Block, SkipCaptcha
195
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 12:
Line 12: +
→Slight change.
I think it would be fair to say I [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Scientific_controversy&action=historysubmit&diff=894934&oldid=894584 clarified] your [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Scientific_controversy&diff=prev&oldid=894584 edit]. What say you? --[[User:Chouston|Chouston]] 00:24, 30 July 2011 (EDT)
I think it would be fair to say I [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Scientific_controversy&action=historysubmit&diff=894934&oldid=894584 clarified] your [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Scientific_controversy&diff=prev&oldid=894584 edit]. What say you? --[[User:Chouston|Chouston]] 00:24, 30 July 2011 (EDT)
:I don't know that it's a clarification, so much as a slight change of meaning. Some scientific controversy is '''not''' driving advancement, which I left room for in my edit. As it currently stands, the article says that controversy ''necessarily'' drives advancement, which is not necessarily true. [[User:LowKey|LowKey]] 20:51, 31 July 2011 (EDT)