Block, SkipCaptcha, Automoderated users, edit
752
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 122:
Line 122: + + + +
→Yasser Arafat: new section
::::::::Concerning evolution, I can't, simply because the theory of evolution is so much an integral part of modern biomedical science (the evidence is overwhelming, you may as well concede that point). As for relativity, like evolution, that's been improved upon quite a bit. So long as all you're trying to argue are the original points of the theory, any Nobel prize winner in physics for the past thirty years would suffice. --[[User:RudrickBoucher|RudrickBoucher]] 23:54, 3 October 2011 (EDT)
::::::::Concerning evolution, I can't, simply because the theory of evolution is so much an integral part of modern biomedical science (the evidence is overwhelming, you may as well concede that point). As for relativity, like evolution, that's been improved upon quite a bit. So long as all you're trying to argue are the original points of the theory, any Nobel prize winner in physics for the past thirty years would suffice. --[[User:RudrickBoucher|RudrickBoucher]] 23:54, 3 October 2011 (EDT)
== Yasser Arafat ==
No mention of renowned terrorist Yasser Arafat, arguably the only Peace Prize recipient less deserving than Obama? At least Obama hadn't done anything unpeaceful yet.... Or anything peaceful for that matter... But he hadn't done anything at all, which means he hadn't done anything that specifically made him "undeserving" of the award. Yes, I know you need more than just not doing anything inherently unpeaceful to win the award. I won't dispute that. But you still shouldn't do anything unpeaceful. And Arafat did. Shouldn't we mention that? [[User:Gregkochuconn|Gregkochuconn]] 20:06, 13 February 2012 (EST)