Difference between revisions of "User talk:Crzyclarks"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(Created page with ""Previous version was rife with inaccuracies/assumptions"...so you can change it to include your inaccuracies/assumptions? I've seen the only source your provided: a silly "we-t...") |
Crzyclarks (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
"Previous version was rife with inaccuracies/assumptions"...so you can change it to include your inaccuracies/assumptions? I've seen the only source your provided: a silly "we-the-undersigned" statement which proves nothing except what they want to believe. This website is not going to call their little fairy-tale a fact...not in the least. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 22:39, 4 June 2012 (EDT) | "Previous version was rife with inaccuracies/assumptions"...so you can change it to include your inaccuracies/assumptions? I've seen the only source your provided: a silly "we-the-undersigned" statement which proves nothing except what they want to believe. This website is not going to call their little fairy-tale a fact...not in the least. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 22:39, 4 June 2012 (EDT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | What's wrong with the source? How about you come up with a source that will even come close to showing scientific consensus for your edit. [[User:Crzyclarks|Crzyclarks]] 22:45, 4 June 2012 (EDT) | ||
Revision as of 02:45, June 5, 2012
"Previous version was rife with inaccuracies/assumptions"...so you can change it to include your inaccuracies/assumptions? I've seen the only source your provided: a silly "we-the-undersigned" statement which proves nothing except what they want to believe. This website is not going to call their little fairy-tale a fact...not in the least. Karajou 22:39, 4 June 2012 (EDT)
What's wrong with the source? How about you come up with a source that will even come close to showing scientific consensus for your edit. Crzyclarks 22:45, 4 June 2012 (EDT)