4,994
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 143:
Line 143: + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
→Forgive me
:::Very good point, however if we are going to give a major edit space for the YEC POV should we not do this for all?--[[User:Tims|TimS]] 09:58, 4 May 2007 (EDT)
:::Very good point, however if we are going to give a major edit space for the YEC POV should we not do this for all?--[[User:Tims|TimS]] 09:58, 4 May 2007 (EDT)
I want to address an earlier comment:
::All ColinR claims is it is a fact that scientists believe something or other, and it is hazy and imprecise what they beleive.
I believe it is a fact I will hit the power ball for $180 million someday. Does the fact I beleive it make it real?
This statement is confusing facts about nature with facts about stated opinions.
*There are such things as facts about stated opinions.
*For example, it is a fact that someone stated "I believe it I will hit the power ball for $180 million someday." It is not a fact that he will hit the power ball. It is not necessarily a fact that he really does believe this. But it '''is''' a fact that he '''stated''' that he '''believes''' this.
*How important a fact about a stated opinion is depends on '''whose''' statement it is.
*A fact about a stated opinion is meaningless to me unless I have a personal judgement about the individual making that statement.
*My judgement may be different than someone elses.
*A fact about a stated opinion is interesting to many readers if there are many readers who have personal judgements about the individual making the statement. It is interesting to few readers if there are few readers to have such judgements.
*Facts about stated opinions are worth putting into an encyclopedia if there are many readers who have such judgements.
*'''My''' own stated opinions are only interesting to the few people who know whether or not they respect my opinions. They do ''not'' belong in an encyclopedia article even when attributed to me. They belong in an article ''even less'' when no source is given but are simply stated ''ex cathedra:"
:::"Conservapedia editor "dpbsmith" believes the Mac OS is better than Windows." Honest, but boring. Nobody cares.
:::"The Mac OS is better than Windows." Highly dishonest. It's just my opinion and I'm not even saying so.
:::"The Mac OS is generally regarded as better than Windows." Even worse, because it's ''concealing'' the fact that it's just my opinion.
:::"The late science-fiction author Douglas Adams was a Macintosh fan." Now we're getting ''somewhere,'' because there ''are'' people who care about his opinion. ''And'' by identifying him as a science-fiction author, everyone can judge whether they care to pay attention to such a person's opinions about computer operating systems.
Finally, I'd add that what is most important is that all widely-held opinions ''be mentioned.'' Relatively little harm is done to (say) creationism if a teacher spends ten minutes telling a class what creationism is, who believes it and why... even if he or she goes on with ten hours or days of evolution. The harm is when a class never hears ''anything'' about creationism, or, worse yet, when a creationist in the classroom is left thinking "Nobody believes this but me." And, of course, this works the other way around as well. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 17:01, 4 May 2007 (EDT)
== On protection and revert of my edits ==
== On protection and revert of my edits ==
I believe I have previously pointed that the quotes are not in support of the stated position that was given with the above references in this page. Furthermore, the quotes themselves link to a page of quotes and not to the articles which is of no educational value. Could someone please remove the quotes or provide less misleading context for the quotes. --[[User:Mtur|Mtur]] 16:29, 4 May 2007 (EDT)
I believe I have previously pointed that the quotes are not in support of the stated position that was given with the above references in this page. Furthermore, the quotes themselves link to a page of quotes and not to the articles which is of no educational value. Could someone please remove the quotes or provide less misleading context for the quotes. --[[User:Mtur|Mtur]] 16:29, 4 May 2007 (EDT)