Difference between revisions of "Talk:Essay: For the record, User: Conservative's 12 major predictions"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(→Thanks, thoughts and a question: new section) |
|||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
Are you sure you don't mean "I/We"? [[User:Dgalore|Dgalore]] | Are you sure you don't mean "I/We"? [[User:Dgalore|Dgalore]] | ||
| + | |||
| + | == Thanks, thoughts and a question == | ||
| + | |||
| + | Thanks for this. My preferred bookie has Obama as short as 1/3, though, and Romney out at 11/5. At a minimum that suggests your odds of a perfect 12 are considerably worse than 50/50, unless they've really borked their analysis of the electoral college carve-up. | ||
| + | |||
| + | I'm genuinely interested in how you'd define victory for the QE! campaign. It's at least logically possible that, one day, YEC will be taught as basic scientific fact in schools and universities worldwide. Do you see this happening in your lifetime? | ||
| + | |||
| + | Thanks again, | ||
| + | |||
| + | --[[User:JohanZ|JohanZ]] 20:15, 30 October 2012 (EDT) | ||
Revision as of 00:15, October 31, 2012
Whats the point of linking and referencing this on the mainpage
I really don't also you don't need to reference links to conservapedia Dvergne 01:33, 30 October 2012 (EDT)
I, User: Conservative
Are you sure you don't mean "I/We"? Dgalore
Thanks, thoughts and a question
Thanks for this. My preferred bookie has Obama as short as 1/3, though, and Romney out at 11/5. At a minimum that suggests your odds of a perfect 12 are considerably worse than 50/50, unless they've really borked their analysis of the electoral college carve-up.
I'm genuinely interested in how you'd define victory for the QE! campaign. It's at least logically possible that, one day, YEC will be taught as basic scientific fact in schools and universities worldwide. Do you see this happening in your lifetime?
Thanks again,
--JohanZ 20:15, 30 October 2012 (EDT)