1,792
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 107:
Line 107: + +
→Rewriting History: You comments don't make any sense
::I don't think I understand your point. It looks to me as though there was merely a contrast drawn between the two theories to show that neither is scientific. Also, I believe that (in your example) Intelligent Design was going to be taught in a biology lesson instead of evolution (i.e. a non-scientific theory being taught in a science lesson), and the Flat Earth Society was only made to show how ludicrous that idea is. How is that poking fun at Christians? Let's face it, if somebody today walked up to you and tried to convince you the Earth was flat you would laugh at them, regardless of whther they were Christian or of any other faith! [[User:MatteeNeutra|MatteeNeutra]] 14:25, 6 April 2007 (EDT)
::I don't think I understand your point. It looks to me as though there was merely a contrast drawn between the two theories to show that neither is scientific. Also, I believe that (in your example) Intelligent Design was going to be taught in a biology lesson instead of evolution (i.e. a non-scientific theory being taught in a science lesson), and the Flat Earth Society was only made to show how ludicrous that idea is. How is that poking fun at Christians? Let's face it, if somebody today walked up to you and tried to convince you the Earth was flat you would laugh at them, regardless of whther they were Christian or of any other faith! [[User:MatteeNeutra|MatteeNeutra]] 14:25, 6 April 2007 (EDT)
::: You comments don't make any sense. Drawing a contrast between two theories does not show that neither is scientific. I did not give an example of Intelligent Design being taught in a biology lesson instead of evolution. Nobody tries to convince anyone that the Earth is flat. [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 14:47, 6 April 2007 (EDT)