User talk:Cptstubing

And your sources to prove we have a bias? Plus, your sources that proves the liberal side of the fence is all lollipops and cuddly animals. I would love to see them. Karajou 05:48, 26 February 2015 (EST)

It seems to be absurd to claim that Conservapedia has no bias! Karajou, you yourself wrote about the Conservapedia Bible Project:

"It's already proven in all walks of life that liberals are either liars or lunatics, so any percentage of liberalism in the project just isn't going to happen. Karajou 14:19, 14 October 2009 (EDT) "

So, if there is a conservative claim and a liberal claim, Conservapedia will side with the conservative position, as the liberal position is compromised per se. That's pretty much a textbook example of bias. --AugustO 07:17, 26 February 2015 (EST)

Yes, we will side with the conservative position (read "bias") because we will not side with liars or lunatics who have a severe bias towards liberalism. Do you have a problem with that? Karajou 09:36, 26 February 2015 (EST)

Bias on itself isn't problematic. It just seems to be superfluous to ask for sources for the obvious. --AugustO 06:39, 27 February 2015 (EST)

Throwing down the gauntlet

Cptstubing, please point out a single factual error in the Conservapedia atheism and homosexuality articles. Conservative 10:19, 26 February 2015 (EST)