2
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 716:
Line 716: + + + +
Talk:Examples of Bias in Wikipedia (view source)
Revision as of 21:42, February 5, 2008
, 21:42, February 5, 2008more on "level of support for evolution"
::::::Agreed. Either one works for me; perhaps this wasn't the most direct route to a satisfactory..."inquiry" / "impeachment of Conservapedia axioms"...but I think that's a good course of action: Let's get some mad scientific method skills up in this slice. (Sorry). [[User:Repub236|Repub236]] 20:34, 30 January 2008 (EST)
::::::Agreed. Either one works for me; perhaps this wasn't the most direct route to a satisfactory..."inquiry" / "impeachment of Conservapedia axioms"...but I think that's a good course of action: Let's get some mad scientific method skills up in this slice. (Sorry). [[User:Repub236|Repub236]] 20:34, 30 January 2008 (EST)
== more on "level of support for evolution" ==
The Wikipedia article is constantly edited to make sure that it '''does not''' actually address the subject, as stated in its own title. There are redundant paragraphs about how almost all "scientists" (computer scientists? political scientists?) alledgedly support evolutionism. What is (usually) missing is the essential truth necessary for the article to be useful - what are the views of the general population? The polls by Newsweek, Gallup, and CBS show quite similar results. The numbers can easily be verified online. However, against WP's own stated policies, they are removed from the article again and again. [[User:Perlster|Perlster]]