Irenaeus, Siteadmin, Check users, oversight, Administrators
351,733
edits
Changes
no edit summary
== Let's Have this "Evolutionary" Debate Here & Now ==
== Let's Have this "Evolutionary" Debate Here & Now ==
Conservative, you have never rebutted my contention that "evolutionary," used as a qualifier to the entire field of science, is nothing more than a qualifier-word designed to make scientists sound less credible. There is a branch of science called "evolutionary biology," but they do not deal with dinosaurs. If you do not properly rebut this argument, I will change the article to not use the word "evolutionary" except where appropriate. -'''<font color="#007FFF">Ames</font><font color="#FF0000">G</font>'''<sub>[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:AmesG yo!]</sub> 01:16, 1 April 2007 (EDT)
Conservative, you have never rebutted my contention that "evolutionary," used as a qualifier to the entire field of science, is nothing more than a qualifier-word designed to make scientists sound less credible. There is a branch of science called "evolutionary biology," but they do not deal with dinosaurs. If you do not properly rebut this argument, I will change the article to not use the word "evolutionary" except where appropriate. -'''<font color="#007FFF">Ames</font><font color="#FF0000">G</font>'''<sub>[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:AmesG yo!]</sub> 01:16, 1 April 2007 (EDT)
:Here is what AmesG said regarding material he posted in regards to it's veracity:
"I honestly had no idea and just wanted to pick a fight." [http://www.conservapedia.com/Talk:Answers_in_Genesis]
Do we really need users who care so little about whether their material is factual or not? Do we need users who are so pugnacious that the facts don't really matter?
I say we cannot afford to babysit AmesG anymore. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 01:50, 1 April 2007 (EDT)conservative
== "Creationary" ==
== "Creationary" ==