Changes

:::::Which research?  I put it in my previous message:  research that is the most relevant and accurate.  Yes, that can be from both sides, but it should be from experts, not amateur bibliosceptics (for example).  Other than being an evangelical atheist with qualifications in scientific fields, I don't know what justification there is for including Richard Dawkins as an authority in the [[Conservapedia talk:Alleged Bible contradictions]] page, for example. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 23:10, 4 April 2007 (EDT)

:::::Which research?  I put it in my previous message:  research that is the most relevant and accurate.  Yes, that can be from both sides, but it should be from experts, not amateur bibliosceptics (for example).  Other than being an evangelical atheist with qualifications in scientific fields, I don't know what justification there is for including Richard Dawkins as an authority in the [[Conservapedia talk:Alleged Bible contradictions]] page, for example. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 23:10, 4 April 2007 (EDT)

::::::He isn't quoted as an 'authority', merely as a 'critical scholar', following a complaint retailed by [[Conservative]] that the critics aren't multidisciplinary enough! --[[User:Petrus|Petrus]] 05:39, 5 April 2007 (EDT)

::::::He isn't quoted as an 'authority', merely as a 'critical scholar', following a complaint retailed by [[Conservative]] that the critics aren't multidisciplinary enough. You can't have it both ways! --[[User:Petrus|Petrus]] 05:39, 5 April 2007 (EDT)

== The Fourth Day ==

== The Fourth Day ==