19
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 140:
Line 140: + + +
no edit summary
I would have thought if that if they did want to contribute constructively they would have edited the article themselves. Instead they have just sort to degrade it in the talk section. I do wish them a hearty Godspeed with you TK!--[[User:ClaireB|ClaireB]] 23:58, 30 June 2009 (EDT)
I would have thought if that if they did want to contribute constructively they would have edited the article themselves. Instead they have just sort to degrade it in the talk section. I do wish them a hearty Godspeed with you TK!--[[User:ClaireB|ClaireB]] 23:58, 30 June 2009 (EDT)
==False Information==
Speaking as someone who has many atheist friends, I find much of this page to be absolutely false. For example: #1 is a classic Straw Man logical fallacy (first, there never has been an atheistic society in history and second, democracy demonstrably does not rely on Christianity - see India for one clear counter-example). Numbers 3, 5, 6, 8, and 11 are utterly false. Case in point: 100% of atheists I know believe in love, intrinsic beauty, and fidelity (disproving #3); every atheist I've ever met notes that there are things that have yet to be explained by science (disproving #6); pretty much every atheist I've ever met has been optimistic and happy (disproving #8); #11 is actually based on education level, knowledge of basic research methods, and similar non-religious elements. Thus, if the point of both the article and site is to provide "truth", this article clearly fails and thus should be fixed. (I'm willing to fix it, but have not done so due to a desire not to be banned for merely trying to help the site live up to its intended purpose.) --[[User:JohnS001|JohnS001]] 18:51, 22 May 2010 (EDT)