sotnd conservaleaks

2009-01-04 ZB1 Was I too hard on Rod Weathers? Is he friend or foe? want more feedback.
2009-01-04 ZB1 BRichtigen
2009-01-04 ZB1 Problem with Math entries
2009-01-04 ZB1 Is PJR very contentious? I don't think so. I think the real issue is......
2009-01-04 ZB1 Anyone have any Christian UK friends with UK websites or friends with websites in English speaking countries? The reason I ask is that search engines look at the amount of global links to a website and the reason we we rank high for atheism at Google ireland is because I .......

Problem with Math entries

conservative777 <conservaped...@gmail.com>, Sun, 4 Jan 2009 08:21:16 -0800 (PST):

I got an email from a person called Richtigen who says two of our math
entries are false.

It has been a couple of decades since I took geometry so I want some
feedback.

He is what Richtigen said:

Have a look at the math section. Instead of incorporating SamHB's
work,
we're still stuck with outright false entries like
http://www.conservapedia.com/Decimal_number or the even worse
http://www.conservapedia.com/Center . How trustworthy will an
encyclopedia
appear to those who used these false concepts and are laughed at at
school?

Temlakos <temla...@gmail.com>, Sun, 04 Jan 2009 13:49:00 -0500:

I don't recognize any problems with those entries.

I've never heard of the concept "decimal number." But I /have/ heard of
the concept "center," and I have no problem with the definition given.

TerryH

"TerryK" <terry.92...@gmail.com>, Sun, 4 Jan 2009 11:40:53 -0800:

Someone with higher math skills than I should check them, but many of us
have observed RW's history of introducing doubt to create confusion and
frustration...

*        TerryK

Geoffrey Plourde <geo.p...@yahoo.com>, Sun, 4 Jan 2009 12:28:13 -0800 (PST):

I doubt I am anywhere high on the totem pole as regards math, but the center is obviously correct. Decimal numbers is technically correct but might be better at decimals. Ed/Justine/Jessica, have you ever heard them referred to as decimal numbers?  

"Jessica Kotomi Tanaka" <kotomi.tan...@gmail.com>, Sun, 4 Jan 2009 22:37:09 +0200:

On 04/01/2009, Geoffrey Plourde <geo.p...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> I doubt I am anywhere high on the totem pole as regards math, but the center
> is obviously correct. Decimal numbers is technically correct but might be
> better at decimals. Ed/Justine/Jessica, have you ever heard them referred to
> as decimal numbers?

There is a very good reason why I studied languages. ^-^. I always
thought decimals came after the "." However, as far as articles go, I
have just had a look at it and am still none the wiser, so as far as
explaining them goes, it is not a very good article.
Jessica

Ed Poor <uncle_ed_p...@yahoo.com>, Mon, 5 Jan 2009 04:43:24 -0800 (PST):

I think that a 760 SAT in math (in high school) qualifies me as a math
expert. I have corrected numerous mistakes in our math articles. Some
may have been made out of ignorance; others may be deliberate
sabotage.

I am suspicious that hardly any one but me has been able to produce an
error-free article on any aspect of math below the university level.
It's the same with our biology articles, which have no basic science
but jump immediately to college or even postgraduate levels of arcane
inaccessibility. For math, I think the reason is to make us a
laughingstock of useless drivel. For biology, I think the reason is to
justify unguided evolution.

Does anyone here have the math or science background to help me
eliminate these problems?

Ed Poor

"TerryK" <terry.92...@gmail.com>, Mon, 5 Jan 2009 04:56:36 -0800:

Geo might. I believe he was editing one of the math articles last night,
making it easier to understand.....

*      
        Terry

Ed Poor <uncle_ed_p...@yahoo.com>, Mon, 5 Jan 2009 05:11:27 -0800 (PST):

I fixed [[decimal]] and [[fraction]] and [[center]] and [[centroid]].
None is finished, but I no longer see any drivel: i.e., errors or
extraneous material.

Ed
An experienced math teacher

Ed Poor <uncle_ed_p...@yahoo.com>, Mon, 5 Jan 2009 05:15:45 -0800 (PST):

The [[Center]] article said that points were equidistant. That is true
only of a circle. The idea of averaging out applies to an advanced
concept (which requires 12th grade calculus), i.e., the [[centroid]].

If it's like 3/4 it's a fraction. If it's 0.75 it's a decimal (or
"decimal number"). Either term is fine.

Ed Poor
Substitute Math Teacher
PYE Education Center
Queens, New York

Ed Poor <uncle_ed_p...@yahoo.com>, Mon, 5 Jan 2009 05:20:52 -0800 (PST):

I suspect that behind the pose of innocence lies the intent to create
confusion and frustration. I would therefore like to call for a ban on
ANY MORE advanced math articles while high school math is incomplete.
Some goes for advanced biology or advanced chemistry or advanced
physics.

It does us no good to conduct discussions that go over our readers'
heads. They simply won't read the articles. And that, I believe, the
saboteurs' number one goal. They don't want people to turn to our
articles when they are seeking trustworthy information. They want
people to give up and go with the flow, i.e., the mainstream which the
media feeds them.

William Burroughs called it the long "newspaper spoon". But adults are
not babies, and they don't need to be spoon fed. Even kids in high
school and college should be thinking for themselves. They should not
be trained to parrot propaganda.

Ed Poor

"Bill Bagot" <wbag...@san.rr.com>, Mon, 5 Jan 2009 05:27:08 -0800:

I actually had a 770, but I didn't keep up with it.  Even then I don't think
my knowledge matched my score, doing things more by "feel" than a deep
seated understanding of formulas.  Quite honestly the college kids would
probably be some of our best bets.

Bill  (Learn Together)

"TerryK" <terry.92...@gmail.com>, Mon, 5 Jan 2009 05:36:46 -0800:

Isn't Roger Schlafly a math whiz?  Maybe Andy can ask him to look the stuff
over?

*      
        Terry

Ed Poor <uncle_ed_p...@yahoo.com>, Mon, 5 Jan 2009 06:04:02 -0800 (PST):

Yes, they'd be our best bets if they would focus on making elementary
concepts understandable to beginners. Not everyone can do this.

Writing and teaching are similar. You have to take what you know, and
put it into a form where someone else who doesn't know it can learn
it. Our founder is a teacher - not just a lawyer.

Ed Poor

DeanS <dean.conservat...@gmail.com>, Mon, 5 Jan 2009 08:48:30 -0800 (PST):

I was quite good in Math in my college days. I received a 4.0 in my
Technical Math course which included some Calculus, as well as courses
in Statistics and Numerical Analysis. Now I'm 52 years old and I find
I have forgotten all that math because I didn't use it. At some point
I need to use Conservapedia to gain back that knowledge.

In high school, I took a Geology related course and avoided Biology. I
really paid for that when I took my ACT and most of the questions were
related to Biology. I never learned that subject either, and as I
mentioned above with Math, I would like to use Conservapedia to gain
that knowledge.

I do know a bit about Geology/Rocks/Minerals. I'm an amateur rock/
mineral collector and I have created/improved many Geology related
articles. I'm going to continue this effort in 2009.

In summary, I'm not qualified to write Math articles or Biology
articles. I do want to learn more about these subjects in 2009.

Dean

Geoffrey Plourde <geo.p...@yahoo.com>, Mon, 5 Jan 2009 17:07:47 -0800 (PST):

I might be able to muddle in it (Up to Calculus) but I doubt that I can do much.

2009-01-04 ZB1 Was I too hard on Rod Weathers? Is he friend or foe? want more feedback.
2009-01-04 ZB1 BRichtigen
2009-01-04 ZB1 Problem with Math entries
2009-01-04 ZB1 Is PJR very contentious? I don't think so. I think the real issue is......
2009-01-04 ZB1 Anyone have any Christian UK friends with UK websites or friends with websites in English speaking countries? The reason I ask is that search engines look at the amount of global links to a website and the reason we we rank high for atheism at Google ireland is because I .......

Last updated 12 Apr 2011 by Georg Kraml.