Siteadmin, Check users, nsTeam1RO, nsTeam1RW, nsTeam1_talkRO, nsTeam1_talkRW, oversight, Administrators
30,650
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 89:
Line 89: + + + +
no ideological edits allowed - stick to reporting facts
"Lowkey", I've grown tired of reverting your silly edits, and even more tired of your user id. Either request conversion of your id. to your real first name and last initial and improve your quality, or please move on. Lots of other sites with lower quality would welcome you. Thanks and Godspeed.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 23:40, 15 January 2009 (EST)
"Lowkey", I've grown tired of reverting your silly edits, and even more tired of your user id. Either request conversion of your id. to your real first name and last initial and improve your quality, or please move on. Lots of other sites with lower quality would welcome you. Thanks and Godspeed.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 23:40, 15 January 2009 (EST)
:And don't make ideological edits like [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Law_of_the_excluded_middle&diff=prev&oldid=611475 this one]. It is only evolutionists who insist that every criticism of evolution is necessarily a "religious" argument - on '''their''' [[excluded middle]] grounds. This is a fallacy, because it leaves out "unknown" causation.
:If life did not emerge because of know physical causes, this doesn't mean a supernatural cause is the only other possibility. They are just using that to have a '''legal''' excuse to suppress criticism of evolution. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] <sup>[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]</sup> 15:58, 16 January 2009 (EST)