142
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 2:
Line 2: +
Term to use
:Thanks Ed!! Now, to clarify, there is no distinction between "evolutionary" and "mainstream" science, except that "evolutionary" is used as a pejorative here to denigrate the quality of the science, even though those using the term don't understand the science itself. Please understand and accept the distinction.-'''<font color="#007FFF">Ames</font><font color="#FF0000">G</font>'''<sub>[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:AmesG yo!]</sub> 12:20, 29 March 2007 (EDT)
:Thanks Ed!! Now, to clarify, there is no distinction between "evolutionary" and "mainstream" science, except that "evolutionary" is used as a pejorative here to denigrate the quality of the science, even though those using the term don't understand the science itself. Please understand and accept the distinction.-'''<font color="#007FFF">Ames</font><font color="#FF0000">G</font>'''<sub>[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:AmesG yo!]</sub> 12:20, 29 March 2007 (EDT)
::As there have been many edit wars in the past over the phrase to use, I really think a site-wide policy needs to be set on this. Of course "evolutionary scientists" is wrong but [[User:CPAdmin1|Tim]] seems to disagree. Maybe it should be brought up on [[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]]'s page. --[[User:JamesK|JamesK]] 12:33, 29 March 2007 (EDT)