798
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 8:
Line 8: + + + + + + + +
Talk:Andromeda galaxy (view source)
Revision as of 13:29, February 11, 2010
, 13:29, February 11, 2010→Disclaimer
:::I don't think "compromises" as to the deceit of an editor here are within my purview, Jacob...that would be between the user and God. What is within my purview is the decision as to if CP should be an enabler for his deceit. Thanks for the suggestion, but I am certain I have the ability to decide this. ;-) --<big>[[User:TK|'''ṬK''']]</big><sub>/Admin</sub><sup>[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]]</sup> 04:52, 11 February 2010 (EST)
:::I don't think "compromises" as to the deceit of an editor here are within my purview, Jacob...that would be between the user and God. What is within my purview is the decision as to if CP should be an enabler for his deceit. Thanks for the suggestion, but I am certain I have the ability to decide this. ;-) --<big>[[User:TK|'''ṬK''']]</big><sub>/Admin</sub><sup>[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]]</sup> 04:52, 11 February 2010 (EST)
:::: Whoa, okay TK that was uncalled for. There is one small area that references to age in this article: "''From this the astronomers calcuated that the various stars of Andromeda's halo vary in age from 6 to 13 billion years, a much wider range then the halo population of the Milky Way that mostly consists of metal-poor stars some 11-13 billion years old.<ref>http://www.skyandtelescope.com/news/3307606.html?page=1&c=y</ref>'' ".
:::: That was placed in '''before''' the compromise JacobB and I reached in regards to talking about age of the universe and how they should be placed into an "Old Universe View" and "Young Universe View" section. No one just got around to this article yet in light of that compromise. No one is trying to be deceitful, and I resent the implication, what is worse is you know how to contact me directly live, you could have asked instead of assumed I am trying something "deceitful". --[[User:BMcP|BMcP]] 08:29, 11 February 2010 (EST)
A disclaimer doesn't resolve logical flaws or over-reliance on assumptions or atheism-pushing. I found it astounding how much this entry pushed an old universe, atheistic ideology for no apparent scientific purpose.
A disclaimer doesn't resolve logical flaws or over-reliance on assumptions or atheism-pushing. I found it astounding how much this entry pushed an old universe, atheistic ideology for no apparent scientific purpose.
I would oppose a disclaimer that said, for example, "this entry assumes that greenhouse gases are causing the world to become dangerously warmer."--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 06:26, 11 February 2010 (EST)
I would oppose a disclaimer that said, for example, "this entry assumes that greenhouse gases are causing the world to become dangerously warmer."--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 06:26, 11 February 2010 (EST)
== Stop.. wait==
Why is distance and size information being ripped out of this article, especially since it is virtually all cited? Why isn't it discussed first in the talk section here? What is disputed about distance? Distance to extra-galactic objects are not just guessed at and it doesn't imply age, it just implies distance. I mean how small do people think the universe is? As far as I know, but creationists and non-creationists agree the universe is very large and most galaxies are millions or billions of light years away. --[[User:BMcP|BMcP]] 08:29, 11 February 2010 (EST)