Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search

Talk:Liberal gullibility (view source)

Revision as of 02:01, April 26, 2008

325 bytes added ,  02:01, April 26, 2008
entry confirmed
Line 29: Line 29:  
:This would seem to be another case of laypeople believing scientists because they are not qualified to judge for themselves.  If it turned out that string theory was a hoax, would I be gullible for believing it might be true based on the assessments of physicists?
 
:This would seem to be another case of laypeople believing scientists because they are not qualified to judge for themselves.  If it turned out that string theory was a hoax, would I be gullible for believing it might be true based on the assessments of physicists?
 
Some better examples, or clearer writing, is probably needed, Andy.--[[User:TomMoore|TomMoore]] 21:48, 25 April 2008 (EDT)
 
Some better examples, or clearer writing, is probably needed, Andy.--[[User:TomMoore|TomMoore]] 21:48, 25 April 2008 (EDT)
 +
 +
== Entry confirmed ==
 +
 +
The comments by AdenJ and TomMoore above, claiming that the liberal statements in the entry are true, simply underscore the point of this entry:  many liberals fall for the falsehoods.  And [[Michael Moore]] and others make a mint off of them.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 22:01, 25 April 2008 (EDT)
Aschlafly
Anthony, Irenaeus, Siteadmin, apieditor, Bureaucrats, Check users, nsAm_Govt_101RO, nsAm_Govt_101RW, nsAm_Govt_101_ta, nsJudgesRO, nsJudgesRW, nsJudges_talkRO, nsJudges_talkRW, nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW, oversight, Administrators
126,482

edits

Retrieved from "https://www.conservapedia.com/Special:MobileDiff/439736"

Navigation menu