Mike the Mad Biologist

Conservapedia’s Glorious War on Sarcasm: the Gene Edition

Posted by Mike on February 27, 2007
(4)
More »

v-wie-vendetta-2
Beta test version of Conservapedia graphical interface. Isn’t he reassuring?

What happens when you take Science Blogs “basic concepts” and add it to Conservapedia, the information website for fucking morons? You get more fun than a barrel of monkeys (which, of course, are not related to humans…). Here’s what the Stupid People have to say about genes (this is the entire definition):

A section of DNA that codes for the production of a protein or a portion of a protein. The gene is the fundamental unit of heredity. Although the gene is the fundamental unit of heredity, changes in genes (so-called “evolution”) cannot explain the differences between species, which require an Intelligent Designer[1].

OK, then. What does explain “the differences between species”? Thetans? I always thought creationists simply claimed that the genetic differences among species were due to God, and not evolution. This Conservapedia entry proves that stupidity is a progressively degenerative disease.

Oh, and you might wonder what source is cited. It’s Of Pandas and People: The Central Question of Biological Origins. This is a joke, right?

On the other hand, driftglass noted recently (italics mine):

And then there is Stupidity. And to understand American culture you must first understand that it’s not that some people don’t like to be stupid. Lots of people love being stupid, and lots of other people make millions of dollars every year telling them that it is perfectly OK to be stupid.

That it is a holy and noble and All-American thing to be stupid. That their God, in fact, requires it. That “elites” have ruined this country, and that only good, old-fashion, dumb as drywall morons can save us from their predations.

We generally refer to these people by the taxonomically correct term of “Republican”.

However while lots of people enjoy steeping in their own stupidity and bigotry, paradoxically, they are terribly frightened of appearing stupid.

Conservapedia in a nutshell. Sigh.

(4)
More »

Comments

  1. #1 JohnTheStudent
    February 27, 2007

    How many times do I need to say this: check the edit history when mocking Conservapedia. Everything except the first sentence was added by Hiram Whickermeister II, aka the Pharyngula commentor Mrs. Tilton. I understand that it is impossible to distinguish between a creationist and a parody of a creationist, but it is possible to check the eidt history.

    Anyone not named “schlafley”, “SharonS” (or some variation, like PhilipB, these are the homeschoolers), or a sysop named “conservative”, is probably a troll.

    There is plenty to mock over there. Check out the contributions of “Aschlafely”. He’s a nut (see: Moon, Thoery of Relativity, ACLU, Bill Clinton). I’m sick of sciencebloggers mocking trolls though! There’s so much ACTUAL lunacy to mock!

  2. #2 Chuck C
    February 27, 2007

    They must have the world’s most worthless server. I can’t believe that there is still so much latency in page retrieval: it’s not like there’s a whole lot of content on any one page.

    I want to go there and play around, but not when it takes 3 minutes to load a page.

  3. #3 Edward
    February 27, 2007

    Actually, the term “gene” is not well defined in the scientific literature. I tend to use more exact terms, like allele, mutation, coding sequence, exon, locus, etc. and avoid “gene” in papers. How anyone can look at the available DNA data and come to the conclusion that there is no evidence there for evolution is completely beyond me, however.

  4. #4 sex shop
    May 8, 2009

    They must have the world’s most worthless server. I can’t believe that there is still so much latency in page retrieval: it’s not like there’s a whole lot of content on any one page.

    I want to go there and play around, but not when it takes 3 minutes to load a page