Conservapedia Explains What Atheists Do… August 18, 2010

Conservapedia Explains What Atheists Do…

I know Conservapedia is a joke to begin with, but someone has to be taking it seriously, right? (Tea Partiers?)

In any case, this article — their featured article of the day — is just uncalled for:

An atheist trying to stop Christianity.

Because that’s supposedly what we do.

Even though there are no examples cited.

It’s bigoted, paranoid, crazy, and just plain wrong.

Which must be why the extremists revel in it.

(Thanks to Josh for the link!)

Browse Our Archives

What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • Yeonghoon Joung

    If the idiot flames represent the Christian religion and the fireman, the atheist, I can see the resemblance. Just, I’m sure they’re really trying to say, “Oh look, heathens burn churches”.

  • VXbinaca

    I find it funny how Conservatives point to Stalinism* as atheists trying to wipe out Christians, and how the two go together so well.

    They almost always shut up when I mention Jonestown, and how Jim Jones was pinker than a rare steak. They usually shut up or whip out the tired “not Christianity” excuse. So no, Communism and Christianity are not mutually exclusive.

    *I’m a fair enough person that though I am a Libertarian, I can recognize that most of the evil in communism was done under Stalin. Muslims had a degree of autonomy under Lenin, even though the Orthodox church was pretty much despised and oppressed throughout the USSR existence.

  • No, nobody really takes Conservapedia seriously.

    Even the Tea Party crazies draw the line somewhere.

    Would you object if they showed a (photoshopped) picture of somebody eating babies?

  • Hmmm… I’m thinking of Poe’s Law here. From what I understand, there are a considerable number of skeptics who have infiltrated Conservapedia and post a lot of parody stuff there. But then, it’s Conservapedia and telling parody from their real views is like going *really* far down the rabbit hole.

  • Evan

    Wow. I have seriously been slacking in my atheistic duties. I have not set fire to anything since I lost power last month and lit a candle. Even that seems to pale in comparison. Is there a schedule for massive events like that in the picture or do we just do these things anarchically on our own time?

  • I think it’s about accurate. Christianity (and other religions) cause untold amounts of damage, as does an uncontrollable building fire. And we’re the minority, just looking as it causes destruction everywhere it goes.

    The fireman is just standing there, knowing there’s nothing he can do, just like we atheists are sometimes willing to let religion burn itself out and suffer from a lack of oxygen until it suffocates and dies from its own self-destructive power.

    Just like it is inevitable that fire eventually dies, so it is for religion.

    I think that picture is absolutely fitting, Hemant.

    (P.S.: It worries me a little that you see this as “Atheists burn down buildings to stop Christianity,” while I saw “Atheists are content to let Christianity self-destruct and burn itself out.”) 😉

  • Evan

    Had another thought regarding whether anyone takes Conservapædia seriously.

    My employers are Ukrainian Orthodox and voice conservative notions all the time, and on occasion turn on FOX News during work hours. They are also guilty of nepotism. Which isn’t itself a bad thing, but many of the shop floor (but mostly those in charge) are either family or members of their church. This one time I had to work on the business laptop belonging to the engineer, a son of another employee and church member, and I discovered he had bookmarked a wiki for orthodox Christianity. I didn’t look deeply into it, but it gave me the impression that if he or anyone else at my job knew of Conservapædia they would surely be visiting it daily.

    The things I hear at work cause much head-desking. And drinking. And it’s worse during the winter months.

  • Richard Wade

    I had both interpretations within a second of each other. The first was “atheists burn churches,” and the second, when I saw the silhouette of the firefighter’s helmet, was “atheists are helpless against Christianity’s advance.”

    Yeah, yeah, whatever. They can blow all the smoke they want; their time is burning out.

    Oh, and by the way, one patient and diligent firefighter standing downwind with a shovel can keep a burning house from spreading embers to the next house. I’ve seen one do it.

    Patience and diligence.

  • rbray18

    like yet another atheist up there kinda pointed at,i see it as this group of Christians calling them selves destructive and harmful and atheists as heroes risking our lives to save others,least that’s the image in my head when using firemen and fire as a analogy for Christians and atheists.

  • Edmond

    Oh come on. Anybody can alter those wiki sites. Somebody’s having a laugh at everybody who’s believing this. It’ll be down so fast, and they’ll apologize for the actions of an independent party.

  • Jason Baur

    It seems pretty clear from the nature of the links posted alongside the image – Christianity is growing rapidly, has “exploded” – that the fire is Christianity and the atheist is the hapless fireman, not the absent arsonist. So it’s dumb, but not malicious per se. Unlike much of the rest of Conservapaedia, which frequently manages to be both.

  • I’m pretty sure that the picture is a fairly accurate portrayal. The rational fireman trying to figure out how to stop the wanton destructive power of irrational belief habits. I like that picture.

  • stephanie

    That’s an awesome image. I don’t actually think of myself as heroic, but if they insist…

  • Conservapedia is a joke. Almost no one takes it seriously.

    And your smear concerning the Tea Partiers is laughably wrong. They’re actually more educated than the average citizen.

  • LGute

    I’m pretty familiar with Conservapaedia. The user who uploaded/posted this is a long-term sysop and has a history of this kind of wacky nonsense on many different sites. He’s not a poe. This whole thing may be taken down tomorrow (they seem to memory hole things a lot), but it’s not the work of a random parodist.

    Also, the “essays” by this user are very commonly half-sensical analogies. Christianity is actually the raging fire that cannot be stopped, which I’m sure was meant to be a good thing, and the atheist is the helpless firefighter (and not an arsonist, just to be clear).

    I guarantee that no thought was given to the implications of this metaphor beyond “firefighter who can’t stop the fire:fire :: atheist:Christianity.”

  • It is entirely appropriate. Christianity is much like a raging flame that leaves behind destruction. Of course. Why didn’t I see that before?

  • If I try to access Conservapedia, I get an “Internal Server Error”. Looks like the server has finally imploded under the Sheer Weight of the Stupid … 8)

  • Arachobia

    I especially like how the picture had a link to the place in flickr where it came from complete with the caption: “this fire broke out at an old mill at 2am…no one was hurt but the flames lit the morning sky for hours….” So we have a photo of a (possibly atheist) fireman watching an old mill burn that is being claimed to be a picture of an arsonist atheist burning a church.

    That’s such an obvious mistake I’m inclined to agree that this is the work of someone taking people who believe in this site for a ride. Then again, people who take this site seriously probably also don’t care to much about silly little things like proof when they make their articles and claims. As expected, the believer remains the angry person with a gun pointed at their own foot.

  • Daktar

    So…that would be a life saving hero trying to stop a dangerous, powerful force? I thought that Christians liked to play themselves up as persecuted victims?

  • I take things too literally sometimes. When I read “Christian internet evangelism” I just thought that burning a church down would have no impact on that at all because their servers would be somewhere else in a safe server farm with backups and fire suppression systems. Maybe even co-located for resilience.

    OK, I may have just finished a DRP audit at work.

  • Makes sense, Christianity is looking forward to the apocalypse. Fire=bad. Firemen=good. I like it. Plus, firefighters are hot. That’s why they sell so many calendars. 😉

  • Claudia

    Sooo, Christianity is an out of control fire ripping through a home, and the atheist is portrayed as a firefighter, probably the most beloved kind of public servant?

    I think the only issue here is to decide if this is an atheist plant or if they really are that stupid. You can never really tell for sure.

  • NateDawg

    Conservapedia must not have seen the Answers in Genesis billboard with the kid with the gun. Atheists obviously prefer to shoot other people over burning down buildings, duh.

  • Tom H

    I’m pretty sure this picture and caption were meant as satire on Conservapedia. I think it was satirizing some of the more hysterical evangelical opinions of atheists. I think it’s kinda funny.

  • Hal in Howell MI

    When will Conservapedia publish our closely guarded recipes for roasting babies?

  • I figured they meant the futility of the single fireman trying to stop the raging fire of Evangelism. In that case, I think this is more accurate:
    We have science and technology on our side.

  • Ron in Houston

    On one hand this is funny in a way. On the other hand, since they’re serious it is decidedly unfunny.

    Isn’t conservapedia like Wikipedia? Can’t we take some of Hemant’s funny images of baby food and also post them as things atheists do?

  • And your smear concerning the Tea Partiers is laughably wrong. They’re actually more educated than the average citizen.

    You can be both educated and a complete moron, of course.

  • talynkotr

    And here I thought it was supposed to be the burning image of Touchdown Jesus which got torched by act of God. That must mean atheists are Gods.

  • Wait… isn’t that a picture from the wildfires in California a few years ago? Weren’t those started by the ELF?

  • L. Vellenga

    billy joel says it best: “we didn’t start the fire; it was always burning since the world’s been turning.”

  • So, they’re admitting that Christianity is a hugely destructive force that wipes out everything in its path irrespective of what it is? And us atheists are bravely risking life and limb to try and save the children trapped in the burning buildings?

    Cool, I know which side I want to be on.

  • God is the emperor’s new clothes. Religion is everybody going along with the crowd in saying how nice the emperor’s new clothes look. Atheists are the little boy who says that the emperor has no clothes on.

    They should have used that as the picture. But of course Conservapedia is not interested in accuracy. They prefer to post an ambiguous picture that can be interpreted with “conservative glasses”.

  • Tags are your friend… 🙂

    Categories: Atheism | Essays | Satire | Humor

  • Iztok
  • Nothing Conservapedia does surprises me anymore. Schlafly DEFINITELY takes after his mother.

  • Thegoodman

    Before reading these comments I was confused. I just thought it was a guy standing next to a fire. I guess if that is a Church, I see what they are implying.

    However, their picture and word choice combination is not well thought out if the point is to make atheists look bad. To me, the words “rapid rise” imply that the fire is christianity. “stop” implies that atheists are firemen. Firemen are good, right? Fire is bad, right?

    An inferno of unstoppable destruction staring a solitary fireman in the face sounds perfectly accurate when describing christianity vs. atheists.

  • j

    I know it’s so extreme that it seems like it must be a fake, poe’s law and all that..

    but don’t forget, this is the FEATURED ARTICLE

    a conservapedia mod did this and, presumably, the rest agree.

  • Of course when conservative Christians look at that that picture, they think an evil atheist (not pictured) burned down a church and the firefighter in foreground is a concerned Christian. That was the intended interpretation for the intended audience (conservative Christians). The mods at Conservapedia don’t care if a handful of atheists interpret it differently. The whole point of Conservapedia is to present the world through the conservative Christian perspective for conservative Christians.

    They are just trying to hold the flock in line… and keep the herd from straying. Facts and truth are secondary. They put God first.

  • Aguz

    You think that’s funny? Go to the discussion pages and enjoy the justification for the edits, it’s comedy gold.

  • ButchKitties

    They almost always shut up when I mention Jonestown, and how Jim Jones was pinker than a rare steak. They usually shut up or whip out the tired “not Christianity” excuse. So no, Communism and Christianity are not mutually exclusive.

    It’s funny that people claim they are mutually exclusive considering that there is a form of Communism that is exclusively Christian. Christian Communists interpret parts of the Bible as meaning that Communism is the ideal social system as taught by Jesus and lived by the Apostles.

    Key passages that they use to support this include:

    Acts 2:44-45 “All the believers were together and had everything in common. Selling their possessions and goods, they gave to anyone as he had need.”

    Acts 2:32-35 “No one claimed that any of his possessions was his own, but they shared everything they had. With great power the apostles continued to testify to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus, and much grace was upon them all. There were no needy persons among them. For from time to time those who owned lands or houses sold them, brought the money from the sales and put it at the apostles’ feet, and it was distributed to anyone as he had need…”

    One could make the case that the early Christians were the original pinkos, and that it wasn’t until 1700+ years later that anyone thought of making Communism secular or atheistic.

  • I’m sure many others already commented this, but it’s not Christianity that we are trying to stop. It’s the abuse of power and control that some in Christianity try to force onto society that atheists are trying to stop. Which, in turn, allows everyone to stop concerning themselves with religion and more on humanity.

  • I’m not at all surprised. They’re a bunch of liars with an agenda. There’s no depth to which they wouldn’t stoop.

  • Dan W

    Wait… so Christianity is a raging, destructive fire, an the atheist is a firefighter trying to figure out how to stop it? The Conservapedia editor who put the caption on this picture epic fails at analogies.

  • Twin-Skies

    Hermant, what are you so upset about?

    I think the picture is a perfect metaphor!

    Their brand of Christianity is a raging, burning wave of stupid that threatens to destroy everything it touches.

  • Jezier

    I must say I like it. Atheist – fireofficer trying to stop the destructive cataclysm – Christianity. Good.

  • Twin-Skies

    So I guess this makes Dawkins the skycrane that gets to dump the cold, freezing logic that dispells Christian superstition?

    Hmm, Dawkins in a skycrane…awesome.

  • This addition was added by User:Conservative on Conservapedia. Conservative is a bit off even by the standard of Conservapedia editors and is responsible for most of the stranger anti-gay and anti-atheist material on Conservapedia. One can be confident that almost any article with a title of the form “Atheism and _” or “Homosexuality and _” is due to him. I wouldn’t make a generalization from his actions to all of Conservapedia aside from the fact that the rest of that project (including the founder Andrew Schlafly) puts up with and apparently condones him putting this junk all over including the main page. (Note that before his time on Conservapedia the user was banned from Wikipedia. See for most of the problems with him on that project.)

    As long as we’re mocking Conservapedia, I’m going to more or less gratuitously point out my latest blog entry as relevant, where I discuss Andrew Schafly’s decision that mathematicss has been infected by liberalism: .

  • stewart

    This is beautiful and true. History does prove this btw. Second to islamic nuts atheists are babies. They are dirty, intolerant, filthy, bigoted, hateful, disgusting, scared sub human trash. Look at your dick wad leader who is now dying thank god christopher stalin hitchins. A serious tool. This guy is far more of an evangelical than jerry falwell ever was. Except falwell actually do some humatarian unlike mr pig who just complains and resents religious people so much it finally took a toll on his fat self. He is a preacher. He makes money trying to convince people there is no god. He goes after the weak like mother theresa instead of hugh hefner who spends his entire life boning chicks. I can’t stand atheist pigs and I’m not even religious but I see the hypocrisy. An atheist or a pig is just afraid of a higher moral authority. They don’t want a boss. Also there have been far more murdered under pig atheist regimes than all organized religions combined. So eat it pigs and stop your whining.

  • Hypatia’s Daughter

    ButchKitties: Even better is Acts: Chapter 5, where a husband & wife die for withholding some of their property:
    1 But a certain man named Ananias, with Sapphira his wife, sold a possession, 2 And kept back part of the price, his wife also being privy to it, and brought a certain part, and laid it at the apostles’ feet. 3 But Peter said, Ananias, why hath Satan filled thine heart to lie to the Holy Ghost, and to keep back part of the price of the land? 4 Whiles it remained, was it not thine own? and after it was sold, was it not in thine own power? why hast thou conceived this thing in thine heart? thou hast not lied unto men, but unto God. 5 And Ananias hearing these words fell down, and gave up the ghost: and great fear came on all them that heard these things.6 And the young men arose, wound him up, and carried him out, and buried him. 7 And it was about the space of three hours after, when his wife, not knowing what was done, came in. 8 And Peter answered unto her, Tell me whether ye sold the land for so much? And she said, Yea, for so much. 9 Then Peter said unto her, How is it that ye have agreed together to tempt the Spirit of the Lord? behold, the feet of them which have buried thy husband are at the door, and shall carry thee out. 10 Then fell she down straightway at his feet, and yielded up the ghost: and the young men came in, and found her dead, and, carrying her forth, buried her by her husband.

  • Examples

    I just gotta ask. How is Christianity a “raging fire that leaves nothing but destruction in its path”?

    I’m the kind of person who needs legitimate examples in order to take another person seriously. Don’t flame me, (lol), just asking.

  • Examples, well there is the Spanish Inquisition (bet you didn’t expect that), the repression of Jews throughout history, the Crusades, the destruction of Muslim science by the Catholic church, Catholic priests raping children and covering it up, the “troubles” in Northern Ireland, 9/11 in New York, 7/7 in London, 3/11 in Madrid, plenty of suicide murderers, the limits placed on education by fanatics who want to change science to fit their myths, all those idiot parents who chose to pray rather than take their children to see a doctor, all the wasted money conned out of gullible people by churches, the numerous attacks on gay people and the limiting of their rights, the repression of women throughout history and even today on religious grounds and, the deaths of millions in Africa who were told that condoms help to spread AIDS.

    Perhaps “raging fire” is a little flowery as a metaphor but there are examples of how Christianity and religion in general are forces of destruction. That isn’t to say that they cannot also do good of course but I’d give up that little benefit if we could get rid of the negative things with it.

error: Content is protected !!