3
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 171:
Line 171: + +
Debate:Is Conservapedia fair and balanced? (view source)
Revision as of 20:19, May 17, 2007
, 20:19, May 17, 2007no edit summary
How can God be the basis for reality when no one can say with certinity that God exists?--[[User:Freehan|Freehan]] 13:46, 16 May 2007 (EDT)
How can God be the basis for reality when no one can say with certinity that God exists?--[[User:Freehan|Freehan]] 13:46, 16 May 2007 (EDT)
:When [[Earth]] (for example) gives such prominence to not just a creationist view, but a ''factional view within creationism'', that can't be balanced. And fair? I'm seeing quite a few complaints about unfair sysoping, but I haven't been here long enough to get a reasonable picture. [[User:Totnesmartin|Totnesmartin]] 18:41, 16 May 2007 (EDT)
:When [[Earth]] (for example) gives such prominence to not just a creationist view, but a ''factional view within creationism'', that can't be balanced. And fair? I'm seeing quite a few complaints about unfair sysoping, but I haven't been here long enough to get a reasonable picture. [[User:Totnesmartin|Totnesmartin]] 18:41, 16 May 2007 (EDT)
You know, this site is by no strech of the imagination "fair and balanced." You can provide accurate citations and links, and still have your stuff reverted by a sysop. I have to say one thing about this site. I used to think that I was a conservative. But after seeing how intolerant of simple disagreement many of the sysops are, and the gross intellectual deficiency of conservatives on this site, I don’t think I am anymore. --[[User:Mullin|Mullin]] 16:19, 17 May 2007 (EDT)