this website was created after the creators accused wikipedia of having a strong liberal bias, so now we have this one that is 'truthful'
for example a portion of their article on Kangaroos
According to the origins theory model used by creation scientists, modern kangaroos, like all modern animals, originated in the Middle East and are the descendants of the two founding members of the modern kangaroo baramin that were taken aboard Noah's Ark prior to the Great Flood. It has not yet been determined by baraminologists whether kangaroos form a holobaramin with the wallaby, tree-kangaroo, wallaroo, pademelon and quokka, or if all these species are in fact apobaraminic or polybaraminic.
Also according to creation science theories, after the Flood, kangaroos bred from the Ark passengers migrated to Australia. There is debate whether this migration happened over land – as Australia was still for a time connected to Europe by a land bridge similar to the one that connected Asia to America – or if they rafted on mats of vegetation torn up by the receding flood waters. Another theory is that God simply generated kangaroos into existence there.
Other views on kangaroo origins include the belief of some Australian aborigines that kangaroos were sung into existence by their ancestors during the "Dreamtime"  and the evolutionary view that kangaroos and the other marsupials evolved from a common marsupial ancestor which lived millions of years ago.
and for some more fun try to figure this one out
This is the article for "Macroeconomics":
Macroeconomics is the analysis of the economy as a whole, or the analysis of large subdivisions of the economy. It is often said that "macroeconomics" is to "microeconomics" as "forest" is to "trees," that is, macroeconomics focuses on broader interactions while microeconomics focuses on smaller events.
Then the article for "microeconomics":
Microeconomics is the study of the behavior of individual units, firms, households or persons in the economy. If macroeconomics is the study of the "forest", then microeconomics is the study of the trees.
Now look at the article for "forest":
Forests are collections of trees as a whole, or large areas of trees. Forest is to trees as macroeconomics is to microeconomics.
Forest is the opposite of trees.
huh isn't that interesting. heh