Difference between revisions of "User talk:Physicsnut"
From Conservapedia
Feebasfactor (Talk | contribs) (welcome as well) |
|||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
: Why? I can understand evolution being a matter of political intrigue, but relativity (special in it's whole, general by most) is accepted by everyone but a bunch of cranks. [[User:Physicsnut|Physicsnut]] 15:28, 17 December 2007 (EST) | : Why? I can understand evolution being a matter of political intrigue, but relativity (special in it's whole, general by most) is accepted by everyone but a bunch of cranks. [[User:Physicsnut|Physicsnut]] 15:28, 17 December 2007 (EST) | ||
| + | |||
| + | ::I honestly have no idea. --[[User:SimonA|SimonA]] 14:18, 18 December 2007 (EST) | ||
And yet I doubt that'll be the only novel scientific perspective you'll find on Conservapedia... Anyway, welcome as well, hope you stick around a while. [[User:Feebasfactor|Feebasfactor]] 18:12, 17 December 2007 (EST) | And yet I doubt that'll be the only novel scientific perspective you'll find on Conservapedia... Anyway, welcome as well, hope you stick around a while. [[User:Feebasfactor|Feebasfactor]] 18:12, 17 December 2007 (EST) | ||
Revision as of 19:18, December 18, 2007
I'm too slack to use the welcome template, which is, furthermore, hideous, but welcome. Be aware that saying good things about relativity is apparently liberal bias. --SimonA 13:48, 17 December 2007 (EST)
- Why? I can understand evolution being a matter of political intrigue, but relativity (special in it's whole, general by most) is accepted by everyone but a bunch of cranks. Physicsnut 15:28, 17 December 2007 (EST)
- I honestly have no idea. --SimonA 14:18, 18 December 2007 (EST)
And yet I doubt that'll be the only novel scientific perspective you'll find on Conservapedia... Anyway, welcome as well, hope you stick around a while. Feebasfactor 18:12, 17 December 2007 (EST)
