Talk:Stephen Hawking

Divorce

How would divorce influence his "promotion of his pseudoscience fantasies"? There's no causality, and unless the claim can be cited beyond simply stating that, "It's unknown," it doesn't belong on an educational website. JaneX 16:51, 8 October 2010 (EDT)

Good point... added references and removed the "it is unknown" bit. AndrewWi 19:56, 1 November 2010 (EDT)

I still don't think it's relevant because atheists and those who promote pseudoscience aren't the only ones who get divorced. How can we explain why John McCain has been divorced once, Newt Gingrich twice and Rush Limbaugh three times? The bottom line is, divorce is an ill that plagues society, and not one group is devoid of it. JaneX 20:15, 1 November 2010 (EDT)

Hawking's "unfortunate belief"

Why is it unfortunate that Hawking has "yet to accept Jesus Christ as his Lord and Savior"? Surely this a subjective statement, very much so opposed to the supposed "objectiveness" of Conservapedia. Some may find it fortunate that Hawking thinks this way. I see no reason why the personal opinion of the writer should be included in the article. I suggest this be removed immediately, if Conservapedia's supposed good name be kept. by all means, mention that Hawking does not accept Jesus Christ as his saviour, but no commennt should be made on the matter in such a way as has been done already in this article.

Value judgements

Do words like unfortunately and foolish really belong here? I understand that this encyclopedia is written from a Christian, Conservative, Young Earth Creationist point of view and I respect that, but there are subtler and gentler ways of promoting these beliefs. There is no need to open walnuts with a sledgehammer, when a nutcracker will do. Personally, I'd remove at least these two words. --Leo-from-UK 13:48, 4 July 2011 (EDT)

If you please, employ the nutcracker! Karajou 13:56, 4 July 2011 (EDT)