Irenaeus, Siteadmin, Check users, oversight, Administrators
351,139
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 96:
Line 96: − +
Talk:Question evolution! campaign (view source)
Revision as of 21:54, June 28, 2011
, 21:54, June 28, 2011→This is a farce, you are embarrassing yourself
1. Evolutionists can't have it both ways on the [[Origin of life]]. You can't spout on about [[Origin of life|chemical evolution]] from one side of your mouth, but on the other hand say it has nothing to do with evolution. Face it, evolution is a religion/philosophy. It is not science.
1. Evolutionists can't have it both ways on the [[Origin of life]]. You can't spout on about [[Origin of life|chemical evolution]] from one side of your mouth, but on the other hand say it has nothing to do with evolution. Face it, evolution is a religion/philosophy. It is not science.
2. I see a noticeable lack of footnotes. But even if you had footnotes, you would probably link to junk science (talkorigins, etc.).
2. I see a noticeable lack of footnotes and/or support for your contentions. But even if you had footnotes and/or "information", you would probably link to or provide junk science "information". (talkorigins, etc.).
By the way, are you an atheist? If so, please provide proof and evidence that atheism is true.
By the way, are you an atheist? If so, please provide proof and evidence that atheism is true.
I suggest rereading Conservapedia's [[evolution]] and [[atheism]] articles over and over until they sink in. [[User:Conservative|conservative]] 17:52, 28 June 2011 (EDT)
I suggest rereading Conservapedia's [[evolution]] and [[atheism]] articles over and over until they sink in. [[User:Conservative|conservative]] 17:52, 28 June 2011 (EDT)