Conservapedia:AFD Exotheology

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Exotheology

Delete

The entry has nothing to do with the title, save the first sentence. It lacks any proper sources (the ones given don't support what's claimed on the entry at all!) and many claims are speculative or simply opinion. ColinRtalk 00:35, 16 April 2007 (EDT)

Seconded. Most of the material should be merged with UFO. But it looks like Andy and Conservative want to get this one on the front page by tomorrow [1] so who knows? Lambchop 00:43, 16 April 2007 (EDT)
That's the name for the belief in life in outer space. It is from Time magazine, a liberal publication. Do you have a better alternative?--Aschlafly 00:51, 16 April 2007 (EDT)
Are you sure you don't mean "Exobiology", which even its own enthusiasts admit is a 'science without a subject"? --BobD 00:53, 16 April 2007 (EDT)
Funny, the Time articles cited explicitly refers to exotheology as the theology of outer space, not the belief in ET life. Moreover, the article 's entire point is about the effect ET life could have on God. And even funnier is how the liberal publication's article entire point is how ET life could even reinforce the Christian God. ColinRtalk 01:01, 16 April 2007 (EDT)
Delete. The author doesn't seem to understand the difference between exotheology and the study of extraterestial (sp?) life. Nevermind the fact that saying alien life is a liberal belief, this article is embarassing to have on the front page.
Delete. The article itself reads very confused, and the passing swipe at a 'liberal belief system' speaks for itself. --Wikinterpreter

My main argument is that this article is certainly not good enough for the front page, where it is currently being referred to from. Embarassing.--PalMDtalk 13:46, 16 April 2007 (EDT)

Delete. This article is trash. Exotheology probably doesn't deserve an article. Exobiology certainly deserves a better one. Ga ohoyt 17:32, 16 April 2007 (EDT)

Delete, or at least fix it. Very little of the article actually addresses the stated subject, which is a form of speculative philosophy, not a science (or pseudoscience). The sources are also kind of lacking. I found a few hits for exotheology through Google and Google Scholar. There's a fair amount of popular information on exotheology, and journal articles by Hoffman and Haught. It shouldn't be hard to write a good exo-t. article. But I wouldn't want to use this as a starting point.--All Fish Welcome 19:03, 16 April 2007 (EDT)

Delete, article dosnt even define what exotheology is, it allso contains some claims which the citations dont confirm, for example the last one about most scientists doubting existence of life outside earth. Allmost nothing on this article has anything to do with the topic. Timppeli 19:38, 16 April 2007 (EDT)


Delete. This article is shockingly bad, and an example of hte mocking traffic it brings in can be seen in the section below. Great job putting in the front page :-P -AmesGyo! 21:43, 16 April 2007 (EDT)

Delete The article is irrelevant as if there were extraterrestrial life, it would be mentioned in the Bible. -Roofus 00:59, 1 May 2007 (EDT)

Delete Clearly, the (round rubber things that vehicles use and trigger the spam filter hahahahah) grind slowly, and, as this article shows, none-too-finely. I'm so glad it hasn't been deleted yet, though. It warms my heart with glee, it really does. But I still have to vote for 'delete', because really, I like a lot of non-whackjob conservatives. MyaR 23:15, 7 June 2007 (EDT)

Delete I had attempted to write something intelligent here (exobiology), which unfortunately was wiped out without even a trace in history by "Conservative" sysop, who then locked it. If Conservapedia wishes to have this article contain some number of paragraphs representing the christian fundamentalist POV, that's great. But to assert a fundamentalist approach to this issue and refuse any other view a hearing, is to exclude the vast majority of American christians and American conservatives, and gives a false picture of conservatism to those who might be taken in. I don't mean to be insulting, but even if the Bible is literally true in every single word, it doesn't define whether or not something is a science or a pseudoscience, both of those being concepts invented long after John wrote the last word of Revelations.

Keep

The author explains the title, and has good sources for it. And the article, by whatever title, has a definite place here.--TerryHTalk 09:59, 16 April 2007 (EDT)

We should document the debate about spending vast amounts of money on the ideological crusade which is SETI. Exobiology isn't science at all. Good on Aschlafly for pointing that out. --Pacman 10:26, 16 April 2007 (EDT)
This is the same argument they made against funding the Columbus expedition. The bible never mentioned any "new world" Lambchop 10:36, 16 April 2007 (EDT)
Nonsense, the exploration of the new world was based on the common sense observation that the world was round and partially unmapped, combined with extrapolating from the observed fact that humans were widespread in the known world. It was entirely reasonable to send ships to trade with and explore the blank bits of the map.
By contrast, exobiologists concoct a fantasy version of space that is the exact opposite of what has been observed. The hard science of it is that the universe is big and empty. --Pacman 12:36, 16 April 2007 (EDT)
Nor did the Bible define the world (cosmos) as limited to the Eurasian-African contiguous land mass. And even the inhabited world (oikoumenes) could stretch to fit.
What the Bible has no warrant for is extraterrestrial nation-states and civilizations. If you want more details, see my article on extraterrestrial life.--TerryHTalk 12:06, 16 April 2007 (EDT)
STRONG KEEP Conservative 13:49, 16 April 2007 (EDT)conservative
Care to elaborate on that? Why? Wikinterpretertalk?
The author does not explain the title at all! The subject of exotheology has nothing to do with "the psuedoscience of ET life." It's about how outer space affects theological issues. Break the word down into its roots, exo and theology. Heck, even the articles cited explicitly state that exotheology is the theology of outer space. Not belief in ET life. ColinRtalk 16:11, 16 April 2007 (EDT)

Keep. DanH 19:10, 16 April 2007 (EDT)

Leave it up. It shows newbies to the site a VERY good idea what to expect from the rest of it. --BobD 20:04, 16 April 2007 (EDT)

omigawd. Please, please, please keep this article. I have already copied it because I suspect it will be deleted. I need the proof because my co-workers will not beleive me. You know, some sites have referred to conservapedia as "stupidpedia," and here is the proof! AK1053287


Keep per the two votes above. While some of us run around creating small articles about things in the real world, there is a subset of this site that is "classic". This article is definitely one of them. Human 15:29, 17 April 2007 (EDT)

  • Keep. RobS 17:42, 10 May 2007 (EDT)
  • Why?