironic to be punished for something which should be so uncontroversial as the first rule of categorization: ''nothing should be [in]<sup>*</sup> a category and [at the same time in]<sup>*</sup> one of its (direct) super/sub-categories.'' Andy often emphasizes the importance of logic for this site, so it is very surprising that he'll enforce (as you, [[User:Conservative]] imply) illogical categorization!

It is really not rocket-science: R. Heinlein was an author who wrote science-fiction - thereby he belongs into [[:category:Science Fiction Authors]]. He doesn't belong into [[:category:Science Fiction]], as any reader who looks at [[:category:Science Fiction]] will be surprised that he obviously doesn't fit in a subcategory....

OTOH [[:category:Best Selling Authors]] should not be a sub-category of [[:category:Science Fiction Authors]] (as it is now), as it includes authors like Glenn Beck and Agatha Christie... [[:category:Best Selling Authors]] is also at the moment a sub-category of [[:category:Liberal Authors]], implying that all best sellers are written by liberals...

New editors should understand logic, too! So, please, show a little bit more logic, and a little less aggression. --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 07:34, 16 January 2015 (EST)
:Don't think listing someone as an "African" and a "African author" or a "conservative" and "conservative author" is the end of the world. This is especially true for small categories. I abridged the manual of style. Wsacht's endless fussing which sometimes was petty was tiresome. So is yours. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 07:54, 16 January 2015 (EST)</div>
(<sup>*</sup>: edited for clarification)

--[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 08:42, 17 January 2015 (EST)
== Biblical creationism will be strong in 2015 ==

See: [[Essay: Biblical creationism will be strong in 2015]].

Stronger, higher, faster! [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 19:46, 17 January 2015 (EST)

:Hey, another prediction! Go, Team Conservative! --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 06:43, 18 January 2015 (EST)

== Jawohl? ==

Some German character traits mentioned by the the Schnitzel Republic: Stubbornness, efficiency/economical and constructive creativeness.[http://schnitzelrepublic.blogspot.com/2010/07/seven-personality-traits-of-german.html]

[[Essay: What if I fail?]]

There is a little bit of German in every great champion? Jawohl? :)

You will do your category tags right. We must have order! [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 02:34, 20 January 2015 (EST)

:One of the most childish comments I've read on Conservapeida. Shouldn't an administrator of Conservapedia, someone who represents this site, stand above mocking ordinary editors? Not everything can be excused by your relative youth: you are a member of this site for nearly eight years - so, even if you have started as a high-school pupil, you should have finished college by now. Start to act the part!

:I haven't read your essay yet: is it about failed predictions? --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 04:11, 20 January 2015 (EST)
::What failed predictions? Could you be more specific? We both know that you cannot! Define the word "soon" taking into account Christian patience and persistence and not worldly impatience! [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 04:31, 20 January 2015 (EST)
:::You are sounding like Bill Clinton: "It depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is". --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 04:36, 20 January 2015 (EST)

:::From the [http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/soon Merriam Webster]:

:::{|
|<div style="margin: 10px; padding: 10px; background-color: lightgreen">
#''obsolete'': at once : immediately
#without undue time lapse : before long [soon after sunrise]
#in a prompt manner : speedily [as soon as possible] [the sooner the better] [no sooner said than done]
#''archaic'' : before the usual time
#''in agreement with one's choice or preference'': willingly [I'd just as soon walk as drive]
</div>
|}
:::--[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 04:47, 20 January 2015 (EST)
Feel free to demonstrate there has been a undue time lapse. Something you have never done! [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 04:57, 20 January 2015 (EST)

=== The ''Question evolution! campaign booklet'' Saga ===

{|class="wikitable"
|50 page Question Evolution! booklet. Question Evolution! Campaign runaway train is going to be released
|[http://web.archive.org/web/20120215050509/http://conservapedia.com/Main_Page Feb 15, 2012]
|-
|A Question evolution! campaign group now has 3 writers and at least 3 Question Evolution! booklets/books will be coming out. Some of the booklets/books will be designed for young people.
|[http://web.archive.org/web/20120501184006/http://conservapedia.com/Main_Page May 1, 2012]
|-
|A 15 questions for evolutionists booklet and book for middle school students will soon be coming out and they are going to be heavily promoted and distributed.
|[http://web.archive.org/web/20120619134057/http://www.conservapedia.com/Main_Page Jun 19,2012]
|-
|SS Evolution! passengers get on your life jackets! A barrage of 100+ page Question evolution! campaign booklet torpedoes is headed your way!
|[http://web.archive.org/web/20120919002949/http://www.conservapedia.com/Main_Page Sep 19, 2012]
|-
|The Question evolution! book for middle school students, edited by a Christian apologist, gains in popularity.
|[http://web.archive.org/web/20130711205854/http://www.conservapedia.com/Main_Page Jul 11, 2013]
|-
|Canadian teacher at a Christian school will be serving as a science editor of the Question evolution! campaign book for middle school students.
|[http://web.archive.org/web/20130718204401/http://www.conservapedia.com/Main_Page Jul 18, 2013]
|}

'''Three years ago''': ''the booklet is going to be released'', '''two and a half year ago''': ''it will soon be coming out'', '''two years ago''': ''it is headed your way!'', '''one and a half year ago''': ''it gains in popularity''. Yeah, that's an "''undue time lapse''", as nothing has happened!

--[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 05:08, 20 January 2015 (EST)
: A few things:

:First an excerpt from some writer: "It’s taken almost five more years of hard work, and plenty of rejection, to get to the point where I’m happy to let something mellow in a drawer for a while before sending it out, or where I can stand the (admittedly) long wait times it takes to hear back from literary journals."[http://goinswriter.com/patience/] Another excerpt from a writer: "My CP [critique partner] wrote and worked and studied for TEN YEARS before getting published."[http://www.charissaweaks.com/2013/06/a-writers-most-important-lesson-patience.html] Good writing takes time. Next time you feel yourself being impatient about various announcements of events happening soon, see it as an exercise in patience. It would also be helpful, if you had something to pass the time. Why don't you work on providing satisfactory answers to the [http://creation.com/15-questions 15 questions for evolutions]. That is something you never did!

:We have been sparring about creation/evolution and wiki matters for awhile. I thought my recent post which featured a post from blog which focuses on German culture/Germany was funny and so did my friend who is of German descent. You did not find it humorous. Given your recent bout of ill humor and my recent schedule demands, I think it is best if I largely take a break from sparring with you on talk pages. No hard feelings on my part. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 21:43, 20 January 2015 (EST)

First, let me say what a pleasure it is to visit once agin with my favorite two people, this time in August's house. The view from your front window is specactular, and your music collection is most impressive. (I'd like to meet in Cons's house next time, but he keeps it locked. He has a front entryway, but he keeps burning it down.)

Now Cons, I'd like to talk to you about offensive national stereotypes. This is serious, and I'd like you to pay attention. Really. I apologize if this comes across as mindless "political correctness", but I'm serious.

I spent a fair amount of time this morning reading a number of web pages and other sources about what "wohl" and "Ja wohl" really mean. It's a very complicated and nuanced word. Google translate says "well", in the health sense, along with "probably", "perhaps", "possibly", etc. The Harper-Collins ''German Concise Dictionary'' (it's anything but concise!) lists it as a "Schlüsselwort" (key word, important word) and gives many meanings, including "comfortable" and "at ease", along with a great number of idioms, such as "er weiß das sehr wohl" -- "he knows that perfectly well". (But they've gotten rid of the "ß", haven't they?) The combination "Ja wohl" means "yes emphatically" or "yes certainly". As a response to a request it begins to take on the meaning that you seem to ascribe to it, from watching ''Hogan's Heros'' and various other silly World War II things: "Yes, sir!" or "I'll do it right away!"

There are web pages that go into detail about its "Yes, sir!" meaning in the military, and the fact that many Americans associate that with the Nazi era.

I've read the "Schnitzelrepublic" web page. It was well-written, light-hearted, and affectionate. But I don't think you have used the term in a light-hearted way with AugustO. Please remember that people can easily be offended by thoughtless national stereotypes, especially when those stereotypes are informed by a ''Hogan's Heros'' mentality. And please remember that the Nazi era was not a pleasant time, for Germany or anyone else, and try to make more erudite (love that word!) and well-thought-out comments.

That said, I'm sure AugustO is very efficient. :-)

Now you two can go back to fighting over what "soon" means, especially in the context of saying just when a booklet will be coming out. Three years is a long time to wait, but I'm sure it will be worth the wait. Idea: Cons, why don't you promise not to block either of us until the booklet comes out?

One more thing: August: can you send me a usable email address? I will not divulge it to anyone else without your permission. My email is at the top of my user page.

[[User:SamHB|SamHB]] 00:52, 21 January 2015 (EST)
::::''Hi - A[...] O[...] --EOM'' --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 08:08, 21 January 2015 (EST)
::I think we're all glad to hear that the RMS ''Creationist'' is plowing full-steam ahead into the iceberg of Darwinism.--[[User:DonnyC|DonnyC]] 22:44, 20 January 2015 (EST)
:::That literally made me laugh out loud, something which the internet rarely accomplishes. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] 00:52, 21 January 2015 (EST)

'''@User:Conservative:''' Interesting quotes. I'm missing the part where they are telling you ''oh, you must announce your book first, and then start to write it!'' BTW: I don't see your announcements as ''exercises in patience'', I see them as ''misleading advertising''. --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 08:16, 21 January 2015 (EST)

== Speaking of predictions ==

Looking at Recent Changes this morning, I saw that JoeyJ has deleted a very interesting talk page. (The corresponding article page had been deleted by AddisonDM a few years earlier.)

The pages are
:*[[User:Conservative/Gentlemen-the-anti-evolution-D-Days-are-going-to-be-happening-the-first-quarter-of-the-calendar-year-of-2009]]
:*[[User_talk:Conservative/Gentlemen-the-anti-evolution-D-Days-are-going-to-be-happening-the-first-quarter-of-the-calendar-year-of-2009]]
:The talk page had contained this question from EddyJ:
:*"How did the D Days of the first quarter of the calendar year of 2009 work out? Almost five years later, is evolution still around?"

This brings up the question: Just how ''did'' those D-Days turn out? Is evolution still around 6 years later?

And, speaking of predictions, a question was raised a few months back (too lazy too look it up; I'm sure you know what I'm talking about) along the lines of "Evolutionists: Beware the Ides of March". Well, that date is coming up real soon now. Can the author tell me just what I'm supposed to be afraid of?

This is not the first year that dire predictions have been made for the Ides of March. In none of the past cases am I aware that the predicted doom came to pass. Can someone tell me what I missed? [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] 13:33, 22 February 2015 (EST)

== User talk:OGSMEDIA ==

<div style="margin: 10px; padding: 10px; background-color: #CCC">

''content created by User:Wschact, User:AugustO and subject to Conservapedia's copyright policy''

{{welcome|OGSMEDIA}}--[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 04:10, 16 January 2015 (EST)

Unfortunately, OGS Media sounds like the advertising department of "Offgrid Survival"... --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 04:10, 16 January 2015 (EST)
: Could you please explain your relationship to Off Grid Survival Media? Thanks, [[User:Wschact|Wschact]] 14:31, 20 January 2015 (EST)</div>

--[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 18:18, 20 January 2015 (EST)

== @User:Conservative: NOTE to Fellow Editors and Admins ==

(As usual [[User talk:Conservative]] is protected, otherwise I'd bring up this topic over there)

User:Conservative, you have deleted [[Talk:Gardening]] and [[Talk:Yoga]], presumably to get rid of [[User:TheAmericanRedoubt]]'s announcement:
::{|style="background-color:lightgrey"
|'''NOTE to Fellow Editors and Admins:''' Please note that I am a trained (both in Asia and the USA) and certified professional practitioner / subject matter expert in the field of Complementary medicine / [[Alternative medicine]], particularly [[Traditional Chinese medicine]]-[[Acupuncture]], [[Ayurvedic medicine]] and [[nutrition]] for the last 19 years.

'''I am a also a life-long [[gardener]] who is certified in [[Permaculture]] [[gardening]] (completed a [[Permaculture design course]] ([[PDC]])'''

Through the month of December 2014 and January 2015, I am working many hours per week on editing Conservapedia. For specifically on a collapsible "See Also" navigation template for the diverse topics of the [[Alternative medicine]], [[First aid]], [[Permaculture]] [[gardening]], [[Firearms]], [[:Category:Survivalism|Emergency preparedness]] and [[Amateur radio]] articles I am also working on and articles on related topics.

I will also be working on the Categories for all of these Alternative medicine topics and related [[Healthcare]], [[Cooking]] and Nutrition categories and items such as [[spices]] (which are related to [[health]] and nutrition)

So, I please request your patience in considering not deleting articles or content I have submitted in these subject areas without first discussing it on the Talk Page and letting me know on my User Page, if you would be so kind.

Also, please note that I plan to rapidly submit articles for the "red links". Thank you for your patience.
|}

Do you intend to get rid of it on pages like the following, too?

*[[Talk:Permaculture design course]]
*[[Talk:First aid]]
*[[Talk:Hugelkultur]]

--[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 05:07, 3 February 2015 (EST)
:You can delete the alternative medicine entries. That was agreed on.

:Keep the material related to conservatism, survivalism, amateur radio, preparedness, guns, cooking, first aid, permaculture, etc.

:Much of the talk page additions by TAR were related to Wsacht hounding. They were "preemptive strikes/justifications/defenses". That is why I deleted those TAR article talk pages. The Wasacht hounding issue appears to be solved. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 05:21, 3 February 2015 (EST)
::We seem to have quite different ideas of "hounding". Well, I leave it for now... --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 05:44, 3 February 2015 (EST)
:::I got [[User:JoeyJ]] page deletion rights. Please ask him to delete any unnecessary talk pages that were created during the TAR/Wsacht feud. You can put the deletion tags on them and JoeyJ can delete them.

:::I am guessing TAR will be back within 1-14 days based on my recent communication with him. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 06:19, 3 February 2015 (EST)

::::Thanks, but it is a tedious task, and I think, I've done my share. --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 06:35, 3 February 2015 (EST)

== Evolutionary belief in Germany: Its future in Germany is kaput! And you still can't satisfactorily answer the 15 questions for evolutionists ==

<div style="margin: 10px; padding: 10px; background-color: #CCC">
<small>'''''content created by User:Conservative and - subject to Conservapedia's copyright policy'''''</small>
I just read this:

Reporter David Wroe adds, “Creationism—the belief that Genesis and other books of the Bible explain life on Earth—is gaining strength in Germany.” He cites a recent University of Dortmund survey that showed that around a fifth of future teachers and a similar proportion of those who had studied basic biology doubted evolution, along with one in eleven who were studying for a higher degree in biology. Meanwhile, private Christian schools are growing more popular, half of which are represented by the creation-promoting Association of Evangelical Schools. Even evolutionist Dittmar Graf says he is “really sure that the percentage of Germans who doubt evolution is going up and up.” Source: [https://answersingenesis.org/creationism/creation-in-germany/ Creationism in Germany, 2009]

On March 17, 2014, the news website ''Deutsche Well'' reported that evangelical Christianity has doubled in [[Germany]] in the last 10 years.[http://www.dw.de/ghanaian-pastor-seeks-to-re-christianize-germany/a-17501259]

And you still cannot satisfactorily answer the [https://answersingenesis.org/creationism/creation-in-germany/ 15 questions] for evolutionists! [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 04:48, 12 February 2015 (EST)</div>

Thank you for the interesting links - no need to erase them! --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 03:59, 16 February 2015 (EST)

:Oh Cons! Did you [[memory hole]] your edit of 04:48, 12 February? Shame on you! Bad, naughty Cons! You know better than to do that. For your penance, I'd like you to make 77 edits to the "Atheism vs. Islam" article, within the space of 10 hours. Oh, I see you already did that. Good. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] 00:25, 17 February 2015 (EST)

== Reading the Bible in Koine Greek ==

My friend is going to learn Koine Greek in order to be able to read the New Testament in its original language. Are you able to do that now fluently?

Do you own an English version of a Bible? If so, what English version do you like? [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 06:30, 18 February 2015 (EST)

:User:Conservative, a short time ago, you wrote that you do not talk about your personal affairs. So, why should I? Unless, we make it a little ''quid pro quo'':
:*How is your Greek?
:*Which version of the Bible do you own? What English version of the Bible do you like?
:I'll answer your questions ''after'' you have answered the questions above. Otherwise I'm quite willing to tell you about the experiences a friend of mine had with the Greek language.
:--[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 07:43, 18 February 2015 (EST)
::An editor using the User: Conservative account would like to take you up on your offer in this manner, answer your questions in relation to English versions of the Bible (any non-English versions will not be included) and of course I will answer the Greek question too. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 20:47, 25 March 2015 (EDT)

:::I'm confused: is this secondary user of your account the friend you spoke about? Are you, the main user, interested in Greek? Never mind, I'm waiting for your answers:
:::*How is your Greek?
:::*Which version of the Bible do you own? What English version of the Bible do you like?
:::--[[User:AugustO|AugustO]]
My knowledge of Koine Greek is poor. It consists of just a few words learned through sermons (for example, the words agape, phileo, eros, [http://www.gotquestions.org/dunamis-meaning.html dunamis], etc. etc.).

I own these versions: NASB, NKJV, KJV, J.B Phillips translation of the New Testament and the NIV (not a big fan of the NIV).

Except for the NIV, I like all of the versions of the Bible I own. Each one has its own flavor. I also like the Berkeley Version and this [http://www.genevabible.com/ new version of the Geneva Bible]. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 06:36, 26 March 2015 (EDT)

:*I got my [[Graecum]] at school, after learning classical Greek for four years. At university, I took a course in ''Bibelgriechisch'' (Greek of the Bible / Koine Greek). So, I'm able to ''translate'' verses, but would have trouble to make polite conversation with the Apostle Matthew.... To understand the subtleties of the texts, I have to consult commentaries.
:*No, I don't own a hard-copy of an English version of the Bible, but thanks to the internet, I can read many versions. In German, I prefer the Lutherbibel, and the first English version I look up is always the [[KJB]].
:--[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 16:34, 28 March 2015 (EDT)
::Thanks. I am torn between doing Bible memorization and learning Koine Greek. I may do both, but probably just one in the short term given the number of various projects I have committed myself to.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 03:54, 30 March 2015 (EDT)

:::I've great respect for those who know large portions of the Bible by heart because they studied it, preached about it, used it - and every Christian should know at least some verses!
:::OTOH, memorizing the Bible for its own sake doesn't strike me as an intellectual endeavor - any third-rate actor should be able to do so. In my experience, those who have memorized it for its own sake are a lot like vegans - it is one of the first things about themselves they bring up in any conversation....
:::--[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 05:29, 1 April 2015 (EDT)
Some branches of psychology are pseudosciences and laymen are able to do just as well as trained professionals. At the same time, cognitive psychology is very useful and helps with such things as designing airplane cockpit instrument panels and increase people's intellectual abilities. [http://www.amazon.com/Your-Memory-How-Works-Improve/dp/1569246297 This book] shows people how to boost their memory by about 40-60% or more using various memory techniques and I believe it was written by a cognitive psychologist. The figures of 40-60% or more is based on experimental evidence. I plan on learning these techniques this year.

[http://www.amazon.com/How-Read-Book-Intelligent-Touchstone/dp/0671212095/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1417944498&sr=8-1&keywords=how+to+read+a+book This book], written by the well-known educator/philosopher Mortimer Adler, which sold over 500,000 books and is considered a classic, shows people how to increase their reading comprehension and a website I visited highly recommended this book and I plan on reading it this year.

After all is said and done, in order to better study/apply information, you need to be able to comprehend it and recall it. So memorization/comprehension are fundamental skills worth enhancing as they increase your efficiency/speed of learning. And part of that process can certainly include practicing new memory skills.

The Book of Daniel noted that knowledge will increase in the end times and we live at a time of a knowledge explosion in many respects so these skills are very useful now. I am a big believer in lifelong learning and chided my friend who recently said she was too old to learn. I told her that the mind is like a muscle and if you don't exercise it you will stagnate.

Lastly, I believe there are benefits of taking time to memorizing Scripture and some of them are given below.

:Fine, then do so. Please inform me ''after'' you have completed this task. --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 09:28, 1 April 2015 (EDT)
::Actually, after I finished my university education, I took some college courses and in one of them I memorized Scripture. So I already started the process.

::Second, there is an additional thing I wanted to say: "Overlearning is the repeated practice of a skill or study of material to further strengthen memory and performance. Rehearsal enhances performance past the initial point of learning because the neural processes involved become more efficient and recall speed improves."[http://www.alleydog.com/glossary/definition.php?term=Overlearning] One of the key concepts of learning is learning through repetition and memorization involves repetition. It also causes saturation of learning and saturation can increase your depth of understanding and saturation of learning [http://www.ez3dbiz.com/ez_creativity.html has been linked to increased creativity] (You can better creatively apply your knowledge).

::Another key point is that at times of temptation, it helps if something is second nature to you. Martial artists repeat movements over and over and over and so things become second nature. So they can perform movements without even thinking about it so to speak. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 18:47, 1 April 2015 (EDT)

:::Good for you. I just think that learning a language is a more enriching task. --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 06:49, 2 April 2015 (EDT)

=== Benefits of memorizing Scripture ===

*[http://sukofamily.org/?p=1434 Benefits of memorizing Scripture]

*[http://www.examiner.com/article/the-benefits-of-memorizing-scripture Benefits of memorizing Scripture - Examiner]

*[http://www.weirdunsocializedhomeschoolers.com/scripture-memory/ Scripture memory box]

I agree with this person who said:

"The perceived value of memorizing scripture, or of memorizing anything for that matter, has fallen on hard times in recent years. Trends in education, and the pervasive belief that memorization is simply a rote practice that has no real impact on true learning, have relegated memorization to an outdated, dusty tool. However, in dismissing the value of memorization, we have lost the practice of internalizing things that are worth keeping and pondering.

Memorization, whether of poetry, a favorite quote or of Scripture, allows you to reflect on the meaning of words repeatedly and in depth. The ultimate goal of memorization is not to regurgitate a thought for the sake of that accomplishment alone, but to allow the words to affect your thinking and your perspective. People who memorize poetry tend to do so because the words carry message that resonates with them."[http://www.examiner.com/article/the-benefits-of-memorizing-scripture]

"Scripture Memorization Works:

Every time we think a thought, including when we memorize and meditate on scripture, our brains are changed. Dr. Amen, a clinical neuroscientist and psychiatrist and author of Making a Good Brain Great, says, “Every time you have a thought your brain releases chemicals. ... Your thoughts
... positive or negative ... make you feel good or they make you feel bad.” What you read and what you say to yourself, changes ever so slightly the neuropathways of your brain and that, in turn, influences your attitudes, behaviors, and emotions. Scripture memorization allows you to choose words and images that shape your mind and heart. It works in us even when we are not conscious of its doing so." For more information please see: [http://mcswichita.net/Teaching/006-ScriptureMemorization&Meditation-JT.pdf SCRIPTURE MEMORIZATION & MEDITATION by By Pastor Jerry Truex] [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 08:21, 1 April 2015 (EDT)

== Recent news report about creationism in Germany/Europe ==

[http://questionevolution.blogspot.com/2015/03/science-nordic-5-year-study-shows.html Science Nordic: Creationism is spreading in Europe/Germany]

:''Yes, my evolutionist friends, even in the atheistic Netherlands some schools are now teaching creationism! '' You don't know much about the Netherlands, do you? --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 15:43, 15 March 2015 (EDT)

== Spoiling for a fight? ==

No, I'm not. I've avoided Conservapedia for a couple of weeks, and I tried not to get sucked into any debates. But - as usual - I cannot let Andy Schlafly's ''"attempts"'' on translating the Bible (see [[User_talk:Aschlafly#The_Son_of_God]] and [[Son of Man]]) stand without protest. So, here I am again, going through my watchlist, addressing points I've missed (perhaps a little bit more curmudgeonly than necessary, but I'm irked). --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 17:06, 15 March 2015 (EDT)
:Do you think you are going to change Schlafly's view on the authorship of Hebrews or that he will cause you to adopt his view? Do you think you are going to change other people's minds about this matter? When I saw your recent edits (including the talk page comment directed towards me), the most reasonable explanation is "spoiling for a fight". [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 17:50, 15 March 2015 (EDT)
:::When I started at Conservapedia four years ago, I thought that one could have interesting discussion on Biblical Greek and gain insights by joined translations. Unfortunately, now I have to admit that this was just wishful thinking: it is the other way round. At first, you have an '''''insight''''' by A. Schlafly, and then, everything, even God's Word is bend to fit the insight.
::"Fourth, argumentative. This one.....some folks might argue about (get it?). Germans can find a thousand things to argue about. It could be one guy planting shrubs of a disliked nature that the neighbor can't stand. It could be the act of cranking your car for two minutes in winter to warm it up. One minute of such a cranking would be tolerated, but not two, and thus inviting an argument sooner or later."[http://schnitzelrepublic.blogspot.com/2010/07/seven-personality-traits-of-german.html] - taken from the essay'' The Seven Personality Traits of a German'' posted at the blog Schnitzel Republic. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 17:53, 15 March 2015 (EDT)
:::Spouting national stereotypes is certainly an excellent way to calm down your interlocutors.
:::But yes, when I spot litter, I pick it up. When I see a rubbish translation based only on a dubious insight, I argue against it. I won't get a clean world, I won't improve the CBP very much (it is just abysmal). But I try. ''Deutsch sein heißt, eine Sache um ihrer selbst willen zu tun.'' --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 18:12, 15 March 2015 (EDT)

== Categories again ==

This page is so fascinating! I hadn't looked at it for a while.

I have made a small edit to [[Power plant]], in keeping with my vision of categories for electrical things. See [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Alternating_Current_%28AC%29&action=historysubmit&diff=1146349&oldid=1146319] and [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Direct_current&action=historysubmit&diff=1146350&oldid=1146317] for what I've done on those two articles. Feel free to change or revert, of course; I trust your judgment.

My attempts to clean up the mess, both in content and in categories, that is the electricity/electronics material here at CP, got bogged down, of course. So much to do! I may tackle some more of it when I have the time. Much of that mess is ''not'' due to TAR.

In answer to your metaphysical question, he may have taken his own advice, bought as many guns as he could afford (that's in one of his pages somewhere), cashing in his life savings to do it, and moved to someplace in the Northwestern United States, with only his amateur radio rig for communications. As far as I know, Conservapedia has no amateur-radio-connected editing server.

Always a pleasure to talk with you. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] 12:14, 7 May 2015 (EDT)

== re: User:TheAmericanRedoubt ==

You wrote: [[User:TheAmericanRedoubt]] has edited Conservapedia two months ago for the last time. Will he be back? What happens to the plethora of red links in the meantime? --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 06:38, 29 May 2015 (EDT)
=== My response ===
I got in contact with [[User:TheAmericanRedoubt]] and he is going to start editing Conservapedia again probably sometime in September of 2015. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 01:22, 2 June 2015 (EDT)
:That is a little bit unsettling... --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 20:27, 7 June 2015 (EDT)
::He's on some kind of secret project/mission that only Cons knows about. See [[Conservapedia:Community_Portal#The_American_Redoubt]]. I'm sure that, when he comes back, his collegial and cooperative attitude will be such that we will all welcome him back as a valued collaborator. So please be patient. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] 21:13, 7 June 2015 (EDT)
:::Try to think of all the red links that will be filled in. The red links being filled in will cause the wiki to look more tidy and orderly - more germanic. :) If he does a superb job, then the level of tidiness and orderliness added to the wiki may even surpass germanic levels and reach Swiss levels.[http://www.dw.de/germans-and-hygiene/a-16459423] :) [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 21:50, 7 June 2015 (EDT)
::::[Just back from washing my hands—seriously!—after reading the above article.] I'm not planning to wait for the end of his secret mission. In fact, I've been working at cleaning up the ridiculously disordered redlinks, inappropriate categories, and just general horribleness that TAR has left behind. After reading the above essay, I can't believe that TAR is German or Swiss. More like (no, I won't put in an obnoxious national stereotype here.) And I intend to continue cleaning it up. I trust that AugustO will set an example for all of us. I'm only a small part German. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] 22:13, 7 June 2015 (EDT)
SamHB, clean up you user page which is at [[User:SamHB|SamHB]]. Try to make it more like [[User:Conservative|User: Conservatism]] in its crisp design, simplistic beauty and austere nature. :) Start by removing all the unsightly "crossed out" font on your user page.

"Let everyone sweep in front of his own door, and the whole world will be clean." - Johann Wolfgang Goethe. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 22:42, 7 June 2015 (EDT)

:Well played, Cons! OK, I will see what I can do about cleaning that up. The multivariable calculus stuff is way obsolete. But maybe it should stay, as a permanent record of my life here. And maybe the crossed out "I can help you; on second thought I can't" garbage should go. But my user page will never have the "crisp design, simplistic beauty and austere nature" (you ''do'' have a way with words!) of yours, for a few reasons:
:*My life at CP, like my life in the real world, is complex and messy. As an example, I've been blocked about 13 times, depending on exactly how you count. (All of them wrongly, but I'm not going to argue that.) It's only in the last couple of years that I seem to have earned enough respect from the admins (yes, even you!) that I don't feel like a criminal all the time. It really does affect one's outlook, and hence one's user page.
:*I don't have the luxury of locking both my user page and talk page, and living behind a cloak of simplicity. You put all your entropy in the various subpages of your user page, like all the music stuff. Doing that just isn't for me.
:*And, of course, you put all your entropy in the "atheism and canoe paddles" articles. (Quick challenge: Come up with a witty reply. Extra points if you can do it without referring to being up the creek without one.)
:*I put my efforts into clean, elegant, and correct pages in mainspace, especially in the math and science area. That's what all the home-schoolers are going to come for, right?
Be that as it may, I will think about making my user page cleaner. But not cleaner than the reality of my life.
:[[User:SamHB|SamHB]] 23:40, 7 June 2015 (EDT)
::SamHB, a [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Conservapedia:Atheism_Project&curid=132852&diff=1157706&oldid=1157355 message] for you. June/July of 2015 are going to be very BAD months for atheism. TERRIBLE things will befall its kingdom. The [[Desecularization|TREND]] is clear and the [http://conservativetriumphs.blogspot.com/2015/03/attention-atheists-google-trends.html writing is on the wall]. Weep and wail militant atheists. Atheism is doomed! [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 00:08, 8 June 2015 (EDT)

== How dare you to call your attempts "translation"? ==

<div style="margin: 10px; padding: 10px; background-color: #CCC">
<small>'''''content created by User:AugustO - subject to Conservapedia's copyright policy'''''</small>

'''How dare you to call your attempts "translation"?'''

Andy, I have criticized your lack of knowledge already above in the section [[#The Son of God]]. Reading [[Essay:Calming the Storm]], I see that you are not even capable of recognizing that εἶπεν is a conjugated form of λέγω (''"... But "λέγω" -- the Greek term used for said in some versions -- does not appear in the Greek above"''). This shows such a lack of basic skills in even reading Greek! And at the same time you are [[Linguistic Bias of Bible Translations|implying]] that you have a special understanding of the "scientific terminology" which was used in the Bible, giving you perhaps a better understanding of the text than [[James Strong]] had!

''How dare you to call your actions a translation?'' You are not able to translate one verse from scratch! A more honest term would be "inspired ramblings"! --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 05:54, 21 June 2015 (EDT)

'''Plea'''

Andy, please, please, address [[Talk:Essay:Calming_the_Storm#Andy.2C_it.27s_your_essay.2C_correct_your_mistakes.2C_please|these problems]]! Please! --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 15:15, 21 June 2015 (EDT)</div>

== an article relating to religion in Germany ==

I thought you might be interested in this article:

[http://www.the-american-interest.com/2015/06/03/are-evangelicals-winning-the-world/ Are Evangelicals Winning the World? Why are parts of Germany formerly under the enforced secularism of the Communist party rediscovering charismatic religion?] by [[Peter L. Berger]], ''The American Interest'', June 3, 2015 [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 21:46, 2 July 2015 (EDT)

== Just checking :-) ==

*x: <math>x</math>
*x^2: <math>x^2</math>
*x^2_1: <math>x^2_1</math>
*\frac{x}{y}: <math>\frac{x}{y}</math>
*\hat{x}: <math>\hat{x}</math>

--[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] ([[User talk:AugustO|talk]]) 09:43, 17 August 2015 (EDT)

:Bravo! It works!!! Praise the [[Lord]].--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 11:37, 17 August 2015 (EDT)

::Thanks for your work: ''hilf Dir selbst, dann hilft Dir Gott!'' --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] ([[User talk:AugustO|talk]]) 14:22, 17 August 2015 (EDT)

== Problem fixed ==

Thanks for alerting me to the problem via the block. The problem has been fixed.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 14:11, 17 August 2015 (EDT)

:It felt strange, but I'm glad that it worked :-) --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] ([[User talk:AugustO|talk]]) 14:23, 17 August 2015 (EDT)

::Clever. Thanks again.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 14:27, 17 August 2015 (EDT)

== Wonderful ==

Wonderful improvements to the "span" locations!!!!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 14:30, 30 August 2015 (EDT)
:You're welcome! --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] ([[User talk:AugustO|talk]]) 14:33, 30 August 2015 (EDT)

== Quick note ==

I misread the message by GregG on Andy's talk page. Had I read the message more carefully, I would have let Andy respond without any commentary from myself.

I do agree with you about vaccinations not causing autism. At the same time, I do think it is good that the public puts pressure on the medical community and the government so vaccines get safer over time. Given the VA Hospital scandal in the USA and health care scandals in other Western democracies, I think competition and public pressure is good for the medical sector of economies. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 13:18, 3 November 2015 (EST)
:Thanks - I tend to agree --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] ([[User talk:AugustO|talk]]) 08:37, 16 November 2015 (EST)

== The American Redoubt as a Wikipedian ==

<div style="margin: 10px; padding: 10px; background-color: #CCC">
<small>'''''content created by User:TheAmericanRedoubt and User:AugustO - subject to Conservapedia's copyright policy'''''</small>

'''This user is a Wikipedian'''

Does anybody know which handle he uses at wikipedia? Perhaps one could contact him over there... --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] ([[User talk:AugustO|talk]]) 17:31, 15 November 2015 (EST)
:: I am not a Wikipedian. [[User:TheAmericanRedoubt|TheAmericanRedoubt]] ([[User talk:TheAmericanRedoubt|talk]]) 11:08, 23 January 2016 (EST)
:So, your status changed since [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=User:TheAmericanRedoubt&diff=next&oldid=1126866 Dec 28, 2014]. Was there a conflict about categorizing? ;-) --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] ([[User talk:AugustO|talk]]) 15:05, 23 January 2016 (EST)
:: Thanks for the reminder to remove that tag. [[User:TheAmericanRedoubt|TheAmericanRedoubt]] ([[User talk:TheAmericanRedoubt|talk]]) 20:35, 23 January 2016 (EST)
</div>

== re: Dinesh D'Souza material removal from one of the articles I created ==

I used to be a somewhat of a fan of Dinesh. But after his firing from King's College and his recent political activities which he got jailed for, I have soured on him. I now use his material when no other source is available (so very sparingly). [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 14:36, 29 February 2016 (EST)

:When you start deleting content, there is always the possibility that one of your collective went rogue: therefore, you should explain such deletions! --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] ([[User talk:AugustO|talk]]) 16:17, 4 March 2016 (EST)

== re: Conservatve2 account ==

I created the Conservatve2 account because I was at a friend's residence and I did not have the password for User: Conservative readily available. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 08:36, 23 March 2016 (EDT)

== Silence speaks volumes ==

The phrase is "Silence speaks volumes" in the plural. The multiple "volumes" being referred to are the volumes of a large encyclopedia. Thank you for giving me an opportunity to, ummmm, clean that up.

Your use of the idiom "went missing" was exactly on target. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 17:58, 7 April 2016 (EDT)

:"Silence speaks volumes" or "the lady doth protest too much, methinks" - it's always one or the other.... --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] ([[User talk:AugustO|talk]]) 11:17, 8 April 2016 (EDT)

== re: German comments ==

Recently, I listened to some music by Beethoven. After listening to the music, I thought of the various important contributions of Germans. For example, Martin Luther and the Protestant Reformation.

I know I did some good-natured ribbing about the Germans, but looking back I regret doing so.

Europe is facing a lot of problems right now. Hopefully, German Christians will help soften some the blow of some of the past mistakes Europeans committed which are starting to cause some significant problems (see: [http://evangelicalfocus.com/blogs/838/Europes_crisis_Gods_opportunity Europe’s crisis. God’s opportunity]). For example, recently I read that many Moslem immigrants to Europe are converting to Christianity (or pretending to) and some churches are taking a pro-active stance on this issue and actively engaging in evangelism efforts. [http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/05/25/why-are-so-many-muslim-refugees-in-europe-suddenly-finding-jesus.html] [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 06:54, 3 June 2016 (EDT)

:Thanks - though our views on "good-natured ribbing" differ considerably. I wish you the very best for your off-wiki endeavours which you have mentioned quite a lot over the last weeks. --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] ([[User talk:AugustO|talk]]) 03:47, 4 June 2016 (EDT)
::I think you are right about some of my comments, but I know at least my Hogan's Hero's comments were good-natured. I also know that I always had a measure of respect for Germanic culture. One of my teachers said that Germans have done some of the greatest things that humanity has ever accomplished and some of the worst things. I think that is a fair statement. When you have a culture which has a good degree of self-discipline you can put that discipline to good uses or bad uses. I do think Europe's economy would be in much worse shape if it weren't for the Germans.

::As far as contemporary Germany, I am not a fan of flooding Europe with Muslims and I think boosting Europe's fertility rate would be a better solution, but I will admit that the insisting that the new immigrants learn the native language (German) and making greater efforts at work placement is a lot better than than the French/Swedish immigration model. But with the New Year's Eve sexual assaults in Colgne, Germany tell me that this is not an optimal solution. I guess Merkel and German businessman are in a difficult situation given the labor demand for German industry. I think making greater efforts to bring in more Christian immigrants would be a better solution as far as short-term solutions.

::I think Europe needs to adopt a more Christian worldview. The agnostic professor [[Eric Kaufmann]] said that boosting fertility rates though public policy has had mixed success as far as countries that have tried this if memory serves, but I can't precisely recall all his public statements that I have heard.[https://books.google.com/books?id=E3X4CgAAQBAJ&pg=PA138&lpg=PA138&dq=%22eric+kaufmann%22+fertility+france&source=bl&ots=sjy2t0PxhI&sig=98Kda6TclDBWelMexgT5lPxsjrQ&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjoj9SAwI7NAhUJNT4KHVnjCGkQ6AEIQTAF#v=onepage&q=%22eric%20kaufmann%22%20fertility%20france&f=false]

::Anyways, the world seems to be changing at a faster pace and I expect there to be some very significant changes in the next 20-25 years or so (robotics, failing welfare states, [[desecularization]], people are probably going to be forced to retire later, increased culture clash as far as Western values and Islamic culture, etc, etc.). [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 09:55, 4 June 2016 (EDT)
I was just thinking about one of my previous statements. Given robotics and potential changes in terms of energy technology, I am not sure what is going to happen as far as the work/leisure equation. I think the world is more complex and being a futurist is a harder job as societies are going into more uncharted territories. For example, [[Gerald Celente]] of the Trends Institute has probably been one of the better futurists over his lifetime, but in recent years he has had some significant failures in terms of his predictions. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 10:07, 4 June 2016 (EDT)
==Happy New Year==
We've missed you and wish you all the best for 2017! [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 21:35, 16 January 2017 (EST)
:Thanks! Best wishes for you, too! --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] ([[User talk:AugustO|talk]]) 05:16, 18 January 2017 (EST)

== Why don't you stop working on the CBP? ==

Why don't you stop working on the CBP?

I gave some reasonable criticisms of the project including one that I just added that you probably agree with relating to original intent of the authors (see the Conservative Bible Project talk page).

The CBP has a flawed design which gets in the way of original intent being adequately expressed in the translation.

On Andy's talk page I suggested you launch a new project at Conservapedia called the Open Source Bible translation Project. Please read what I posted on Andy's talk page and respond. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 04:47, 10 April 2017 (EDT)

:If there are fake news out there, it is not enough to post the real story somewhere else - you have to confront the fake news directly. In light of [[Revelation_16-22_(Translated)#22:18|Rev 22:18-20]], this is especially important for the a fake [[Good News]].
:Furthermore, Andy's "insights" pop up as ''Gospel truth'' on articles in the main space, like [[Counterexamples to Relativity]] and [[Epistle to the Hebrews]]. --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] ([[User talk:AugustO|talk]]) 04:56, 10 April 2017 (EDT)
::Why not agree to launching a Open Source Bible translation project at Conservapedia and periodically criticize the CBP? You are never going to like the final product of the CBP. And you are never going to like co-laboring with Mr. Schlafly on the CBP.

::And if your criticism of the CBP of it being a translation that is designed to cater to the opinions of Mr. Schlafly is a sincere and valid criticism, then why would you want to work on a project which will never have wide appeal? [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 05:20, 10 April 2017 (EDT)

*What use is it to splinter the small resources even more? And ''I'''m aware of my limitations: a story written by me in a foreign language would not appeal to an American reader.
*The interesting thing: I'm learning very much due to the CBP, e.g., I never before thought about word frequencies in the Bible other than as a mean to efficiently learn the vocabulary. I take my time to look thoroughly into things, and this way I have benefited from this ill-guided project, improved my vocabulary and my general knowledge of Greek over various time periods.
*I'm aware that I could get minuscule changed to the project by intense flattering. Unfortunately, that is not my way. So, I want to make my points so crystal clear that all but one understand my position.
--[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] ([[User talk:AugustO|talk]]) 05:52, 10 April 2017 (EDT)
::OK. I think I am going to obtain the newest version of the NASB. I did learn more about Bible versions as a result of the CBP. In addition, I don't think I will engage in anymore criticism of the CBP. I don't think my criticism will be received and acted on. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 06:16, 10 April 2017 (EDT)
:::*NASB? Good for you - it this the version you intend to [[#Benefits_of_memorizing_Scripture|memorize]]?
:::*You should keep an eye on the CBP - AFAIK, all editors who tried there to egg Andrew Schlafly on later turned out to be trolls.
:::*As you do not want to appear to endorse the project, I think you should register your protest from time to time.
:::--[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] ([[User talk:AugustO|talk]]) 06:49, 10 April 2017 (EDT)
Yes, now that I know the pros and cons of the various versions, I have picked the NASB as the version I wish to memorize.

Second, I set some goals for the remainder of my life which will be very challenging to meet. I don't think I will have the luxury of keeping an eye on the CBP. Fully registering my criticisms, which I have done via the CBP talk page, will have to suffice. It comes down to priorities. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 09:42, 10 April 2017 (EDT)
:I have been an outspoken critic of the CBP and I thought all my suggestions would be ignored. But today I was surprised by Andy taking one of my suggestions and altering one of the 10 guidelines of the CBP project. I took it upon myself to implement another change in the guidelines which I hope will stick as this issue was the second most grievous problem with the project. My suggestions are very sensible. I do endeavor to be a reasonable person and not be an unreasonable nitpicker. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 13:22, 10 April 2017 (EDT)

== IRC ==

Hello,<br />
After some discussion (on [[User_talk:DavidB4#Conservapedia_IRC_channel|my talk page]] and [[User_talk:Aschlafly#IRC|Andy's]]) it has been decided that I start an [[Internet Relay Chat]] channel for Conservapedia, since our old one has been dead since 2009. It is now registered and somewhat set up. I don't know if you use IRC or are interested in doing so, but anyone with block privileges on Conservapedia can also get block privileges on the new IRC channel. Unfortunately, IRC accounts are deleted after 30 days of being unused, so unless you plan on using the IRC at least once a month, there is probably not much point in registering. In any case, feel free to try it out--if you account gets deleted, we can always make another one later. If you are interested, please let me know!<br />
The IRC channel is: #conservapedia @irc.accessIRC.net<br />
Let me know if you have any questions or need anything else, also! --[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">David B</font>]] <sup>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</sup> 15:41, 11 April 2017 (EDT)

== Hey ==

We never spoke on a talk page, but I think you're the best Bible translator on this site, the very best. Don't let Conservative get away with any of his petty grammar remarks.--[[User:Abcqwe|Nathan]] ([[User talk:Abcqwe|talk]]) 16:33, 4 June 2017 (EDT)

== You’re Cool ==

Again, just sayin'. [[User:DaveSG|DaveSG]] ([[User talk:DaveSG|talk]]) 01:14, 24 February 2018 (EST)

User talk:AugustO

2018-02-24T06:14:28Z

DaveSG: /* Coolio */ new section

{{useful links}}

==User:PetyrB has been blocked ==

User:PetyrB has been blocked. He was Markman. It will be much harder for him to give a repeat performance. And if he manages to give a repeat performance, it will be very short lived. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 17:14, 7 July 2014 (EDT)
:He blocked everyone except me. I feel left out. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] 22:23, 7 July 2014 (EDT)
::I wasn't blocked either. [[User:GregG|GregG]] 22:58, 7 July 2014 (EDT)
:::I notice that he blocked you three times last year. Perhaps he's mellowed. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] 00:09, 8 July 2014 (EDT)

Becoming an editor of good standing may become harder for someone like him, but I fear that it will be next to impossible for an honest newcomer! Without a strong motivation (for me, it is the my outrage about the disservice the CBP does to the Bible - and a bewilderment when reading about physics), you won't have the dedication to overcome the obstacles into which you are running here at Conservapedia: It took me quite an effort to find a way to appeal my first blocks!

It's at Catch-22 situation: If you make errors - as any newbie will do - you get blocked, and most probably just quit. Newcomers who don't make errors are most probably reincarnations who learned the ropes in a couple of earlier lives. --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 17:41, 23 July 2014 (EDT)

== Short note ==

If you ever get banned again, let me know at [[User:Conservative/mail|HERE]] and I will unblock you. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 13:57, 11 July 2014 (EDT)
:If he is blocked he will not be able to notify you. He will have been blocked surely? There really does need to be a better way to contact admins here in the case of parodists like markman blocking people imo. [[User:Davidspencer|Davidspencer]] 14:27, 11 July 2014 (EDT)
::He can create another user account solely for the purpose of contacting me at another IP address.
:::Ok, I will remember that in case markman comes back. He previously banned me several times as well [[User:Davidspencer|Davidspencer]] 14:41, 11 July 2014 (EDT)
::::Fine, just be patient. I am not sure how often the mailbox will be checked, but it will definitely be checked from time to time. And you can always contact other admins too. It makes sense to mitigate any damage caused by a rogue blocker whose blocking privileges are short lived. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 14:50, 11 July 2014 (EDT)
::From the Conservapedia commandments page: "Administrators have discretion to act on matters not specifically mentioned here, such as vandalism and sockpuppets."[http://www.conservapedia.com/Conservapedia:Commandments] Common sense discretion can be exercised by Conservapedia administrators. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 14:39, 11 July 2014 (EDT)

==''Has hope he will be more amiable should he return''==

User:Conservative, you blocked me arbitrarily for three days ("''needlessly being quarrelsome''"), and then you unblocked me, equally arbitrarily. Are you really thinking that this leads to ''amiability''? No, it stirred my curiosity. I reread our exchange at [[Talk:Generalized linear model]] and digged a little deeper into the matters discussed:

<div style="margin: 10px; padding: 10px; background-color: #CCC">
''content created by User:Conservative User:AugustO and subject to Conservapedia's copyright policy''
Why was this page deleted? From my personal files:
:AugustO, I thought you were merely whining. You said you wanted the article improved, yet were unwilling to do the work to improve it. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 18:42, 23 July 2014 (EDT)
::How does your petty insult ("whining") justify the deletion of this talk page? Below I showed my willingness to improve the sorry state of this article by collaborating with you! --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 07:46, 24 July 2014 (EDT)
:::I may write articles on [[Correlation and dependence]] and [[Spearman's rank correlation coefficient]] and [[Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient]] in the future. By the way, [[Vox Day]] wrote an interesting article entitled [http://voxday.blogspot.ca/2014/02/statistical-misleadings.html Statistical misleadings]. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 13:51, 24 July 2014 (EDT)

*"I may write articles on [[Correlation and dependence]] and [[Spearman's rank correlation coefficient]] and [[Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient]] in the future." Given your history of announcements (Project 200+, Question Evolution brochure for high-school-pupils, etc.), I'll be very surprised when this happens!
*Regina Nuzzo's [http://www.nature.com/news/scientific-method-statistical-errors-1.14700 "Scientific method: Statistical errors"] is indeed an interesting article.
*Still no explanation for the deletion.
--[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 16:34, 24 July 2014 (EDT)
</div>

While you still haven't answer my question about the deletion of the talk-page, I came to the conclusion that my mentioning of the ''Question evolution! book for middle school students'' triggered the deletion of the revisions and my block. You seem to be on an Orwellian campaign to erase this book from memory, a campaign which bodes ill for the trustworthiness of Conservapedia. --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 18:42, 27 July 2014 (EDT)

This is too complicated for an outsider to follow. The important point is that AugustO, who earned the respect of many CP editors is back, and I welcome his contributions. I hope that we can all learn to live together in content-creation-harmony. [[User:Wschact|Wschact]] 19:38, 27 July 2014 (EDT)

:Harmony is important, but honesty, too - especially at a ''trustworthy encyclopedia''. --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 19:45, 27 July 2014 (EDT)

== Project ==

Would you like to collaborate with other editors on a wiki project to help Conservapedia be a strong resource for a given topic.

The topic could be decided by the editors participating.

If you are interested, please go to: [http://www.conservapedia.com/Conservapedia:Community_Portal#A_project_for_active_editors_to_collaborate_on The collaborative project]. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 22:02, 25 December 2014 (EST)

:I'm a little surprised by this "project". A wiki should ''per se'' be a collaborative project: I tend to jump on subjects which pique my interest (without an additional layer of administration.) Major obstacles for collaboration on Conservapedia's articles are for me:
:*Some sysops think they own certain articles, and will keep up their preferred version without engaging in a meaningful discussion on the talk-page (see e.g., [[E=mc²]]). Some sysops even prevent editing of their pet articles by locking them - I think that you, User:Conservative, are the main culprit when it comes to this tactic!
:*Collaboration prerequisites a certain degree of maturity and honesty. You, User:Conservative, don't have at least one of these characteristics: for example, the "we are many" - charade is just infantile. And how do I know that you won't create new dummy accounts to manipulate discussions? You haven't come clean about [[User:Historybuff]], therefore I don't know whether you will take such crooked steps again.
:--[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 08:11, 28 December 2014 (EST)
::Are you claiming that merely one person is editing using the User: Conservative account? If so, considering your insistence that merely one person is editing using the account, what proof and evidence do you have for this claim? Your little tirade here is not impressive. Also, if you are such a big fan of collaboration, why can't the totality of "User: Conservative"'s edits be a team effort? If "User:Conservative" allows a conservative friend or friends to also use the account, what is that to you? None of the Conservapedia Commandments forbids the sharing of an account.

::Next, a very small percentage of my/our articles are locked in terms of editing them.

::Furthermore, the Conservapedia wiki article protect tab was created to be used! [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 00:12, 31 December 2014 (EST)

:::It's just common sense:
:::*If you are many, your ''manual of style'' must be epic: your way of writing is quite unique. Furthermore, it is quite inconceivable that there is more than one editor who shows such a consistent inability to use the preview button (''it was created to be used'').
:::*In your interactions with your fellow sysops, you are treated as a single person.
:::*Your medical history: every time you excuse your actions with a lack of sleep, etc., it is the story of a single person.
:::Hey, it is the internet: You could be a group of medically enhanced Rottweilers, and until your account is closed by your local dog-catcher, we cannot be sure... But for me, you failed the [[Turing test]] on multi-personality.
:::All of the above is not very important: what counts is that you (and your friends/sysops) know how many you are. You know whether you wish to try to deceive your fellow editors.
:::It is the same as with your dummy account of [[User:Historybuff]]: you know whether you acted immorally. For me, it just seems so - and in the internet, appearance is quite important, as we are not able to prove much.
:::--[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 02:40, 31 December 2014 (EST)
AugustO, as far as the inconceivability of User: Conservative being multiple editors, your lack of imagination and [http://schnitzelrepublic.blogspot.com/2010/07/seven-personality-traits-of-german.html germanic stubbornness] is not a serious objection.

Second, how would you know if one person or persons using the User: Conservative was using the preview button? Have you done an analysis of the edits concerning this matter? How would you know if persons using the User: Conservative do not use the preview account? How would you know the reason or reasons why "User: Conservativedom" sometimes does not use the preview button?

"User: Conservative" has edited during the day and night. And the illness affecting one of the editors of the User: Conservative account has largely been conquered. For example, a full eight hours of sleep occurred today for the person affected.

Do you believe that one person largely wrote the [[homosexuality]] and the [[Atheist actions against homosexuals]] article (the title of the article was originally Atheist persecution against homosexuals" if memory serves, but one editor within "User: Conservativedom" objected to this title) and that one person wrote both articles. The article [[Atheist actions against homosexuals]] was a shock to those obsessed with the User: Conservative account and the footnoting style is different than the [[homosexuality]] article as well. What are your thoughts on this matter?

Have you read C.S. Lewis's article entitled [http://textualcriticism.scienceontheweb.net/SUPLEM/CSLewis.html Modern Theology and Biblical Criticism]? It should give you pause on psychologically analyzing a writer/writers and his/her/their intentions, etc. etc.

Why don't you ask User: Karajou if User: Conservative is merely one editor? We can guarantee you that User: Karajou will not claim that User: Conservative is merely one editor. Why? Because User: Karajou was informed that more than one person has edited using the User: Conservative account. And User: Karajou has checkuser and could certainly verify this matter.

In addition, we know you were successfully rebuffed about the "historybuff" matter and that you most certainly do not have the moral high ground. You did not prove the identity/identities of the mysterious historybuff. And you acknowledged (after you shown to be acting in an unbecoming manner) that no Conservapedia rule was broken if a person using the historybuff account was an Conservapedia admin (Of course, the same would apply if persons using the account were admins) so you failed again!

Furthermore, has the User: Conservative account edited the [[Sun Tzu]] article? If so, then at least one editor with User: Conservativedom understands the strategy/tactic of stealth and keeping the opposition guessing (User: Conservativedom does not agree with all of Sun Tzu's actions/writings by the way). And we know that the left/liberals such as Alinsky use the tactic of attacking individuals before attacking institutions/groups (Rule #12 of [http://www.bestofbeck.com/wp/activism/saul-alinskys-12-rules-for-radicals Alinsky's rules for radicals]). But, User: Conservative is more than one editor! [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 15:04, 31 December 2014 (EST)
:By the way, German evolutionists did not think that American creationists would land on the beaches of Normandy. But that is exactly what happened!!! (And [[Dwight D. Eisenhower|Dwight D. Eisenhower]] appears to have been a creationist [http://www.icr.org/article/presidential-support-for-creationism/]).

::''"We can guarantee you that User: Karajou will not claim that User: Conservative is merely one editor. Why? Because User: Karajou was informed that more than one person has edited using the User: Conservative account."''
::When did this happen? In the first months of your membership? I doubt it, as it seems unlikely that Andy would bestow such extensive rights as "checkuser" and "administrator" on a communal account.
::Even when I started editing in 2011, you hadn't come out as a multitude, that happened during the last one or two years. So, assuming that there is more than one user at your account, he/she/them were invited to do so somewhat after 2011. Am I right?
::This is quite troubling: your weren't even able to lobby for upload-rights for [[User:TheAmericanRedoubt]] until now, but you gave some person access to "checkuser", "administrator" and "oversight" rights! Either this person never had an account here at Conservapedia, or it had an account before, but wasn't seen worthy to get these rights which you decided to share.
::I would call this ''nepotism'', and it is impossible to square it with Conservapedia's claim of being a ''meritocracy'':
::::'''''Conservapedia is a meritocracy. Administrators are selected as needed from the best of the best contributors, there is no popularity contest to determine promotion, and nominations not accepted. By your own work shall you be known. '''''
::But that is just a [[Conservapedia:Guidelines|guideline]] - and you are not so awfully keen of them, like:
::::'''''Conservapedia does not allow "sockpuppet" accounts or unaccountable anonymous proxy use. '''''
::''In addition, we know you were successfully rebuffed about the "historybuff" matter and that you most certainly do not have the moral high ground. You did not prove the identity/identities of the mysterious historybuff. And you acknowledged (after you shown to be acting in an unbecoming manner) that no Conservapedia rule was broken if a person using the historybuff account was an Conservapedia admin (Of course, the same would apply if persons using the account were admins) so you failed again! ''
::You were [[User:Historybuff]]. The little incident of your intermingled comments at the main talk page made this obvious. [[User:Karajou]] could prove it. Thereby '''you broke a rule (or do you claim that it is just a ''guideline'' and doesn't apply to you?)'''
::--[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 03:39, 2 January 2015 (EST)
:::Why are you assuming that User: Conservative may be merely two persons? Why not more?

:::The User: Conservative account will continue to be shrouded in mystery to you - a black box of conservatism!

:::As far as the meritocracy issue, the User: Conservative account produces articles that are useful and of interest to the public, well-researched, accurate and scrupulously footnoted. The articles are some of the most popular articles at Conservapedia. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 04:27, 2 January 2015 (EST)

::::*The problems which I mentioned above just increase if there are more than two editors
::::*So, you decided what merits being "administrator" or having "checkuser" rights? Isn't that the kind of ''nomination'' which is explicitly frowned upon in the guidelines?
::::*How many socks are there for your account? I repeat, running User:Historybuff was against Conservapedia's guidelines, and the smokescreen which you put up here won't change this fact.
::::--[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 08:19, 2 January 2015 (EST)
高深莫測 [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 21:29, 2 January 2015 (EST)
:There is nothing ''inscrutable'' (?) about it. You are just unwilling to take responsibility for your actions. --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 01:53, 3 January 2015 (EST)
::The User: Conservative account was given admin status before the guidelines page was created. The puts a spanner in your germanic stubbornness, your germanic argumentativeness and your germanic obsession with tradition/rules, Herr O![http://schnitzelrepublic.blogspot.com/2010/07/seven-personality-traits-of-german.html] Secondly, Conservapedia's policies/rules were not broken. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 02:10, 3 January 2015 (EST)

:::You created your sock [[User:Historybuff]] on Aug 2, 2014, violating the guideline which is in place since years:
::::'''''Conservapedia does not allow "sockpuppet" accounts or unaccountable anonymous proxy use. '''''
:::--[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 02:54, 3 January 2015 (EST)
First socks, then shoes. Have you ever examined Conservapedia's logo? In America, one is presumed innocent until proven guilty. You never demonstrated that an editor (or editors) of the User: Conservative account edited using the historybuff account.

Second, the point is moot as the former Admin Rob Smith made an appellation to a guideline which affects matters as can be seen [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Conservapedia:Sockpuppet&diff=892529&oldid=890286 HERE]. And Admin Joaquin Martinez has edited Conservapedia using various accounts and Aschlafly has never once expressed displeasure about this matter. So your quest to prevail in this matter is futile. It is quite impossible that a guideline was broken in this matter!

Feel free to engage in [[last wordism]] at juncture. :)[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 03:09, 3 January 2015 (EST)

:*Do you deny that [[User:Historybuff]] was your sock?
:*Joaquín Martínez doesn't try to hide his identity by using various accounts.
:*I stick to the commandments and guidelines, thank you.
:Feel free to run away. --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 03:15, 3 January 2015 (EST)
::AugustO, you remind me of the person who became upset with me when I performed the en passant move in a chess game and captured his pawn. He was not familiar with the en passant rule and claimed a rule was being broken by me. Prove your allegation and ignorance of Conservapedia's rules is no excuse. Checkmate, Herr O!!! Once again, you battled against the User: Conservative account and was easily and effortlessly defeated! [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 03:32, 3 January 2015 (EST)
:::At least you admit that [[User:Historybuff]] was your pawn. Using it was just not a ''clever move'', but an act of deceit. --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 03:37, 3 January 2015 (EST)
No admission was made. Prove your allegation and know the rules before you claim a rule was broken! [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 03:41, 3 January 2015 (EST)

== Happy New Year ==

The editors of the User: Conservative account wish you a happy new year. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 01:06, 2 January 2015 (EST)
==Unblock==
Dear AugustO,
Thank you for unblocking me. At the same time, TAR also blocked my IP address. If you have access to the block log, could you please unblock that IP as well? Many thanks. Cheers, [[User:Wschact|Wschact]] 15:59, 11 January 2015 (EST)
:Thanks, [[User:Wschact|Wschact]] 17:43, 11 January 2015 (EST)
:: "Cheers?" I lived and worked in England and France for 4 years. I very rarely hear Americans say "Cheers". In my limited experience, usually Brits and Australians say it. You Wschact have said it a lot here on CP. Of course, nothing at all wrong with having British or Australian editors here -- on the contrary, the diversity is wonderful. However, you perhaps being from one of those two rather liberal [[gun free zone]] countries would explain your frequent anti-American [[liberal bias]] in your frequent deletions of strong conservative American and especially firearms/Second Amendment related materials. Now it makes more sense. When I lived over there I frequently heard [[NRA]] Second Amendment bashing. I guess you and other self-described, so-called "moderate" ([[RINO]] or actual [[liberal]]) [[gun control|anti-self defense]] CP editors perhaps have never seen this flyer. Please examine this [[World War II]] flyer: https://cdn2-b.examiner.com/sites/default/files/styles/image_content_width/hash/b4/c5/b4c52576c5d83bde287c5f26a41b9ba5.jpg?itok=wQk-jVj6
::http://www.examiner.com/article/would-you-send-a-gun-to-defend-a-british-home

::Perhaps [[User:Conservative]], Karajou or JPatt, when you get a chance would please upload this picture to CP under the file name "Send a gun to defend a British home.jpg"? I would like to use it in both an article and an Pro Second Amendment essay such as [[Essay:France Pays Dearly - Liberal Gun Control Laws and Gun Free Zones that Welcome Terrorists]]. Some of my essays ([[Conservapedia:Essays#Firearms_and_the_Second_Amendment]]) will be good conservative American Patriot "[[Essay:Sheepdogs_for_the_sheeple|sheepdog]]" responses to AugustO and Wshacts deletion of Second Amendment, Tenth Amendment States' rights and other firearms related conservative content. Thanks.
::[[User:TheAmericanRedoubt|TheAmericanRedoubt]] 09:38, 13 January 2015 (EST)

:::If you wish to talk with [[User:Wschact]] about your time in England, perhaps you should unblock him... --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 10:31, 13 January 2015 (EST)

== On cats and lives ==

[[User:Conservative]], please stand by your threats:
<p style="background-color:yellow">A cat only has so many lives. I think you are on your 8th. But in all of the excitement lately, maybe its your 9th. Do you fell lucky?<br>Don't count on me bailing you out if you go against Karajou and TheAmericanRedoubt. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 09:10, 13 January 2015 (EST)</p>
Well, [[User:Conservative]], I don't intend to "go against Karajou and TheAmericanRedoubt". But if anything happens to my current live, I just hope that you will do the right thing - one can dream. --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 10:30, 13 January 2015 (EST)
:Glad to hear. Good faith editors should not be pestered. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 03:20, 14 January 2015 (EST)
::I promise to do the right thing. If you are blocked unfairly, I will unblock you.

::Second, have you seen [http://www.iwebtool.com/alexa_traffic_rank?domain=creation.com&data=p&range=2y THIS]? It looks like 2015 could easily be the WORST year in the history of Darwinism! 2014 was a TERRIBLE year for evolutionism.

::Who knows what surprises [[Creation Ministries International]] and the [[Discovery Institute]] will unleash on Darwinism in 2015?!!!![[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 06:17, 15 January 2015 (EST)

:::''"I promise to do the right thing. If you are blocked unfairly, I will unblock you."'' I couldn't ask for more. Unfortunately, our view about unfair blocks differ: I think that my last block - two days for reinserting a section to [[User talk:Aschlafly]] (because ''A talk page is a user's castle!'') - was unfair, seen that deleting [[User talk:SamHB]] against the explicit wishes of the user stayed unsanctioned: see [[User_talk:Aschlafly#Deuteronomy_25:13-15]] --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 10:05, 15 January 2015 (EST)
::::You carp about others breaking rule or supposedly breaking rules. You are not above the rules! As a German, one would think you would thank me for my germanic insistence that you obey the rules also! [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 16:18, 15 January 2015 (EST)
:::::I'm sure that I'll be admonished every time I break a rule or violate a guideline of this site! What about you? --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 16:22, 15 January 2015 (EST)
::::::I don't detect a thankfulness for my correction. You still have a rebellious spirit! :) [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 16:36, 15 January 2015 (EST)

===In 19 Months AugustO submits 2 New 1 Paragraph Articles, 13 New Talk Pages; in 2 weeks 83 Related to TheAmericanRedoubt===
Since the 22nd of May 2013 ([[Special:Contributions&limit=500&target=AugustO]]) Mr. O has written 2 new 1 paragraph long articles: [[Sleswick-Holsatia]] and [[Ceslas Spicq]]. Also 1 new redirect page "article" ([[Amu]]). He has created 13 new Talk Page articles. 83 of his edits in only 2 weeks have been of my work or related to my work.
Perhaps he might want to please consider paying more attention to this [[Conservapedia:Guidelines#90.2F10_Rule]] instead of to every detail of my numerous new article and essay contributions.
The gentleman "doth protest too much, methinks". :-)
[[Patience]] is a [[virtue]] Mr. O seem to be still attempting to master.
[[User:TheAmericanRedoubt|TheAmericanRedoubt]] 18:08, 15 January 2015 (EST)

:Yes, I'm annoyed, too, by the effort it takes to get you to make the slightest corrections, like: [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Attack_on_Pearl_Harbor&curid=2830&diff=1132468&oldid=1132467 the category at Attack on Pearl Harbor]. You are still producing a plethora of red links - though you have promised otherwise - and I won't ignore this. --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 18:19, 15 January 2015 (EST)

:: I just now gave temporary 1 day block since he is ignoring numerous advice from Admin [[User:Conservative]] and continues to violate the 90/10 rule. [[User:TheAmericanRedoubt|TheAmericanRedoubt]] 18:25, 15 January 2015 (EST)

----
Well, [[User:Conservative]], time to think what the right thing to do is... Will you support this abuse of the 90/10 rule? --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 18:34, 15 January 2015 (EST)
:I receive a report that you are blocking the good faith efforts of someone who wants to create content.

:I think you are on your way to having your blocking rights removed. If that happens, a long block against you could last quite a long time. Due to my reduced activity level, I might not even notice if you are blocked for some time even if I was going to undo the block.

:I have some projects I am tackling plus I expect to be tacking two more soon so I need to catch up on things. I had an accident happen to me recently and was temporarily injured which set me behind on things. But I recovered recently so I am moving forward. So I told the editor that I cannot referee this one and to refer the matter to Karajou. Try not to pick any unnecessary fights with other editors. That is my advice. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 19:15, 15 January 2015 (EST)

::So, you would always do the right thing, if not all members of your collective were to busy... --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 19:23, 15 January 2015 (EST)
::(EC) Sorry to hear about your accident, I wish you a speedy recovery! --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 19:25, 15 January 2015 (EST)
:::Thanks on wishes for a recovery.

:::Second, User: ConservativeS (plural) fought an ideological [http://www.thefreedictionary.com/delaying+action delaying action] as far as evangelical/militant atheism caused by the fad of [[New Atheism]], but as you can see [http://www.google.com/trends/explore#q=atheist%2C%20atheism%2C%20New%20atheism%2C%20richard%20dawkins&cmpt=q&tz= HERE] and the articles [[global atheism|decline of global atheism]] and [[atheist movement|decline of the atheist movement]], the cavalry of Christian apologists, atheists shooting themselves in the foot and circumstances has arrived!!!

:::To a large degree, our work is done. Like the proverbial and mysterious, [http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0068699/ high plains drifter/gunslinger], we will be less active and largely ride off into the sunset. :) It's time to tackle new challenges. :) [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 20:09, 15 January 2015 (EST)

@AugustO: I would recommend that you accept what Conservapedia has become, and stop trying to change that. You are in great danger. User TAR, who doesn't seem to be well-versed in how this place operates, has been making extremely thinly-veiled threats against you, with the reference to 8 lives or whatever. A phrase that he seems to have picked up from Cons. Stay away. That's what I'm doing.

@Cons: (1) You might want to remind TAR that a few days ago he made an edit with the word "insidious" in the comment, referring to what he was reverting. You might want to remind him that people have gotten into a lot of trouble for using inflammatory words in edit comments. Like "hideous", if I recall correctly. (2) Perhaps you ought to be careful about saying that your work is done and that you might "ride off into the sunset" and "tackle new challenges". Someone might come along and delete your user and talk pages :-) :-) :-).

@both of you: I was delighted to see you two having a conversation on my talk page recently, and I have joined in the conversation. Feel free to come and visit me. I can't really go "outside" when my home state is described as treasonous, so I have to stay at home. I get lonely at times.

[[User:SamHB|SamHB]] 22:21, 15 January 2015 (EST)

:I'm aware of the - rather unveiled - threads, both by [[User:Conservative]] and [[User:TheAmericanRecoubt]]. Conservapedia stands at a croosroad at this moment, and for me, it is just irresponsible not to show the pitfalls of the way which is likely to be chosen.... --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 04:34, 16 January 2015 (EST)
::AugustO, if you get blocked by someone, don't count on me to look into the matter or to notice. I am less active on the wiki now and plan on being less active as well.

::In addition, lately you have become so petty and contentious, I cannot say it would trouble me if you no longer edited the wiki. No hard feelings, but that's just the way it is. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 08:26, 16 January 2015 (EST)

== FFAF is not a sock account ==

FFAF is not a sock account. Didn't the Facebook category tag for [[Freedom from Atheism Foundation]] which I removed tell you that it was not a sock? I don't think Aschalfly account will be creating a Facebook category tag anytime soon. :) [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 03:23, 14 January 2015 (EST)

:*How did [[User:Karajou]] deduce that it is in fact a sock-account? He has "checkuser"-rights, hasn't he?
:*You pride yourself with stealth and subterfuge, therefore I cannot take the things you say at face value. --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 15:57, 14 January 2015 (EST)
::Stealth is not telling untruths. A stealth fighter pilot is not lying to the radar operators of an opposing country. :)

::Karajou probably blocked the person because there was overlap with another person using the same IP for some reason.

::Third, people often think reciprocity is deserved when they do something for others. The Freedom from Atheism Foundation (FFAF) has plugged several CP atheism articles. So it is natural that someone would create an article on their foundation at CP. Given that CP covers the atheism topic with some depth, a volunteer/fan of theirs adding an article on FFAF is not unreasonable. Social media plays a significant role in social movements and they have a notable and growing social media presence. They are also financially backed by a large foundation I have been told. Furthermore, they are taking steps to grow into a much larger organization. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 16:31, 14 January 2015 (EST)

:::August0 why do you say that I am a 'sock' of Conservative ? I don't even know that that means ? [[User:FFAF|FFAF]] 09:37, 15 January 2015 (EST)
::::A sock is a sockpuppet. A sockpuppet is a duplicate user account. Don't worry about it. I am an admin and I straightened out the misunderstanding. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 16:33, 15 January 2015 (EST)
:::::This is indeed troubling. If FFAF is unduly blocked, Conservative may not notice due to time/commitments and having largely ridden off into the sunset like the Lone/Many Ranger(s). Then who will revert FFAF's unfair block? Perhaps one of the other admins should keep a particular eye out for FFAF being harassed or blocked. Incidentally, I have changed a section heading in [[Essay:Worst Liberal Movies]]. Somebody please check it; I believe it is an improvement as mentioned in [[Talk:Essay:Worst Liberal Movies]]. :) [[User:ConsMovies|ConsMovies]] 09:56, 20 January 2015 (EST)

== My Approach to the Categorization Problem ==

<div style="margin: 10px; padding: 10px; background-color: #CCC">
<small>'''''content created by User:Conservative and User:AugustO - subject to Conservapedia's copyright policy'''''</small>

Here is what I'll do when I encounter nonsensical categories:
*I will delete them - once.
*I will explain the deletion on the talk-page.
If the categories are reintroduced, so be it.

In this case, I deleted [[:Category : Science Fiction]] (already covered by [[:Category:Science Fiction Authors]]), [[:Category : Dystopian Fiction]] (covered by [[:Category : Dystopian Fiction Authors]], and [[:Category : Libertarianism]] (covered by [[:Category : Libertarian Authors]]). --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 05:41, 16 January 2015 (EST)
:Enjoy your preoccupation with category tags and your blocking powers while you can. Because they are both coming to an end! You were warned Category Tag Nazi! Your blitzkreig of category tag complaints will soon be kaput! [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 07:00, 16 January 2015 (EST)
::[[User:Conservative]], you are insulting me. --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 07:04, 16 January 2015 (EST)
:::You are being inhospitable to new editors and needlessly contentious. I have had it. I asked the owner of the website to strip you of your blocking powers. I believe Karajou agrees with me on this matter. I am not going to discuss this matter with you anymore because it is obvious that I am talking to a brick wall. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 07:32, 16 January 2015 (EST)

It will be very ironic to be punished for something which should be so uncontroversial as the first rule of categorization: ''nothing should be [in]<sup>*</sup> a category and [at the same time in]<sup>*</sup> one of its (direct) super/sub-categories.'' Andy often emphasizes the importance of logic for this site, so it is very surprising that he'll enforce (as you, [[User:Conservative]] imply) illogical categorization!

It is really not rocket-science: R. Heinlein was an author who wrote science-fiction - thereby he belongs into [[:category:Science Fiction Authors]]. He doesn't belong into [[:category:Science Fiction]], as any reader who looks at [[:category:Science Fiction]] will be surprised that he obviously doesn't fit in a subcategory....

OTOH [[:category:Best Selling Authors]] should not be a sub-category of [[:category:Science Fiction Authors]] (as it is now), as it includes authors like Glenn Beck and Agatha Christie... [[:category:Best Selling Authors]] is also at the moment a sub-category of [[:category:Liberal Authors]], implying that all best sellers are written by liberals...

New editors should understand logic, too! So, please, show a little bit more logic, and a little less aggression. --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 07:34, 16 January 2015 (EST)
:Don't think listing someone as an "African" and a "African author" or a "conservative" and "conservative author" is the end of the world. This is especially true for small categories. I abridged the manual of style. Wsacht's endless fussing which sometimes was petty was tiresome. So is yours. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 07:54, 16 January 2015 (EST)</div>
(<sup>*</sup>: edited for clarification)

--[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 08:42, 17 January 2015 (EST)
== Biblical creationism will be strong in 2015 ==

See: [[Essay: Biblical creationism will be strong in 2015]].

Stronger, higher, faster! [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 19:46, 17 January 2015 (EST)

:Hey, another prediction! Go, Team Conservative! --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 06:43, 18 January 2015 (EST)

== Jawohl? ==

Some German character traits mentioned by the the Schnitzel Republic: Stubbornness, efficiency/economical and constructive creativeness.[http://schnitzelrepublic.blogspot.com/2010/07/seven-personality-traits-of-german.html]

[[Essay: What if I fail?]]

There is a little bit of German in every great champion? Jawohl? :)

You will do your category tags right. We must have order! [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 02:34, 20 January 2015 (EST)

:One of the most childish comments I've read on Conservapeida. Shouldn't an administrator of Conservapedia, someone who represents this site, stand above mocking ordinary editors? Not everything can be excused by your relative youth: you are a member of this site for nearly eight years - so, even if you have started as a high-school pupil, you should have finished college by now. Start to act the part!

:I haven't read your essay yet: is it about failed predictions? --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 04:11, 20 January 2015 (EST)
::What failed predictions? Could you be more specific? We both know that you cannot! Define the word "soon" taking into account Christian patience and persistence and not worldly impatience! [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 04:31, 20 January 2015 (EST)
:::You are sounding like Bill Clinton: "It depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is". --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 04:36, 20 January 2015 (EST)

:::From the [http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/soon Merriam Webster]:

:::{|
|<div style="margin: 10px; padding: 10px; background-color: lightgreen">
#''obsolete'': at once : immediately
#without undue time lapse : before long [soon after sunrise]
#in a prompt manner : speedily [as soon as possible] [the sooner the better] [no sooner said than done]
#''archaic'' : before the usual time
#''in agreement with one's choice or preference'': willingly [I'd just as soon walk as drive]
</div>
|}
:::--[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 04:47, 20 January 2015 (EST)
Feel free to demonstrate there has been a undue time lapse. Something you have never done! [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 04:57, 20 January 2015 (EST)

=== The ''Question evolution! campaign booklet'' Saga ===

{|class="wikitable"
|50 page Question Evolution! booklet. Question Evolution! Campaign runaway train is going to be released
|[http://web.archive.org/web/20120215050509/http://conservapedia.com/Main_Page Feb 15, 2012]
|-
|A Question evolution! campaign group now has 3 writers and at least 3 Question Evolution! booklets/books will be coming out. Some of the booklets/books will be designed for young people.
|[http://web.archive.org/web/20120501184006/http://conservapedia.com/Main_Page May 1, 2012]
|-
|A 15 questions for evolutionists booklet and book for middle school students will soon be coming out and they are going to be heavily promoted and distributed.
|[http://web.archive.org/web/20120619134057/http://www.conservapedia.com/Main_Page Jun 19,2012]
|-
|SS Evolution! passengers get on your life jackets! A barrage of 100+ page Question evolution! campaign booklet torpedoes is headed your way!
|[http://web.archive.org/web/20120919002949/http://www.conservapedia.com/Main_Page Sep 19, 2012]
|-
|The Question evolution! book for middle school students, edited by a Christian apologist, gains in popularity.
|[http://web.archive.org/web/20130711205854/http://www.conservapedia.com/Main_Page Jul 11, 2013]
|-
|Canadian teacher at a Christian school will be serving as a science editor of the Question evolution! campaign book for middle school students.
|[http://web.archive.org/web/20130718204401/http://www.conservapedia.com/Main_Page Jul 18, 2013]
|}

'''Three years ago''': ''the booklet is going to be released'', '''two and a half year ago''': ''it will soon be coming out'', '''two years ago''': ''it is headed your way!'', '''one and a half year ago''': ''it gains in popularity''. Yeah, that's an "''undue time lapse''", as nothing has happened!

--[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 05:08, 20 January 2015 (EST)
: A few things:

:First an excerpt from some writer: "It’s taken almost five more years of hard work, and plenty of rejection, to get to the point where I’m happy to let something mellow in a drawer for a while before sending it out, or where I can stand the (admittedly) long wait times it takes to hear back from literary journals."[http://goinswriter.com/patience/] Another excerpt from a writer: "My CP [critique partner] wrote and worked and studied for TEN YEARS before getting published."[http://www.charissaweaks.com/2013/06/a-writers-most-important-lesson-patience.html] Good writing takes time. Next time you feel yourself being impatient about various announcements of events happening soon, see it as an exercise in patience. It would also be helpful, if you had something to pass the time. Why don't you work on providing satisfactory answers to the [http://creation.com/15-questions 15 questions for evolutions]. That is something you never did!

:We have been sparring about creation/evolution and wiki matters for awhile. I thought my recent post which featured a post from blog which focuses on German culture/Germany was funny and so did my friend who is of German descent. You did not find it humorous. Given your recent bout of ill humor and my recent schedule demands, I think it is best if I largely take a break from sparring with you on talk pages. No hard feelings on my part. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 21:43, 20 January 2015 (EST)

First, let me say what a pleasure it is to visit once agin with my favorite two people, this time in August's house. The view from your front window is specactular, and your music collection is most impressive. (I'd like to meet in Cons's house next time, but he keeps it locked. He has a front entryway, but he keeps burning it down.)

Now Cons, I'd like to talk to you about offensive national stereotypes. This is serious, and I'd like you to pay attention. Really. I apologize if this comes across as mindless "political correctness", but I'm serious.

I spent a fair amount of time this morning reading a number of web pages and other sources about what "wohl" and "Ja wohl" really mean. It's a very complicated and nuanced word. Google translate says "well", in the health sense, along with "probably", "perhaps", "possibly", etc. The Harper-Collins ''German Concise Dictionary'' (it's anything but concise!) lists it as a "Schlüsselwort" (key word, important word) and gives many meanings, including "comfortable" and "at ease", along with a great number of idioms, such as "er weiß das sehr wohl" -- "he knows that perfectly well". (But they've gotten rid of the "ß", haven't they?) The combination "Ja wohl" means "yes emphatically" or "yes certainly". As a response to a request it begins to take on the meaning that you seem to ascribe to it, from watching ''Hogan's Heros'' and various other silly World War II things: "Yes, sir!" or "I'll do it right away!"

There are web pages that go into detail about its "Yes, sir!" meaning in the military, and the fact that many Americans associate that with the Nazi era.

I've read the "Schnitzelrepublic" web page. It was well-written, light-hearted, and affectionate. But I don't think you have used the term in a light-hearted way with AugustO. Please remember that people can easily be offended by thoughtless national stereotypes, especially when those stereotypes are informed by a ''Hogan's Heros'' mentality. And please remember that the Nazi era was not a pleasant time, for Germany or anyone else, and try to make more erudite (love that word!) and well-thought-out comments.

That said, I'm sure AugustO is very efficient. :-)

Now you two can go back to fighting over what "soon" means, especially in the context of saying just when a booklet will be coming out. Three years is a long time to wait, but I'm sure it will be worth the wait. Idea: Cons, why don't you promise not to block either of us until the booklet comes out?

One more thing: August: can you send me a usable email address? I will not divulge it to anyone else without your permission. My email is at the top of my user page.

[[User:SamHB|SamHB]] 00:52, 21 January 2015 (EST)
::::''Hi - A[...] O[...] --EOM'' --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 08:08, 21 January 2015 (EST)
::I think we're all glad to hear that the RMS ''Creationist'' is plowing full-steam ahead into the iceberg of Darwinism.--[[User:DonnyC|DonnyC]] 22:44, 20 January 2015 (EST)
:::That literally made me laugh out loud, something which the internet rarely accomplishes. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] 00:52, 21 January 2015 (EST)

'''@User:Conservative:''' Interesting quotes. I'm missing the part where they are telling you ''oh, you must announce your book first, and then start to write it!'' BTW: I don't see your announcements as ''exercises in patience'', I see them as ''misleading advertising''. --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 08:16, 21 January 2015 (EST)

== Speaking of predictions ==

Looking at Recent Changes this morning, I saw that JoeyJ has deleted a very interesting talk page. (The corresponding article page had been deleted by AddisonDM a few years earlier.)

The pages are
:*[[User:Conservative/Gentlemen-the-anti-evolution-D-Days-are-going-to-be-happening-the-first-quarter-of-the-calendar-year-of-2009]]
:*[[User_talk:Conservative/Gentlemen-the-anti-evolution-D-Days-are-going-to-be-happening-the-first-quarter-of-the-calendar-year-of-2009]]
:The talk page had contained this question from EddyJ:
:*"How did the D Days of the first quarter of the calendar year of 2009 work out? Almost five years later, is evolution still around?"

This brings up the question: Just how ''did'' those D-Days turn out? Is evolution still around 6 years later?

And, speaking of predictions, a question was raised a few months back (too lazy too look it up; I'm sure you know what I'm talking about) along the lines of "Evolutionists: Beware the Ides of March". Well, that date is coming up real soon now. Can the author tell me just what I'm supposed to be afraid of?

This is not the first year that dire predictions have been made for the Ides of March. In none of the past cases am I aware that the predicted doom came to pass. Can someone tell me what I missed? [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] 13:33, 22 February 2015 (EST)

== User talk:OGSMEDIA ==

<div style="margin: 10px; padding: 10px; background-color: #CCC">

''content created by User:Wschact, User:AugustO and subject to Conservapedia's copyright policy''

{{welcome|OGSMEDIA}}--[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 04:10, 16 January 2015 (EST)

Unfortunately, OGS Media sounds like the advertising department of "Offgrid Survival"... --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 04:10, 16 January 2015 (EST)
: Could you please explain your relationship to Off Grid Survival Media? Thanks, [[User:Wschact|Wschact]] 14:31, 20 January 2015 (EST)</div>

--[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 18:18, 20 January 2015 (EST)

== @User:Conservative: NOTE to Fellow Editors and Admins ==

(As usual [[User talk:Conservative]] is protected, otherwise I'd bring up this topic over there)

User:Conservative, you have deleted [[Talk:Gardening]] and [[Talk:Yoga]], presumably to get rid of [[User:TheAmericanRedoubt]]'s announcement:
::{|style="background-color:lightgrey"
|'''NOTE to Fellow Editors and Admins:''' Please note that I am a trained (both in Asia and the USA) and certified professional practitioner / subject matter expert in the field of Complementary medicine / [[Alternative medicine]], particularly [[Traditional Chinese medicine]]-[[Acupuncture]], [[Ayurvedic medicine]] and [[nutrition]] for the last 19 years.

'''I am a also a life-long [[gardener]] who is certified in [[Permaculture]] [[gardening]] (completed a [[Permaculture design course]] ([[PDC]])'''

Through the month of December 2014 and January 2015, I am working many hours per week on editing Conservapedia. For specifically on a collapsible "See Also" navigation template for the diverse topics of the [[Alternative medicine]], [[First aid]], [[Permaculture]] [[gardening]], [[Firearms]], [[:Category:Survivalism|Emergency preparedness]] and [[Amateur radio]] articles I am also working on and articles on related topics.

I will also be working on the Categories for all of these Alternative medicine topics and related [[Healthcare]], [[Cooking]] and Nutrition categories and items such as [[spices]] (which are related to [[health]] and nutrition)

So, I please request your patience in considering not deleting articles or content I have submitted in these subject areas without first discussing it on the Talk Page and letting me know on my User Page, if you would be so kind.

Also, please note that I plan to rapidly submit articles for the "red links". Thank you for your patience.
|}

Do you intend to get rid of it on pages like the following, too?

*[[Talk:Permaculture design course]]
*[[Talk:First aid]]
*[[Talk:Hugelkultur]]

--[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 05:07, 3 February 2015 (EST)
:You can delete the alternative medicine entries. That was agreed on.

:Keep the material related to conservatism, survivalism, amateur radio, preparedness, guns, cooking, first aid, permaculture, etc.

:Much of the talk page additions by TAR were related to Wsacht hounding. They were "preemptive strikes/justifications/defenses". That is why I deleted those TAR article talk pages. The Wasacht hounding issue appears to be solved. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 05:21, 3 February 2015 (EST)
::We seem to have quite different ideas of "hounding". Well, I leave it for now... --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 05:44, 3 February 2015 (EST)
:::I got [[User:JoeyJ]] page deletion rights. Please ask him to delete any unnecessary talk pages that were created during the TAR/Wsacht feud. You can put the deletion tags on them and JoeyJ can delete them.

:::I am guessing TAR will be back within 1-14 days based on my recent communication with him. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 06:19, 3 February 2015 (EST)

::::Thanks, but it is a tedious task, and I think, I've done my share. --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 06:35, 3 February 2015 (EST)

== Evolutionary belief in Germany: Its future in Germany is kaput! And you still can't satisfactorily answer the 15 questions for evolutionists ==

<div style="margin: 10px; padding: 10px; background-color: #CCC">
<small>'''''content created by User:Conservative and - subject to Conservapedia's copyright policy'''''</small>
I just read this:

Reporter David Wroe adds, “Creationism—the belief that Genesis and other books of the Bible explain life on Earth—is gaining strength in Germany.” He cites a recent University of Dortmund survey that showed that around a fifth of future teachers and a similar proportion of those who had studied basic biology doubted evolution, along with one in eleven who were studying for a higher degree in biology. Meanwhile, private Christian schools are growing more popular, half of which are represented by the creation-promoting Association of Evangelical Schools. Even evolutionist Dittmar Graf says he is “really sure that the percentage of Germans who doubt evolution is going up and up.” Source: [https://answersingenesis.org/creationism/creation-in-germany/ Creationism in Germany, 2009]

On March 17, 2014, the news website ''Deutsche Well'' reported that evangelical Christianity has doubled in [[Germany]] in the last 10 years.[http://www.dw.de/ghanaian-pastor-seeks-to-re-christianize-germany/a-17501259]

And you still cannot satisfactorily answer the [https://answersingenesis.org/creationism/creation-in-germany/ 15 questions] for evolutionists! [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 04:48, 12 February 2015 (EST)</div>

Thank you for the interesting links - no need to erase them! --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 03:59, 16 February 2015 (EST)

:Oh Cons! Did you [[memory hole]] your edit of 04:48, 12 February? Shame on you! Bad, naughty Cons! You know better than to do that. For your penance, I'd like you to make 77 edits to the "Atheism vs. Islam" article, within the space of 10 hours. Oh, I see you already did that. Good. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] 00:25, 17 February 2015 (EST)

== Reading the Bible in Koine Greek ==

My friend is going to learn Koine Greek in order to be able to read the New Testament in its original language. Are you able to do that now fluently?

Do you own an English version of a Bible? If so, what English version do you like? [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 06:30, 18 February 2015 (EST)

:User:Conservative, a short time ago, you wrote that you do not talk about your personal affairs. So, why should I? Unless, we make it a little ''quid pro quo'':
:*How is your Greek?
:*Which version of the Bible do you own? What English version of the Bible do you like?
:I'll answer your questions ''after'' you have answered the questions above. Otherwise I'm quite willing to tell you about the experiences a friend of mine had with the Greek language.
:--[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 07:43, 18 February 2015 (EST)
::An editor using the User: Conservative account would like to take you up on your offer in this manner, answer your questions in relation to English versions of the Bible (any non-English versions will not be included) and of course I will answer the Greek question too. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 20:47, 25 March 2015 (EDT)

:::I'm confused: is this secondary user of your account the friend you spoke about? Are you, the main user, interested in Greek? Never mind, I'm waiting for your answers:
:::*How is your Greek?
:::*Which version of the Bible do you own? What English version of the Bible do you like?
:::--[[User:AugustO|AugustO]]
My knowledge of Koine Greek is poor. It consists of just a few words learned through sermons (for example, the words agape, phileo, eros, [http://www.gotquestions.org/dunamis-meaning.html dunamis], etc. etc.).

I own these versions: NASB, NKJV, KJV, J.B Phillips translation of the New Testament and the NIV (not a big fan of the NIV).

Except for the NIV, I like all of the versions of the Bible I own. Each one has its own flavor. I also like the Berkeley Version and this [http://www.genevabible.com/ new version of the Geneva Bible]. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 06:36, 26 March 2015 (EDT)

:*I got my [[Graecum]] at school, after learning classical Greek for four years. At university, I took a course in ''Bibelgriechisch'' (Greek of the Bible / Koine Greek). So, I'm able to ''translate'' verses, but would have trouble to make polite conversation with the Apostle Matthew.... To understand the subtleties of the texts, I have to consult commentaries.
:*No, I don't own a hard-copy of an English version of the Bible, but thanks to the internet, I can read many versions. In German, I prefer the Lutherbibel, and the first English version I look up is always the [[KJB]].
:--[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 16:34, 28 March 2015 (EDT)
::Thanks. I am torn between doing Bible memorization and learning Koine Greek. I may do both, but probably just one in the short term given the number of various projects I have committed myself to.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 03:54, 30 March 2015 (EDT)

:::I've great respect for those who know large portions of the Bible by heart because they studied it, preached about it, used it - and every Christian should know at least some verses!
:::OTOH, memorizing the Bible for its own sake doesn't strike me as an intellectual endeavor - any third-rate actor should be able to do so. In my experience, those who have memorized it for its own sake are a lot like vegans - it is one of the first things about themselves they bring up in any conversation....
:::--[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 05:29, 1 April 2015 (EDT)
Some branches of psychology are pseudosciences and laymen are able to do just as well as trained professionals. At the same time, cognitive psychology is very useful and helps with such things as designing airplane cockpit instrument panels and increase people's intellectual abilities. [http://www.amazon.com/Your-Memory-How-Works-Improve/dp/1569246297 This book] shows people how to boost their memory by about 40-60% or more using various memory techniques and I believe it was written by a cognitive psychologist. The figures of 40-60% or more is based on experimental evidence. I plan on learning these techniques this year.

[http://www.amazon.com/How-Read-Book-Intelligent-Touchstone/dp/0671212095/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1417944498&sr=8-1&keywords=how+to+read+a+book This book], written by the well-known educator/philosopher Mortimer Adler, which sold over 500,000 books and is considered a classic, shows people how to increase their reading comprehension and a website I visited highly recommended this book and I plan on reading it this year.

After all is said and done, in order to better study/apply information, you need to be able to comprehend it and recall it. So memorization/comprehension are fundamental skills worth enhancing as they increase your efficiency/speed of learning. And part of that process can certainly include practicing new memory skills.

The Book of Daniel noted that knowledge will increase in the end times and we live at a time of a knowledge explosion in many respects so these skills are very useful now. I am a big believer in lifelong learning and chided my friend who recently said she was too old to learn. I told her that the mind is like a muscle and if you don't exercise it you will stagnate.

Lastly, I believe there are benefits of taking time to memorizing Scripture and some of them are given below.

:Fine, then do so. Please inform me ''after'' you have completed this task. --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 09:28, 1 April 2015 (EDT)
::Actually, after I finished my university education, I took some college courses and in one of them I memorized Scripture. So I already started the process.

::Second, there is an additional thing I wanted to say: "Overlearning is the repeated practice of a skill or study of material to further strengthen memory and performance. Rehearsal enhances performance past the initial point of learning because the neural processes involved become more efficient and recall speed improves."[http://www.alleydog.com/glossary/definition.php?term=Overlearning] One of the key concepts of learning is learning through repetition and memorization involves repetition. It also causes saturation of learning and saturation can increase your depth of understanding and saturation of learning [http://www.ez3dbiz.com/ez_creativity.html has been linked to increased creativity] (You can better creatively apply your knowledge).

::Another key point is that at times of temptation, it helps if something is second nature to you. Martial artists repeat movements over and over and over and so things become second nature. So they can perform movements without even thinking about it so to speak. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 18:47, 1 April 2015 (EDT)

:::Good for you. I just think that learning a language is a more enriching task. --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 06:49, 2 April 2015 (EDT)

=== Benefits of memorizing Scripture ===

*[http://sukofamily.org/?p=1434 Benefits of memorizing Scripture]

*[http://www.examiner.com/article/the-benefits-of-memorizing-scripture Benefits of memorizing Scripture - Examiner]

*[http://www.weirdunsocializedhomeschoolers.com/scripture-memory/ Scripture memory box]

I agree with this person who said:

"The perceived value of memorizing scripture, or of memorizing anything for that matter, has fallen on hard times in recent years. Trends in education, and the pervasive belief that memorization is simply a rote practice that has no real impact on true learning, have relegated memorization to an outdated, dusty tool. However, in dismissing the value of memorization, we have lost the practice of internalizing things that are worth keeping and pondering.

Memorization, whether of poetry, a favorite quote or of Scripture, allows you to reflect on the meaning of words repeatedly and in depth. The ultimate goal of memorization is not to regurgitate a thought for the sake of that accomplishment alone, but to allow the words to affect your thinking and your perspective. People who memorize poetry tend to do so because the words carry message that resonates with them."[http://www.examiner.com/article/the-benefits-of-memorizing-scripture]

"Scripture Memorization Works:

Every time we think a thought, including when we memorize and meditate on scripture, our brains are changed. Dr. Amen, a clinical neuroscientist and psychiatrist and author of Making a Good Brain Great, says, “Every time you have a thought your brain releases chemicals. ... Your thoughts
... positive or negative ... make you feel good or they make you feel bad.” What you read and what you say to yourself, changes ever so slightly the neuropathways of your brain and that, in turn, influences your attitudes, behaviors, and emotions. Scripture memorization allows you to choose words and images that shape your mind and heart. It works in us even when we are not conscious of its doing so." For more information please see: [http://mcswichita.net/Teaching/006-ScriptureMemorization&Meditation-JT.pdf SCRIPTURE MEMORIZATION & MEDITATION by By Pastor Jerry Truex] [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 08:21, 1 April 2015 (EDT)

== Recent news report about creationism in Germany/Europe ==

[http://questionevolution.blogspot.com/2015/03/science-nordic-5-year-study-shows.html Science Nordic: Creationism is spreading in Europe/Germany]

:''Yes, my evolutionist friends, even in the atheistic Netherlands some schools are now teaching creationism! '' You don't know much about the Netherlands, do you? --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 15:43, 15 March 2015 (EDT)

== Spoiling for a fight? ==

No, I'm not. I've avoided Conservapedia for a couple of weeks, and I tried not to get sucked into any debates. But - as usual - I cannot let Andy Schlafly's ''"attempts"'' on translating the Bible (see [[User_talk:Aschlafly#The_Son_of_God]] and [[Son of Man]]) stand without protest. So, here I am again, going through my watchlist, addressing points I've missed (perhaps a little bit more curmudgeonly than necessary, but I'm irked). --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 17:06, 15 March 2015 (EDT)
:Do you think you are going to change Schlafly's view on the authorship of Hebrews or that he will cause you to adopt his view? Do you think you are going to change other people's minds about this matter? When I saw your recent edits (including the talk page comment directed towards me), the most reasonable explanation is "spoiling for a fight". [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 17:50, 15 March 2015 (EDT)
:::When I started at Conservapedia four years ago, I thought that one could have interesting discussion on Biblical Greek and gain insights by joined translations. Unfortunately, now I have to admit that this was just wishful thinking: it is the other way round. At first, you have an '''''insight''''' by A. Schlafly, and then, everything, even God's Word is bend to fit the insight.
::"Fourth, argumentative. This one.....some folks might argue about (get it?). Germans can find a thousand things to argue about. It could be one guy planting shrubs of a disliked nature that the neighbor can't stand. It could be the act of cranking your car for two minutes in winter to warm it up. One minute of such a cranking would be tolerated, but not two, and thus inviting an argument sooner or later."[http://schnitzelrepublic.blogspot.com/2010/07/seven-personality-traits-of-german.html] - taken from the essay'' The Seven Personality Traits of a German'' posted at the blog Schnitzel Republic. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 17:53, 15 March 2015 (EDT)
:::Spouting national stereotypes is certainly an excellent way to calm down your interlocutors.
:::But yes, when I spot litter, I pick it up. When I see a rubbish translation based only on a dubious insight, I argue against it. I won't get a clean world, I won't improve the CBP very much (it is just abysmal). But I try. ''Deutsch sein heißt, eine Sache um ihrer selbst willen zu tun.'' --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 18:12, 15 March 2015 (EDT)

== Categories again ==

This page is so fascinating! I hadn't looked at it for a while.

I have made a small edit to [[Power plant]], in keeping with my vision of categories for electrical things. See [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Alternating_Current_%28AC%29&action=historysubmit&diff=1146349&oldid=1146319] and [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Direct_current&action=historysubmit&diff=1146350&oldid=1146317] for what I've done on those two articles. Feel free to change or revert, of course; I trust your judgment.

My attempts to clean up the mess, both in content and in categories, that is the electricity/electronics material here at CP, got bogged down, of course. So much to do! I may tackle some more of it when I have the time. Much of that mess is ''not'' due to TAR.

In answer to your metaphysical question, he may have taken his own advice, bought as many guns as he could afford (that's in one of his pages somewhere), cashing in his life savings to do it, and moved to someplace in the Northwestern United States, with only his amateur radio rig for communications. As far as I know, Conservapedia has no amateur-radio-connected editing server.

Always a pleasure to talk with you. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] 12:14, 7 May 2015 (EDT)

== re: User:TheAmericanRedoubt ==

You wrote: [[User:TheAmericanRedoubt]] has edited Conservapedia two months ago for the last time. Will he be back? What happens to the plethora of red links in the meantime? --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 06:38, 29 May 2015 (EDT)
=== My response ===
I got in contact with [[User:TheAmericanRedoubt]] and he is going to start editing Conservapedia again probably sometime in September of 2015. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 01:22, 2 June 2015 (EDT)
:That is a little bit unsettling... --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 20:27, 7 June 2015 (EDT)
::He's on some kind of secret project/mission that only Cons knows about. See [[Conservapedia:Community_Portal#The_American_Redoubt]]. I'm sure that, when he comes back, his collegial and cooperative attitude will be such that we will all welcome him back as a valued collaborator. So please be patient. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] 21:13, 7 June 2015 (EDT)
:::Try to think of all the red links that will be filled in. The red links being filled in will cause the wiki to look more tidy and orderly - more germanic. :) If he does a superb job, then the level of tidiness and orderliness added to the wiki may even surpass germanic levels and reach Swiss levels.[http://www.dw.de/germans-and-hygiene/a-16459423] :) [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 21:50, 7 June 2015 (EDT)
::::[Just back from washing my hands—seriously!—after reading the above article.] I'm not planning to wait for the end of his secret mission. In fact, I've been working at cleaning up the ridiculously disordered redlinks, inappropriate categories, and just general horribleness that TAR has left behind. After reading the above essay, I can't believe that TAR is German or Swiss. More like (no, I won't put in an obnoxious national stereotype here.) And I intend to continue cleaning it up. I trust that AugustO will set an example for all of us. I'm only a small part German. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] 22:13, 7 June 2015 (EDT)
SamHB, clean up you user page which is at [[User:SamHB|SamHB]]. Try to make it more like [[User:Conservative|User: Conservatism]] in its crisp design, simplistic beauty and austere nature. :) Start by removing all the unsightly "crossed out" font on your user page.

"Let everyone sweep in front of his own door, and the whole world will be clean." - Johann Wolfgang Goethe. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 22:42, 7 June 2015 (EDT)

:Well played, Cons! OK, I will see what I can do about cleaning that up. The multivariable calculus stuff is way obsolete. But maybe it should stay, as a permanent record of my life here. And maybe the crossed out "I can help you; on second thought I can't" garbage should go. But my user page will never have the "crisp design, simplistic beauty and austere nature" (you ''do'' have a way with words!) of yours, for a few reasons:
:*My life at CP, like my life in the real world, is complex and messy. As an example, I've been blocked about 13 times, depending on exactly how you count. (All of them wrongly, but I'm not going to argue that.) It's only in the last couple of years that I seem to have earned enough respect from the admins (yes, even you!) that I don't feel like a criminal all the time. It really does affect one's outlook, and hence one's user page.
:*I don't have the luxury of locking both my user page and talk page, and living behind a cloak of simplicity. You put all your entropy in the various subpages of your user page, like all the music stuff. Doing that just isn't for me.
:*And, of course, you put all your entropy in the "atheism and canoe paddles" articles. (Quick challenge: Come up with a witty reply. Extra points if you can do it without referring to being up the creek without one.)
:*I put my efforts into clean, elegant, and correct pages in mainspace, especially in the math and science area. That's what all the home-schoolers are going to come for, right?
Be that as it may, I will think about making my user page cleaner. But not cleaner than the reality of my life.
:[[User:SamHB|SamHB]] 23:40, 7 June 2015 (EDT)
::SamHB, a [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Conservapedia:Atheism_Project&curid=132852&diff=1157706&oldid=1157355 message] for you. June/July of 2015 are going to be very BAD months for atheism. TERRIBLE things will befall its kingdom. The [[Desecularization|TREND]] is clear and the [http://conservativetriumphs.blogspot.com/2015/03/attention-atheists-google-trends.html writing is on the wall]. Weep and wail militant atheists. Atheism is doomed! [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 00:08, 8 June 2015 (EDT)

== How dare you to call your attempts "translation"? ==

<div style="margin: 10px; padding: 10px; background-color: #CCC">
<small>'''''content created by User:AugustO - subject to Conservapedia's copyright policy'''''</small>

'''How dare you to call your attempts "translation"?'''

Andy, I have criticized your lack of knowledge already above in the section [[#The Son of God]]. Reading [[Essay:Calming the Storm]], I see that you are not even capable of recognizing that εἶπεν is a conjugated form of λέγω (''"... But "λέγω" -- the Greek term used for said in some versions -- does not appear in the Greek above"''). This shows such a lack of basic skills in even reading Greek! And at the same time you are [[Linguistic Bias of Bible Translations|implying]] that you have a special understanding of the "scientific terminology" which was used in the Bible, giving you perhaps a better understanding of the text than [[James Strong]] had!

''How dare you to call your actions a translation?'' You are not able to translate one verse from scratch! A more honest term would be "inspired ramblings"! --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 05:54, 21 June 2015 (EDT)

'''Plea'''

Andy, please, please, address [[Talk:Essay:Calming_the_Storm#Andy.2C_it.27s_your_essay.2C_correct_your_mistakes.2C_please|these problems]]! Please! --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 15:15, 21 June 2015 (EDT)</div>

== an article relating to religion in Germany ==

I thought you might be interested in this article:

[http://www.the-american-interest.com/2015/06/03/are-evangelicals-winning-the-world/ Are Evangelicals Winning the World? Why are parts of Germany formerly under the enforced secularism of the Communist party rediscovering charismatic religion?] by [[Peter L. Berger]], ''The American Interest'', June 3, 2015 [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 21:46, 2 July 2015 (EDT)

== Just checking :-) ==

*x: <math>x</math>
*x^2: <math>x^2</math>
*x^2_1: <math>x^2_1</math>
*\frac{x}{y}: <math>\frac{x}{y}</math>
*\hat{x}: <math>\hat{x}</math>

--[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] ([[User talk:AugustO|talk]]) 09:43, 17 August 2015 (EDT)

:Bravo! It works!!! Praise the [[Lord]].--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 11:37, 17 August 2015 (EDT)

::Thanks for your work: ''hilf Dir selbst, dann hilft Dir Gott!'' --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] ([[User talk:AugustO|talk]]) 14:22, 17 August 2015 (EDT)

== Problem fixed ==

Thanks for alerting me to the problem via the block. The problem has been fixed.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 14:11, 17 August 2015 (EDT)

:It felt strange, but I'm glad that it worked :-) --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] ([[User talk:AugustO|talk]]) 14:23, 17 August 2015 (EDT)

::Clever. Thanks again.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 14:27, 17 August 2015 (EDT)

== Wonderful ==

Wonderful improvements to the "span" locations!!!!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 14:30, 30 August 2015 (EDT)
:You're welcome! --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] ([[User talk:AugustO|talk]]) 14:33, 30 August 2015 (EDT)

== Quick note ==

I misread the message by GregG on Andy's talk page. Had I read the message more carefully, I would have let Andy respond without any commentary from myself.

I do agree with you about vaccinations not causing autism. At the same time, I do think it is good that the public puts pressure on the medical community and the government so vaccines get safer over time. Given the VA Hospital scandal in the USA and health care scandals in other Western democracies, I think competition and public pressure is good for the medical sector of economies. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 13:18, 3 November 2015 (EST)
:Thanks - I tend to agree --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] ([[User talk:AugustO|talk]]) 08:37, 16 November 2015 (EST)

== The American Redoubt as a Wikipedian ==

<div style="margin: 10px; padding: 10px; background-color: #CCC">
<small>'''''content created by User:TheAmericanRedoubt and User:AugustO - subject to Conservapedia's copyright policy'''''</small>

'''This user is a Wikipedian'''

Does anybody know which handle he uses at wikipedia? Perhaps one could contact him over there... --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] ([[User talk:AugustO|talk]]) 17:31, 15 November 2015 (EST)
:: I am not a Wikipedian. [[User:TheAmericanRedoubt|TheAmericanRedoubt]] ([[User talk:TheAmericanRedoubt|talk]]) 11:08, 23 January 2016 (EST)
:So, your status changed since [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=User:TheAmericanRedoubt&diff=next&oldid=1126866 Dec 28, 2014]. Was there a conflict about categorizing? ;-) --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] ([[User talk:AugustO|talk]]) 15:05, 23 January 2016 (EST)
:: Thanks for the reminder to remove that tag. [[User:TheAmericanRedoubt|TheAmericanRedoubt]] ([[User talk:TheAmericanRedoubt|talk]]) 20:35, 23 January 2016 (EST)
</div>

== re: Dinesh D'Souza material removal from one of the articles I created ==

I used to be a somewhat of a fan of Dinesh. But after his firing from King's College and his recent political activities which he got jailed for, I have soured on him. I now use his material when no other source is available (so very sparingly). [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 14:36, 29 February 2016 (EST)

:When you start deleting content, there is always the possibility that one of your collective went rogue: therefore, you should explain such deletions! --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] ([[User talk:AugustO|talk]]) 16:17, 4 March 2016 (EST)

== re: Conservatve2 account ==

I created the Conservatve2 account because I was at a friend's residence and I did not have the password for User: Conservative readily available. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 08:36, 23 March 2016 (EDT)

== Silence speaks volumes ==

The phrase is "Silence speaks volumes" in the plural. The multiple "volumes" being referred to are the volumes of a large encyclopedia. Thank you for giving me an opportunity to, ummmm, clean that up.

Your use of the idiom "went missing" was exactly on target. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 17:58, 7 April 2016 (EDT)

:"Silence speaks volumes" or "the lady doth protest too much, methinks" - it's always one or the other.... --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] ([[User talk:AugustO|talk]]) 11:17, 8 April 2016 (EDT)

== re: German comments ==

Recently, I listened to some music by Beethoven. After listening to the music, I thought of the various important contributions of Germans. For example, Martin Luther and the Protestant Reformation.

I know I did some good-natured ribbing about the Germans, but looking back I regret doing so.

Europe is facing a lot of problems right now. Hopefully, German Christians will help soften some the blow of some of the past mistakes Europeans committed which are starting to cause some significant problems (see: [http://evangelicalfocus.com/blogs/838/Europes_crisis_Gods_opportunity Europe’s crisis. God’s opportunity]). For example, recently I read that many Moslem immigrants to Europe are converting to Christianity (or pretending to) and some churches are taking a pro-active stance on this issue and actively engaging in evangelism efforts. [http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/05/25/why-are-so-many-muslim-refugees-in-europe-suddenly-finding-jesus.html] [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 06:54, 3 June 2016 (EDT)

:Thanks - though our views on "good-natured ribbing" differ considerably. I wish you the very best for your off-wiki endeavours which you have mentioned quite a lot over the last weeks. --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] ([[User talk:AugustO|talk]]) 03:47, 4 June 2016 (EDT)
::I think you are right about some of my comments, but I know at least my Hogan's Hero's comments were good-natured. I also know that I always had a measure of respect for Germanic culture. One of my teachers said that Germans have done some of the greatest things that humanity has ever accomplished and some of the worst things. I think that is a fair statement. When you have a culture which has a good degree of self-discipline you can put that discipline to good uses or bad uses. I do think Europe's economy would be in much worse shape if it weren't for the Germans.

::As far as contemporary Germany, I am not a fan of flooding Europe with Muslims and I think boosting Europe's fertility rate would be a better solution, but I will admit that the insisting that the new immigrants learn the native language (German) and making greater efforts at work placement is a lot better than than the French/Swedish immigration model. But with the New Year's Eve sexual assaults in Colgne, Germany tell me that this is not an optimal solution. I guess Merkel and German businessman are in a difficult situation given the labor demand for German industry. I think making greater efforts to bring in more Christian immigrants would be a better solution as far as short-term solutions.

::I think Europe needs to adopt a more Christian worldview. The agnostic professor [[Eric Kaufmann]] said that boosting fertility rates though public policy has had mixed success as far as countries that have tried this if memory serves, but I can't precisely recall all his public statements that I have heard.[https://books.google.com/books?id=E3X4CgAAQBAJ&pg=PA138&lpg=PA138&dq=%22eric+kaufmann%22+fertility+france&source=bl&ots=sjy2t0PxhI&sig=98Kda6TclDBWelMexgT5lPxsjrQ&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjoj9SAwI7NAhUJNT4KHVnjCGkQ6AEIQTAF#v=onepage&q=%22eric%20kaufmann%22%20fertility%20france&f=false]

::Anyways, the world seems to be changing at a faster pace and I expect there to be some very significant changes in the next 20-25 years or so (robotics, failing welfare states, [[desecularization]], people are probably going to be forced to retire later, increased culture clash as far as Western values and Islamic culture, etc, etc.). [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 09:55, 4 June 2016 (EDT)
I was just thinking about one of my previous statements. Given robotics and potential changes in terms of energy technology, I am not sure what is going to happen as far as the work/leisure equation. I think the world is more complex and being a futurist is a harder job as societies are going into more uncharted territories. For example, [[Gerald Celente]] of the Trends Institute has probably been one of the better futurists over his lifetime, but in recent years he has had some significant failures in terms of his predictions. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 10:07, 4 June 2016 (EDT)
==Happy New Year==
We've missed you and wish you all the best for 2017! [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 21:35, 16 January 2017 (EST)
:Thanks! Best wishes for you, too! --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] ([[User talk:AugustO|talk]]) 05:16, 18 January 2017 (EST)

== Why don't you stop working on the CBP? ==

Why don't you stop working on the CBP?

I gave some reasonable criticisms of the project including one that I just added that you probably agree with relating to original intent of the authors (see the Conservative Bible Project talk page).

The CBP has a flawed design which gets in the way of original intent being adequately expressed in the translation.

On Andy's talk page I suggested you launch a new project at Conservapedia called the Open Source Bible translation Project. Please read what I posted on Andy's talk page and respond. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 04:47, 10 April 2017 (EDT)

:If there are fake news out there, it is not enough to post the real story somewhere else - you have to confront the fake news directly. In light of [[Revelation_16-22_(Translated)#22:18|Rev 22:18-20]], this is especially important for the a fake [[Good News]].
:Furthermore, Andy's "insights" pop up as ''Gospel truth'' on articles in the main space, like [[Counterexamples to Relativity]] and [[Epistle to the Hebrews]]. --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] ([[User talk:AugustO|talk]]) 04:56, 10 April 2017 (EDT)
::Why not agree to launching a Open Source Bible translation project at Conservapedia and periodically criticize the CBP? You are never going to like the final product of the CBP. And you are never going to like co-laboring with Mr. Schlafly on the CBP.

::And if your criticism of the CBP of it being a translation that is designed to cater to the opinions of Mr. Schlafly is a sincere and valid criticism, then why would you want to work on a project which will never have wide appeal? [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 05:20, 10 April 2017 (EDT)

*What use is it to splinter the small resources even more? And ''I'''m aware of my limitations: a story written by me in a foreign language would not appeal to an American reader.
*The interesting thing: I'm learning very much due to the CBP, e.g., I never before thought about word frequencies in the Bible other than as a mean to efficiently learn the vocabulary. I take my time to look thoroughly into things, and this way I have benefited from this ill-guided project, improved my vocabulary and my general knowledge of Greek over various time periods.
*I'm aware that I could get minuscule changed to the project by intense flattering. Unfortunately, that is not my way. So, I want to make my points so crystal clear that all but one understand my position.
--[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] ([[User talk:AugustO|talk]]) 05:52, 10 April 2017 (EDT)
::OK. I think I am going to obtain the newest version of the NASB. I did learn more about Bible versions as a result of the CBP. In addition, I don't think I will engage in anymore criticism of the CBP. I don't think my criticism will be received and acted on. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 06:16, 10 April 2017 (EDT)
:::*NASB? Good for you - it this the version you intend to [[#Benefits_of_memorizing_Scripture|memorize]]?
:::*You should keep an eye on the CBP - AFAIK, all editors who tried there to egg Andrew Schlafly on later turned out to be trolls.
:::*As you do not want to appear to endorse the project, I think you should register your protest from time to time.
:::--[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] ([[User talk:AugustO|talk]]) 06:49, 10 April 2017 (EDT)
Yes, now that I know the pros and cons of the various versions, I have picked the NASB as the version I wish to memorize.

Second, I set some goals for the remainder of my life which will be very challenging to meet. I don't think I will have the luxury of keeping an eye on the CBP. Fully registering my criticisms, which I have done via the CBP talk page, will have to suffice. It comes down to priorities. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 09:42, 10 April 2017 (EDT)
:I have been an outspoken critic of the CBP and I thought all my suggestions would be ignored. But today I was surprised by Andy taking one of my suggestions and altering one of the 10 guidelines of the CBP project. I took it upon myself to implement another change in the guidelines which I hope will stick as this issue was the second most grievous problem with the project. My suggestions are very sensible. I do endeavor to be a reasonable person and not be an unreasonable nitpicker. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 13:22, 10 April 2017 (EDT)

== IRC ==

Hello,<br />
After some discussion (on [[User_talk:DavidB4#Conservapedia_IRC_channel|my talk page]] and [[User_talk:Aschlafly#IRC|Andy's]]) it has been decided that I start an [[Internet Relay Chat]] channel for Conservapedia, since our old one has been dead since 2009. It is now registered and somewhat set up. I don't know if you use IRC or are interested in doing so, but anyone with block privileges on Conservapedia can also get block privileges on the new IRC channel. Unfortunately, IRC accounts are deleted after 30 days of being unused, so unless you plan on using the IRC at least once a month, there is probably not much point in registering. In any case, feel free to try it out--if you account gets deleted, we can always make another one later. If you are interested, please let me know!<br />
The IRC channel is: #conservapedia @irc.accessIRC.net<br />
Let me know if you have any questions or need anything else, also! --[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">David B</font>]] <sup>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</sup> 15:41, 11 April 2017 (EDT)

== Hey ==

We never spoke on a talk page, but I think you're the best Bible translator on this site, the very best. Don't let Conservative get away with any of his petty grammar remarks.--[[User:Abcqwe|Nathan]] ([[User talk:Abcqwe|talk]]) 16:33, 4 June 2017 (EDT)

== Coolio ==

Again, just sayin'. [[User:DaveSG|DaveSG]] ([[User talk:DaveSG|talk]]) 01:14, 24 February 2018 (EST)

User talk:SamHB

2018-02-24T06:10:43Z

DaveSG: You’re cool

[[User talk:SamHB/Archive 1]]
[[User_talk:SamHB/archive_2]]

== Red telephone for Cons ==

Cons: Thank you for dealing with the matter of [[Special:Contributions/Cal_Um]]. I know that you recognize that you are not an expert in relativity and know better than to get into the technical details of these discussions, and I appreciate that. (I wish more people recognized their limitations in this area; you can look up my recent controversies.) But this was a clear case of you recognizing that this guy was a troublemaker, and coming to my aid.

And now I see that there has been another case, with [[Special:Contributions/Bobbillyman69]], taken care of by Andy. Vandals look at the Recent Changes log: "Oh, look! Relativity is on today's dinner menu!" We old-timers know all about that phenomenon.

[[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 12:21, 7 March 2017 (EST)
:Your welcome. I just happened to see it. I am guessing that for the foreseeable future that you and Andy are going to have to maintain the article as far as keeping it in accordance to compromise you two reached as far as the wording of the article. I don't think I will be of much help in the future. Again, I just happened to see that particular vandal.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 12:32, 7 March 2017 (EST)

== A liberal is wanted for an online dialogue ==

A liberal is wanted to have a single online dialogue. Please let them know at http://opposing-views.org/ if you are interested. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 21:15, 29 March 2017 (EDT)
:Here is their contact page: http://opposing-views.org/contact/ [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 21:25, 29 March 2017 (EDT)

::Well, I'm somewhat flattered, but significantly puzzled, by this. From looking at the web page, it looks like some kind of general liberal/conservative debate site. Currently focused on Obamacare, but with a wider outlook in general. My guess is that they are looking to increase their "contributor staff", particularly liberals, and they came to you. Or, more likely, you discovered them.

::I'm not interested in contributing to such a site. And one thing puzzles me about it. There are '''thousands''' of liberal/conservative discussions/debates/controversies that take place every day. I find myself in such discussions several times per day. So these people want to create yet another one? With nothing noteworthy about it? They will be (already are) totally drowned out by the discussions already going on around the internet. I have about a dozen such web sites already bookmarked.

::Now, about your choice of correspondent: I'm flattered, of course. But, when you needed to find a liberal friend, you came to ''Conservapedia''? Well, perhaps you contacted 97 other liberal acquaintances, besides EJamesW, AlanE, and myself. Actual liberals are a rare and endangered species here.

::About my politics. You put in some question, that you seem to have deleted, asking whether it's really true that I'm a liberal. Well, compared to most people, especially the admins, here at CP, I am way far left of the norm. But relative to the outside world, I am rather middle-of-the-road. (I can't speak for EJamesW or Alan, but I would guess that they are similar.) I actually hold a lot of conservative and "traditional" views, though that doesn't seem to mean much at CP. For example, I am appalled that we have a President who is a serial adulterer and is on his third marriage. And, all through the cold war, I was on the side of freedom, not the side of the murderous Communist thugs who were out to conquer the world. I believe in American exceptionalism, and believed that the United States was a beacon of liberty to the whole world. I was relieved when the Soviet Union collapsed. But now Russia, the descendant of the Soviet Union, is ruled by Vladimir Putin, a descendant of the Communists, one who invades other countries and fairly openly has his political opponents murdered. I am appalled that our current President doesn't have a problem with this.

::[[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 14:10, 1 April 2017 (EDT)
:::OK. Thanks for letting me know your decision promptly. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 18:03, 1 April 2017 (EDT)
::::I hope that it is possible to be a social conservative, a fiscal conservative, a political conservative, but still believe in rule of law, quantum mechanics, special relativity, and recent advances in machine learning/artificial intelligence. I never thought of SamHB as being a "liberal." [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 18:39, 1 April 2017 (EDT)
OK. SamHB is less on the left spectrum that I thought. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 11:11, 2 April 2017 (EDT)
:Doesn't help him though, does it, when some ''petty tyrant of the field'' decides to burn a conversation and give him a day off just because they can. [[User:AlanE|AlanE]] ([[User talk:AlanE|talk]]) 00:24, 3 April 2017 (EDT)
::Sigh. Semper idem. --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] ([[User talk:AugustO|talk]]) 02:25, 3 April 2017 (EDT)
:::Well, actually, he can't. No, to be precise, he ''can'', but he ''may not''. It's interesting that this happened shortly after I complained about abuse of block power [[Talk:Main_Page#Abuse_of_block_power|here]], and his reply seemed to acknowledge that it was not within his authority to block me—"That's not up to me at this point, but to one of the admins".

:::I suspect that Northwest is probably feeling a bit guity about having violated his position of trust so blatantly by blocking someone over a content dispute. He may not realize that I am well respected by the admins; I've been around a while and they know me well. I've had some run-ins with Ed Poor, and he blocked me a couple of times for my abrasiveness, but we have since made peace. If Northwest looks at my block log, he will see that, until this week, none of my blocks involved "liberal POV". Mostly they were by people who had a rather checkered history of honesty, or for totally bogus claims of sockpuppetry with people I had never heard of.

:::It's ironic that all this happened only 2-1/2 hours after I put the lyrics to ''America'' on my user page, specifically calling out the lines
::::Confirm thy soul in self-control,
::::Thy liberty in law!
:::That was aimed at Donald Trump, who seems to have little self-control, little respect for law, little knowledge of American history and traditions, and little knowledge of, and respect for, the teachings of Jesus. But, as we say in this country: if the shoe fits, wear it.

:::In a few days I may go over to his talk page and try to make peace. To try to convince him that we can make CP a better place if we all work together. And that it would be better not to toss around the words "liberal" and "leftist" with such wild abandon, because it just makes CP look less respectable and trustworthy to do so. And that one doesn't need to be a "leftist" to oppose murderous thug Vladimir Putin.

:::[[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 22:38, 13 April 2017 (EDT)

::::To make it short and to the point: You were warned before about your behavior on CP and you didn't want to listen (specifically regarding numbers 9 and 10 - ''especially'' number 10, which you violated several times before - at [[Conservapedia:How Conservapedia Differs from Wikipedia|How Conservapedia Differs from Wikipedia]]), so that's how you got the day off. To read how both you and AlanE are talking about this, you both come off sounding like the liberal media pundits who complain about Donald Trump's travel ban against specific Islamic countries and his proposed illegal immigration ban.

::::Your comment "And that it would be better not to toss around the words "liberal" and "leftist" with such wild abandon, because it just makes CP look less respectable and trustworthy to do so" also reflects exactly the type of things liberals say regarding CP (at the [[Liberal Style]] article, under Debate and rhetorical tactics):
:::::"Like to use the phrase 'reflects poorly on the site' when talking about the liberal articles on Conservapedia."
::::And numbers 5 and 6 under Liberalism in the same article:
:::::"Calling the use of the term liberal when used in a derogatory context 'stupid'"
:::::"Will often deny being a liberal, or will claim to be a 'true conservative', while spouting liberal and Democrat talking points and criticizing basic conservative beliefs and principles."
::::And under Personal traits (again in the same article):
:::::"Concealing one's liberal views rather than admitting them"
::::But at day's end, this is still Conservapedia, ''not'' Liberalpedia. [[User:Northwest|Northwest]] ([[User talk:Northwest|talk]]) 09:11, 14 April 2017 (EDT)

::I could parody being a liberal, but when pressed to the wall all my inner contradictions and stupidity would come out, which might then just seal the deal. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''CIA v Trump updated score'':CIA 3, Trump 2]]</sup> 13:15, 13 April 2017 (EDT)
:::I puzzled by several aspects of this. By "parody being a liberal" do you mean make fun of liberals with over-the-top humor, the way Stephen Colbert used to parody conservatives on his "Colbert Report"? (He shows his politics in a different way in his present show.) Or do you mean "Convincingly pretend to be a liberal, in a way that would trick one into believing that I am sincere?" Any intelligent and well-informed person (which you are) can do that. What do you mean by "my inner contradictions and stupidity would come out"? That you would have a hard time convincingly imitating the stupidity of liberals (liberals and conservatives both have consistency problems) so that your ruse would be unsuccessful? Or that your personal "contradictions and stupidity" would make you unable to do the job? And what do you mean by "seal the deal"? Succeed at your imitation? Or let others succeed at unmasking your attempts? [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 22:51, 13 April 2017 (EDT)
::::You covered all bases quite well. Parodying a liberal is not hard. If you come to a juncture where you're at a loss, and you have to think "''What would be the appropriate liberal response?''", you just say something nonsensical and contradictory, and it would pass. That's what I mean by seal the deal - there would be no question I'm a liberal speaking from the heart. [[Poe's Law]]. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''CIA v Trump updated score'':CIA 3, Trump 2]]</sup> 19:07, 14 April 2017 (EDT)

== Vaping ==

(No, I'm not referring to E-cigarettes.) Cons, please do not vape other people's talk pages, OK? I know that what you recently vaped here was insignificant, but please don't do it. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 18:14, 14 April 2017 (EDT)

== 9th anniversary ==

Congratulations on your 9th anniversary here! Despite disagreements, edit wars, and 19 blocks, you are still around! I know a number of people don't agree with you on various topics, and even I disagree on some things you believe (most notably, macroevolution) but I appreciate that you have "stuck it out" and are still trying to make CP better. I also appreciate your insights on matters which have been influenced by things long before I was here. You were also the only one when I first joined who seemed to be making an effort to help me learn the ropes and how things work here (an effort I am trying to pass on to others now). Thanks for your efforts! --[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">David B</font>]] <sup>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</sup> 11:49, 28 April 2017 (EDT)

== Re: Claims of familiarity with CP guidelines ==

Since you claim to be familiar with, and "well versed in", Conservapedia's guidelines (per your edit on [[User talk:1990'sguy|1990'sguy's talk page]]), here's a refresher from the [[Conservapedia:Guidelines#Member Accounts|Member Accounts]] section:

* Conservapedia is a politically conservative, Christian encyclopedia project. We welcome opposing views, but are not interested in users who come here only to change articles to their ideology (''as you've insisted on doing with selected articles here as of late to change them to fit liberal POV, despite your claims otherwise - ed.''), or disrupt by constantly arguing on the article talk pages that we are "wrong" (''likewise - ed.''). Trolling comments, incivility and personal attacks can be removed from discussion pages.
* We are not a debate forum, but a project. If you contribute, where you can, by adding substantive content, abiding by our Guidelines, we welcome you. If not, remember it is a big Internet, and you should go where you can support the goals of that project.

[[User:Northwest|Northwest]] ([[User talk:Northwest|talk]]) 18:37, 28 April 2017 (EDT)
:Go write up a Popeye episode, son. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 18:43, 28 April 2017 (EDT)
::This applies to you too, JohnZ, just so you know. [[User:Northwest|Northwest]] ([[User talk:Northwest|talk]]) 19:13, 28 April 2017 (EDT)

== re: Liberal article ==

I made some revisions to the [[liberal]] article to make it more accurate. And made some talk page edits indicating my reasons for the changes. For example, liberalism is not communism or Nazism. [[Attila the Hun]] was not a liberal, etc.

If you want to review the article periodically to make sure my changes stick, it would be appreciated.

I will pay you the courtesy of not having all or most liberals equated with Attila the Hun, Adolf Hitler, Mao or Stalin. I would ask you, however, to have the decency to not publicize private emails.

By the way, I have been to Framingham, MA and got along with all the people I met. The people I met in Framingham did not give me Nazi salutes. And I did not see any Nazi flags on front lawns. Nor did I see any statues of Lenin while on Massachusetts thruways or while in Framingham. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 01:45, 9 May 2017 (EDT)

:No Nazi flags? No Lenin statues? Not one? I guess Massachusetts is going soft. It must be all the political correctness or something. :-) I haven't seen any of that stuff in my trips to upstate New York either. Or in my trips to Iowa, Arizona, Arkansas, Kentucky, Michigan, Virginia, Alabama, Tennessee, or Missouri. What's the world coming to?

:Seriously, I have noticed your recent attempts to inject some reasonableness into certain articles, and I appreciate that. (I'm serious this time!) In fact, I have recently noticed some rather decent articles here. But plenty of awful ones, like "liberal" and its ilk. I'm trying to improve the good ones, while ignoring the awful ones. But you need to know that my ability to "make changes stick" is very limited, though I'll try. See my block log, the history of the [[Pussy Riot]] article, and the last half of the "A liberal is wanted for an online dialogue" section above (as well as a paragraph below), to see what I'm talking about. So someone might undo anything I do (and block me in violation of policy). But I'll try.

:I don't consider "not having all or most liberals equated with Attila the Hun, Adolf Hitler, Mao or Stalin" to be a courtesy to me personally. It's a courtesy to Conservapedia. But I appreciate it in any case.

:About the email: Perhaps I should have redacted the email address, but I considered that the name was so nondescript that it must have been a garbage gmail account that you created. If you have gotten spam on that account, I apologize. However, I think the general content of emails can't be considered private. (Just ask Hillary Clinton!) And most of the message was just hawking your own pages right here at CP, along with one link to a vimeo clip to an old Star Trek thing.

:Peace, my non-Nazi non-Communist friend, [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 13:45, 9 May 2017 (EDT)

:::Follow-up: I have redacted the email more thoroughly; I assume from Cons's vaping that that is what he wanted me to to. He can't possibly have wanted me to conceal the ''fact that he sent it'', since he openly announced it in advance on this page.

::But if you do anything that goes against Conservapedia policy (as you've done repeatedly over time, and even recently), you ''will'' stand a chance of being blocked again (and despite what you otherwise think, blocking someone for violating CP policy is ''not'' "illegal"), so don't go thinking you can game the system just so you can get your way and get liberal POV imposed on this site. All you're doing every time you bring this up is that you're showing you prefer to ignore the rules of this site (and your history here, once again, proves that). [[User:Northwest|Northwest]] ([[User talk:Northwest|talk]]) 23:43, 9 May 2017 (EDT)
:::SamHB, I look at your restoration and its skepticism that more than one person has edited using the User: Conservative account.

:::The edit log shows that the User: Conservative account created the [[Atheism and the persecution of homosexuals]] article. The edit log shows that the User: Conservative account created the [[Gay bowel syndrome]] and [[Homosexuality and Parasites]] articles. No intelligent person believes that these articles are the work of one person. The footnoting style is radically different for the [[Atheism and the persecution of homosexuals]] article and frankly the article lacked machismo as soon as it used the alphabet soup of LGBTQ. Frankly, I don't even know what all those letters stand for. Why is the Q even used? It seems redundant.

:::You still not reconciled this blaring incongruently which was even noticed by a non-fan of the User: Conservative account. There must be some reason why you are not coming up with a reasonable explanation of the incongruity? What is it?

:::By the way, the explanation is so simple. More than one person has edited using the User: Conservative account.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 13:45, 30 May 2017 (EDT)

== re: "I'm going to organize this in broad categories. That's the right thing to do for articles about scientists" ==

Bill Nye is an engineer. He is not a scientist. Stop engaging in credential inflation! I realize that evolutionism is exceedingly weak. But try to not engage in desperation tactics and make efforts to control yourself. :)[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 11:46, 1 June 2017 (EDT)
:Well, it's the right thing for articles about science popularizers too.

:Sorry, I should have said "science popularizers". The fact that he's an engineer is irrelevant.

:I think the suggestion that I need to make efforts to control myself is a little harsh for such an infraction as calling him a scientist instead of a science popularizer. It doesn't strike me as anywhere near as great a failure of self-control as spending years pretending to be multiple people, or spending years making tens of thousands (hundreds of thousands? millions?) of edits, deletions, renamings, cross-links, and ineffably pointless changes to image sizes, mostly for an utterly obsessive corpus of foolishness.

:But we're still friends. I enjoy sparring with you. And I've got more stuff to do in reply to your previous edit on this page. But first, I need to change an image size.

:[[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 18:18, 1 June 2017 (EDT)

== talk page second archive ==

You user talk page is insanely long. I think you are overdue for [[User talk:SamHB/archive 2]]. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 09:03, 2 June 2017 (EDT)

:You're right. Done. Thank you. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 18:12, 3 June 2017 (EDT)
== Nice job ==
I read your user page archives - really entertaining, and they made me realized how wretched I was to write articles for Cons, even if they did get on the Main Page. Please, don't stop believing in relativity. Hold onto that feeling.--[[User:Abcqwe|Nathan]] ([[User talk:Abcqwe|talk]]) 16:34, 4 June 2017 (EDT)

== re: well-intentioned and level-headed people ==

You wrote: "You need to know that user "Conservative" ''is not in any way typical of the people we have here''. There are a lot of well-intentioned and level-headed people here, and you could have been a member of that community."

:First of all, User: Conservative is not merely one editor. So your petty personal attacks are lamer than you think. It is readily apparent that User: Conservative is more than editor. For example, the glaring topical/footnoting/writing style differences in the [[Atheism and the persecution of homosexuals]] article and some of the other homosexuality articles by the User: Conservative account. You have never explained these glaring differences.

:Secondly, you have yet to find a single factual error in any of the articles written by the User:Conservative account. You merely dislike some of the articles because they conflict with some of your errant/miscreant, liberal notions. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 22:29, 5 June 2017 (EDT)
:::Actually, I've been meaning to rip you to shreds, yet again, over that weird fantasy of yours. But there's usually something more urgent to do. Especially now, with the "abcqwe" issue. Trying to keep him on board is much more important than yet another go-around with you. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 23:30, 5 June 2017 (EDT)
::Your name is <name redacted>, everybody who has ever posted on this site knows your name is <name redacted>, people who died 100 years ago know your name is <name redacted>. People who will not be born until the 22nd century knows your name is <name redacted>. Insult your own intelligence(not hard to do I know) but the rest of us are not falling for it.
:::Actually, that's not my name, assuming that you were referring to me (SamHB) when you wrote "you" above. Maybe you are confusing me with someone else.
:::In any case, it is considered poor form to "out" or "dox" someone on a wiki. And the identity and personal info about the person you are perhaps referring to are well known. I suspect that you are about to be blocked, if you haven't already been blocked as I write this. And what you wrote above will likely be vaped, though I will restore it (with the name redacted) if that happens. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 23:30, 5 June 2017 (EDT)
::::
::::SanHV, why is the footnoting for [[Atheism and the persecution of homosexuals]] different from many other [[User: Conservative]] articles?

:::: I found out this month what the Q is in the acronym LGBTQ stands for. Why does the article [[Atheism and the persecution of homosexuals]] use the term LGBTQ, but the other homosexuality articles created by the User: Conservtive account not use that term?
:::::Probably because you are a klutz with your keyboard, as indicated by your spelling of "Conservtive". It stands for "queer", by the way.[[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 00:59, 9 June 2017 (EDT)

::::Is the term LGBTQ one that I would likely use? For example, how often does the word "gay" appear in Conservapedia's homosexuality articles?
:::::I wouldn't know. I'd have to read them. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 00:59, 9 June 2017 (EDT)

::::Is the term "persecution of homosexuals" one that I would likely use? Why was there an internal battle within the User: Conservative account about the title of the article [[Atheism and the persecution of homosexuals]]? For example, why was the title of that article changed/moved?
:::::Because you like to do that kind of thing, as anyone who looks at your contributions knows. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 00:59, 9 June 2017 (EDT)

::::Liberals dominate the field of psychology. Do liberals excel in the field of psychology in order to be able to discern that more than one editor has used the User:Conservative account?
:::::I doubt it. I doubt that, by and large, they give a hoot about the size of your "collective". [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 00:59, 9 June 2017 (EDT)
::::If liberals do excel in the discipline of psychology, why do so many psychology experiments and journal articles have an inability to be replicated? See: [http://www.nature.com/news/over-half-of-psychology-studies-fail-reproducibility-test-1.18248 Over half of psychology studies fail reproducibility test], ''Nature'', August 27, 2015

::::RobS, 1990sguy and Karajou have been told privately that more than one editor has used the User: Conservative account. There was an attempt to make one of these editors an editor of the User: Conservative account, but Aschlafly would not permit it.
:::::Can you send me the email in which Andy said that? And, by "one of these editors" do you mean one of RobS, 1990sguy and Karajou? All you would have to do is privately send them your CP password. Andy would not know. In fact, if you mail me your password, at sam4557@gmail.com, I could become a member of your collective! The "sockpuppet" rule prohibits one person from having multiple CP accounts, but there's no rule about giving out your password. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 00:59, 9 June 2017 (EDT)

::::Lastly, you couldn't rip a wet paper bad to shreds, let alone rip of member of the User: Conservative account to shreds. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 02:04, 6 June 2017 (EDT)
By the way, a 2006 international survey reported that 30% of the Swiss reject evolution which is one of the highest national percentages in Europe.[http://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/Home/Archive/Swiss_drag_knuckles_accepting_evolution.html?cid=70292] [[Switzerland]] has one of the very highest standards of living in Europe.

Denmark has one of the highest rates of belief in evolution in Europe (See: Jon D. Miller; Eugenie C. Scott; Shinji Okamoto (11 August 2006). "Public Acceptance of Evolution". Science. 313 (5788): 765–766.).

The Swiss are known for yodeling.
::I'm extremely fascinated, delighted, and enchanted to hear that. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 00:59, 9 June 2017 (EDT)
The Danes are known for bestiality! A 2015 ''Jerusalem Post'' article indicates "[[Copenhagen]] has for long been the bestiality capital of Europe and has attracted many tourists mainly visiting to have sex with animals. Legislation against this practice was only enacted this year."[http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Suggestions-for-the-anti-Semitic-slurs-list-434293] [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 02:28, 6 June 2017 (EDT)
:There are some worthwhile projects that I want to accomplish. I am not going to continue this latest battle between us. It doesn't make sense to respond to every slight someone directs your way. I am moving on. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 08:33, 6 June 2017 (EDT)
::I regret using the word miscreant above. It wasn't necessary.
:::No hard feelings. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 18:40, 6 June 2017 (EDT)

::I also agree with you that it would have been nice to retain the editor who recently departed. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 15:57, 6 June 2017 (EDT)
::::What??? To whom were you referring??? The one who was "showboating" and annoying Karajou and VargasMilan2 [sic]? I assumed you thought it was abcqwe, and I could find no evidence that he communicated with Karajou or VargasMilan. Who was it? Seriously, I'm curious. I'd like to know whether it was someone that I also disliked. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 18:40, 6 June 2017 (EDT)
:::I just discovered that someone blocked [[User:Abcqwe]]. He made a number of posts to talk pages that irritated people. It seems as if he was spoiling for a fight and/or trying to gain attention. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 17:13, 6 June 2017 (EDT)
:::::You just discovered that now?????? Really? [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 18:40, 6 June 2017 (EDT)
::::For the record, he blocked himself indefinitely, but I changed the block to five years because indefinite blocks are problematic. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 17:23, 6 June 2017 (EDT)
:::::OK. He was a provocateur at the end. No great loss. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 17:57, 6 June 2017 (EDT)
::::::But, was it necessary to delete his user and talk pages? Or is this just CP policy? --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 18:24, 6 June 2017 (EDT)
:::::::No, it is not policy. Please restore them. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 18:40, 6 June 2017 (EDT)
In terms of webmaster best practices, deleting low value pages is a beneficial thing to do. In 2017, Conservapedia is going to delete abandoned user pages and their respective talk pages. Andy has given the green light about this matter and he is not changing his mind about it. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 20:00, 6 June 2017 (EDT)
::It is a "best practice" only because you have the technical permission, as an administrator, to do whatever you please. You can delete whatever you want, vape whatever you want, and block whomever you want, at any time. You even burned down ''this'' page on 10 January, 2015. I was never under the illusion that you would honor my request to restore his pages. And I can't help noticing that, shortly after you explained this "best practice", you deleted a few pages just to make the point. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 00:59, 9 June 2017 (EDT)
:Re: annoying Karajou and VargasMilan2 - see: http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=User_talk:Karajou&diff=1351118&oldid=1350637 He sometimes signed his posts "Nate". As far as VargaMilan2, see conversation I moved to the community portal. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 20:23, 6 June 2017 (EDT)
::I think [[User:Abcqwe]] began to be more of a provocateur after I posted this article [[American liberalism and 21st century political losses]]. Given that he is an American liberal, it probably triggered his backlash/bitterness/resentment.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 20:33, 6 June 2017 (EDT)
:::I don't think Abcqwe annoyed Karajou or VargasMilan while he actually edited. They wrote what they did in response to the news that he was leaving. On top of that, it seems that Abcqwe uses a lot of sarcasm and sarcastic humor, and I think his "confession" displayed some of it. He also seems to have overexaggerated. Personally, I think he should have been more frank in his post, and I don't think his sense of humor helped at all. Many people probably got the impression that he was a parodist/liberal, while I think it is more believable that he was a more moderate person who originally joined in good faith. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 22:06, 6 June 2017 (EDT)
:::I seem to be the invisible man regarding Abcque. I was the one who tried to keep a lid on his vandalism. Did I need help? Yes. Did I ask for it?Yes. Did I get any from the lads wallowing in their anti liberal groupthinkfest, not giving a stuff for truth? No I did not. Do I still think that CP should be vehicle for information for homesckoolers? Yes. Is it ? No. Do I give a damn? Strangely, yes I do.
::::Sorry Sam. I have tried other forums to change an article title to allow me to correct the article. I want [[Joseph Belloc]] changed to [[Hilaire Belloc]]. Its simple really but the lads are too busy doing what they like doing. [[User:AlanE|AlanE]] ([[User talk:AlanE|talk]]) 03:08, 9 June 2017 (EDT)

== Border fence for the unfree state of Massachusetts ==

[[File:Prison.jpg|thumbnail|200px|center|Border fence for the unfree state of [[Massachusetts]] designed to keep people from leaving the state. See also: [[Essay: Free States Movement|Free States Movement]] ]]
Actually, I haven't seen any fences like that, except at MCI<ref>Massachusetts Correctional Institution</ref> Concord, where I go to visit my cousin (you know, the one who is a member of your collective; they let people edit Conservapedia from the slammer), who is serving a 5-year stretch for not being a [[Essay: Professor PZ Myers fails his applied biology course#Addendum|"svelte Bible believing young earth creationist like Chuck Norris"]].
{{clear}}

==Joking about TAR==

Question: Will TAR return? [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 13:24, 8 June 2017 (EDT)
:I will consider it ''only'' if he agrees to completely stop link-spamming and adding categories. If not, I or someone else will be forced to block him. I agree that he made some good changes, but the bad far outweighed the good. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 15:00, 8 June 2017 (EDT)
::I don't believe TAR is coming back. I was merely joking. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]])

That joke is not the least bit funny. I doubt that 1990'sguy appreciated the humor. As I'm sure you recall, during the period when TAR was being removed from the site (which is chronicled at [[User_talk:DavidB4#Cleaning_up_after_the_blocked_users]] and [[User_talk:Aschlafly/Archive60#Re:_Cleanup_work_post_TheAmericanRedoubt]], you repeatedly implied that you were somehow in private communication with him, and that, because of this, you could reassure everyone that he had no intention of coming back. But since you have a reputation for pretending to be in secret communication with people, just as you pretend to be multiple people, no one believed you. So Andy had to revoke his rights.

I don't believe he's coming back either, but not because of some private communication. It's because he would be shown the door instantly.

[[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 00:33, 9 June 2017 (EDT)
:At this point, I really am not concerned if you believe I have had various private conversations with people or if you believe more than one person has edited using the [[User: Conservative]] account.

:It is probably best if we keep our communications cordial, but very limited in the future.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 20:34, 10 June 2017 (EDT)

::OK. The "ripping you to shreds" that I had planned will not occur. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 12:31, 11 June 2017 (EDT)
:::A few points:

:::1. You called my liar and I have never lied at this wiki. More than one person has edited using the User: Conservative account. You may not accept this fact as being true, but that is your problem and not mine. Aschafly is certainly aware that the User: Conservative account has had more than one editor use it and Karajou is aware as well. I did a checker user on the User: Conservative account and at least one other editor has used the account in the last 3 months.

:::2. I should have been more cordial in my last communication with you. After all is said and done, I have decided to communicate far less on talk pages due to competing priorities. So any absence of communication with you isn't personal. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 17:36, 11 June 2017 (EDT)

== From warrior to diplomat ==

"Warrior to Diplomat

In his previous roles, Harald had focused primarily on marshaling the troops to defeat the competition. Now he found himself devoting a surprising amount of time to influencing a host of external constituencies, including regulators, the media, investors, and NGOs. His support staff was bombarded with requests for his time: Could he participate in industry or government forums sponsored by the government affairs department? Would he be willing to sit for an interview with an editor from a leading business publication? Could he meet with a key group of institutional investors? Some of these groups he was familiar with; others not at all. But what was entirely new to him was his responsibility not just to interact with various stakeholders but also to proactively address their concerns in ways that meshed with the firm’s interests. Little of Harald’s previous experience prepared him for the challenges of being a corporate diplomat.

What do effective corporate diplomats do? They use the tools of diplomacy—negotiation, persuasion, conflict management, and alliance building—to shape the external business environment to support their strategic objectives. In the process they often find themselves collaborating with people with whom they compete aggressively in the market every day.

To do this well, enterprise leaders need to embrace a new mind-set—to look for ways that interests can or do align, understand how decisions are made in different kinds of organizations, and develop effective strategies for influencing others."[https://hbr.org/2012/06/how-managers-become-leaders]

Harald made the transition. The Apostle Paul made the transition. I wonder if someone else can? :) [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 23:50, 11 June 2017 (EDT)

:I '''think''' you are making some good points in what you say, and it's certainly true that my ways of interacting with people on the internet (and in real life too) could use some improvement. But I'm having a hard time following your examples. I don't know who "Harald" is/was. Some ancient Nordic king? I know who the Apostle Paul was, but I don't see his situation as being relevant to business, the media, investors, or NGO's. And my situation isn't relevant to those things either. At least you didn't bring in Sun-Tzu. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 17:20, 19 June 2017 (EDT)
::SamHB, I was merely saying that I have decided to be more diplomatic.
:::Oh! I was reading way too much into what you were saying. (I often do that.) So you were saying that '''you''' want to "make the transition" and do a better job of persuasion and conflict management. OK, I will try to do the same.
:::As an example, I will try to calm GinnyS down. I think she may be cruisin' for a bruisin'. I will try to explain that you are an acquired taste, and that personal attacks are ''never'' allowed. And I'll try to make that same point to JohnZ, for when he comes back. He is in a situation that is similar in some ways but different in other ways. I think that, due to my longevity, I have gotten a certain amount of respect among the young-uns, and I can use that respect to get them to behave better.
:::[[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 23:00, 30 June 2017 (EDT)

::As an aside, as far as Trump, I have never seen a president attacked as much as Trump and with such venom. On the other hand, I have never seen a president counterpunch as much too (and sometimes in a very personal way). It is nothing new though. Burr/Hamilton had many exchanges of words before their duel. And Lincoln was viciously attacked by his critics if memory serves. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 23:22, 29 June 2017 (EDT)
:::Trump deserves every bit of what he gets. He knows next to nothing about American government, institutions, history, or traditions, seems to know very little about Christianity (though I realize I'm suppose to remove the plank from my own eye before making accusations like that), and seems to know very little about the Christian notions of generosity, forgiveness, humility, and contrition. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 23:00, 30 June 2017 (EDT)

== If you know of any good faith editors who have edited in the last 5 years and... ==

If you know of any good faith editors who have edited in the last 5 years and they are not on my list at [[User talk:Wikignome72]], please let me know.

I relied on: the recent changes list, my memory, user talk page edits for some of the active or formerly active editors. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 15:11, 19 June 2017 (EDT)

:Actually, yes, I could contribute a lot of names of people to keep. As you may know, I do a lot of "homework" or "research" here at CP, and I have a pretty good idea of who's who. Perhaps second only to you. But I think it's an unnecessary exercise to delete the old pages. And I sure hope your current deletion binge (well, deletion suggestion binge) isn't a reaction to my complaining, above, that you should not have deleted abcqwe's page.

:By the way, I have been trying to make an addition to Wikignome72's page, saying essentially the same thing, for over 3 hours, getting edit conflicts each time. I'll wait until you come up for air.

:If you actually want me to come up with a list of people that should be protected, I could do that. I would probably do it by going through the edit histories of all the articles that I have worked on and think are good, and noting everyone who contributed (who isn't a jerk).

:[[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 17:20, 19 June 2017 (EDT)

== Some people our friend ought to keep ==

First preliminary, your quizzes are cute.

Second preliminary, I really think he ought to be welcomed, even if he is just you. I don't know why you keep deleting my attempts to welcome him. I like to keep up the pretense that he's a real person.

Third preliminary, I had no idea there was so much garbage in the user base. But I hope you don't think you are saving disk space; you aren't. Nothing ever really goes away in a computer database. Except "vaping", which you aren't doing.

I see the purge is in full swing. I've gone over the list, and there are a few people I recognize as having been, one way or another, significant people in CP's history. I'd like you (him, her) to consider restoring them. Some people left in anger (and at least one had some serious criticism of you personally.) But they are nevertheless part of our history. People won't know how we got here if they can't see our history. I've argued in the recent past that we should keep the "Parthian shot" of someone who has been blocked, so that, if they try to come back, we will know why they were kicked out and why they should not be allowed back in. But it's more than that. We need to remember the conflicts that have gone on in the past. Well, some of them; many people were just losers and deserve to be forgotten. Heck, isn't there a page called something like "Examples of censorship by the 'tolerant'"? I haven't looked at it lately, but we may be damaging it. We need to keep at least some of those examples around, don't we?

So here are a few people I've found so far. Is it possible to bring them back? I think it is, unless they have been "vaped", which I don't think they have been.
*DanH Wasn't he a sysop and well-respected person? Wasn't he the chess player? I may misremember the details [I sure do!], but he was an important part of our history. I seem to have confused him with ...
*DeanS Wasn't he a sysop and well-respected person? Wasn't he the chess player? And the Mormon who was concerned about whether there would be intolerance of Mormon? (Answer: none at all.) Wasn't he the person whose wife died? Wasn't he the geologist whose user name was originally "crocoite" (an interesting mineral), and then changed it in order to comply with the username policy? I may misremember the details, but he was an important part of our history.
*MatthewQ I see there's been some back-and-forth on this. He was a somewhat interesting science contributor.
*StaceyT Yeah, she was unhappy. But we need to see what sorts of things made people unhappy.
*Ymmotrojam He was a big player at one time.
*Coolguy Yes, he was recent, and p*ss*d some people off and was shown the door. But we need to see that history.
*And, of course, you won't delete Philip J Rayment, right?
There are others that haven't been deleted (yet).

Did you know that DeborahB created her account when Conservapedia was only 6 days old? She was a true "founding mother".

[[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 11:20, 20 June 2017 (EDT)
:I will restore DanH.

:MathewQ mere had "useful links" on his user page so there is no need to restore that, but I kept his user talk page.

:StacyT was contentious and probably a sock of a man if I recall. Definitely a loser. Not restoring.

:Ymmotrojam deleted his own user page and talk page. I am respecting his wishes and keeping those pages deleted.

:Coolguy was a person who was not willing to engage in dialogue. Like many on the left, he was ignorant of history and/or wanted to engage in revisionism. He just wanted to pontificate. There are plenty of reasons to believe that various founding fathers were not Christians. But when you look at the state constitutions and various other important historical considerations, it is very apparent that Coolguy was pushing a very ignorant/false narrative of American history. I not going to bother to restore his user page or talk page. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 13:31, 20 June 2017 (EDT)

== Re: restoration of DanH and PJR. Looking into other restoration ==

The user pages of [[User:DanH]] and [[User:Philip J. Rayment]] (PJR) were so boring, it gave me an excuse to delete them. But I really shouldn't have deleted them. And I just discovered that TK made those pages boring with his revisions to those pages.

So I restored those pages to their former glory. I did add a link to my atheism article from PJR's talk page by adding a bracket around his use of the word "atheists" on his user page. I am still in communication with PJR and his wife, and I know that PJR would not mind my small change.

I am looking into the DeanS restoration. I did not delete it. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 14:22, 20 June 2017 (EDT)
:[[User:DeanS]] user page history has been restored along with TK's replacing of the blanking by DeanS with a retired template. The retired template looks better. I don't think DeanS would have minded.

:DeanS deleted his user talk page. I am going to keep it deleted.

:I think DeanS left due to ill health, but it could have been due to disputes with evangelical Christians on the website (He was a Mormon) or some other reason. I have no idea. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 14:32, 20 June 2017 (EDT)
::As far as DeanS, I did a little detective work and restored his talk page to the version I think he would have wanted. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 14:48, 20 June 2017 (EDT)
:::Thanks for attending to these details. As far as leaving the last version of something up, when it just says "retired", there's nothing wrong with that, as long as data squirrels like myself can look through the history and see what led to the retirement. That's what we should have—a historical record. (Excuse me, an historical record.) [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 15:34, 20 June 2017 (EDT)
::::I think PJR left due to a battle over gun owner rights/public safety controversies. But perhaps that was merely the final straw. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 15:41, 20 June 2017 (EDT)
I restored the user page of [[User:JacobB]] as well. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 15:58, 20 June 2017 (EDT)
::I removed the striked out text from PJR's user page. It looked sloppy and I didn't see any real purpose in it. Next time I talk to PJR, I will see if he is fine with the edit. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 17:32, 20 June 2017 (EDT)

==Taking some of your advice==

Greetings, Cons!

The long message you left for me yesterday was extremely interesting. I had to go back a long way (June 29, 2015) to find what you were referring to and refresh my memory of the issue. It's too bad that yesterday's message was lost in a wiki server malfunction.<ref>This seems to happen a lot with your contributions.</ref> The "advice" that you seem to have been referring to was that you should direct your persuasive energies into ways that are more likely to have an actual effect on people, such as human interaction, rather than writing Conservapedia articles. And you mentioned "opportunity cost", that is, the cost of one approach versus another in terms of actual payoff.

You ended with your usual argument against evolution, giving two web references. The first was to a page that had a religious web site in its name. As you know, I totally ignore any arguments about scientific topics appearing in religious web sites or religious publications. If one can't make an argument about a scientific topic (as opposed to, say, a topic of morality or ethics), without saying "because the Bible says so", I'm not interested.

The second web site was [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ohp4dmkOmKE this]. So I had to look. Though it was clear right from the start (though not from the URL itself) that it was a religious web site—it was from the PNN News and Ministry Network, and it also had front-page references to http://www.hickoryhammockbaptist.org and http://creation.com. It had five "questions for the evolution believer". I had to sit through a guy with a very irritating voice listing the questions. (Aren't there 15 questions elsewhere? This guy isn't even trying!)
:The first was about abiogenesis. We all know that the question of abiogenesis, while interesting and having no known solution at present (or perhaps ever), lies outside of the issues of evolution/Biblical creation and young-Earth/old-Earth cosmology. So I had to sit through 55 seconds (opportunity cost!) of that nonsense.
:The second one was about "language", making the point that the DNA code satisfies all the accepted criteria for being a language, yet is unique among languages in that it was not developed by humans. (Not true, by the way.) And so somehow this meant that evolution must not have happened. Huh?
:It went downhill rapidly from there. The third was about sexual reproduction, and how "wasted energy" involved in this meant that evolution could not be correct. Or something. I stopped listening.
All things considered, sort of fun. But now, if you'll excuse me, I need to take your advice about taking my advice, and consider the opportunity cost of replying to you on my talk page. So long for now. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 21:19, 7 July 2017 (EDT)
::Essentially, I said that I am going to use my time better so I have a greater positive impact in life. Recently, I am more on track except for a comment on main page talk today.

::In July of 2017, I will be working on a Conservapedia related project. But you will see no edits being performed by the User: Conservative account in relation to this project.

::“Be extremely subtle, even to the point of formlessness. Be extremely mysterious, even to the point of soundlessness. Thereby you can be the director of the opponent's fate.” - [[Sun Tzu]]
:::Well, that's some advice I am '''not''' going to take. But if you think it works for you (I disagree) go right ahead. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 10:58, 8 July 2017 (EDT)

::此（译注：用间）兵之要，三军之所恃而动也 [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 22:12, 7 July 2017 (EDT)
::::I sent you a sour email recently about you publishing one of my emails recently. Looking back, I shouldn't have sent it.

::::No hard feelings. Enjoy your summer. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 01:45, 10 July 2017 (EDT)

OK, I got the email. I want to apologize for any behavior that may have led you to believe I can't be trusted with private information. Let me assure you that I am a trustworthy person when I know what information is being kept confidential.

The email that you are referring to is presumably the message listed above somewhere (or maybe it's been archived by now), in which I divulged both the sender and the content. Of course I divulged the fact that you sent the message--you had already said publicly that you were going to send it. I assumed that the email name of the sender was not secret because it looked like a "throwaway" name of the sort that people often create. In fact, you have sent other emails to people with various names. I assumed that you don't consider them secret. If I harmed you by revealing the name, I apologize.

After you complained, I redacted everything in the email listed above except the content. I believed that the content was typical of the things you write all over the place at Conservapedia. It was largely references to your various articles, as is your writing style. If the particular content of that message was something you wanted protected, I apologize.

If you wish to vape the redacted message above on this page, go ahead; I won't complain or restore it. (As you know, I usually oppose vaping, especially on users' talk pages, and sometimes restore the vaped material.)

So I need to know just how much secrecy you desire:
*Do you want me not to reveal even the fact of having received a message? Even if you said, here on this talk page, that you are going to send it or have sent it?
*Do you want me not to reveal the user ID of the sender?
*Do you want me not to reveal the content?
*Do you want me not even to say that I have replied, or otherwise give any general information about what was discussed?
At the risk of violating the last point, I suspect that the project you referred to (which you also mentioned above on this page) is something I wouldn't be interested in. I know that, in the past, your projects have been things like an anti-evolution pamphlet. Now if you want to collaborate on an anti-creationist pamphlet (you know, things like "15 questions that creationists can't answer") by all means, sign me up.

[[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 14:07, 13 July 2017 (EDT)

:At Conservapedia, I am not going to discuss any of the off wiki activities of the editors who use the User: Conservative account. This is the simplest solution to potential problems caused by the intolerant left.

:The simplest solution to the email issue is for me to no longer send you any emails. But perhaps I will change my mind on this matter. I can certainly pray about this matter. If we were to communicate privately it would probably be Skype communication due to constraints upon my time. I am going to strongly endeavor to be more efficient with my time and communicating via email can be more time intensive. But you have indicated that you are not interested in Skype communications so in all likelihood, I doubt there will be future private communications between us.

:Again, no hard feelings. I will certainly endeavor to keep my communications with you at Conservapedia cordial. And again, enjoy your summer. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 15:43, 13 July 2017 (EDT)
::I just sent you an email. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 07:43, 15 July 2017 (EDT)
:::I sent you an additional email. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 08:20, 15 July 2017 (EDT)
::::I will keep my promise of confidentiality. So let me just say that there has been some traffic on the sam4557 email account of late. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 09:29, 15 July 2017 (EDT)
:::::I just sent you another email. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 11:10, 15 July 2017 (EDT)
::::::I sent you a small request via email. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 11:34, 15 July 2017 (EDT)
== re: polishing up my grammar and writing skills ==

I sent you a private email. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 00:32, 31 July 2017 (EDT)

==For Cons==
I normally find "listicles" ("The 15 worst beaches", etc.) on the internet to be extremely stupid. But [https://www.msn.com/en-us/lifestyle/whats-hot/38-things-no-man-over-40-should-own/ss-AAoKipb?utm_source=taboola&utm_medium=referral#image=2 this one] was actually entertaining. I especially liked [https://www.msn.com/en-us/lifestyle/whats-hot/38-things-no-man-over-40-should-own/ss-AAoKipb?utm_source=taboola&utm_medium=referral#image=9 item number 8]. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 01:33, 2 August 2017 (EDT)
::I am cutting back on entertainment. I made a couple of promises to people that require stricter time management.

::In terms of time management, I shouldn't have done any Conservapedia editing today. But I decided to get back on track.

::"Top performers make mistakes, commit errors, and get off track just like everyone else. The difference is that they get back on track as quickly as possible." - How to Build a New Habit: This is Your Strategy Guide by James Clear[http://jamesclear.com/habit-guide]

::There are so many internet cat videos, but so little time. :)[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]])
I did a little bit of additional editing to reflect some significant changes relative to some of the articles I have created in the past. But I really shouldn't have done that.

But I am getting back on track in terms of some important promises.

However, I will not be editing Conservapedia for 66 days (see this interesting study: [http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ejsp.674/full How are habits formed: Modelling habit formation in the real world]). You can hold me to this. On October 7, 2017, I will let you know how things went in terms of new habit creation and bad habit cessation.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 10:34, 2 August 2017 (EDT)

::I find it odd that all the many members of the User:Conservative account are all going to be busy for the next 66 days, is this an admission that there is only one of you? Listed in the differences between Wikipedia and Conservapedia is the respect for a users talk page. So what is this about?
[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=User_talk:SamHB&curid=133755&action=history]
Not a lot of respect for the rules here, but then again the rules have never applied to you have they?--[[User:JoshO|JoshO]] ([[User talk:JoshO|talk]]) 16:12, 2 August 2017 (EDT)

:Those 66 days just flew by. If you cannot model your habits on your own, perhaps you should try to get help from others? --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] ([[User talk:AugustO|talk]]) 06:07, 10 August 2017 (EDT)

::Are you forgetting that more than one editor uses the User:Conservative account and it's the specific editor who said he was taking time off that would be doing it? [[User:Northwest|Northwest]] ([[User talk:Northwest|talk]]) 06:30, 10 August 2017 (EDT)
:::AugustO, I am going to get back on track. I will not edit Conservapedia until Sunday, October 15, 2017. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 07:00, 10 August 2017 (EDT)
AugustO, I am going to get back on track. '''I will not edit Conservapedia until Sunday, October 15, 2017'''
*13:37, 12 August 2017 (diff | hist) . . (+96)‎ . . 2018 Global Atheist Convention ‎
*13:37, 12 August 2017 (diff | hist) . . (+125)‎ . . 2018 Global Atheist Convention ‎
*13:19, 12 August 2017 (diff | hist) . . (+30)‎ . . Atheist fundraising vs. religious fundraising ‎ (→‎See also) (current)
*13:18, 12 August 2017 (diff | hist) . . (-12)‎ . . Fundraising ‎ (→‎Religious fundraising vs. atheist/irreligious fundraising) (current)
*13:17, 12 August 2017 (diff | hist) . . (+17)‎ . . Charity ‎ (→‎See also) (current)
*13:17, 12 August 2017 (diff | hist) . . (+30)‎ . . Fundraising ‎
*13:16, 12 August 2017 (diff | hist) . . (-1)‎ . . Fundraising ‎
*13:15, 12 August 2017 (diff | hist) . . (0)‎ . . m Fundraising ‎ (Conservative moved page Fund-raising to Fundraising) --[[User:IMcCleod|IMcCleod]] ([[User talk:IMcCleod|talk]]) 16:18, 12 August 2017 (EDT)

::IMcCleod, do you also assume that only one editor uses the User:Conservative account (even though it has been made clear that it is used by multiple editors)? [[User:Northwest|Northwest]] ([[User talk:Northwest|talk]]) 23:16, 12 August 2017 (EDT)
:::IMcCloud, Christendom is playing a significant role in bringing [[Atheist factions|the quarrelsome]] and socially challenged [[atheist movement]] to its knees and now [[Global atheism statistics|atheists are shrinking in their global influence]].

:::American [[Atheist fundraising vs. religious fundraising|atheist fundraising]] is now anemic. The atheist activist Lee Moore recently admitted concerning major atheist organizations in the United States: "Most of them are starved for cash. They're downsizing left and right."[http://www.conservapedia.com/Atheist_fundraising_vs._religious_fundraising#Atheist_activist_Lee_Moore:_Donations_to_atheist_organizations_are_down_due_to_infighting_within_the_atheist_movement]

:::While I am pleased to see that the largely despondent atheist movement is imploding while Christendom is going one glorious victory after another (see: [[Atheist pessimism about the atheist movement]] and [[High morale of Christendom]]), I have decided to broaden my horizons (And SamHB has played a role in this matter).

:::As tempting as it is to add further information about the current state of affairs concerning the [[atheism vs. Christianity]] topic, I have decided that I must do better in keeping my commitment to be more focused in some of my current endeavors. Therefore, I am going to be completely resolute in this matter and not edit this wiki until October 18, 2017. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]])

"AugustO, I am going to get back on track. '''I will not edit Conservapedia until Sunday, October 15, 2017"
*18:01, 15 August 2017 (diff | hist) . . (+280)‎ . . Millennials, irreligion and obesity ‎ (→‎See also) (current)
*17:54, 15 August 2017 (diff | hist) . . (-25)‎ . . Millennials, irreligion and obesity--[[User:Jaris|Jaris]] ([[User talk:Jaris|talk]]) 18:17, 15 August 2017 (EDT) ‎

==More about Cons==
In a [http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:SamHB#Taking_some_of_your_advice section above] Cons asked for complete secrecy if we are to engage in an email dialog. I gave him that assurance. I have abided by it, and will continue to do so. He then wrote that he had sent me an email.

Other than to say that there has been some traffic on the sam4557 account, I will have nothing to say about any email. Please do not ask about it; I will not reply. Everything I write below is based entirely on material that is publicly visible on this website.

Alert observers may have noticed that I dropped out of sight at about the same time that Cons (first) did. That is entirely a coincidence; there was no "pact" or "challenge". I dropped out because it became clear, from the [[Pussy Riot]] article, that "assistants" / "junior sysops" have been granted absolute power to control editorial content however they see fit, blocking other contributors if it suits them, and that a few of those assistants are actively wielding that power.

Now, about Cons's "pledge" to refrain from editing CP and pursue more productive activities (I have no idea where the 66 days figure comes from), it is clear that, although there has been some good behavior, there has been some backsliding. Various other people have, quite understandably, chided him over this. Cons has apologized and promised to do better, only to have succumbed to temptation again. Longstanding bad habits are difficult to break. I would recommend that people show some Christian forgiveness, forbearance, and understanding as he struggles with this. (This would certainly be easier if Cons had shown more understanding and forbearance toward others in the past.)

But there is something quite revealing about what has been going on. '''He could easily have blamed the backsliding on other members of his "consortium".''' Instead, he owned up to it. This shows, ''the way nothing else can'', that the business of Cons's account being operated by multiple people was utter nonsense. Most sensible people, including myself, saw through this all along. But a few people, as seen above on this page, including sysops who presumably had access to whatever non-public information there might have been, seem to have been totally taken in by this nonsense. Cons was man enough to admit to his failings, and other people should be man enough to accept that this "multiple person" fantasy was just that.

[[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 20:37, 19 August 2017 (EDT)

:I know you're referring specifically to me regarding the Pussy Riot article, SamHB. You were told on that and other articles (more than once) not to impose a liberal POV on them, but you didn't take heed of that advice and you went ahead anyway in violation of Conservapedia policy, following past behavioral patterns that led to you being blocked numerous times before by other editors. When you also say "various other people" regarding User:Conservative, what you really mean is the same poster using multiple accounts (most of which have since been blocked for sockpuppeteering) to hurl that accusation about the account just being used by one editor as opposed to more than one. Until Conservative says otherwise, I'm going to take his word for it. [[User:Northwest|Northwest]] ([[User talk:Northwest|talk]]) 21:24, 19 August 2017 (EDT)

== Re: SamHB's recent post to his talk page ==

A few things:

'''1.''' The 66 days is based on a journal article in the ''European Journal of Social Psychology'' entitled ''How are habits formed: Modelling habit formation in the real world''.[http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ejsp.674/full]

'''2.''' Sysops/admins have been told that more one person has used the User:Conservative account and I have indicated this multiple times. Sysops/admins have access to the check user function of this wiki which has enabled them to see that the User: Conservative account has been edited from multiple geographic regions (sometimes the account has been edited from more than one geographic region in the same day due to the fact that the account has been used by more than one editor).

It has also been observed that the footnoting style of various User: Conservative edits has been radically different.

In addition, skepticism has been expressed that one of the users of the User: Conservative account would create an article entitled [[Atheism and the persecution of homosexuals]].

'''3.''' SamHB is correct that longstanding bad habits can be difficult to break. While it is true that I had about a week long stretch without editing Conservapedia in early August of 2017, I ended my break from editing this wiki before the 66 days was up.

Since this habit is more entrenched than anticipated, more drastic measures are clearly needed! So this habit will be broken using multiple methods - including a tried and true Marine Corps and Navy Seal method (Push ups if the old habit reemerges!).

My next edit to this wiki will be on Tuesday, October 25, 2017.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 12:33, 20 August 2017 (EDT)

:There might be things I want to say here, but they will have to wait until the 66 days are up.
:@Cons: You know what you need to do. Or, more precisely, what not to do. If you absolutely have to have some critical change made, feel free to send me an email.
:@everyone else: Please stay away.

:[[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 21:10, 20 August 2017 (EDT)

== Please check your email ==

SamHB, please check your email. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 06:18, 14 September 2017 (EDT)
:I have not looked at my sam4557 email since late August, and do not plan to look at it for 66 days. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 23:05, 14 September 2017 (EDT)

== Quick note ==

For the next 66 days, I may not strictly adhere to the 66 days editing total fast on Conservapedia editing, but I will at least be on a very restricted diet. :)

I may do a limited amount of main page posts. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 23:03, 28 September 2017 (EDT)
:I know I have to be very strict about this former pledge. The Apostle Paul says some relevant things about this matter. I am going to write to you about this matter.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]])
== More than one User: Conservative at Conservapedia ==

Note the footnoting and writing styles in these recent articles written using the [[User: Conservative]] account:

*[[List of atheist shooters and serial killers]]

*[[Atheism and mental illness]]

*[[Essay: Was Stephen Paddock an atheist mass killer?]]

The footnoting styles are clearly different between the first/second works and the third work (which is an essay). Why are the footnoting styles different? Because multiple editors have used the User: Conservative account.

Clearly, the [[ad hominem]] attacks against "User: Conservative" and the armchair psychological analysis of "User: Conservative" should be reexamined.

There are scholars that speculate there are multiple writers behind the work commonly associated with [[Sun Tzu]].

"Be extremely subtle, even to the point of formlessness. Be extremely mysterious, even to the point of soundlessness. Thereby you can be the director of the opponent's fate." - Sun Tzu.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]])
== A major search engine whose name begins with the letter G, recognizes that certain "atheist gentlemen" have been rattled and overwhelmed by the sheer weight of the "Atheism and ...." heavy artillery barage by the User: Conservative collective ==
[[File:Google recognizes COCD.png|thumbnail|center|800px]]
{{clear}}

For more information, please see:

*[[Essay: Conservapedia Obsessive Compulsive Disorder is an officially recognized mental disorder|Conservapedia Obsessive Compulsive Disorder is an officially recognized mental disorder]]

Talking about obsessions:
{{cquote|My next edit to this wiki will be on Tuesday, October 25, 2017.Conservative (talk) 12:33, 20 August 2017 (EDT)}}
And no, I had no trouble waiting until '''''Wednesday''''', October 25, 2017, to post this comment ;-)
--[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] ([[User talk:AugustO|talk]]) 04:51, 25 October 2017 (EDT)
:Which is nowhere ''near'' the level of liberal obsession with wanting to silence free speech for everyone but themselves (hence the regular attacks on this site by immature liberal vandals, and even attacks from within by the few regular liberal posters who ''think'' they know what's best for this site better than the admins do). [[User:Northwest|Northwest]] ([[User talk:Northwest|talk]]) 00:26, 26 October 2017 (EDT)

== User: Conservative account ==

I had another member of the User: Conservative editor base change the password to the User: Conservative account.

In about a couple months or so, he will give me the new password.

Taking a break from editing for awhile. See you when you get back.

By the way, the [[2018 Global Atheist Convention that was cancelled|2018 Global Atheist Convention]] was cancelled due to lack of interest. Of course, this is yet another sign that Christendom has gloriously triumphed over the [[atheist movement]]! :)[[User:Wikignome72|Wikignome72]] ([[User talk:Wikignome72|talk]]) 11:02, 15 November 2017 (EST)

==References==
{{reflist}}

== Not impressed ==

Besides you seeking to provoke yet another fight on this site, you've also demonstrated two things by copying the user template I created for my user page (the one indicating that the user does not support the liberal media) and changing it into something else (accusing Breitbart News, a conservative news site, of being "fake news" even though it is not):

# You proved through your actions that liberals (like yourself) lack originality and prefer to copy and imitate others (per the [[Liberal Style]] article, in number seven of the [[Liberal Style#Debate and rhetorical tactics|Debate and rhetorical tactics section]])
# You resorted to the notorious tactic made infamous by Marx, Lenin and Goebbels in accusing conservative media of what the liberal media (particularly CNN, MSNBC, the nightly network newscasts, the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Huffington Post, Vice Media, etc.) is guilty of itself (propagating lies, bias and fake news)

Congrats, you just proved the point Conservapedia (and other sources) made about liberals and their tactics once again through your actions in trying to force a liberal POV here. [[User:Northwest|Northwest]] ([[User talk:Northwest|talk]]) 09:37, 21 November 2017 (EST)

== <font color="red">This page is not to be used for abusing, insulting, berating, or bullying cancer patients, or otherwise engaging in the kind of social, moral, or ethical depravity that people outgrow by age 10.</font> ==

I didn't berate any cancer patients. I merely pointed out the unhealthy and anti-social habits of atheists which give the atheist population a higher cancer rate.
:You most certainly did. A careful reading of your activities here at CP relating to cancer, as well as what's been going on over at RW, shows very clearly that you were engaging in abusive and, frankly, un-Christian behavior toward RW user "Mercian". It is completely obvious from a careful reading of this what has been going on. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 21:32, 30 December 2017 (EST)
In 2017, I helped my friend by researching the best solutions to treat his loved one's cancer. He asked me to do it because he felt I had strong research skills. In 2018, I am helping an anti-cancer initiative. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 00:15, 24 December 2017 (EST)
:Congratulations. BTW, I'm also engaged in helping an anti-cancer initiative.
:Also, your suggestion that left-handed people are somehow "mutant" strikes me as a bit more provocative than someone who is trying to win hearts and minds ought to be. You might want to tone down the negativity in the things you write. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 21:32, 30 December 2017 (EST)
::"A systematic literature review combined with primary research on handedness demonstrates that atheism and/or paranormal belief is associated with all of these indicators of high mutational load."[https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40806-017-0133-5]

::Judging by [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WKl9H037C1k THE VIDEO] I saw where he explains his theory, the British anthropologist who published the article appears to be a person of high intelligence, but likely not as creative in his thinking as he ought to be (Maybe left-handedness creates otherness and people less prone to conformity), Nevertheless, he does appear to be smart enough to recognize what high mutational load is.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 23:37, 30 December 2017 (EST)
=== Atheism and cancer ===

<s>Some atheist (or at the very least someone who appeared to be an atheist) claimed an [[Atheism and cancer]] article was created in the past at this wiki. Yet, when I did a search using the search box, I found no record of such an article being created at this wiki.</s>
:That's funny. The article you cite was created, by you, at 14:39 on 22 December, before you wrote the above. It's still there now, having been edited almost continuously by you. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 23:29, 23 December 2017 (EST)

<s>Given what I know about [[Atheism and health]] and [[Global atheism and aging populations]], I suspected there was a positive correlation between atheism and cancer. And lo and behold, there is!

By the way, you might find this to be interesting:

According to the American Cancer Society:

"According to the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), 69% of cancer patients say they pray for their health. A recent study published in Cancer, a peer-reviewed journal of the American Cancer Society, suggests a link between religious or spiritual beliefs and better physical health reported among patients with cancer."[https://www.cancer.org/latest-news/study-cancer-patients-with-strong-religious-or-spiritual-beliefs-report-better-health.html]

The Christian apologist Gary Habermas wrote: "Double-blind prayer experiments: where people pray for others with terminal illness. Habermas admitted that most such experiments have not worked, but the three that he knows of that have indeed worked were cases of orthodox-Christians praying for the sick."[https://www.christianpost.com/news/christian-apologist-10-reasons-for-the-fall-of-atheism-106531/]

See: [[Atheism and cancer#Religion/irreligion and cancer treatment|Religion/irreligion and cancer treatment]] [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 15:19, 22 December 2017 (EST)</s>

=== I've got the power! ===
[[File:Freethinkers.jpg|thumbnail|200px|right|<s>Dr. [[Jonathan Sarfati]] is a staff member of [[Creation Ministries International]].</s> ]]
<s>An atheist/agnostic wrote about me: "These people get off on controlling you, on subjecting you to their power... I'm sorry that... mound of misery got to you."

SamHB, I thought Christians believed in free will, that people are free moral agents and that God can help people overcome various temptations? See also: [[Atheism and free will]]</s>
:Actually, we do believe that! Conservapedia addiction is a tough addiction to break, but people have broken even tougher ones. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 23:29, 23 December 2017 (EST)

<s>"When in reality no one can ever make you feel ANYTHING! That’s right; you heard me. No one can make you cry. No one can make you happy. No one can make you sad. No one can make you feel better. No one can make you feel guilty…but you." - Heather Wilson

Evidently, Heather Wilson has more [[machismo]] than the gentlemen of a certain atheist wiki!

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_BRv9wGf5pk I've got the power!]

The truth often hurts. And certain gentlemen can't handle the truth!

Evidently, I am the puppet master and certain atheist gentlemen are my puppets!</s>
[[File:Second dog with a bone.jpg|right|thumbnail|220px|<s>Atheists obsessed with [[Conservapedia]] are like a [[dog]] with a bone. Their dogged persistence in thinking about Conservapedia, discussing Conservapedia and making forecasts about Conservapedia is quite prodigious and intense.</s> ]]
<s>I've got the power.

I've got the power.

Like the crack of the whip, I Snap attack...

Bang the bass, turn up the treble.

Radical mind, day and night all the time.

7:14, wise divine. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]])
:I read this comment directed to me by a member of SJW atheist wiki: "What have you done but spiel hate...".

:A best selling book declares that SJWs always project. It's so true.

:Well cited and factual encyclopedia articles spieling hate. it such an absurd proposition. The British atheist EJamesW on Conservapedia's atheism related articles: "...they're very detailed, thorough and have lots of quotes and citations." (see: [[Essay: A British atheist on Conservapedia's atheism articles]]). [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 03:54, 23 December 2017 (EST)</s>

== Re: Online boxing match ==

Merician and I have been engaging in a bit of an online boxing match lately, but we have been playing by [https://www.thefreedictionary.com/Marquis+of+Queensberry+rules Marquess of Queensberry Rules].

See also: [[Talk:Essay: British atheist acknowledges the reasonableness of a User: Conservative editor]]. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 22:09, 30 December 2017 (EST)
:Addemdun: See my comments above regarding high mutational loads/left-handedness/socialization, otherness and less likely to engage in conformity (I expanded the [[Atheists and genetic mutations]] article to provide more in-depth analysis/commentary.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 05:41, 31 December 2017 (EST)

== <s>Atheistic China and baby eating</s> ==

<s>See: [[Atheistic China and baby eating]]

See also: [[Atheists eat babies meme]]

From 2005 to 2015, mews organizations reported about gross immorality in irreligious countries/regions [[Atheism and bestiality|that involved animals]]. And now this! SamHB, what's next? See also: [[Atheism and moral depravity]]</s>

[[File:Poodle.jpg|thumbnail|200px|center|<s>SamHB, don't say I didn't try to stop the irreligious when they started to abuse poodles! See: [[Atheism and bestiality]]</s> ]]
{{clear}}
<s>I hope this further clarifies why I drew the line the sand where I did in terms of publicizing the misdeeds of the irreligious. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 06:00, 3 February 2018 (EST)</s>

:If you want to turn Conservapedia from an encyclopedia for conservatives into a playpen for adults behaving in utterly infantile ways (and on the main page, no less!) I can't stop you. But please don't do it on my talk page. You seem, from this and earlier incidents, to believe that I have some special intellectual bond with you, or some interest in these matters. I don't. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 10:50, 17 February 2018 (EST)

== Your edits ==

When you edited the Billy Graham article, [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Texas_elections,_2018&diff=826892431&oldid=826891839 you reverted] my previous edit in addition to making the grammar fix. I didn't notice your fix, and with good reason, considering that your improvement was very small compared to what you reverted. Sorry for the confusion. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 11:21, 21 February 2018 (EST)

== You're Cool ==

Just Sayin'. [[User:DaveSG|DaveSG]] ([[User talk:DaveSG|talk]]) 01:09, 24 February 2018 (EST)

User talk:SamHB

2018-02-24T06:09:15Z

DaveSG: /* Mank */ new section

[[User talk:SamHB/Archive 1]]
[[User_talk:SamHB/archive_2]]

== Red telephone for Cons ==

Cons: Thank you for dealing with the matter of [[Special:Contributions/Cal_Um]]. I know that you recognize that you are not an expert in relativity and know better than to get into the technical details of these discussions, and I appreciate that. (I wish more people recognized their limitations in this area; you can look up my recent controversies.) But this was a clear case of you recognizing that this guy was a troublemaker, and coming to my aid.

And now I see that there has been another case, with [[Special:Contributions/Bobbillyman69]], taken care of by Andy. Vandals look at the Recent Changes log: "Oh, look! Relativity is on today's dinner menu!" We old-timers know all about that phenomenon.

[[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 12:21, 7 March 2017 (EST)
:Your welcome. I just happened to see it. I am guessing that for the foreseeable future that you and Andy are going to have to maintain the article as far as keeping it in accordance to compromise you two reached as far as the wording of the article. I don't think I will be of much help in the future. Again, I just happened to see that particular vandal.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 12:32, 7 March 2017 (EST)

== A liberal is wanted for an online dialogue ==

A liberal is wanted to have a single online dialogue. Please let them know at http://opposing-views.org/ if you are interested. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 21:15, 29 March 2017 (EDT)
:Here is their contact page: http://opposing-views.org/contact/ [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 21:25, 29 March 2017 (EDT)

::Well, I'm somewhat flattered, but significantly puzzled, by this. From looking at the web page, it looks like some kind of general liberal/conservative debate site. Currently focused on Obamacare, but with a wider outlook in general. My guess is that they are looking to increase their "contributor staff", particularly liberals, and they came to you. Or, more likely, you discovered them.

::I'm not interested in contributing to such a site. And one thing puzzles me about it. There are '''thousands''' of liberal/conservative discussions/debates/controversies that take place every day. I find myself in such discussions several times per day. So these people want to create yet another one? With nothing noteworthy about it? They will be (already are) totally drowned out by the discussions already going on around the internet. I have about a dozen such web sites already bookmarked.

::Now, about your choice of correspondent: I'm flattered, of course. But, when you needed to find a liberal friend, you came to ''Conservapedia''? Well, perhaps you contacted 97 other liberal acquaintances, besides EJamesW, AlanE, and myself. Actual liberals are a rare and endangered species here.

::About my politics. You put in some question, that you seem to have deleted, asking whether it's really true that I'm a liberal. Well, compared to most people, especially the admins, here at CP, I am way far left of the norm. But relative to the outside world, I am rather middle-of-the-road. (I can't speak for EJamesW or Alan, but I would guess that they are similar.) I actually hold a lot of conservative and "traditional" views, though that doesn't seem to mean much at CP. For example, I am appalled that we have a President who is a serial adulterer and is on his third marriage. And, all through the cold war, I was on the side of freedom, not the side of the murderous Communist thugs who were out to conquer the world. I believe in American exceptionalism, and believed that the United States was a beacon of liberty to the whole world. I was relieved when the Soviet Union collapsed. But now Russia, the descendant of the Soviet Union, is ruled by Vladimir Putin, a descendant of the Communists, one who invades other countries and fairly openly has his political opponents murdered. I am appalled that our current President doesn't have a problem with this.

::[[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 14:10, 1 April 2017 (EDT)
:::OK. Thanks for letting me know your decision promptly. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 18:03, 1 April 2017 (EDT)
::::I hope that it is possible to be a social conservative, a fiscal conservative, a political conservative, but still believe in rule of law, quantum mechanics, special relativity, and recent advances in machine learning/artificial intelligence. I never thought of SamHB as being a "liberal." [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 18:39, 1 April 2017 (EDT)
OK. SamHB is less on the left spectrum that I thought. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 11:11, 2 April 2017 (EDT)
:Doesn't help him though, does it, when some ''petty tyrant of the field'' decides to burn a conversation and give him a day off just because they can. [[User:AlanE|AlanE]] ([[User talk:AlanE|talk]]) 00:24, 3 April 2017 (EDT)
::Sigh. Semper idem. --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] ([[User talk:AugustO|talk]]) 02:25, 3 April 2017 (EDT)
:::Well, actually, he can't. No, to be precise, he ''can'', but he ''may not''. It's interesting that this happened shortly after I complained about abuse of block power [[Talk:Main_Page#Abuse_of_block_power|here]], and his reply seemed to acknowledge that it was not within his authority to block me—"That's not up to me at this point, but to one of the admins".

:::I suspect that Northwest is probably feeling a bit guity about having violated his position of trust so blatantly by blocking someone over a content dispute. He may not realize that I am well respected by the admins; I've been around a while and they know me well. I've had some run-ins with Ed Poor, and he blocked me a couple of times for my abrasiveness, but we have since made peace. If Northwest looks at my block log, he will see that, until this week, none of my blocks involved "liberal POV". Mostly they were by people who had a rather checkered history of honesty, or for totally bogus claims of sockpuppetry with people I had never heard of.

:::It's ironic that all this happened only 2-1/2 hours after I put the lyrics to ''America'' on my user page, specifically calling out the lines
::::Confirm thy soul in self-control,
::::Thy liberty in law!
:::That was aimed at Donald Trump, who seems to have little self-control, little respect for law, little knowledge of American history and traditions, and little knowledge of, and respect for, the teachings of Jesus. But, as we say in this country: if the shoe fits, wear it.

:::In a few days I may go over to his talk page and try to make peace. To try to convince him that we can make CP a better place if we all work together. And that it would be better not to toss around the words "liberal" and "leftist" with such wild abandon, because it just makes CP look less respectable and trustworthy to do so. And that one doesn't need to be a "leftist" to oppose murderous thug Vladimir Putin.

:::[[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 22:38, 13 April 2017 (EDT)

::::To make it short and to the point: You were warned before about your behavior on CP and you didn't want to listen (specifically regarding numbers 9 and 10 - ''especially'' number 10, which you violated several times before - at [[Conservapedia:How Conservapedia Differs from Wikipedia|How Conservapedia Differs from Wikipedia]]), so that's how you got the day off. To read how both you and AlanE are talking about this, you both come off sounding like the liberal media pundits who complain about Donald Trump's travel ban against specific Islamic countries and his proposed illegal immigration ban.

::::Your comment "And that it would be better not to toss around the words "liberal" and "leftist" with such wild abandon, because it just makes CP look less respectable and trustworthy to do so" also reflects exactly the type of things liberals say regarding CP (at the [[Liberal Style]] article, under Debate and rhetorical tactics):
:::::"Like to use the phrase 'reflects poorly on the site' when talking about the liberal articles on Conservapedia."
::::And numbers 5 and 6 under Liberalism in the same article:
:::::"Calling the use of the term liberal when used in a derogatory context 'stupid'"
:::::"Will often deny being a liberal, or will claim to be a 'true conservative', while spouting liberal and Democrat talking points and criticizing basic conservative beliefs and principles."
::::And under Personal traits (again in the same article):
:::::"Concealing one's liberal views rather than admitting them"
::::But at day's end, this is still Conservapedia, ''not'' Liberalpedia. [[User:Northwest|Northwest]] ([[User talk:Northwest|talk]]) 09:11, 14 April 2017 (EDT)

::I could parody being a liberal, but when pressed to the wall all my inner contradictions and stupidity would come out, which might then just seal the deal. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''CIA v Trump updated score'':CIA 3, Trump 2]]</sup> 13:15, 13 April 2017 (EDT)
:::I puzzled by several aspects of this. By "parody being a liberal" do you mean make fun of liberals with over-the-top humor, the way Stephen Colbert used to parody conservatives on his "Colbert Report"? (He shows his politics in a different way in his present show.) Or do you mean "Convincingly pretend to be a liberal, in a way that would trick one into believing that I am sincere?" Any intelligent and well-informed person (which you are) can do that. What do you mean by "my inner contradictions and stupidity would come out"? That you would have a hard time convincingly imitating the stupidity of liberals (liberals and conservatives both have consistency problems) so that your ruse would be unsuccessful? Or that your personal "contradictions and stupidity" would make you unable to do the job? And what do you mean by "seal the deal"? Succeed at your imitation? Or let others succeed at unmasking your attempts? [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 22:51, 13 April 2017 (EDT)
::::You covered all bases quite well. Parodying a liberal is not hard. If you come to a juncture where you're at a loss, and you have to think "''What would be the appropriate liberal response?''", you just say something nonsensical and contradictory, and it would pass. That's what I mean by seal the deal - there would be no question I'm a liberal speaking from the heart. [[Poe's Law]]. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''CIA v Trump updated score'':CIA 3, Trump 2]]</sup> 19:07, 14 April 2017 (EDT)

== Vaping ==

(No, I'm not referring to E-cigarettes.) Cons, please do not vape other people's talk pages, OK? I know that what you recently vaped here was insignificant, but please don't do it. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 18:14, 14 April 2017 (EDT)

== 9th anniversary ==

Congratulations on your 9th anniversary here! Despite disagreements, edit wars, and 19 blocks, you are still around! I know a number of people don't agree with you on various topics, and even I disagree on some things you believe (most notably, macroevolution) but I appreciate that you have "stuck it out" and are still trying to make CP better. I also appreciate your insights on matters which have been influenced by things long before I was here. You were also the only one when I first joined who seemed to be making an effort to help me learn the ropes and how things work here (an effort I am trying to pass on to others now). Thanks for your efforts! --[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">David B</font>]] <sup>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</sup> 11:49, 28 April 2017 (EDT)

== Re: Claims of familiarity with CP guidelines ==

Since you claim to be familiar with, and "well versed in", Conservapedia's guidelines (per your edit on [[User talk:1990'sguy|1990'sguy's talk page]]), here's a refresher from the [[Conservapedia:Guidelines#Member Accounts|Member Accounts]] section:

* Conservapedia is a politically conservative, Christian encyclopedia project. We welcome opposing views, but are not interested in users who come here only to change articles to their ideology (''as you've insisted on doing with selected articles here as of late to change them to fit liberal POV, despite your claims otherwise - ed.''), or disrupt by constantly arguing on the article talk pages that we are "wrong" (''likewise - ed.''). Trolling comments, incivility and personal attacks can be removed from discussion pages.
* We are not a debate forum, but a project. If you contribute, where you can, by adding substantive content, abiding by our Guidelines, we welcome you. If not, remember it is a big Internet, and you should go where you can support the goals of that project.

[[User:Northwest|Northwest]] ([[User talk:Northwest|talk]]) 18:37, 28 April 2017 (EDT)
:Go write up a Popeye episode, son. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 18:43, 28 April 2017 (EDT)
::This applies to you too, JohnZ, just so you know. [[User:Northwest|Northwest]] ([[User talk:Northwest|talk]]) 19:13, 28 April 2017 (EDT)

== re: Liberal article ==

I made some revisions to the [[liberal]] article to make it more accurate. And made some talk page edits indicating my reasons for the changes. For example, liberalism is not communism or Nazism. [[Attila the Hun]] was not a liberal, etc.

If you want to review the article periodically to make sure my changes stick, it would be appreciated.

I will pay you the courtesy of not having all or most liberals equated with Attila the Hun, Adolf Hitler, Mao or Stalin. I would ask you, however, to have the decency to not publicize private emails.

By the way, I have been to Framingham, MA and got along with all the people I met. The people I met in Framingham did not give me Nazi salutes. And I did not see any Nazi flags on front lawns. Nor did I see any statues of Lenin while on Massachusetts thruways or while in Framingham. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 01:45, 9 May 2017 (EDT)

:No Nazi flags? No Lenin statues? Not one? I guess Massachusetts is going soft. It must be all the political correctness or something. :-) I haven't seen any of that stuff in my trips to upstate New York either. Or in my trips to Iowa, Arizona, Arkansas, Kentucky, Michigan, Virginia, Alabama, Tennessee, or Missouri. What's the world coming to?

:Seriously, I have noticed your recent attempts to inject some reasonableness into certain articles, and I appreciate that. (I'm serious this time!) In fact, I have recently noticed some rather decent articles here. But plenty of awful ones, like "liberal" and its ilk. I'm trying to improve the good ones, while ignoring the awful ones. But you need to know that my ability to "make changes stick" is very limited, though I'll try. See my block log, the history of the [[Pussy Riot]] article, and the last half of the "A liberal is wanted for an online dialogue" section above (as well as a paragraph below), to see what I'm talking about. So someone might undo anything I do (and block me in violation of policy). But I'll try.

:I don't consider "not having all or most liberals equated with Attila the Hun, Adolf Hitler, Mao or Stalin" to be a courtesy to me personally. It's a courtesy to Conservapedia. But I appreciate it in any case.

:About the email: Perhaps I should have redacted the email address, but I considered that the name was so nondescript that it must have been a garbage gmail account that you created. If you have gotten spam on that account, I apologize. However, I think the general content of emails can't be considered private. (Just ask Hillary Clinton!) And most of the message was just hawking your own pages right here at CP, along with one link to a vimeo clip to an old Star Trek thing.

:Peace, my non-Nazi non-Communist friend, [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 13:45, 9 May 2017 (EDT)

:::Follow-up: I have redacted the email more thoroughly; I assume from Cons's vaping that that is what he wanted me to to. He can't possibly have wanted me to conceal the ''fact that he sent it'', since he openly announced it in advance on this page.

::But if you do anything that goes against Conservapedia policy (as you've done repeatedly over time, and even recently), you ''will'' stand a chance of being blocked again (and despite what you otherwise think, blocking someone for violating CP policy is ''not'' "illegal"), so don't go thinking you can game the system just so you can get your way and get liberal POV imposed on this site. All you're doing every time you bring this up is that you're showing you prefer to ignore the rules of this site (and your history here, once again, proves that). [[User:Northwest|Northwest]] ([[User talk:Northwest|talk]]) 23:43, 9 May 2017 (EDT)
:::SamHB, I look at your restoration and its skepticism that more than one person has edited using the User: Conservative account.

:::The edit log shows that the User: Conservative account created the [[Atheism and the persecution of homosexuals]] article. The edit log shows that the User: Conservative account created the [[Gay bowel syndrome]] and [[Homosexuality and Parasites]] articles. No intelligent person believes that these articles are the work of one person. The footnoting style is radically different for the [[Atheism and the persecution of homosexuals]] article and frankly the article lacked machismo as soon as it used the alphabet soup of LGBTQ. Frankly, I don't even know what all those letters stand for. Why is the Q even used? It seems redundant.

:::You still not reconciled this blaring incongruently which was even noticed by a non-fan of the User: Conservative account. There must be some reason why you are not coming up with a reasonable explanation of the incongruity? What is it?

:::By the way, the explanation is so simple. More than one person has edited using the User: Conservative account.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 13:45, 30 May 2017 (EDT)

== re: "I'm going to organize this in broad categories. That's the right thing to do for articles about scientists" ==

Bill Nye is an engineer. He is not a scientist. Stop engaging in credential inflation! I realize that evolutionism is exceedingly weak. But try to not engage in desperation tactics and make efforts to control yourself. :)[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 11:46, 1 June 2017 (EDT)
:Well, it's the right thing for articles about science popularizers too.

:Sorry, I should have said "science popularizers". The fact that he's an engineer is irrelevant.

:I think the suggestion that I need to make efforts to control myself is a little harsh for such an infraction as calling him a scientist instead of a science popularizer. It doesn't strike me as anywhere near as great a failure of self-control as spending years pretending to be multiple people, or spending years making tens of thousands (hundreds of thousands? millions?) of edits, deletions, renamings, cross-links, and ineffably pointless changes to image sizes, mostly for an utterly obsessive corpus of foolishness.

:But we're still friends. I enjoy sparring with you. And I've got more stuff to do in reply to your previous edit on this page. But first, I need to change an image size.

:[[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 18:18, 1 June 2017 (EDT)

== talk page second archive ==

You user talk page is insanely long. I think you are overdue for [[User talk:SamHB/archive 2]]. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 09:03, 2 June 2017 (EDT)

:You're right. Done. Thank you. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 18:12, 3 June 2017 (EDT)
== Nice job ==
I read your user page archives - really entertaining, and they made me realized how wretched I was to write articles for Cons, even if they did get on the Main Page. Please, don't stop believing in relativity. Hold onto that feeling.--[[User:Abcqwe|Nathan]] ([[User talk:Abcqwe|talk]]) 16:34, 4 June 2017 (EDT)

== re: well-intentioned and level-headed people ==

You wrote: "You need to know that user "Conservative" ''is not in any way typical of the people we have here''. There are a lot of well-intentioned and level-headed people here, and you could have been a member of that community."

:First of all, User: Conservative is not merely one editor. So your petty personal attacks are lamer than you think. It is readily apparent that User: Conservative is more than editor. For example, the glaring topical/footnoting/writing style differences in the [[Atheism and the persecution of homosexuals]] article and some of the other homosexuality articles by the User: Conservative account. You have never explained these glaring differences.

:Secondly, you have yet to find a single factual error in any of the articles written by the User:Conservative account. You merely dislike some of the articles because they conflict with some of your errant/miscreant, liberal notions. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 22:29, 5 June 2017 (EDT)
:::Actually, I've been meaning to rip you to shreds, yet again, over that weird fantasy of yours. But there's usually something more urgent to do. Especially now, with the "abcqwe" issue. Trying to keep him on board is much more important than yet another go-around with you. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 23:30, 5 June 2017 (EDT)
::Your name is <name redacted>, everybody who has ever posted on this site knows your name is <name redacted>, people who died 100 years ago know your name is <name redacted>. People who will not be born until the 22nd century knows your name is <name redacted>. Insult your own intelligence(not hard to do I know) but the rest of us are not falling for it.
:::Actually, that's not my name, assuming that you were referring to me (SamHB) when you wrote "you" above. Maybe you are confusing me with someone else.
:::In any case, it is considered poor form to "out" or "dox" someone on a wiki. And the identity and personal info about the person you are perhaps referring to are well known. I suspect that you are about to be blocked, if you haven't already been blocked as I write this. And what you wrote above will likely be vaped, though I will restore it (with the name redacted) if that happens. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 23:30, 5 June 2017 (EDT)
::::
::::SanHV, why is the footnoting for [[Atheism and the persecution of homosexuals]] different from many other [[User: Conservative]] articles?

:::: I found out this month what the Q is in the acronym LGBTQ stands for. Why does the article [[Atheism and the persecution of homosexuals]] use the term LGBTQ, but the other homosexuality articles created by the User: Conservtive account not use that term?
:::::Probably because you are a klutz with your keyboard, as indicated by your spelling of "Conservtive". It stands for "queer", by the way.[[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 00:59, 9 June 2017 (EDT)

::::Is the term LGBTQ one that I would likely use? For example, how often does the word "gay" appear in Conservapedia's homosexuality articles?
:::::I wouldn't know. I'd have to read them. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 00:59, 9 June 2017 (EDT)

::::Is the term "persecution of homosexuals" one that I would likely use? Why was there an internal battle within the User: Conservative account about the title of the article [[Atheism and the persecution of homosexuals]]? For example, why was the title of that article changed/moved?
:::::Because you like to do that kind of thing, as anyone who looks at your contributions knows. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 00:59, 9 June 2017 (EDT)

::::Liberals dominate the field of psychology. Do liberals excel in the field of psychology in order to be able to discern that more than one editor has used the User:Conservative account?
:::::I doubt it. I doubt that, by and large, they give a hoot about the size of your "collective". [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 00:59, 9 June 2017 (EDT)
::::If liberals do excel in the discipline of psychology, why do so many psychology experiments and journal articles have an inability to be replicated? See: [http://www.nature.com/news/over-half-of-psychology-studies-fail-reproducibility-test-1.18248 Over half of psychology studies fail reproducibility test], ''Nature'', August 27, 2015

::::RobS, 1990sguy and Karajou have been told privately that more than one editor has used the User: Conservative account. There was an attempt to make one of these editors an editor of the User: Conservative account, but Aschlafly would not permit it.
:::::Can you send me the email in which Andy said that? And, by "one of these editors" do you mean one of RobS, 1990sguy and Karajou? All you would have to do is privately send them your CP password. Andy would not know. In fact, if you mail me your password, at sam4557@gmail.com, I could become a member of your collective! The "sockpuppet" rule prohibits one person from having multiple CP accounts, but there's no rule about giving out your password. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 00:59, 9 June 2017 (EDT)

::::Lastly, you couldn't rip a wet paper bad to shreds, let alone rip of member of the User: Conservative account to shreds. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 02:04, 6 June 2017 (EDT)
By the way, a 2006 international survey reported that 30% of the Swiss reject evolution which is one of the highest national percentages in Europe.[http://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/Home/Archive/Swiss_drag_knuckles_accepting_evolution.html?cid=70292] [[Switzerland]] has one of the very highest standards of living in Europe.

Denmark has one of the highest rates of belief in evolution in Europe (See: Jon D. Miller; Eugenie C. Scott; Shinji Okamoto (11 August 2006). "Public Acceptance of Evolution". Science. 313 (5788): 765–766.).

The Swiss are known for yodeling.
::I'm extremely fascinated, delighted, and enchanted to hear that. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 00:59, 9 June 2017 (EDT)
The Danes are known for bestiality! A 2015 ''Jerusalem Post'' article indicates "[[Copenhagen]] has for long been the bestiality capital of Europe and has attracted many tourists mainly visiting to have sex with animals. Legislation against this practice was only enacted this year."[http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Suggestions-for-the-anti-Semitic-slurs-list-434293] [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 02:28, 6 June 2017 (EDT)
:There are some worthwhile projects that I want to accomplish. I am not going to continue this latest battle between us. It doesn't make sense to respond to every slight someone directs your way. I am moving on. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 08:33, 6 June 2017 (EDT)
::I regret using the word miscreant above. It wasn't necessary.
:::No hard feelings. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 18:40, 6 June 2017 (EDT)

::I also agree with you that it would have been nice to retain the editor who recently departed. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 15:57, 6 June 2017 (EDT)
::::What??? To whom were you referring??? The one who was "showboating" and annoying Karajou and VargasMilan2 [sic]? I assumed you thought it was abcqwe, and I could find no evidence that he communicated with Karajou or VargasMilan. Who was it? Seriously, I'm curious. I'd like to know whether it was someone that I also disliked. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 18:40, 6 June 2017 (EDT)
:::I just discovered that someone blocked [[User:Abcqwe]]. He made a number of posts to talk pages that irritated people. It seems as if he was spoiling for a fight and/or trying to gain attention. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 17:13, 6 June 2017 (EDT)
:::::You just discovered that now?????? Really? [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 18:40, 6 June 2017 (EDT)
::::For the record, he blocked himself indefinitely, but I changed the block to five years because indefinite blocks are problematic. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 17:23, 6 June 2017 (EDT)
:::::OK. He was a provocateur at the end. No great loss. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 17:57, 6 June 2017 (EDT)
::::::But, was it necessary to delete his user and talk pages? Or is this just CP policy? --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 18:24, 6 June 2017 (EDT)
:::::::No, it is not policy. Please restore them. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 18:40, 6 June 2017 (EDT)
In terms of webmaster best practices, deleting low value pages is a beneficial thing to do. In 2017, Conservapedia is going to delete abandoned user pages and their respective talk pages. Andy has given the green light about this matter and he is not changing his mind about it. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 20:00, 6 June 2017 (EDT)
::It is a "best practice" only because you have the technical permission, as an administrator, to do whatever you please. You can delete whatever you want, vape whatever you want, and block whomever you want, at any time. You even burned down ''this'' page on 10 January, 2015. I was never under the illusion that you would honor my request to restore his pages. And I can't help noticing that, shortly after you explained this "best practice", you deleted a few pages just to make the point. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 00:59, 9 June 2017 (EDT)
:Re: annoying Karajou and VargasMilan2 - see: http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=User_talk:Karajou&diff=1351118&oldid=1350637 He sometimes signed his posts "Nate". As far as VargaMilan2, see conversation I moved to the community portal. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 20:23, 6 June 2017 (EDT)
::I think [[User:Abcqwe]] began to be more of a provocateur after I posted this article [[American liberalism and 21st century political losses]]. Given that he is an American liberal, it probably triggered his backlash/bitterness/resentment.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 20:33, 6 June 2017 (EDT)
:::I don't think Abcqwe annoyed Karajou or VargasMilan while he actually edited. They wrote what they did in response to the news that he was leaving. On top of that, it seems that Abcqwe uses a lot of sarcasm and sarcastic humor, and I think his "confession" displayed some of it. He also seems to have overexaggerated. Personally, I think he should have been more frank in his post, and I don't think his sense of humor helped at all. Many people probably got the impression that he was a parodist/liberal, while I think it is more believable that he was a more moderate person who originally joined in good faith. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 22:06, 6 June 2017 (EDT)
:::I seem to be the invisible man regarding Abcque. I was the one who tried to keep a lid on his vandalism. Did I need help? Yes. Did I ask for it?Yes. Did I get any from the lads wallowing in their anti liberal groupthinkfest, not giving a stuff for truth? No I did not. Do I still think that CP should be vehicle for information for homesckoolers? Yes. Is it ? No. Do I give a damn? Strangely, yes I do.
::::Sorry Sam. I have tried other forums to change an article title to allow me to correct the article. I want [[Joseph Belloc]] changed to [[Hilaire Belloc]]. Its simple really but the lads are too busy doing what they like doing. [[User:AlanE|AlanE]] ([[User talk:AlanE|talk]]) 03:08, 9 June 2017 (EDT)

== Border fence for the unfree state of Massachusetts ==

[[File:Prison.jpg|thumbnail|200px|center|Border fence for the unfree state of [[Massachusetts]] designed to keep people from leaving the state. See also: [[Essay: Free States Movement|Free States Movement]] ]]
Actually, I haven't seen any fences like that, except at MCI<ref>Massachusetts Correctional Institution</ref> Concord, where I go to visit my cousin (you know, the one who is a member of your collective; they let people edit Conservapedia from the slammer), who is serving a 5-year stretch for not being a [[Essay: Professor PZ Myers fails his applied biology course#Addendum|"svelte Bible believing young earth creationist like Chuck Norris"]].
{{clear}}

==Joking about TAR==

Question: Will TAR return? [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 13:24, 8 June 2017 (EDT)
:I will consider it ''only'' if he agrees to completely stop link-spamming and adding categories. If not, I or someone else will be forced to block him. I agree that he made some good changes, but the bad far outweighed the good. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 15:00, 8 June 2017 (EDT)
::I don't believe TAR is coming back. I was merely joking. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]])

That joke is not the least bit funny. I doubt that 1990'sguy appreciated the humor. As I'm sure you recall, during the period when TAR was being removed from the site (which is chronicled at [[User_talk:DavidB4#Cleaning_up_after_the_blocked_users]] and [[User_talk:Aschlafly/Archive60#Re:_Cleanup_work_post_TheAmericanRedoubt]], you repeatedly implied that you were somehow in private communication with him, and that, because of this, you could reassure everyone that he had no intention of coming back. But since you have a reputation for pretending to be in secret communication with people, just as you pretend to be multiple people, no one believed you. So Andy had to revoke his rights.

I don't believe he's coming back either, but not because of some private communication. It's because he would be shown the door instantly.

[[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 00:33, 9 June 2017 (EDT)
:At this point, I really am not concerned if you believe I have had various private conversations with people or if you believe more than one person has edited using the [[User: Conservative]] account.

:It is probably best if we keep our communications cordial, but very limited in the future.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 20:34, 10 June 2017 (EDT)

::OK. The "ripping you to shreds" that I had planned will not occur. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 12:31, 11 June 2017 (EDT)
:::A few points:

:::1. You called my liar and I have never lied at this wiki. More than one person has edited using the User: Conservative account. You may not accept this fact as being true, but that is your problem and not mine. Aschafly is certainly aware that the User: Conservative account has had more than one editor use it and Karajou is aware as well. I did a checker user on the User: Conservative account and at least one other editor has used the account in the last 3 months.

:::2. I should have been more cordial in my last communication with you. After all is said and done, I have decided to communicate far less on talk pages due to competing priorities. So any absence of communication with you isn't personal. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 17:36, 11 June 2017 (EDT)

== From warrior to diplomat ==

"Warrior to Diplomat

In his previous roles, Harald had focused primarily on marshaling the troops to defeat the competition. Now he found himself devoting a surprising amount of time to influencing a host of external constituencies, including regulators, the media, investors, and NGOs. His support staff was bombarded with requests for his time: Could he participate in industry or government forums sponsored by the government affairs department? Would he be willing to sit for an interview with an editor from a leading business publication? Could he meet with a key group of institutional investors? Some of these groups he was familiar with; others not at all. But what was entirely new to him was his responsibility not just to interact with various stakeholders but also to proactively address their concerns in ways that meshed with the firm’s interests. Little of Harald’s previous experience prepared him for the challenges of being a corporate diplomat.

What do effective corporate diplomats do? They use the tools of diplomacy—negotiation, persuasion, conflict management, and alliance building—to shape the external business environment to support their strategic objectives. In the process they often find themselves collaborating with people with whom they compete aggressively in the market every day.

To do this well, enterprise leaders need to embrace a new mind-set—to look for ways that interests can or do align, understand how decisions are made in different kinds of organizations, and develop effective strategies for influencing others."[https://hbr.org/2012/06/how-managers-become-leaders]

Harald made the transition. The Apostle Paul made the transition. I wonder if someone else can? :) [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 23:50, 11 June 2017 (EDT)

:I '''think''' you are making some good points in what you say, and it's certainly true that my ways of interacting with people on the internet (and in real life too) could use some improvement. But I'm having a hard time following your examples. I don't know who "Harald" is/was. Some ancient Nordic king? I know who the Apostle Paul was, but I don't see his situation as being relevant to business, the media, investors, or NGO's. And my situation isn't relevant to those things either. At least you didn't bring in Sun-Tzu. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 17:20, 19 June 2017 (EDT)
::SamHB, I was merely saying that I have decided to be more diplomatic.
:::Oh! I was reading way too much into what you were saying. (I often do that.) So you were saying that '''you''' want to "make the transition" and do a better job of persuasion and conflict management. OK, I will try to do the same.
:::As an example, I will try to calm GinnyS down. I think she may be cruisin' for a bruisin'. I will try to explain that you are an acquired taste, and that personal attacks are ''never'' allowed. And I'll try to make that same point to JohnZ, for when he comes back. He is in a situation that is similar in some ways but different in other ways. I think that, due to my longevity, I have gotten a certain amount of respect among the young-uns, and I can use that respect to get them to behave better.
:::[[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 23:00, 30 June 2017 (EDT)

::As an aside, as far as Trump, I have never seen a president attacked as much as Trump and with such venom. On the other hand, I have never seen a president counterpunch as much too (and sometimes in a very personal way). It is nothing new though. Burr/Hamilton had many exchanges of words before their duel. And Lincoln was viciously attacked by his critics if memory serves. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 23:22, 29 June 2017 (EDT)
:::Trump deserves every bit of what he gets. He knows next to nothing about American government, institutions, history, or traditions, seems to know very little about Christianity (though I realize I'm suppose to remove the plank from my own eye before making accusations like that), and seems to know very little about the Christian notions of generosity, forgiveness, humility, and contrition. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 23:00, 30 June 2017 (EDT)

== If you know of any good faith editors who have edited in the last 5 years and... ==

If you know of any good faith editors who have edited in the last 5 years and they are not on my list at [[User talk:Wikignome72]], please let me know.

I relied on: the recent changes list, my memory, user talk page edits for some of the active or formerly active editors. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 15:11, 19 June 2017 (EDT)

:Actually, yes, I could contribute a lot of names of people to keep. As you may know, I do a lot of "homework" or "research" here at CP, and I have a pretty good idea of who's who. Perhaps second only to you. But I think it's an unnecessary exercise to delete the old pages. And I sure hope your current deletion binge (well, deletion suggestion binge) isn't a reaction to my complaining, above, that you should not have deleted abcqwe's page.

:By the way, I have been trying to make an addition to Wikignome72's page, saying essentially the same thing, for over 3 hours, getting edit conflicts each time. I'll wait until you come up for air.

:If you actually want me to come up with a list of people that should be protected, I could do that. I would probably do it by going through the edit histories of all the articles that I have worked on and think are good, and noting everyone who contributed (who isn't a jerk).

:[[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 17:20, 19 June 2017 (EDT)

== Some people our friend ought to keep ==

First preliminary, your quizzes are cute.

Second preliminary, I really think he ought to be welcomed, even if he is just you. I don't know why you keep deleting my attempts to welcome him. I like to keep up the pretense that he's a real person.

Third preliminary, I had no idea there was so much garbage in the user base. But I hope you don't think you are saving disk space; you aren't. Nothing ever really goes away in a computer database. Except "vaping", which you aren't doing.

I see the purge is in full swing. I've gone over the list, and there are a few people I recognize as having been, one way or another, significant people in CP's history. I'd like you (him, her) to consider restoring them. Some people left in anger (and at least one had some serious criticism of you personally.) But they are nevertheless part of our history. People won't know how we got here if they can't see our history. I've argued in the recent past that we should keep the "Parthian shot" of someone who has been blocked, so that, if they try to come back, we will know why they were kicked out and why they should not be allowed back in. But it's more than that. We need to remember the conflicts that have gone on in the past. Well, some of them; many people were just losers and deserve to be forgotten. Heck, isn't there a page called something like "Examples of censorship by the 'tolerant'"? I haven't looked at it lately, but we may be damaging it. We need to keep at least some of those examples around, don't we?

So here are a few people I've found so far. Is it possible to bring them back? I think it is, unless they have been "vaped", which I don't think they have been.
*DanH Wasn't he a sysop and well-respected person? Wasn't he the chess player? I may misremember the details [I sure do!], but he was an important part of our history. I seem to have confused him with ...
*DeanS Wasn't he a sysop and well-respected person? Wasn't he the chess player? And the Mormon who was concerned about whether there would be intolerance of Mormon? (Answer: none at all.) Wasn't he the person whose wife died? Wasn't he the geologist whose user name was originally "crocoite" (an interesting mineral), and then changed it in order to comply with the username policy? I may misremember the details, but he was an important part of our history.
*MatthewQ I see there's been some back-and-forth on this. He was a somewhat interesting science contributor.
*StaceyT Yeah, she was unhappy. But we need to see what sorts of things made people unhappy.
*Ymmotrojam He was a big player at one time.
*Coolguy Yes, he was recent, and p*ss*d some people off and was shown the door. But we need to see that history.
*And, of course, you won't delete Philip J Rayment, right?
There are others that haven't been deleted (yet).

Did you know that DeborahB created her account when Conservapedia was only 6 days old? She was a true "founding mother".

[[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 11:20, 20 June 2017 (EDT)
:I will restore DanH.

:MathewQ mere had "useful links" on his user page so there is no need to restore that, but I kept his user talk page.

:StacyT was contentious and probably a sock of a man if I recall. Definitely a loser. Not restoring.

:Ymmotrojam deleted his own user page and talk page. I am respecting his wishes and keeping those pages deleted.

:Coolguy was a person who was not willing to engage in dialogue. Like many on the left, he was ignorant of history and/or wanted to engage in revisionism. He just wanted to pontificate. There are plenty of reasons to believe that various founding fathers were not Christians. But when you look at the state constitutions and various other important historical considerations, it is very apparent that Coolguy was pushing a very ignorant/false narrative of American history. I not going to bother to restore his user page or talk page. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 13:31, 20 June 2017 (EDT)

== Re: restoration of DanH and PJR. Looking into other restoration ==

The user pages of [[User:DanH]] and [[User:Philip J. Rayment]] (PJR) were so boring, it gave me an excuse to delete them. But I really shouldn't have deleted them. And I just discovered that TK made those pages boring with his revisions to those pages.

So I restored those pages to their former glory. I did add a link to my atheism article from PJR's talk page by adding a bracket around his use of the word "atheists" on his user page. I am still in communication with PJR and his wife, and I know that PJR would not mind my small change.

I am looking into the DeanS restoration. I did not delete it. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 14:22, 20 June 2017 (EDT)
:[[User:DeanS]] user page history has been restored along with TK's replacing of the blanking by DeanS with a retired template. The retired template looks better. I don't think DeanS would have minded.

:DeanS deleted his user talk page. I am going to keep it deleted.

:I think DeanS left due to ill health, but it could have been due to disputes with evangelical Christians on the website (He was a Mormon) or some other reason. I have no idea. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 14:32, 20 June 2017 (EDT)
::As far as DeanS, I did a little detective work and restored his talk page to the version I think he would have wanted. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 14:48, 20 June 2017 (EDT)
:::Thanks for attending to these details. As far as leaving the last version of something up, when it just says "retired", there's nothing wrong with that, as long as data squirrels like myself can look through the history and see what led to the retirement. That's what we should have—a historical record. (Excuse me, an historical record.) [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 15:34, 20 June 2017 (EDT)
::::I think PJR left due to a battle over gun owner rights/public safety controversies. But perhaps that was merely the final straw. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 15:41, 20 June 2017 (EDT)
I restored the user page of [[User:JacobB]] as well. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 15:58, 20 June 2017 (EDT)
::I removed the striked out text from PJR's user page. It looked sloppy and I didn't see any real purpose in it. Next time I talk to PJR, I will see if he is fine with the edit. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 17:32, 20 June 2017 (EDT)

==Taking some of your advice==

Greetings, Cons!

The long message you left for me yesterday was extremely interesting. I had to go back a long way (June 29, 2015) to find what you were referring to and refresh my memory of the issue. It's too bad that yesterday's message was lost in a wiki server malfunction.<ref>This seems to happen a lot with your contributions.</ref> The "advice" that you seem to have been referring to was that you should direct your persuasive energies into ways that are more likely to have an actual effect on people, such as human interaction, rather than writing Conservapedia articles. And you mentioned "opportunity cost", that is, the cost of one approach versus another in terms of actual payoff.

You ended with your usual argument against evolution, giving two web references. The first was to a page that had a religious web site in its name. As you know, I totally ignore any arguments about scientific topics appearing in religious web sites or religious publications. If one can't make an argument about a scientific topic (as opposed to, say, a topic of morality or ethics), without saying "because the Bible says so", I'm not interested.

The second web site was [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ohp4dmkOmKE this]. So I had to look. Though it was clear right from the start (though not from the URL itself) that it was a religious web site—it was from the PNN News and Ministry Network, and it also had front-page references to http://www.hickoryhammockbaptist.org and http://creation.com. It had five "questions for the evolution believer". I had to sit through a guy with a very irritating voice listing the questions. (Aren't there 15 questions elsewhere? This guy isn't even trying!)
:The first was about abiogenesis. We all know that the question of abiogenesis, while interesting and having no known solution at present (or perhaps ever), lies outside of the issues of evolution/Biblical creation and young-Earth/old-Earth cosmology. So I had to sit through 55 seconds (opportunity cost!) of that nonsense.
:The second one was about "language", making the point that the DNA code satisfies all the accepted criteria for being a language, yet is unique among languages in that it was not developed by humans. (Not true, by the way.) And so somehow this meant that evolution must not have happened. Huh?
:It went downhill rapidly from there. The third was about sexual reproduction, and how "wasted energy" involved in this meant that evolution could not be correct. Or something. I stopped listening.
All things considered, sort of fun. But now, if you'll excuse me, I need to take your advice about taking my advice, and consider the opportunity cost of replying to you on my talk page. So long for now. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 21:19, 7 July 2017 (EDT)
::Essentially, I said that I am going to use my time better so I have a greater positive impact in life. Recently, I am more on track except for a comment on main page talk today.

::In July of 2017, I will be working on a Conservapedia related project. But you will see no edits being performed by the User: Conservative account in relation to this project.

::“Be extremely subtle, even to the point of formlessness. Be extremely mysterious, even to the point of soundlessness. Thereby you can be the director of the opponent's fate.” - [[Sun Tzu]]
:::Well, that's some advice I am '''not''' going to take. But if you think it works for you (I disagree) go right ahead. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 10:58, 8 July 2017 (EDT)

::此（译注：用间）兵之要，三军之所恃而动也 [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 22:12, 7 July 2017 (EDT)
::::I sent you a sour email recently about you publishing one of my emails recently. Looking back, I shouldn't have sent it.

::::No hard feelings. Enjoy your summer. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 01:45, 10 July 2017 (EDT)

OK, I got the email. I want to apologize for any behavior that may have led you to believe I can't be trusted with private information. Let me assure you that I am a trustworthy person when I know what information is being kept confidential.

The email that you are referring to is presumably the message listed above somewhere (or maybe it's been archived by now), in which I divulged both the sender and the content. Of course I divulged the fact that you sent the message--you had already said publicly that you were going to send it. I assumed that the email name of the sender was not secret because it looked like a "throwaway" name of the sort that people often create. In fact, you have sent other emails to people with various names. I assumed that you don't consider them secret. If I harmed you by revealing the name, I apologize.

After you complained, I redacted everything in the email listed above except the content. I believed that the content was typical of the things you write all over the place at Conservapedia. It was largely references to your various articles, as is your writing style. If the particular content of that message was something you wanted protected, I apologize.

If you wish to vape the redacted message above on this page, go ahead; I won't complain or restore it. (As you know, I usually oppose vaping, especially on users' talk pages, and sometimes restore the vaped material.)

So I need to know just how much secrecy you desire:
*Do you want me not to reveal even the fact of having received a message? Even if you said, here on this talk page, that you are going to send it or have sent it?
*Do you want me not to reveal the user ID of the sender?
*Do you want me not to reveal the content?
*Do you want me not even to say that I have replied, or otherwise give any general information about what was discussed?
At the risk of violating the last point, I suspect that the project you referred to (which you also mentioned above on this page) is something I wouldn't be interested in. I know that, in the past, your projects have been things like an anti-evolution pamphlet. Now if you want to collaborate on an anti-creationist pamphlet (you know, things like "15 questions that creationists can't answer") by all means, sign me up.

[[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 14:07, 13 July 2017 (EDT)

:At Conservapedia, I am not going to discuss any of the off wiki activities of the editors who use the User: Conservative account. This is the simplest solution to potential problems caused by the intolerant left.

:The simplest solution to the email issue is for me to no longer send you any emails. But perhaps I will change my mind on this matter. I can certainly pray about this matter. If we were to communicate privately it would probably be Skype communication due to constraints upon my time. I am going to strongly endeavor to be more efficient with my time and communicating via email can be more time intensive. But you have indicated that you are not interested in Skype communications so in all likelihood, I doubt there will be future private communications between us.

:Again, no hard feelings. I will certainly endeavor to keep my communications with you at Conservapedia cordial. And again, enjoy your summer. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 15:43, 13 July 2017 (EDT)
::I just sent you an email. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 07:43, 15 July 2017 (EDT)
:::I sent you an additional email. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 08:20, 15 July 2017 (EDT)
::::I will keep my promise of confidentiality. So let me just say that there has been some traffic on the sam4557 email account of late. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 09:29, 15 July 2017 (EDT)
:::::I just sent you another email. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 11:10, 15 July 2017 (EDT)
::::::I sent you a small request via email. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 11:34, 15 July 2017 (EDT)
== re: polishing up my grammar and writing skills ==

I sent you a private email. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 00:32, 31 July 2017 (EDT)

==For Cons==
I normally find "listicles" ("The 15 worst beaches", etc.) on the internet to be extremely stupid. But [https://www.msn.com/en-us/lifestyle/whats-hot/38-things-no-man-over-40-should-own/ss-AAoKipb?utm_source=taboola&utm_medium=referral#image=2 this one] was actually entertaining. I especially liked [https://www.msn.com/en-us/lifestyle/whats-hot/38-things-no-man-over-40-should-own/ss-AAoKipb?utm_source=taboola&utm_medium=referral#image=9 item number 8]. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 01:33, 2 August 2017 (EDT)
::I am cutting back on entertainment. I made a couple of promises to people that require stricter time management.

::In terms of time management, I shouldn't have done any Conservapedia editing today. But I decided to get back on track.

::"Top performers make mistakes, commit errors, and get off track just like everyone else. The difference is that they get back on track as quickly as possible." - How to Build a New Habit: This is Your Strategy Guide by James Clear[http://jamesclear.com/habit-guide]

::There are so many internet cat videos, but so little time. :)[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]])
I did a little bit of additional editing to reflect some significant changes relative to some of the articles I have created in the past. But I really shouldn't have done that.

But I am getting back on track in terms of some important promises.

However, I will not be editing Conservapedia for 66 days (see this interesting study: [http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ejsp.674/full How are habits formed: Modelling habit formation in the real world]). You can hold me to this. On October 7, 2017, I will let you know how things went in terms of new habit creation and bad habit cessation.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 10:34, 2 August 2017 (EDT)

::I find it odd that all the many members of the User:Conservative account are all going to be busy for the next 66 days, is this an admission that there is only one of you? Listed in the differences between Wikipedia and Conservapedia is the respect for a users talk page. So what is this about?
[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=User_talk:SamHB&curid=133755&action=history]
Not a lot of respect for the rules here, but then again the rules have never applied to you have they?--[[User:JoshO|JoshO]] ([[User talk:JoshO|talk]]) 16:12, 2 August 2017 (EDT)

:Those 66 days just flew by. If you cannot model your habits on your own, perhaps you should try to get help from others? --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] ([[User talk:AugustO|talk]]) 06:07, 10 August 2017 (EDT)

::Are you forgetting that more than one editor uses the User:Conservative account and it's the specific editor who said he was taking time off that would be doing it? [[User:Northwest|Northwest]] ([[User talk:Northwest|talk]]) 06:30, 10 August 2017 (EDT)
:::AugustO, I am going to get back on track. I will not edit Conservapedia until Sunday, October 15, 2017. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 07:00, 10 August 2017 (EDT)
AugustO, I am going to get back on track. '''I will not edit Conservapedia until Sunday, October 15, 2017'''
*13:37, 12 August 2017 (diff | hist) . . (+96)‎ . . 2018 Global Atheist Convention ‎
*13:37, 12 August 2017 (diff | hist) . . (+125)‎ . . 2018 Global Atheist Convention ‎
*13:19, 12 August 2017 (diff | hist) . . (+30)‎ . . Atheist fundraising vs. religious fundraising ‎ (→‎See also) (current)
*13:18, 12 August 2017 (diff | hist) . . (-12)‎ . . Fundraising ‎ (→‎Religious fundraising vs. atheist/irreligious fundraising) (current)
*13:17, 12 August 2017 (diff | hist) . . (+17)‎ . . Charity ‎ (→‎See also) (current)
*13:17, 12 August 2017 (diff | hist) . . (+30)‎ . . Fundraising ‎
*13:16, 12 August 2017 (diff | hist) . . (-1)‎ . . Fundraising ‎
*13:15, 12 August 2017 (diff | hist) . . (0)‎ . . m Fundraising ‎ (Conservative moved page Fund-raising to Fundraising) --[[User:IMcCleod|IMcCleod]] ([[User talk:IMcCleod|talk]]) 16:18, 12 August 2017 (EDT)

::IMcCleod, do you also assume that only one editor uses the User:Conservative account (even though it has been made clear that it is used by multiple editors)? [[User:Northwest|Northwest]] ([[User talk:Northwest|talk]]) 23:16, 12 August 2017 (EDT)
:::IMcCloud, Christendom is playing a significant role in bringing [[Atheist factions|the quarrelsome]] and socially challenged [[atheist movement]] to its knees and now [[Global atheism statistics|atheists are shrinking in their global influence]].

:::American [[Atheist fundraising vs. religious fundraising|atheist fundraising]] is now anemic. The atheist activist Lee Moore recently admitted concerning major atheist organizations in the United States: "Most of them are starved for cash. They're downsizing left and right."[http://www.conservapedia.com/Atheist_fundraising_vs._religious_fundraising#Atheist_activist_Lee_Moore:_Donations_to_atheist_organizations_are_down_due_to_infighting_within_the_atheist_movement]

:::While I am pleased to see that the largely despondent atheist movement is imploding while Christendom is going one glorious victory after another (see: [[Atheist pessimism about the atheist movement]] and [[High morale of Christendom]]), I have decided to broaden my horizons (And SamHB has played a role in this matter).

:::As tempting as it is to add further information about the current state of affairs concerning the [[atheism vs. Christianity]] topic, I have decided that I must do better in keeping my commitment to be more focused in some of my current endeavors. Therefore, I am going to be completely resolute in this matter and not edit this wiki until October 18, 2017. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]])

"AugustO, I am going to get back on track. '''I will not edit Conservapedia until Sunday, October 15, 2017"
*18:01, 15 August 2017 (diff | hist) . . (+280)‎ . . Millennials, irreligion and obesity ‎ (→‎See also) (current)
*17:54, 15 August 2017 (diff | hist) . . (-25)‎ . . Millennials, irreligion and obesity--[[User:Jaris|Jaris]] ([[User talk:Jaris|talk]]) 18:17, 15 August 2017 (EDT) ‎

==More about Cons==
In a [http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:SamHB#Taking_some_of_your_advice section above] Cons asked for complete secrecy if we are to engage in an email dialog. I gave him that assurance. I have abided by it, and will continue to do so. He then wrote that he had sent me an email.

Other than to say that there has been some traffic on the sam4557 account, I will have nothing to say about any email. Please do not ask about it; I will not reply. Everything I write below is based entirely on material that is publicly visible on this website.

Alert observers may have noticed that I dropped out of sight at about the same time that Cons (first) did. That is entirely a coincidence; there was no "pact" or "challenge". I dropped out because it became clear, from the [[Pussy Riot]] article, that "assistants" / "junior sysops" have been granted absolute power to control editorial content however they see fit, blocking other contributors if it suits them, and that a few of those assistants are actively wielding that power.

Now, about Cons's "pledge" to refrain from editing CP and pursue more productive activities (I have no idea where the 66 days figure comes from), it is clear that, although there has been some good behavior, there has been some backsliding. Various other people have, quite understandably, chided him over this. Cons has apologized and promised to do better, only to have succumbed to temptation again. Longstanding bad habits are difficult to break. I would recommend that people show some Christian forgiveness, forbearance, and understanding as he struggles with this. (This would certainly be easier if Cons had shown more understanding and forbearance toward others in the past.)

But there is something quite revealing about what has been going on. '''He could easily have blamed the backsliding on other members of his "consortium".''' Instead, he owned up to it. This shows, ''the way nothing else can'', that the business of Cons's account being operated by multiple people was utter nonsense. Most sensible people, including myself, saw through this all along. But a few people, as seen above on this page, including sysops who presumably had access to whatever non-public information there might have been, seem to have been totally taken in by this nonsense. Cons was man enough to admit to his failings, and other people should be man enough to accept that this "multiple person" fantasy was just that.

[[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 20:37, 19 August 2017 (EDT)

:I know you're referring specifically to me regarding the Pussy Riot article, SamHB. You were told on that and other articles (more than once) not to impose a liberal POV on them, but you didn't take heed of that advice and you went ahead anyway in violation of Conservapedia policy, following past behavioral patterns that led to you being blocked numerous times before by other editors. When you also say "various other people" regarding User:Conservative, what you really mean is the same poster using multiple accounts (most of which have since been blocked for sockpuppeteering) to hurl that accusation about the account just being used by one editor as opposed to more than one. Until Conservative says otherwise, I'm going to take his word for it. [[User:Northwest|Northwest]] ([[User talk:Northwest|talk]]) 21:24, 19 August 2017 (EDT)

== Re: SamHB's recent post to his talk page ==

A few things:

'''1.''' The 66 days is based on a journal article in the ''European Journal of Social Psychology'' entitled ''How are habits formed: Modelling habit formation in the real world''.[http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ejsp.674/full]

'''2.''' Sysops/admins have been told that more one person has used the User:Conservative account and I have indicated this multiple times. Sysops/admins have access to the check user function of this wiki which has enabled them to see that the User: Conservative account has been edited from multiple geographic regions (sometimes the account has been edited from more than one geographic region in the same day due to the fact that the account has been used by more than one editor).

It has also been observed that the footnoting style of various User: Conservative edits has been radically different.

In addition, skepticism has been expressed that one of the users of the User: Conservative account would create an article entitled [[Atheism and the persecution of homosexuals]].

'''3.''' SamHB is correct that longstanding bad habits can be difficult to break. While it is true that I had about a week long stretch without editing Conservapedia in early August of 2017, I ended my break from editing this wiki before the 66 days was up.

Since this habit is more entrenched than anticipated, more drastic measures are clearly needed! So this habit will be broken using multiple methods - including a tried and true Marine Corps and Navy Seal method (Push ups if the old habit reemerges!).

My next edit to this wiki will be on Tuesday, October 25, 2017.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 12:33, 20 August 2017 (EDT)

:There might be things I want to say here, but they will have to wait until the 66 days are up.
:@Cons: You know what you need to do. Or, more precisely, what not to do. If you absolutely have to have some critical change made, feel free to send me an email.
:@everyone else: Please stay away.

:[[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 21:10, 20 August 2017 (EDT)

== Please check your email ==

SamHB, please check your email. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 06:18, 14 September 2017 (EDT)
:I have not looked at my sam4557 email since late August, and do not plan to look at it for 66 days. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 23:05, 14 September 2017 (EDT)

== Quick note ==

For the next 66 days, I may not strictly adhere to the 66 days editing total fast on Conservapedia editing, but I will at least be on a very restricted diet. :)

I may do a limited amount of main page posts. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 23:03, 28 September 2017 (EDT)
:I know I have to be very strict about this former pledge. The Apostle Paul says some relevant things about this matter. I am going to write to you about this matter.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]])
== More than one User: Conservative at Conservapedia ==

Note the footnoting and writing styles in these recent articles written using the [[User: Conservative]] account:

*[[List of atheist shooters and serial killers]]

*[[Atheism and mental illness]]

*[[Essay: Was Stephen Paddock an atheist mass killer?]]

The footnoting styles are clearly different between the first/second works and the third work (which is an essay). Why are the footnoting styles different? Because multiple editors have used the User: Conservative account.

Clearly, the [[ad hominem]] attacks against "User: Conservative" and the armchair psychological analysis of "User: Conservative" should be reexamined.

There are scholars that speculate there are multiple writers behind the work commonly associated with [[Sun Tzu]].

"Be extremely subtle, even to the point of formlessness. Be extremely mysterious, even to the point of soundlessness. Thereby you can be the director of the opponent's fate." - Sun Tzu.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]])
== A major search engine whose name begins with the letter G, recognizes that certain "atheist gentlemen" have been rattled and overwhelmed by the sheer weight of the "Atheism and ...." heavy artillery barage by the User: Conservative collective ==
[[File:Google recognizes COCD.png|thumbnail|center|800px]]
{{clear}}

For more information, please see:

*[[Essay: Conservapedia Obsessive Compulsive Disorder is an officially recognized mental disorder|Conservapedia Obsessive Compulsive Disorder is an officially recognized mental disorder]]

Talking about obsessions:
{{cquote|My next edit to this wiki will be on Tuesday, October 25, 2017.Conservative (talk) 12:33, 20 August 2017 (EDT)}}
And no, I had no trouble waiting until '''''Wednesday''''', October 25, 2017, to post this comment ;-)
--[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] ([[User talk:AugustO|talk]]) 04:51, 25 October 2017 (EDT)
:Which is nowhere ''near'' the level of liberal obsession with wanting to silence free speech for everyone but themselves (hence the regular attacks on this site by immature liberal vandals, and even attacks from within by the few regular liberal posters who ''think'' they know what's best for this site better than the admins do). [[User:Northwest|Northwest]] ([[User talk:Northwest|talk]]) 00:26, 26 October 2017 (EDT)

== User: Conservative account ==

I had another member of the User: Conservative editor base change the password to the User: Conservative account.

In about a couple months or so, he will give me the new password.

Taking a break from editing for awhile. See you when you get back.

By the way, the [[2018 Global Atheist Convention that was cancelled|2018 Global Atheist Convention]] was cancelled due to lack of interest. Of course, this is yet another sign that Christendom has gloriously triumphed over the [[atheist movement]]! :)[[User:Wikignome72|Wikignome72]] ([[User talk:Wikignome72|talk]]) 11:02, 15 November 2017 (EST)

==References==
{{reflist}}

== Not impressed ==

Besides you seeking to provoke yet another fight on this site, you've also demonstrated two things by copying the user template I created for my user page (the one indicating that the user does not support the liberal media) and changing it into something else (accusing Breitbart News, a conservative news site, of being "fake news" even though it is not):

# You proved through your actions that liberals (like yourself) lack originality and prefer to copy and imitate others (per the [[Liberal Style]] article, in number seven of the [[Liberal Style#Debate and rhetorical tactics|Debate and rhetorical tactics section]])
# You resorted to the notorious tactic made infamous by Marx, Lenin and Goebbels in accusing conservative media of what the liberal media (particularly CNN, MSNBC, the nightly network newscasts, the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Huffington Post, Vice Media, etc.) is guilty of itself (propagating lies, bias and fake news)

Congrats, you just proved the point Conservapedia (and other sources) made about liberals and their tactics once again through your actions in trying to force a liberal POV here. [[User:Northwest|Northwest]] ([[User talk:Northwest|talk]]) 09:37, 21 November 2017 (EST)

== <font color="red">This page is not to be used for abusing, insulting, berating, or bullying cancer patients, or otherwise engaging in the kind of social, moral, or ethical depravity that people outgrow by age 10.</font> ==

I didn't berate any cancer patients. I merely pointed out the unhealthy and anti-social habits of atheists which give the atheist population a higher cancer rate.
:You most certainly did. A careful reading of your activities here at CP relating to cancer, as well as what's been going on over at RW, shows very clearly that you were engaging in abusive and, frankly, un-Christian behavior toward RW user "Mercian". It is completely obvious from a careful reading of this what has been going on. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 21:32, 30 December 2017 (EST)
In 2017, I helped my friend by researching the best solutions to treat his loved one's cancer. He asked me to do it because he felt I had strong research skills. In 2018, I am helping an anti-cancer initiative. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 00:15, 24 December 2017 (EST)
:Congratulations. BTW, I'm also engaged in helping an anti-cancer initiative.
:Also, your suggestion that left-handed people are somehow "mutant" strikes me as a bit more provocative than someone who is trying to win hearts and minds ought to be. You might want to tone down the negativity in the things you write. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 21:32, 30 December 2017 (EST)
::"A systematic literature review combined with primary research on handedness demonstrates that atheism and/or paranormal belief is associated with all of these indicators of high mutational load."[https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40806-017-0133-5]

::Judging by [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WKl9H037C1k THE VIDEO] I saw where he explains his theory, the British anthropologist who published the article appears to be a person of high intelligence, but likely not as creative in his thinking as he ought to be (Maybe left-handedness creates otherness and people less prone to conformity), Nevertheless, he does appear to be smart enough to recognize what high mutational load is.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 23:37, 30 December 2017 (EST)
=== Atheism and cancer ===

<s>Some atheist (or at the very least someone who appeared to be an atheist) claimed an [[Atheism and cancer]] article was created in the past at this wiki. Yet, when I did a search using the search box, I found no record of such an article being created at this wiki.</s>
:That's funny. The article you cite was created, by you, at 14:39 on 22 December, before you wrote the above. It's still there now, having been edited almost continuously by you. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 23:29, 23 December 2017 (EST)

<s>Given what I know about [[Atheism and health]] and [[Global atheism and aging populations]], I suspected there was a positive correlation between atheism and cancer. And lo and behold, there is!

By the way, you might find this to be interesting:

According to the American Cancer Society:

"According to the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), 69% of cancer patients say they pray for their health. A recent study published in Cancer, a peer-reviewed journal of the American Cancer Society, suggests a link between religious or spiritual beliefs and better physical health reported among patients with cancer."[https://www.cancer.org/latest-news/study-cancer-patients-with-strong-religious-or-spiritual-beliefs-report-better-health.html]

The Christian apologist Gary Habermas wrote: "Double-blind prayer experiments: where people pray for others with terminal illness. Habermas admitted that most such experiments have not worked, but the three that he knows of that have indeed worked were cases of orthodox-Christians praying for the sick."[https://www.christianpost.com/news/christian-apologist-10-reasons-for-the-fall-of-atheism-106531/]

See: [[Atheism and cancer#Religion/irreligion and cancer treatment|Religion/irreligion and cancer treatment]] [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 15:19, 22 December 2017 (EST)</s>

=== I've got the power! ===
[[File:Freethinkers.jpg|thumbnail|200px|right|<s>Dr. [[Jonathan Sarfati]] is a staff member of [[Creation Ministries International]].</s> ]]
<s>An atheist/agnostic wrote about me: "These people get off on controlling you, on subjecting you to their power... I'm sorry that... mound of misery got to you."

SamHB, I thought Christians believed in free will, that people are free moral agents and that God can help people overcome various temptations? See also: [[Atheism and free will]]</s>
:Actually, we do believe that! Conservapedia addiction is a tough addiction to break, but people have broken even tougher ones. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 23:29, 23 December 2017 (EST)

<s>"When in reality no one can ever make you feel ANYTHING! That’s right; you heard me. No one can make you cry. No one can make you happy. No one can make you sad. No one can make you feel better. No one can make you feel guilty…but you." - Heather Wilson

Evidently, Heather Wilson has more [[machismo]] than the gentlemen of a certain atheist wiki!

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_BRv9wGf5pk I've got the power!]

The truth often hurts. And certain gentlemen can't handle the truth!

Evidently, I am the puppet master and certain atheist gentlemen are my puppets!</s>
[[File:Second dog with a bone.jpg|right|thumbnail|220px|<s>Atheists obsessed with [[Conservapedia]] are like a [[dog]] with a bone. Their dogged persistence in thinking about Conservapedia, discussing Conservapedia and making forecasts about Conservapedia is quite prodigious and intense.</s> ]]
<s>I've got the power.

I've got the power.

Like the crack of the whip, I Snap attack...

Bang the bass, turn up the treble.

Radical mind, day and night all the time.

7:14, wise divine. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]])
:I read this comment directed to me by a member of SJW atheist wiki: "What have you done but spiel hate...".

:A best selling book declares that SJWs always project. It's so true.

:Well cited and factual encyclopedia articles spieling hate. it such an absurd proposition. The British atheist EJamesW on Conservapedia's atheism related articles: "...they're very detailed, thorough and have lots of quotes and citations." (see: [[Essay: A British atheist on Conservapedia's atheism articles]]). [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 03:54, 23 December 2017 (EST)</s>

== Re: Online boxing match ==

Merician and I have been engaging in a bit of an online boxing match lately, but we have been playing by [https://www.thefreedictionary.com/Marquis+of+Queensberry+rules Marquess of Queensberry Rules].

See also: [[Talk:Essay: British atheist acknowledges the reasonableness of a User: Conservative editor]]. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 22:09, 30 December 2017 (EST)
:Addemdun: See my comments above regarding high mutational loads/left-handedness/socialization, otherness and less likely to engage in conformity (I expanded the [[Atheists and genetic mutations]] article to provide more in-depth analysis/commentary.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 05:41, 31 December 2017 (EST)

== <s>Atheistic China and baby eating</s> ==

<s>See: [[Atheistic China and baby eating]]

See also: [[Atheists eat babies meme]]

From 2005 to 2015, mews organizations reported about gross immorality in irreligious countries/regions [[Atheism and bestiality|that involved animals]]. And now this! SamHB, what's next? See also: [[Atheism and moral depravity]]</s>

[[File:Poodle.jpg|thumbnail|200px|center|<s>SamHB, don't say I didn't try to stop the irreligious when they started to abuse poodles! See: [[Atheism and bestiality]]</s> ]]
{{clear}}
<s>I hope this further clarifies why I drew the line the sand where I did in terms of publicizing the misdeeds of the irreligious. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 06:00, 3 February 2018 (EST)</s>

:If you want to turn Conservapedia from an encyclopedia for conservatives into a playpen for adults behaving in utterly infantile ways (and on the main page, no less!) I can't stop you. But please don't do it on my talk page. You seem, from this and earlier incidents, to believe that I have some special intellectual bond with you, or some interest in these matters. I don't. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 10:50, 17 February 2018 (EST)

== Your edits ==

When you edited the Billy Graham article, [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Texas_elections,_2018&diff=826892431&oldid=826891839 you reverted] my previous edit in addition to making the grammar fix. I didn't notice your fix, and with good reason, considering that your improvement was very small compared to what you reverted. Sorry for the confusion. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 11:21, 21 February 2018 (EST)

== Mank ==

Just Sayin'. [[User:DaveSG|DaveSG]] ([[User talk:DaveSG|talk]]) 01:09, 24 February 2018 (EST)