Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
157 bytes added ,  23:42, July 5, 2009
added an example of Wikipedia's double standard
Line 9: Line 9:  
The son finally decides to return to his father in the [[Prodigal Son]] when he realizes that among the people he left his father for, "no one gave him anything" in contrast to his father's generosity.  The son had been applying a double standard against his father, but no longer.
 
The son finally decides to return to his father in the [[Prodigal Son]] when he realizes that among the people he left his father for, "no one gave him anything" in contrast to his father's generosity.  The son had been applying a double standard against his father, but no longer.
   −
The history of [[politics]] is full of examples of this sort of hypocrisy.
+
Examples of [[liberal]] double standards include:
    
*[[Global warming]]: Supporters of the [[Kyoto Protocol]] (an emissions reduction treaty) say that "[[correlation is not causation]]" when scientists point out the dozens of natural [[climate cycles]] linking changes in sunspots to changes in Earth's air temperature. But their argument for a [[runaway greenhouse effect]] is based on a single period from 1850 to present in which carbon dioxide levels and air temperatures have risen together.
 
*[[Global warming]]: Supporters of the [[Kyoto Protocol]] (an emissions reduction treaty) say that "[[correlation is not causation]]" when scientists point out the dozens of natural [[climate cycles]] linking changes in sunspots to changes in Earth's air temperature. But their argument for a [[runaway greenhouse effect]] is based on a single period from 1850 to present in which carbon dioxide levels and air temperatures have risen together.
    
*[[Evolution]]: Ardent supporters of the Theory of Evolution blindly accept any study that purportedly "proves" their theory, without addressing (or even allowing the criticism of) any flaws in such studies. But when it comes to alternative theories (whether it be [[Creationism]], intelligent design, or something else), the same people immediately reject them without even studying the details.
 
*[[Evolution]]: Ardent supporters of the Theory of Evolution blindly accept any study that purportedly "proves" their theory, without addressing (or even allowing the criticism of) any flaws in such studies. But when it comes to alternative theories (whether it be [[Creationism]], intelligent design, or something else), the same people immediately reject them without even studying the details.
 +
 +
*[[Wikipedia]] is much harsher in describing [[conservatives]] and sites perceived to be conservative.  Compare, for example, Wikipedia's entries on Conservapedia and Scholarpedia.
    
== See also ==
 
== See also ==
Anthony, Irenaeus, Siteadmin, Bureaucrats, Check users, nsAm_Govt_101RO, nsAm_Govt_101RW, nsAm_Govt_101_ta, nsJudgesRO, nsJudgesRW, nsJudges_talkRO, nsJudges_talkRW, nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW, oversight, Administrators
125,910

edits

Navigation menu