Changes

I appreciate your concern. But while I have little confidence in Andrew Schlafly's knowledge of physics, he has shown in the past that [http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:Log&type=block&page=User%3AAndyFranklinson he can differentiate between robust statements and insulting language]. He certainly is able to patrol his own talk page - the only problem I could have is that someone takes offense on his behalf. --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 06:37, 14 February 2013 (EST)

I appreciate your concern. But while I have little confidence in Andrew Schlafly's knowledge of physics, he has shown in the past that [http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:Log&type=block&page=User%3AAndyFranklinson he can differentiate between robust statements and insulting language]. He certainly is able to patrol his own talk page - the only problem I could have is that someone takes offense on his behalf. --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 06:37, 14 February 2013 (EST)

:The only thing that concerns me is that you are beginning to sound a bit obsessed.  In the big scheme of things it isn't really a big deal that some article on theoretical physics is a bit off.  It won't ever change.  Andy won't permit that.  You keep going on and on assuming that Andy can be swayed by this piece of evidence or that but that relies on a faulty assumption.  Andy doesn't care about evidence, he is only interested in what he knows, and he physically can't know anything that contradicts his world view.  Don't blame Andy, it is just the way that he is.  For whatever reason his mind is completely closed to anything that might be at odds with his truths.  That "e=mc2 is liberal claptrap" is just one of those truths.  Move onto something else.  --[[User:DamianJohn|DamianJohn]] 15:56, 14 February 2013 (EST)

:The only thing that concerns me is that you are beginning to sound a bit obsessed.  In the big scheme of things it isn't really a big deal that some article on theoretical physics is a bit off.  It won't ever change.  Andy won't permit that.  You keep going on and on assuming that Andy can be swayed by this piece of evidence or that but that relies on a faulty assumption.  Andy doesn't care about evidence, he is only interested in what he knows, and he physically can't know anything that contradicts his world view.  Don't blame Andy, it is just the way that he is.  For whatever reason his mind is completely closed to anything that might be at odds with his truths.  That "e=mc2 is liberal claptrap" is just one of those truths.  Move onto something else.  --[[User:DamianJohn|DamianJohn]] 15:56, 14 February 2013 (EST)