Wow. If you thought Andrew Schlafly’s Conservapedia couldn’t get any more idiotic, I present to you this article, where they try to claim that the “new atheist leaders” — Dawkins, Hitchens, Harris, Dennett and PZ — are too fat. And that’s bad, because Christians are skinny and healthy. Go read it, then point and laugh. Then if you really want a guffaw, you can read their explanation for why the theory of relativity is wrong.
Apr 25 2012
Conservapedia: New Atheists are Fat!
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
About the Author
44 comments
1 ping
Skip to comment form ↓
erichoug
April 25, 2012 at 10:42 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
I used to read conservapedia because I thought it was funny. Now I just find it depressing.
There are still some people that comment and talk on it who are good people who just have a fundamental disagreement with the people on the left. But, most of the people there, especially Mr. Schlafly, have completely abandoned principle, honesty, integrity, and any pretense at rational thought in favor of a blind and bigoted partisanship that truly baffles me.
If Mr. Obama said that the sun rose in the east and set in the west, these people would immediately deny it.
They are not longer the voice of reasoned dissent from the opposite site of the aisle they are idiotic ideologues who cry freedom while demanding you do exactly what they say.
KG
April 25, 2012 at 10:46 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
In fact, obesity, like most other “social pathologies”, correlates well with socio-economic inequality at a population level (see Wilkinson and Pickett The Spirit Level) across rich countries and across US states. In the latter case at least, this means it also correlates well with religiosity.
holytape
April 25, 2012 at 10:48 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Rush Limbaugh, John Hagee, Rick Warren, Jerry Falwell and Chris Christie are all skinny. It’s just the liberal reality that adds ten to one hundred and fifty pounds.
Raging Bee
April 25, 2012 at 10:50 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
If Mr. Obama said that the sun rose in the east and set in the west, these people would immediately deny it.
I almost wish Obama would call a press conference just to say that; and see exactly how the loony right react to it. At the very least, Newt Blingrich (another fat atheist?!) would probably find a way to call it “disgraceful.”
Oh, and have these uber-idiots even SEEN any of the atheists they’re blathering about? IIRC the only one who looks at all overweight is Dennett (who gets a kick out of being occasionally mistaken for Santa Claus.)
Raging Bee
April 25, 2012 at 10:57 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
I just had a look at the relativity bit. By all the Gods that live, these people have created a whole new dimension of cluelessness. (For starters, an object’s mass does not approach zero as its velocity approaches c; it approaches INFINITY. “Dumbass” is far too mild a word for these people.)
observer
April 25, 2012 at 11:08 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
These people must be effective in turning people towards God, because I can’t read a thing they write without muttering “sweet Jesus! “
carolineborduin
April 25, 2012 at 11:09 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
That Conservapedia page – wow. All that work creating a page of links and text rationalizing utter crap.
Skip White
April 25, 2012 at 11:11 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
I only skimmed the page on relativity, but I’m surprised that the entirety of the argument isn’t “Einstein was born Jewish and then was an atheist, so he’s wrong because the Bible says so.”
matty1
April 25, 2012 at 11:15 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
A few clicks reveals an even more amusing essay on Penn Jillette’s walrus slide vs. thin Indian Christian lady dancers
Choice lines include
and
Finally one of the picture captions reads
There is no adequate response to this, laughter is not enough.
davidbrown
April 25, 2012 at 11:16 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
The ‘talk page’ portion of the relativity page is way more fun than the relativity page itself. Read the (amazingly) well-written and well-thought-out comments, and then the Schafly replies. (Shorter Schafly: “I don’t need proof or references – I’ve got conservative logic! And it’s the lamestream media’s fault!”.) Comedy gold.
Captain Mike
April 25, 2012 at 11:16 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
@ Raging Bee: In addition to Dennett, I wouldn’t have called Hitchens svelte.
This is pretty stupid, but on the other hand it’s nice to see men they disagree with being made fun of because of their appearance. That’s progress, right? Right?
interrobang
April 25, 2012 at 11:20 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
To paraphrase Winston Churchill, I may be fat, but I can lose weight, and you’ll still be stupid.
Their delusion and detachment from reality as we know it gets even weirder and/or funnier when you think about how the Republicans collectively between them own about 1/8 of a neck. Seems like most of the people in American public life who spend the most time whinging on about religion and morality and Christianity and blah blah all look like eggs parked on top of beach balls, on something that vaguely resembles legs.
As they say over on Balloon Juice, IT’S ALWAYS PROJECTION.
Doug Little
April 25, 2012 at 11:26 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
I like their predominant use of the American flag on the site. I think all rational clear thinking Americans should take exception to that.
laurentweppe
April 25, 2012 at 11:36 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
You only abandon something if you had it in the first place
Area Man
April 25, 2012 at 11:38 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
@9:
That appears suspiciously like a Poe. When Conserapaedia first came out, it immediately became the target of pranksters. I imagine a lot of people still amuse themselves inserting random bits of crazy to see if anyone can tell the difference.
Also, your link doesn’t work.
Doug Little
April 25, 2012 at 11:39 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Weight gain or loss is directly related to quality of food and quality of exercise*. Unfortunately good quality food is expensive so obesity is always going to hit less well off people, as if they don’t already have enough shit stacked against them.
* There is an excellent book by Jonathan Bailor that wades through 10 years of research on the subject.
matty1
April 25, 2012 at 11:51 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
@15 Of course it’s a Poe, you mean the whole site isn’t?
As for links try
http://www.conservapedia.com/Essay:_Penn_Jillette_doing_walrus_slide_vs._thin_Christian_lady_dancers
hinschelwood
April 25, 2012 at 11:52 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
@15
It’s true that conservapedia attracts a lot of parodists, but the series of “obesity” and “machismo” articles are written by Ken DeMyer, one of the admins. As much as people think he’s also a parodist, he spends too much time doing this stuff for it to be a joke.
Trebuchet
April 25, 2012 at 11:59 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
The “Atheists are Fat” meme is pretty much the sole property of a Conservapedia obsessed guy called Ken DeMeyer — “User:Conservative” at CP. You can keep up with his shenanigans at RationalWiki, who have a WIGO (What Is Going On) page on CP.
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Conservapedia:What_is_going_on_at_CP%3F
I check in on the WIGO every day, just for laughs. They do captures on a log of the best stuff so you don’t even have to give extra hits to Conservapedia.
michaelgaribaldi
April 25, 2012 at 12:01 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Is this even a valid source at Liberty U?
Trebuchet
April 25, 2012 at 12:02 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Oh, and Ken is apparently not a POE, much as we’d like to think so.
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Ken_Demeyer
Draken
April 25, 2012 at 12:10 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
I thought most dissent on CP was banhammered out almost before it could get a foothold. Current admins are all yes-nodders.
erichoug:
They are not longer the voice of reasoned dissent
Were they ever? This is aschlafly we’re talking about, multiple award holder on FSTDT.
michaelgaribaldi
April 25, 2012 at 12:12 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
If you need a real laugh, go read their Star Trek article. I doubt even homeschoolers would feel comfortable citing Conservapedia as a source on any subject at all.
Conservapedia must be a case of one man with half a brain, and a small grant from the Heritage Foundation.
rturpin
April 25, 2012 at 12:13 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
When it comes to diet, the hippies were right. Stick with vegetables, mushrooms, greens, beans, whole grains. And only whatever meat you kill and clean yourself. ;-)
slc1
April 25, 2012 at 12:15 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Re Skip White @ #8
Actually, Einstein denied being an atheist. He would probably more accurately be described as a Deist or agnostic, depending on when in pontificated on the subject.
The Lorax
April 25, 2012 at 12:16 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Since when is Richard Dawkins fat?
tacitus
April 25, 2012 at 12:25 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
As ludicrous as it may seem, if Schlafly ditched DeMyer and his endlessly inane sneering, Conservapedia would improve significantly. (Not that difficult when you consider just how dreadful it is now.)
The reason he doesn’t is that DeMyer is probably the most prolific contributor to the site, albeit mostly in the form of unencyclopedic screeds on how atheists are fat and that global atheism is dying. That causes bystanders (like Ed) to come and stare incredulously at the insanity of it all, thus driving traffic to the site.
Without DeMyer, the site would rapidly sink into oblivion, so Schlafly lets him break all the rules of the site with impunity, and allows him to take over the main page for his bizarre ramblings. That Schlafly tolerates a level of stupid even greater than his own to prop up the site just shows what a pathetic figure he cuts in the conservative movement.
lofgren
April 25, 2012 at 12:31 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
I like that they rely on phone interviews to correlate religiosity with exercise and nutrition. Three things that people lie about the most – how much they eat, how often they exercise, and how religious they are – all in one poll. Is it remotely surprising that they would correlate strongly? I’ll bet exercising a lot and eating healthy also correlate well with a very conventional (but amazing) sex life and always thoroughly washing your hands after going to the bathroom.
lordshipmayhem
April 25, 2012 at 12:42 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Atheists aren’t FAT. They’re ext3.
[/geek humour]
Modusoperandi
April 25, 2012 at 1:05 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
lofgren “I like that they rely on phone interviews to correlate religiosity with exercise and nutrition. Three things that people lie about the most – how much they eat, how often they exercise, and how religious they are – all in one poll.”
Well wouldn’t you lying Atheists lie too? Lie more? You can’t fill that God-shaped hole with Ding Dongs, Atheists! So stop trying! Also, give me one.
zmidponk
April 25, 2012 at 1:32 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
I think one of the classic parts of that site are where the owner, Andy Schlafly, has proclaimed that Fidel Castro actually died several years ago, and any and all public appearances since then have been made by a double, and the ‘lamestream media’ are either colluding with this or being fooled by the stand in and remaining silent about such suspicious things like the alleged Castro wearing a scarf, apparently to hide the ‘age of the neck’. You can see that, and various other ways in which Conservapedia is definitely not wrong, no sirree, here:
http://conservapedia.com/Conservapedia_proven_wrong
fifthdentist
April 25, 2012 at 1:36 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Obviously this person has never seen a Southern Baptist congregation in southern Georgia. Or a Methodist one. Or Presbyterian. Or Church of God. Or Church of Christ. Or Church of God in Christ. …
Michael Heath
April 25, 2012 at 1:42 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
tacitus writes:
I skimmed Wikipedia’s record for Conservapedia to check out if anyone contributed information regarding Conservapedia’s influence in the public square. I’m primarily concerned K-12 conservative Christian children being home-schooled or attending a denominational school utilize this horrid site, or their indoctrinators. As best as I could tell they had nothing.
Olav
April 25, 2012 at 1:42 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
lordshipmayhem says:
Mostly ext4 nowadays. Except embedded atheists, who are still ext2.
opyros
April 25, 2012 at 2:05 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
That only applies to GNU atheists, however. BSD-style atheists may be UFS2 or FFS or even ZFS.
Doug Little
April 25, 2012 at 2:08 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Whole grains not so much, you want to stay away from refined starches and sugars. 80% of your diet should be non-starchy vegetables and lean protein (40%,40% split). You can snack on fruit, nuts and seeds. You should never starve yourself, this is the worst thing you can do. Basically if you think about what our distant ancestors would have eaten*, you are on the right track.
* And by distant I’m talking mind blowing to a YEC distant.
lofgren
April 25, 2012 at 2:17 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Aren’t whole grains by definition unrefined starches?
tacitus
April 25, 2012 at 3:12 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Yeah, it says a lot that much of Conservapedia’s traffic comes from RationalWiki, at least according to one of the sites that measures site metrics.
Schlafly does homeschool a few poor unfortunate souls–and does a terrible job at it–but it’s a drop in the ocean compared with overall number of kids get a private, religion-based education.
Doug Little
April 25, 2012 at 3:25 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Yes I can see the confusion there it was the first thing that popped into my head when reading the book as well.
I think that he generalizes on the side of refined products as they are particularly bad for you. Whole grains are better than their refined counter parts but are still relatively low on his particular scale.
On of the main reasons is that the body is particularly efficient at turning starch into glucose that then gets stored as body fat. Lean protein on the other hand is particularly inefficient with approx 30% of the original calories available to be potentially stored as body fat, digestion burns the rest.
Doug Little
April 25, 2012 at 3:30 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Starches have a high glycemic index as well. which is another of the criteria that he uses to rate certain foods.
John Hinkle
April 25, 2012 at 3:54 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
I’m sure they meant “fat” with a “ph.”
Doug Little
April 25, 2012 at 4:17 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
or fat with a phd.
twincats
April 25, 2012 at 4:30 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Wait, you mean if I go back and drink the kool-aid, I’ll be normal weight again??
Nah, not worth it.
imthegenieicandoanything
April 25, 2012 at 5:52 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Also of interest is the KKKonserv-o-pedia article on “glue,” which atheists new and old share basic properties with in their futile attempts at debating the gawdly, and the photographs of Richard Dawkins’ (or, as he is identified several times in the article, “dumbo ugly atheist second-rate actor ex-game show host Richard Dawson”) mother’s wake, in which she is clearly wearing army boots.
Unless they are armed, I need not even get upset at these self-debased, infantile, would-be evil little shits. They need not even be ridiculed, just quoted.
Hey, I think your post was good.
June 4, 2012 at 2:58 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Hey, I think your post was good….
[...]Conservapedia: New Atheists are Fat! | Dispatches from the Culture Wars[...]…