85
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 8:
Line 8: + + + + + + + +
User talk:KSorenson (view source)
Revision as of 04:16, November 12, 2009
, 04:16, November 12, 2009no edit summary
More generally, this is not Wikipedia where [[liberal]] distortions of science dominate. We tell the truth here. The [[black hole]] entry is no exception.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 23:08, 11 November 2009 (EST)
More generally, this is not Wikipedia where [[liberal]] distortions of science dominate. We tell the truth here. The [[black hole]] entry is no exception.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 23:08, 11 November 2009 (EST)
::I beg your pardon, sir? I most certainly did not delete it. Perhaps you overlooked it because I moved it to the bottom of the article? Or perhaps it's because I omitted rewrote it without the word "falsifiability," which … well, to put it bluntly was misleading. The Schwarzchild and Kerr metrics are certainly falsifiable.
::In either case, I will happily restore that sentence (or sentences; I'm not looking at the draft right now) and re-submit. If you still think the existing article is the better choice, then please (obviously) feel free to revert a third time, and I will leave it at that.
::Though I would very much like to work with you to come up with a draft of the article that you'll accept. The Schwarzchild and Kerr metrics are fascinating, and I'm afraid I have to say that the existing article on black holes is not as good as it could be.
::Thank you again for your feedback.--[[User:KSorenson|KSorenson]] 23:16, 11 November 2009 (EST)