User talk:Splark

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Hello Splark, happy to see another editor contributing to the Scientology article. Do you think it appropriate to place links as part of the article to substantiate its statements? For example, we might make note of its newness as a Religion, the link says it was founded in 1954.

I saw you added a sentence. The reason I mention linking is because there is a lot of information on the internet. The Church does not say what your recently added sentence says. And so I searched through the Scientology dictionarys (red for technology and green for administration) and found nothing at all about that. Also, I searched through the technical volume index (13 large volumes) and the administration index (10 large volumes) and looked through a lot of the Scientology and Dianetics books. Nada, nothing about that subject at all. Scientology doesn't present itself as a belief system (though the article presently says "the Scientology belief system"). Scientology doesn't suggest any belief at all that I can find. So that's why I ask about the linking, you see?

I know that websites which are critical of Scientology SAY that "scientology believes ...." or SAY that "scientologists believe ...", and I'm new here. So that's why I'm asking how you feel about links appearing in the article.

Yes, I understand that perfectly. I have viewed that and other sites and I understand that your edit is of information on the site you mention. Those statements exist as part of a body of information we might call "criticism of scientology". Let me give you a parallel situation, okay? Your friend, Ronny has just invented ice cream and conservapedia runs an article titled "Ice Cream", okay? You've tried ice cream and know what it is. But Joe (who lives in The Netherland) has never tried ice cream. HOWEVER, Joe feels his statements about ice cream are valid and he posts them on his personal website. Joe's statements include, "Ice cream causes warts". Should that go in a conservapedia article?

The situation is parallel because the source, the Church of Scientology, (Or your friend Ronny) does not say anything like that. But a number of person websites who have never understood what ice cream is, say "ice cream causes warts". If you follow ? Terryeo 21:34, 12 March 2007 (EDT)


Good job! Glad to see another person is showing the harsh truth in the Bible! Meekrok

What harsh truth? Yes, a lot of the truth is harsh, but if you look at all the benefits you can see how good the truth is too. Scorpionman 19:31, 16 March 2007 (EDT)


BJU teaches Young-Earth Creationism. How can you be an OEC? Scorpionman 19:32, 16 March 2007 (EDT)

They definitely make fun of me sometimes. --Splark 02:34, 17 March 2007 (EDT)

Air pressure lower at night due to sleeping?

An interesting fact is that the air pressure in the in the US has been shown to be slightly--but measurably--lower at night, due to the large number of people who are asleep and hence exhaling and inhaling more slowly.

Where on earth did you get that? What's your source? I have to say I flatly don't believe it. Even if everyone in the world breathed in at the same exact instant and breathed out at the same exact instant, the total amount of air involved = 6 billion people × vital capacity of 5 liters = 30 billion liters = 3 ·1010 liters.

If you assume the atmosphere is a sealed compartment with its bottom at sea level and its top at 1.5 kilometers, its volume is 500,000,000 km2 · 1.5 = 750,000,000 km3 = 7.5 · 108 km3 = 7.5 · 1017 m3 = 7.5 · 1020 liters. That means the volume of the atmosphere is 2.5 · 1010 times as large as the total volume of the atmosphere. It could at the very most cause a change of 0.000000004 kPa which is not detectible, since diurnal variation due to other factors is about 0.1 kPa.

And that's only if everyone in the world breaths together at the exact same time. Dpbsmith 14:57, 29 March 2007 (EDT)