1,792
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 77:
Line 77: + +
→RSchlafly: I described a distinction that evolutionists make
Your edits were the height of inanity. Saying, "some people say this, but only because they're evolutionists," whatever that means, is asinine. It's an argument that contains its own refutation, and is thoroughly un-encyclopedic, uninformative, and worthless.-'''<font color="#007FFF">Ames</font><font color="#FF0000">G</font>'''<sub>[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:AmesG yo!]</sub> 18:53, 28 March 2007 (EDT)
Your edits were the height of inanity. Saying, "some people say this, but only because they're evolutionists," whatever that means, is asinine. It's an argument that contains its own refutation, and is thoroughly un-encyclopedic, uninformative, and worthless.-'''<font color="#007FFF">Ames</font><font color="#FF0000">G</font>'''<sub>[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:AmesG yo!]</sub> 18:53, 28 March 2007 (EDT)
: I described a distinction that evolutionists make. Are you saying that the distinction does not exist? That it is not noteworthy? Or what? Please explain. [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 19:00, 28 March 2007 (EDT)