nsTeam1RO, nsTeam1RW, nsTeam1_talkRO, nsTeam1_talkRW
26,487
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 1:
Line 1: − ==Scientology== − Jouyous, You're going to have to cool off, buddy. Please read the editing commandments as I've indicated on Scientology's talk page. Follow them and we can all edit on a level playing field, okay? [[User:Terryeo|Terryeo]] 00:31, 25 April 2007 (EDT) − Hello Jouyous One. I have changed or deleted a number of your edits on the Scientology article because they violate Conservapedia guidelines. Why don't we use the discussion page to go over the edits you want to make. The point on Conservapedia is to have truthful articles that are not full of oddball citations and personal pages, and that don't resort to opinion. I'm sure we can come to some agreements on what goes on this article and what does not, based on the guidelines.[[User:Grrrilla|Grrrilla]] − − I am having a good deal of trouble responding to your questions on the Scientology talk page because you rapidly make many postings. So, in order to respond, I'll respond here once in a while. You stated there: − <blockquote>I believe in redemption through Jesus Christ. If I were to tell my children, "thats what I believe, but you decide" and then they decide NOT to believe that, are they still Christians?</blockquote>Rather than judge yes, no, or otherwise, I'll again quote what you quoted, that is, I will quote what the Scientology website presents, what Scientology says: <blockquote>''In Scientology no one is asked to accept anything as belief or on faith. That which is true for you is what you have observed to be true.''</blockquote> − Your children have made a decision, they have decided what is true '''for themselves'''. What is not answered? You ask me if they are Christian but I can not answer that because I do not know what they have decided, exactly. It is up to the individual to decide whether they are Christian or not, not up to me to judge whether their statements add together and make them a Christian or not. [[User:Terryeo|Terryeo]] 17:30, 25 April 2007 (EDT) − − ...though it remains to be seen whether my changes to [[Scientology]] will stick. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 19:10, 25 April 2007 (EDT) − − ===regarding your request=== − − Please place the cited material you want put in the Scientology article here: [[User:conservative/scientology]] [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 20:23, 25 April 2007 (EDT)conservative − − − Americans have a extremely low opinion of Scientology. I suspect you are writing about this topic in order to dissuade people from joining Scientology. I think my external links will do this if people notice them. Want to contribute to [[Christian apologetics]]? [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 02:03, 26 April 2007 (EDT) − − − My edits are not toward convincing you of what is valid, true, or untrue. Your editing tells me that you have done some reading about Scientology, you have met the subject, somehow, somewhere. I don't intend that you should modify what you think, what you believe, what you would like others to think, follow, or believe. None of that is why I edit here. I edit here to put known information onto the page, in a way that can be understood. There is information. Lord knows, there is lots of information. It can be presented so it makes sense. That is what I am attempting to do. Certain vested interests stand strongly against Scientology. Drug companies are an example, and this is because Scientology has several programs that impinge on various sorts of drug company products. Scientology is not against drugs nor against medical treatment where appropriate, but has programs against the misuse of drugs. It was Scientology's CCHR that called attention certain drugs and resulted in "black box" warnings on them. There are other examples of vested interests, too, such as psychiatry. One of the results is there is quite a lot of critical information about scientology on the internet. Also, it is a new religious movement, and, not being widely understood, prompts critical responses. I hope to work with you and create good, useable articles here on Conservapedia. [[User:Terryeo|Terryeo]] 07:20, 26 April 2007 (EDT) − − − See my post here: [[Talk:Scientology]]. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 08:10, 26 April 2007 (EDT)conservative − − − I warned the other Sysops/Admins and the Director of Conservapedia about Terryeo. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 09:37, 26 April 2007 (EDT) − − ===What you have accomplished, Joyous=== − You begin to edit a couple of days ago. You posted to Conservative's talk page, rather than attempt to talk with me. You find legal threat where I make no legal threat. You insist that scientology, somehow, by not "supporting" faith, acts against faith. You posted:<br /> − My only real problem is that he seems to focus on removal of information, rather than addition of information, and creates complexity rather than simplicity. − * His (IMO) bizarre focus on the photo issue is problematic − * His desire to equate the concept of "thetan" with Christian soul is problematic, given one is admittedly materialistic and one is divine. − * His bizarre rambling statements − * His constant referring back to legal issues, which should be irrelevant. − * He denies the centrality of faith as a irreconcilable difference between Christianity and Scientology, despite their own literature.<br /> I have tried to reply to you on each of these issues. In fact, I have stated several times that there is no belief in scientology and therefore, no "irreconcilable difference". Further, I have told you that many Christians are Scientologists and visa versa. I realize I am speaking in the face of websites that say otherwise, but the irreconcilable facts speak for themselves. I have given it a good effort, Joyous. Now, thanks in large measure to your efforts, I find myself considered to be a "contentious, problematic editor". This is what you have accomplished. If it is what you intended, then your work is nearly done. Happy Ho Ho's. [[User:Terryeo|Terryeo]] 09:44, 26 April 2007 (EDT) − − ===I made some edits to the scientology article that I think you will appreciate=== − − I made some edits to the [[Scientology]] article that I think you will appreciate. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 17:25, 26 April 2007 (EDT) − − ===I am glad I could help at the Scientology page=== − − I am glad I could help at the Scientology page. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 19:47, 26 April 2007 (EDT) − − − == Evolution == − − On Andy's talk page before that section was archived, you wrote: − {{QuoteBox|Phil, I have read your edits extensively, and I know that you understand that evolutionary theory ''does not'' claim that one creature turns into another kind of creature. I recognize from you're writing that you are better informed than that, unless I've read poorly.--[[User:JoyousOne|JoyousOne]] 15:31, 10 May 2007 (EDT)}} − On the contrary, what I recognise is that the ''definition'' of evolution used today doesn't include that, but the common understanding, and clearly still a part of what evolution is all about, is that one kind of creature turned into another. Else how do you go from a dinosaur to a bird? That is one kind of creature turning into another. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 09:48, 11 May 2007 (EDT) − − ::Actually what you said was that one creature turns into another. Evolutionary theory makes no such claim. Any individual is just that...an individual. Species, over time, change. You state it two different ways above. "Common understanding" of evolution, as you stated, is quite muddled, and many lay people believe that evolution implies that a chimp can somehow turn into a human...this is ''not'' what evolutionary theory says. Educating people above "common understanding" should be an important goal.[[User:JoyousOne|JoyousOne]] 09:58, 11 May 2007 (EDT) − − :::I said, "...a creature to change into a different kind of creature...", so perhaps I wasn't clear that I wasn't talking about an individual creature. But having clarified, that, evolution ''does'' make those claims, as per the example I gave above of the dinosaurs turning (evolving) into birds. It is just my wording that is at issue, or the underlying point? [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 10:12, 11 May 2007 (EDT) − − − ::It was just your wording apparently. Thank you for clarifying. It is a common misconception among those who do not understand evolutionary theory (independent of whether they accept it or not) [[User:JoyousOne|JoyousOne]] 14:32, 11 May 2007 (EDT) − − ==thinking about cleaning up== − I hope no one minds, but this page is kind of messy.[[User:JoyousOne|JoyousOne]] 19:52, 14 May 2007 (EDT) − − == Response == − − A very famous christian apologist may have a gradutuate student of his update the [[Christian apologetics]] article in the fall. Time will tell. I plan on calling him in the fall to remind him. In the meantime, you can do a Google search on Christian apologetics and fill in material yourself. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 20:05, 14 May 2007 (EDT) − − == Anti-CP Blogs == − − I'm going to start a list of anti-CP blogs for reference. Some make good points, some are just vitriol, but at least this way, there is a list for people to check out. If wanted, I will post it as an article, but for now I'll keep it on my user space for my own use. It couldn't hurt to post useful comments at them. − − *http://jonswift.blogspot.com/2007/02/conservapedia.html − *http://cpcolumn.wordpress.com/ − *http://www.newscientist.com/blog/technology/2007/02/conservative-rival-for-wikipedia.html − *http://www.thismodernworld.com/3584 − *http://www.liberalavenger.com/2007/02/24/conservapedia-on-the-moon/ − *http://www.thismodernworld.com/3584 − − Hi, very good idea! One of those blogs [[http://cpcolumn.wordpress.com/]] stands out because it's a blog completely devoted to Conservapedia and often has new articles. [[User:Leopeo|Leopeo]] 06:50, 16 May 2007 (EDT) − − Maybe you could just call it "blogs about Conservapedia" and include those which have positive words for CP, to keep it more neutral. [[User:Leopeo|Leopeo]] 06:57, 16 May 2007 (EDT)
Removing all content from page