24
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 143:
Line 143: + + + + + +
no edit summary
more of the article is spent disproving evolution than explaining it (which is barely done at all).
more of the article is spent disproving evolution than explaining it (which is barely done at all).
:::Given discrimination, how many are eager to answer surveys or go public? Second, science is not a voting booth. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 13:43, 8 August 2011 (EDT)
:::Given discrimination, how many are eager to answer surveys or go public? Second, science is not a voting booth. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 13:43, 8 August 2011 (EDT)
::::Science is an open forum. Despite the fact that this article states several legislations have been made to enforce Creationism in schools, they have been overturned by the Supreme Court.
::::Proponents of creationism in these cases stated that
:::::Creationism is not science, and
:::::failed to produce any articles which supported creationism in any peer-review forum. [[User:Valuables|Valuables]] 17:42, 11 August 2011 (EDT)
Listing fraudulent evidence offers only to attempt to discredit a theory. There's as much to talk about for Creationism, and it doesn't have any real effect on educating people about the theory or its evidence or lack-there-of, as this article doesn't address any evidence of evolution. [[User:Valuables|Valuables]] 17:42, 11 August 2011 (EDT)
== changes to the evolution article ==
== changes to the evolution article ==
Although the Conservapedia evolution article is a thorn in the side of many internet atheists/evolutionists (as it cites evolutionists candidly admitting the many fatal and serious weaknesses of the evolutionary paradigm) and continues to be a well trafficked article at Conservapedia, Conservapedia is considering making some changes to the CP evolution article. Of course, evolutionism devotees and other cranks will play no part in the revisions. There is no pressing need to do this, however, given that the [[Question evolution! campaign]] will grind away at evolutionary nonsense with great alacrity as [[Shockofgod]] will be promoting the campaign "full throttle". :) [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zbmAn3M8r0I] [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 13:45, 9 August 2011 (EDT)
Although the Conservapedia evolution article is a thorn in the side of many internet atheists/evolutionists (as it cites evolutionists candidly admitting the many fatal and serious weaknesses of the evolutionary paradigm) and continues to be a well trafficked article at Conservapedia, Conservapedia is considering making some changes to the CP evolution article. Of course, evolutionism devotees and other cranks will play no part in the revisions. There is no pressing need to do this, however, given that the [[Question evolution! campaign]] will grind away at evolutionary nonsense with great alacrity as [[Shockofgod]] will be promoting the campaign "full throttle". :) [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zbmAn3M8r0I] [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 13:45, 9 August 2011 (EDT)