38
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 6:
Line 6: + +
Talk:Scientific Theory of Evolution (view source)
Revision as of 00:24, March 22, 2007
, 00:24, March 22, 2007no edit summary
:Charlie, I wholly (!!!!) agree with you, I really do. Trust me, I revere the ''Kitzmiller'' decision for blasting ID out of the water. But this article will get deleted wholesale, and we'll have only the [[theory of evolution]] page, which is wholly unscientific. I think this might be the best we can do on this site. But could you please talk more about evolution as a positive in this article, rather than delete the "controversial" paragraph? I'd appreciate ANY ANY help you can give. Really, I'm hugely on your side.-[[User:AmesG|AmesG]] 20:21, 21 March 2007 (EDT)
:Charlie, I wholly (!!!!) agree with you, I really do. Trust me, I revere the ''Kitzmiller'' decision for blasting ID out of the water. But this article will get deleted wholesale, and we'll have only the [[theory of evolution]] page, which is wholly unscientific. I think this might be the best we can do on this site. But could you please talk more about evolution as a positive in this article, rather than delete the "controversial" paragraph? I'd appreciate ANY ANY help you can give. Really, I'm hugely on your side.-[[User:AmesG|AmesG]] 20:21, 21 March 2007 (EDT)
:AmesG, I'm glad you agree, but I still feel claiming that there is a controversy at all is a creationist lie. It may be the best we can do, but saying there's a real issue here is a creationist viewpoint, not that of the majority of Americans. I'll have to come back and fill in more information about evolution when I've got a chance. If you want some good evidence for evolution, take a look at [http://www.mnscience.org], a nonprofit aimed at stopping the spread of ID. I'd say that's a reasonable source for a scientific treatment of Evolution. --[[User:Charliemc86|Charliemc86]]