Changes

Surely that's sensible - the start of each section just needs the disclaimer once?  --[[User:Cgday|Cgday]] 17:25, 20 March 2007 (EDT)

Surely that's sensible - the start of each section just needs the disclaimer once?  --[[User:Cgday|Cgday]] 17:25, 20 March 2007 (EDT)

:Is the follwing sentence a fact? "Close to 65 million years ago, at the end of the Cretaceous period, and the beginning of what we call the Tertiary period, an event occurred which has come to be known as the K-T Event. This event obliterated most life on Earth, plunging the world into something that would now be likened to global nuclear winter, through which few extant species could survive."  Or is it scientists opinion?  Before you answers that question please read this article: http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/2587  The truth is that there have been countless dinosaur extinction explanations given by the evolutionary position. You can't have countless sentences stating "facts" when they are not facts. The compromise is the only solution that will end the countless edit warring.  Do the evolutionists, including AmesG, agree to compromise.  If they don't I will ask Aschlafly to keep the page locked.  [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 17:33, 20 March 2007 (EDT)conservative

:Is the following sentence a fact? "Close to 65 million years ago, at the end of the Cretaceous period, and the beginning of what we call the Tertiary period, an event occurred which has come to be known as the K-T Event. This event obliterated most life on Earth, plunging the world into something that would now be likened to global nuclear winter, through which few extant species could survive."  Or is it scientists opinion?  Before you answers that question please read this article: http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/2587  The truth is that there have been countless dinosaur extinction explanations given by the evolutionary position. You can't have countless sentences stating "facts" when they are not facts. The compromise is the only solution that will end the countless edit warring.  Do the evolutionists, including AmesG, agree to compromise.  If they don't I will ask Aschlafly to keep the page locked.  [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 17:33, 20 March 2007 (EDT)conservative

== Loch Ness Monster ==

== Loch Ness Monster ==

Wait... really?  We're going with the Loch Ness Monster?  [[User:Myk|Myk]] 17:34, 20 March 2007 (EDT)

Wait... really?  We're going with the Loch Ness Monster?  [[User:Myk|Myk]] 17:34, 20 March 2007 (EDT)