Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 109: Line 109:     
I mean, people have so far pointed out the damning hypocrisy in this 'article', but so far its all being deemed as Liberal nonsense. Well, I am a Liberal and I find this article ridiculously hypocritical, and have noticed similar debating tactics among conservatives on this site. IN fact, this should be regarded as 'idiot's style', as idiots on both sides of the spectrum employ tactics like these mentioned. [[User:Graham|Graham]] 08:26, 23 September 2007 (EDT)
 
I mean, people have so far pointed out the damning hypocrisy in this 'article', but so far its all being deemed as Liberal nonsense. Well, I am a Liberal and I find this article ridiculously hypocritical, and have noticed similar debating tactics among conservatives on this site. IN fact, this should be regarded as 'idiot's style', as idiots on both sides of the spectrum employ tactics like these mentioned. [[User:Graham|Graham]] 08:26, 23 September 2007 (EDT)
 +
 +
Of course you would call it hypocritical.  That's because you refuse to accept the authority that Conservatives based their comments on, which the vast majority of their comments rely on.  Conservatives use authoritative sources such as the Constitution or the Bible, where liberals say things based on nothing but their opinion as the authority.  That is the difference.
    
== Crocoite - Civility? ==
 
== Crocoite - Civility? ==
Line 144: Line 146:     
:: Dude, it's spelled "atheists" ("i" after "e", except after "c" ...).  And, by the way, most [[liberals]] do deny that the God created the world in six days.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 09:50, 3 June 2008 (EDT)
 
:: Dude, it's spelled "atheists" ("i" after "e", except after "c" ...).  And, by the way, most [[liberals]] do deny that the God created the world in six days.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 09:50, 3 June 2008 (EDT)
 +
:::"Science" proved that wrong, Andy. <sub>pun intended</sub> +_+ <sub>always tired</sub> [[User:Kektklik|Kektk]] 23:30, 3 June 2008 (EDT)
    
== Confused ==
 
== Confused ==
Line 178: Line 181:     
That nothing links to a page is not justification for deleting it.  People may find it by searching for it in the "FIND" box.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 21:38, 6 March 2008 (EST)
 
That nothing links to a page is not justification for deleting it.  People may find it by searching for it in the "FIND" box.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 21:38, 6 March 2008 (EST)
 +
 +
==Controversial==
 +
[[Iconoclastic controversy]], [[Global Warming Controversy]], [[Creation-evolution controversy]], [[Muhammad cartoons controversy]], [[Abortion controversy]], [[Easter controversy]], [[Intelligent design controversy]], [[Video game controversy]]. [[User:DannyRedful|DannyRedful]] 16:11, 13 June 2008 (EDT)
 +
 +
== Grammer ==
 +
 +
shouldn't the first letter of every sentence be capitalized and I was wondering if those external links could be changed to referenced???  Just trying to help.  respond to me on my talk page.  --[[User:AmeliaJ|AmeliaJ]] 17:37, 28 December 2008 (EST)
 +
 +
== Missing ref tags ==
 +
 +
I would make the change myself if I could; Point #8: "Silence Speaks Volume" has a few links next to it that do not have ref tags. Point #31 has ref tags, why not point #8? Thanks to whoever fixes this. [[User:JonG|~ ]][[User_talk:JonG|JonG]][[Special:Contributions/JonG| ~]] 01:44, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
 +
 +
== Better word than "unjustified", use "unsubstantiated" instead. ==
 +
 +
Concerning: "#unjustified claims of expertise, authority or knowledge"
 +
 +
A better word instead of "unjustified" is "unsubstantiated" there.
 +
 +
:Good suggestion.  I'll make the change.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 17:09, 5 August 2016 (EDT)
Siteadmin, 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
125,789

edits

Navigation menu