- Joined
- Jul 31, 2010
- Messages
- 3,595
- Reaction score
- 1,259
- Location
- Kentucky
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Moderate
9. The action-at-a-distance by Jesus, described in John 4:46-54.
10. The failure to discover gravitons, despite wasting hundreds of millions in taxpayer money in searching.
27. It is impossible to perform an experiment to determine whether Einstein's theory of relativity is correct, or the older Lorentz aether theory is correct. Believing one over the other is a matter of faith.
28. In Genesis 1:6-8, we are told that one of God's first creations was a firmament in the heavens. This likely refers to the creation of the luminiferous aether.
The theory of relativity is a mathematical system that allows no exceptions. It is heavily promoted by liberals who like its encouragement of relativism and its tendency to mislead people in how they view the world.[1]
Conservapedia is 100% serious. They have a seriously Crayola view of everything.:lol:
This is a joke website, right? No one could possibly be this stupid.
I'd like to see some proof of thatThere was a thread on this a while back....
It came out that a number of the "editors" of the site and main contributors were actually liberals that were basically posting up the most stereotypically over the top things possible to make things look bad.
The problem, as far as I can tell, is that the fake wackos are better at being wackos than the real wacko...Wow, so when vandals come by and post something stupid, what happens is the site then reverts from fake wacko back to real wacko?
What does this have to do with whether or not E=mc2 is a liberal conspiracy?
There was a thread on this a while back....
It came out that a number of the "editors" of the site and main contributors were actually liberals that were basically posting up the most stereotypically over the top things possible to make things look bad. The reason it worked is because the guy that actually founded it IS bat **** insane and is ACTUALLY stereotypically over the top. However, its about as legitimate as encylcopedia dramatica
There was a thread on this a while back....
It came out that a number of the "editors" of the site and main contributors were actually liberals that were basically posting up the most stereotypically over the top things possible to make things look bad. The reason it worked is because the guy that actually founded it IS bat **** insane and is ACTUALLY stereotypically over the top. However, its about as legitimate as encylcopedia dramatica