In the end, I think it’s another example of why satire is so difficult these days: The targets tend to be so much more extreme than any plausible satire.

Of course, given the unfolding story at Wikipedia–Seth Finkelstein’s covering it here, here –the best piece–and here–I wonder whether Wikipedia doesn’t need to be renamed Walesopedia?

I thought about revising the entry on gravity, pointing out that the fact the Moon is receding from the Earth at 3cm a year merely shows that gravity isn’t the only force acting on the earth-moon system. Then I realized that I wasn’t responsible for fixing the entire Internet.

In my now humble opinion, the thing to do is see if people, particularly politicians, start using it as a reference resource.

Actually, ignorance is the wrong term in any case.

If you can get to the site, check out a few other pages; I think you’ll find that the Kangaroo item is not atypical.

When you grew up, plate tectonics weren’t that solidly established. Trying to make plate tectonics and a literal view of the Bible fit together causes mental gymnastics like believing that continental shift happened since the Flood. And, of course, that humans were around for the Flood. That’s some fast restructuring of the earth–but it limits the number of sciences that have to be thrown out the window.

I’m told the entry on Gravity is interesting as well, but I can’t get back to Conservapedia…

Have you considered whether the Kangaroo article might have been posted by a prankster? I grew up fundamentalist (since recovered) and never heard anything like that.

Another thing to look for would be to see how the article changes over the coming days and months. Even if a somewhat weird creationist sincerely believed in the kangaroo article, perhaps Justice Scalia or William F. Buckley will drop by and change it back to a somewhat more mainstream version.

Given the newness of the tool, I don’t think it’s time to start equating conservative with ignorance.

well, to each their own, I suppose…