Changes

I realize this is an emotional subject for many, but if the conservapedia can't manage to weed out the misleading and biased information, it will end up as the laughingstock that so many already assume it will become.

I realize this is an emotional subject for many, but if the conservapedia can't manage to weed out the misleading and biased information, it will end up as the laughingstock that so many already assume it will become.

The end of the first paragraph says that Islam is growing quickly "mostly" because of high fecundity rates.  Most data shows that high reproductive rates are important, but they are in parts of Africa, Asia, and South America where Christianity is showing its greatest gains as well.  It's debatable whether there are more conversions from Christianity to Islam than vice versa (and citing an interview of on person is not good evidence!), be both get most of their conversions from non judeo-christian-islam religions.  So what possible point can there be for including this, except to make the conservapedia look biased?

The end of the first paragraph says that Islam is growing quickly "mostly" because of high fecundity rates.  Most data shows that high reproductive rates are important, but they are in parts of Africa, Asia, and South America where Christianity is showing its greatest gains as well.  It's debatable whether there are more conversions from Christianity to Islam than vice versa (citing an interview with one person is not good evidence!), but both get most of their conversions from non judeo-christian-islam religions.  So what possible point can there be for including this, except to make the conservapedia look biased?