Talk:Flood Geology

List of criticisms

Despite suggesting that this is the place for criticisms of flood geology, I'm deleting the list that Cgday put in this article for the following reasons:

• Because it is a copy and paste from a discussion forum on another web-site. Conservapedia articles are supposed to be original content.
• Because a list of this format and length is not appropriate for an encyclopedia article.
• The list is introduced with the comment, "'This list is to establish that those criticisms have been raised, not to suggest they have any weight". If that is all, then mentioning the fact and putting a link in a footnote is sufficient.
• Also on that comment, and to use an analogy, an article on the moon landings that listed criticisms (that they were faked) simply on the grounds that they have been raised is ludicrous. Surely the criticisms should have some validity before being included/mentioned/etc.
• I doubt that a forum post would be considered an acceptable source even for linking to in a footnote.

Philip J. Rayment 06:36, 11 April 2007 (EDT)

just as a point of clarification - it's not copied from there but they did copy that from my original source. Never mind, I'll construct the list from scratch - Peer reviewed journals are fine as sources right? --Cgday 06:41, 11 April 2007 (EDT)