20
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 392:
Line 392: + + + +
Talk:Theory of relativity (view source)
Revision as of 21:06, November 29, 2009
, 21:06, November 29, 2009→Request for References
::: Lack of Bible-reading is so prevalent among relativists that I hardly think a citation is needed to demonstrate it. Not to pick on editor Raatz, but take a look at his complete lack of Bible-related edits here despite his insistence that he still reads it: [http://www.conservapedia.com/Special:Contributions/Jfraatz]. '''''Indeed, it's difficult to imagine any theory other than relativity that so sours an impressionable student on the Bible'''''. The theory of evolution, perhaps.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 15:25, 29 November 2009 (EST)
::: Lack of Bible-reading is so prevalent among relativists that I hardly think a citation is needed to demonstrate it. Not to pick on editor Raatz, but take a look at his complete lack of Bible-related edits here despite his insistence that he still reads it: [http://www.conservapedia.com/Special:Contributions/Jfraatz]. '''''Indeed, it's difficult to imagine any theory other than relativity that so sours an impressionable student on the Bible'''''. The theory of evolution, perhaps.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 15:25, 29 November 2009 (EST)
Andy- you have made the claim again, and now you are claiming its so obvious you don't need a citation, but it only appears obvious to you. Any single example is anecdotal- as you yourself have pointed out with your "one person who smokes into old age doesn't prove cigarettes don't cause cancer" argument. You are making a claim, and I for one would appreciate knowing why you believe it.
I cannot speak for Raatz, but I myself do read the bible, and the only contributions I have made to this project are attempted edits to relativity. The reason is that I am a physicist, and felt that my contributions would best be made in this specialized area. Conservapedia appears to have many knowledgeable of the bible, but few physicists. Not making bible related edits is not evidence of not reading the bible- it could be evidence of finding the current articles satisfactory. As a physicist, I find this relativity article simply embarrassing, and hence the endeavor to improve it. I encourage you, Andy, to take your famously open mind and sit down with a good introduction to the theory, and work through some standard introductory problems. I think that actually learning what you try to criticize may help greatly. --[[User:WLink|WLink]] 16:06, 29 November 2009 (EST)
== A Word on Relativism ==
== A Word on Relativism ==