Changes

:::::You're on very dangerous intellectual ground to not accept any sources from an opponent. Sounds almost elitist. If you've got sources and counter arguments you would like to add, be my guest. If it's a good position, one will win out over the other. That's just the nature of how things work when both sides are presented. You shouldn't be so afraid if you're so sure of yourself.<br />"Your sources all have the agenda of making science...look less credible."<br />That's an completely unfounded claim. There whole point is to protect the distortion of science by the evolutionary theory. --[[User:Ymmotrojam|Ymmotrojam]] 20:06, 19 March 2007 (EDT)

:::::You're on very dangerous intellectual ground to not accept any sources from an opponent. Sounds almost elitist. If you've got sources and counter arguments you would like to add, be my guest. If it's a good position, one will win out over the other. That's just the nature of how things work when both sides are presented. You shouldn't be so afraid if you're so sure of yourself.<br />"Your sources all have the agenda of making science...look less credible."<br />That's an completely unfounded claim. There whole point is to protect the distortion of science by the evolutionary theory. --[[User:Ymmotrojam|Ymmotrojam]] 20:06, 19 March 2007 (EDT)

::::::Have you ever '''''read''''' a text on Evolution?  Let us mean what we say, and say what we mean: I mean to say, what do you know about science, to think that evolution harms it?--[[User:AmesG|AmesG]] 20:12, 19 March 2007 (EDT)

::::::[[User:Ymmotrojam|Ymmotrojam]], have you ever '''''read''''' a text on Evolution?  Let us mean what we say, and say what we mean: I mean to say, what do you know about science, to think that evolution harms it?--[[User:AmesG|AmesG]] 20:12, 19 March 2007 (EDT)

::::::I have a very open mind, actually. However, when you state that something is encyclopedic material, you should be able to find at least SOME sources other than one of the involved sides. Right now, the concept of "Evolutionism" is as encyclopedic as the "O RLY?" owl, and LESS encyclopedic than the Star Wars kid, Pastafarianism and possibly "All your base are belong to us".

::::::I have a very open mind, actually. However, when you state that something is encyclopedic material, you should be able to find at least SOME sources other than one of the involved sides. Right now, the concept of "Evolutionism" is as encyclopedic as the "O RLY?" owl, and LESS encyclopedic than the Star Wars kid, Pastafarianism and possibly "All your base are belong to us".