1,161
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 47:
Line 47: + + + + +
Talk:Scientific Theory of Evolution (view source)
Revision as of 01:07, March 22, 2007
, 01:07, March 22, 2007Paragraph sounds like it would be better on Evolutionism
:Charlie's got it, and the other article is humongous and managed by one admin - [[user:Conservative]]. So two problems - (1) I don't really want to mess with his turf, especially since we've had our conflicts, and, (2) merging it would be a lot of work and potentially offensive to people who like the old page. I personally like the disambiguation solution.-[[User:AmesG|AmesG]] 21:04, 21 March 2007 (EDT)
:Charlie's got it, and the other article is humongous and managed by one admin - [[user:Conservative]]. So two problems - (1) I don't really want to mess with his turf, especially since we've had our conflicts, and, (2) merging it would be a lot of work and potentially offensive to people who like the old page. I personally like the disambiguation solution.-[[User:AmesG|AmesG]] 21:04, 21 March 2007 (EDT)
== Paragraph sounds like it would be better on Evolutionism ==
:"''Evolution has been a recent source of controversy in the United States. Some prominent Americans seriously question evolution, based on a feeling that it conflicts with religious beliefs. However, religion and evolution are not mutually exclusive. Many deeply religious people believe that God set evolution into effect, which is no detraction to His majesty. This is referring to the theory of Theistic Evolution, which is distinctly different from Intelligent Design, a form of Creationism. Intelligent Design asserts that an Intelligent Designer (often God) oversees all changes in species.''"
This to me sounds like it's less about science, and more about a cultural reaction. The [[Evolutionism]] article is being to developed to cover that kind of thing. What do you guys think about moving it there? --[[User:Ymmotrojam|Ymmotrojam]] 21:07, 21 March 2007 (EDT)