Conservapedia - User contributions [en]

Moon

2007-03-19T12:57:02Z

Mark4: removed factual inaccuracies and irrelevancies

The '''Moon''' orbits the [[Earth]]. Unlike most planets, Earth has only one moon and it has several striking characteristics:

1. Throughout man's existence, the Moon has had the same size as the [[Sun]] when viewed from Earth. This creates a beautiful symmetry and permits phenomenal eclipses to occur. The odds of that symmetry occurring by chance are very small. That symmetry will not last forever, as the sun is continually shrinking.

2. The Moon presents the same side to Earth at all times, even though the Moon revolves around the Earth. That requires the rotation of the Moon to be timed precisely to offset the separate effects of the revolution around Earth. Physicists explain this phenomenon by invoking [[tidal locking]]; tidal forces on Earth caused a bulge on the Moon, thereby creating a drag on the rotation of the Moon until its same face always presents to the Earth. It was once believed that the planet [[Mercury]] had a similar locked rotation due to gravitational forces from the sun, such that the same side of Mercury always faces the sun. In fact, Mercury's tidal locking is incomplete; it does not always present the same face to the sun, but rather switches the side that it presents to the sun every full revolution.

Current tidal forces exerted by the Earth on the Moon cannot account fully for its bulge or egg shape, though accounting for greater tidal forces in the past may explain this discrepancy.<ref>http://physics.fortlewis.edu/Astronomy/astronomy%20today/CHAISSON/AT308/HTML/AT30803.HTM</ref>

3. The Moon's surface lacks the abundant [[iron]] that permeates the Earth, thereby proving that the Moon did not come from the Earth. This deficiency of iron on the Moon disproved the theory that the Moon must have originated by breaking off from the Earth.

4. The Moon is currently receding from the Earth at less than 6 inches per year. The Moon could never have been closer than about 11,000 miles or it would have been broken up by tidal forces. If the rate of recession is assumed to have averaged about 6 inches per year, the Moon's present distance of about 250,000 miles implies an age for the Moon of no more than 2.6 billion years. However, the tidal forces between Earth and Moon are not constant, and so simply extrapolating from the current rate of change is not strictly valid.

== See also ==
*[[Moon Theories]]

== Notes and References ==

<references/>

[[Category:Astronomy]]

User talk:Mark4

2007-03-19T12:49:56Z

Mark4:

Mark, this site is not for misguided attempts at sex ed. You don't set the rules here. State your intention here to abide the [[rules]] and refrain from posting sex ed material, or otherwise you will be blocked again. Your edit of Marx was also inappropriately derogatory about religion.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 08:42, 19 March 2007 (EDT)
:I fail to see how it is misguided - I see it as simply stating the facts. How do you expect people to learn about what their bodies are made of and what the stuff coming out of them is? Sooner or later they'll find out anyway, ''as they should''. I don't understand how you can't acknowledge this is a step backwards in attempting to spread knowledge - this is hindering it.

:However, since I see that stating the facts is not necessarily the way things are done here, I'll abide by the rules and attempt to write as much unbiased content as possible. Can I have my old username back (Mark)? - [[User:Mark4|Mark4]] 12:49, 19 March 2007 (GMT)

User talk:Mark4

2007-03-19T12:49:26Z

Mark4:

Mark, this site is not for misguided attempts at sex ed. You don't set the rules here. State your intention here to abide the [[rules]] and refrain from posting sex ed material, or otherwise you will be blocked again. Your edit of Marx was also inappropriately derogatory about religion.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 08:42, 19 March 2007 (EDT)
:I fail to see how it is misguided - I see it as simply stating the facts. How do you expect people to learn about what their bodies are made of and what the stuff coming out of them is? Sooner or later they'll find out anyway, ''as they should''. I don't understand how you can't acknowledge this is a step backwards in attempting to spread knowledge - this is hindering it.

However, since I see that stating the facts is not necessarily the way things are done here, I'll abide by the rules and attempt to write as much unbiased content as possible. Can I have my old username back (Mark)? - [[User:Mark4|Mark4]] 12:49, 19 March 2007 (GMT)

Karl Marx

2007-03-19T12:15:51Z

Mark4: Grammar error, removed blatant lie.

Karl Marx (1818-1883) was a German economist who codified communist theory in his book "The Communist Manifesto" (1848), which he co-authored with his associate Fredriech Engels. The book declared, "The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class [economic] struggles." Communism prohibits a full right of private property and in its place attempts to force people to be equal in wealth.

Marx predicted that the proletariat (working class) would overthrow the wealthy in a capitalistic society, and then establish a new system that would be socialism in its early stage and pure communism in its later stage. Socialism differs from communism in that socialism does not require full equality in result and does not deny all private property. But socialism was considered by Marx to be an early stage of communism.

Marx was born in Prussia, educated in Germany, and a writer in London. His most famous work in the field of economics was "Das Kapital" ("Capital"), in which he declared economics to be the guiding force of history and that owners pay workers just enough for them to support their families. The value of the goods produced by workers is much more than the wages paid, and this "surplus value" is literally stolen from workers by owners. Owners took this surplus value and perpetuated this unfair system by investing it into more machines and consumption by the wealthy. Inevitably, class struggle by the poor against the rich, and the poor would violently overthrow the rich and end capitalism.

Marx drew heavily on the ideas of the German philosopher [[Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel]] and collaborated closely with another German philosopher, [[Friedrich Engels]].

Marx is considered very controversial in religious circles for his statement, "Religion ... is the opium of the people." It is a very well-known quote precisely because of the controversy and because in non-religious circles is seen as quite a fitting description of what religion is. It was written in his 1843 work "A Contribution to the [http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1843/critique-hpr/intro.htm Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right]" and expresses Marx's belief that religion offers a false palliative to assuage the suffering of the oppressed, which he felt prevents people from seeking to cure the conditions which cause that suffering. It is often cited as evidence of Marx's atheism and disdain for anything intended to control people on a massive scale.

[[Category:Biographies]]
[[Category:History]]
[[Category:Economics]]
[[Category:Sociology]]

User talk:Godlives

2007-03-19T12:09:29Z

Mark4: /* Try this */

While the David Hicks item is true, they'll delete it since it' source to wikipedia. Source it to a news org and it should be fine. [[User:Cracker|Cracker]][[User_Talk:Cracker|talk]] 07:27, 19 March 2007 (EDT)

Thanks for the tip. I have only just stumbled across this site and am absolutely flabbergasted. They criticise Wikipedia but on that site if there is a mistake it can be corrected. On this site, many important pages are just locked so the obvious mistakes cannot be corrected. [[User:Godlives|Godlives]] 07:32, 19 March 2007 (EDT)

==Yup==
Look at [[Examples of Bias in Wikipedia| This]] as compared to [[Examples of Bias in Conservapedia| This!]] [[User:Cracker|Cracker]][[User_Talk:Cracker|talk]] 07:38, 19 March 2007 (EDT)

==Try this==
I saw that. I have checked through quite a few 'articles' now on topics I am somewhat familiar with and I have noticed many which while inaccurate are being posted by people who are sending up the site, aqnd some which are genuinely funny. I presume the sysops don't know enough to correct these articles and may even believe they are accurate. It seems that a sites as biased as this will never generate the respect necessary to attract sufficient numbers of quality contributors. Try this to get a relevant page started: [[Major bias in conservapedia]] [[User:Godlives|Godlives]] 07:43, 19 March 2007 (EDT)

Well, I guess it was fun while it lasted. they'll likely BAN you for such subversiveness.[[User:Cracker|Cracker]][[User_Talk:Cracker|talk]] 07:50, 19 March 2007 (EDT)

:They ban people for far less, so it seems like Godlives isn't going to live very long.

Conservapedia talk:Major bias in conservapedia

2007-03-19T12:06:13Z

Mark4: New page: Surely you can see this is going to fail dismally... do you really think the sysops are going to let this stand? I agree it would do some good towards the health of this place to promote a...

Surely you can see this is going to fail dismally... do you really think the sysops are going to let this stand? I agree it would do some good towards the health of this place to promote a more objective and less censored point of view, but judging by the speed and ruthless ignorance with which they delete and modify articles, I don't see this ever happening.