Siteadmin, Check users, oversight, Administrators
350,925
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 430:
Line 430: − +
Talk:Barack Hussein Obama (view source)
Revision as of 09:28, November 18, 2008
, 09:28, November 18, 2008→If it can perhaps be quibbled that there is merely a 20% chance of Obama being a Muslim, then why is the Obama article stating that he is likely a Muslim?
"Perhaps one can quibble whether that probability is 20% or 60% or 90%, but no one can insist with a straight face that it is 0%."
"Perhaps one can quibble whether that probability is 20% or 60% or 90%, but no one can insist with a straight face that it is 0%."
If it can be perhaps be quibbled that the likelihood of Obama being a Muslim is merely 20%, then why is the article still stating that Obama is likely a Muslim? [[User:Conservative|conservative]] 04:01, 18 November 2008 (EST)
If it can be perhaps be quibbled that the likelihood of Obama being a Muslim is merely 20%, then why is the article still stating that Obama is likely a Muslim? Second, do you think that a reference work should use scholarly caution and that scholarly caution helps make a reference work authoritative? [[User:Conservative|conservative]] 04:01, 18 November 2008 (EST)