Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2024-06-08/Concept

The Signpost
← Back to Contents
View Latest Issue


File:Photograph of Federal Records Center, Alexandria, Virginia (34877725360).jpg
USNA
PD
800
Concept

Palimpsestuous

Contribute   —  
Share this
By JPxG

Early human habitation

From Wikipedia, the correct encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Username or IP removed in the year of our Redemption 338-01-06T03:00:27 (edit summary removed). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
(change visibility) (diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

This page revision has been removed from the public archives. Details can be found in the deletion log for this page.
As an administrator, you can still view this revision if you wish to proceed, by clicking "show" to the right.
−
The '''early human habitation heresy''' is the erroneous, debunked belief that human beings existed prior to the Antecessors' intervention in the first year of our creation and Redemption (1 YR). It is considered to be blasphemy, and is frequently espoused by members of extremist sects. Correct knowledge indicates that humans were created in their present state by the Antecessors, who established the structures of Governance and entrusted them to the Holy Council, before leaving our planet permanently.
+
The '''early human habitation fact''' is the true belief that human beings existed prior to the Antecessors' intervention in the first year of our creation and Redemption (1 YR/2104 anno domini/2857 ab urbe condita). Who do you think built the Empire State Building? HIDDEN plaques say 1,931. Common era started 1,931 years before Empire State Building! Why do trees have so many rings? Methuselah, bristlecone pine, was confirmed 5,000 years old, named after old man "Methuselah" from holy book written 3,000 years before false First Year of Redemption. Who made coins with pictures of humans on them thousands of years ago, all over globe? It was confirmed with carbon-dating... research "Christianism", "Muslim", "Judaism". Neozealots SUPPRESS the true history. Humans lived in harmony 300 years ago without brain implants, before electricity and computers. In TRUE year 2024, humans had no electricity, and there was no war! Humans in 1900s could cure cancer easily with "cannabis" and "homeopathy" -- medicine was suppressed by neozealots of UNHOLY COUNCIL.
← Previous "Concept"
+ Add a comment

Discuss this story

These comments are automatically transcluded from this article's talk page. To follow comments, add the page to your watchlist. If your comment has not appeared here, you can try purging the cache.
  • This joke appears to be over my head. Regardless, I'm not sure how to feel about my apparent promotion to Administrator of FutureWikipedia; I definitely don't remember submitting that RfA. (Unless I haven't done it yet? Weebly-wobbly...) FeRDNYC (talk) 04:47, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • To editor FeRDNYC: I could be wrong, but I don't see a joke in there. This is just another concept related to what we do here on WP. If you look up palimpsestuous in Wiktionary, you will be led to how this creepy ol' word applies. Best to you! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 15:14, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      I thought this was an [unintentional] allusion to Neurocracy, a game that similarly uses diffs to worldbuild an alternate reality and to allow players to explore the story of a murder. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 01:40, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      @Paine Ellsworth: Aha, thanks. Although, given that the wiktionary entry basically defines "palimpsestuous" as a joke itself (a humorous blend of palimpsest +‎ incestuous), I suppose that's where the joke is here, as well.
      @Rotideypoc41352: Huh! The Neurocracy connections are definitely interesting, perhaps especially if unintentional! FeRDNYC (talk) 03:11, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • The headline The New York Times, NPR and Reuters block Wikipedia editors from citing their articles is seriously misleading because the problem is limited to editors using the visual editor and Citoid. I use the source editor and citation templates, and have no problem creating references to these publications. I may be wrong, but I believe that most highly productive editors use the source editor. Is there evidence to the contrary? Cullen328 (talk) 17:47, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The Signpost is looking for new talent.