<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="yes"?><oembed><version><![CDATA[1.0]]></version><provider_name><![CDATA[The Dish]]></provider_name><provider_url><![CDATA[http://dish.andrewsullivan.com]]></provider_url><author_name><![CDATA[Andrew Sullivan]]></author_name><author_url><![CDATA[https://dish.andrewsullivan.com/author/sullydish/]]></author_url><title><![CDATA[In The Annals of&nbsp;Conservapedia]]></title><type><![CDATA[link]]></type><html><![CDATA[
<p>A reader writes: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>I ended up surfing over to conservapedia.com for good laugh after I saw it <a href="http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2007/02/conservapedia.html">posted</a> on your blog. I came across the <a href="http://www.conservapedia.com/Examples_of_Bias_in_Wikipedia">following sentence</a> while reading their &quot;Examples of Bias in Wikipedia&quot; </p>
<blockquote>
<p>&quot;For example, even though most Americans (and probably most of the world) reject the theory of evolution, Wikipedia editors commenting on the topic are nearly 100% pro-evolution. Self-selection has a tendency to exacerbate bias in the absence of affirmative steps to limit it.&quot; </p>
</blockquote>
<p>I don&#8217;t know if it strikes you or anyone else as funny that a group of conservatives has used a reasonable definition of natural selection &#8211; &quot;a tendency to exacerbate bias through self-selection&quot; &#8211; to refute, er, evolution.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>A small joke, I guess. The bigger joke is that conservatism is now allied to creationism. </p>
]]></html></oembed>