User contributions
January 1, 2012
Talk:Conservative of the Year 2011
General McChrystal
+590
Talk:Conservative of the Year 2011
General McChrystal
+169
Talk:Conservative of the Year 2011
General McChrystal
+184
Talk:Conservative of the Year 2011
General McChrystal
+342
Talk:Conservative of the Year 2011
Wait What?
+318
Talk:Conservative of the Year 2011
General McChrystal: new section
+345
Conservative of the Year 2011
Undo revision 950177 by Aschlafly (talk)Why is General McChrystal less worthy than Shockofgod? He's an outstanding American.
+273
Conservative of the Year 2011
no edit summary
+273
Talk:Conservative of the Year 2011
Pink drivers' license
+143
Talk:Conservative of the Year 2011
Pink drivers' license: new section
+189
Conservative of the Year 2011
no edit summary
+157
December 31, 2011
Conservative of the Year 2011
no edit summary
+119
Talk:Conservative of the Year 2011
no edit summary
+540
User talk:ArtWellesley
Edit War
+176
Talk:Age of the Earth
Decay rates: new section
+621
Age of the Earth
Undo revision 949800 by Aschlafly (talk)No. It is very likely INCORRECT that decay rates have remained constant, but it's not IMPAUSIBLE.
-12
Talk:Question evolution! campaign
Third-party coverage
+84
Seattle
Miscellaneous
+18
Seattle
Demographics
m+1
Liturgy
no edit summary
+12
Talk:Conservative of the Year 2011
no edit summary
+250
Talk:Conservative of the Year 2011
no edit summary
m+2
Talk:Conservative of the Year 2011
no edit summary
+634
December 30, 2011
Talk:Conservative of the Year 2011
no edit summary
+672
Talk:Conservative of the Year 2011
no edit summary
+169
Age of the Earth
It's not implausible. I think it's wrong and it certainly hasn't been shown to be true, but it's definitely plausible.
-12
Counterexamples to Evolution
Undo revision 949639 by CommonSenseReality (talk)If you'd read the article you'd know.
+21,565
Liberal stupidity
Britain's wind farms vs. reality: The reference doesn't say that anyone had to reduce energy consumption or go without, and I can't find anything to say this happened. It sounds unlikely.
-63
Carbon dating
Rate of Atomic Decay: Not quite true. It can be - and has been - verified as remaining constant over the period since we've been able to measure it. However it may not have been constant earlier.
-417
Carbon dating
Variable intake: Adding detail.
+319
Walt Brown
Fixing typos and use of British English.
+1,208