1,792
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 196:
Line 196: + +
→Both Theories Correct?: No, I did not ask for a definition of ''scientific theory''
: People kept putting kooky stuff in. [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 15:08, 8 June 2007 (EDT)
: People kept putting kooky stuff in. [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 15:08, 8 June 2007 (EDT)
::Can't take the truth, can you? I suggested you remove an erroneous assumption that two opposing scientific theories can be held to be true by the same scientific community at the same time. You asked for a citation proving that this is fundamental to the meaning of 'scientific theory'. I gave you several. You locked the article just in case the truth crept in, even though this discussion had been confined to the talk page. Don't you feel kind of "kooky" yourself right about now? NitramNos 15:20, 8 June 2007 (EDT)
::Can't take the truth, can you? I suggested you remove an erroneous assumption that two opposing scientific theories can be held to be true by the same scientific community at the same time. You asked for a citation proving that this is fundamental to the meaning of 'scientific theory'. I gave you several. You locked the article just in case the truth crept in, even though this discussion had been confined to the talk page. Don't you feel kind of "kooky" yourself right about now? NitramNos 15:20, 8 June 2007 (EDT)
::: No, I did not ask for a definition of ''scientific theory''. Your comments are abusive and irrelevant. If you have some source that contradicts something in the article, then say so. [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 15:46, 8 June 2007 (EDT)