Difference between revisions of "Talk:Evolution"

Latest revision as of 14:00, August 25, 2025

Strong indicators that 2014 will be a bad year for Darwinism and atheism

Indicators that 2014 will be a bad year for Darwinism and atheism: Surefire signs that 2014 will be the WORST year in the history of Darwinism and atheism Conservative 06:12, 18 December 2013 (EST)

Robert Skildelsky

User:Conservative]: You used a source on these major Portal pages: Charles Darwin, The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, John Maynard Keynes and Evolution (The costly return of geopolitics, Jun 27, 2023). His latest, Lord Robert Skidelsky: Pax-Americana is Over, seems to directly contradict your Essay: The United States will be the leading power in the world for the foreseeable future, who declares it has ended. To avoid the confusion you have created on the part of our readers between your ideas and Skildelsky, why don't you properly qualify the source by creating the Robert Skildelsky article? RobS^{Zelensky Must Go!} 13:23, April 20, 2025 (EDT)

Alfred Russel Wallace - Co-discoverer of natural selection

Hello, I cannot edit this page, but is there a way to add "Alfred Russel Wallace who was the co-discoverer of natural selection, eventually came to see that nature exhibited design and purpose with evolution." citation: Alfred Russel Wallace. 1911. "The World of Life: A Manifestation of Creative Power, Directive Mind and Ultimate Purpose" It summarizes his view of natural history, evolution, natural selection, and their intersection with design. His work shows that nature and design are not mutually exclusive.

I removed the protection from the page. Conservative (talk) 10:00, August 25, 2025 (EDT)

@@ Line 5: / Line 5: @@
 | style="text-align: center; padding: 10px 40px 10px 40px;" | [[Talk:Theory_of_evolution/Archive_Set_1|Set 1 of Archives]]
 |}
+<br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />
+== Strong indicators that 2014 will be a bad year for  Darwinism and atheism ==
+Indicators that 2014 will be a bad year for Darwinism and atheism: [http://questionevolution.blogspot.com/2013/12/surefire-signs-that-2014-will-be-worst.html Surefire signs that 2014 will be the WORST year in the history of Darwinism and atheism] [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 06:12, 18 December 2013 (EST)
+==[[Robert Skildelsky]]==
+[[User:Conservative]]]: You used a source on these major Portal pages: [[Charles Darwin]], [[The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection]], [[John Maynard Keynes]] and [[Evolution]] ([https://www.jordantimes.com/opinion/robert-skidelsky/costly-return-geopolitics The costly return of geopolitics], Jun 27, 2023). His latest, [https://youtu.be/ALnyAWz5l8I Lord Robert Skidelsky: Pax-Americana is Over], seems to directly contradict your [[Essay: The United States will be the leading power in the world for the foreseeable future]], who declares it has ended. To avoid the confusion you have created on the part of our readers between your ideas and Skildelsky, why don't you properly qualify the source by creating the [[Robert Skildelsky]] article? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Zelensky Must Go!'']]</sup> 13:23, April 20, 2025 (EDT)
-__TOC__
+== Alfred Russel Wallace - Co-discoverer of natural selection ==
-== Houston, we have anti-evolutionism campaign lift off ==
+Hello, I cannot edit this page, but is there a way to add "Alfred Russel Wallace who was the co-discoverer of natural selection, eventually came to see that nature exhibited design and purpose with evolution." citation: Alfred Russel Wallace. 1911. "The World of Life: A Manifestation of Creative Power, Directive Mind and Ultimate Purpose" It summarizes his view of natural history, evolution, natural selection, and their intersection with design. His work shows that nature and design are not mutually exclusive.
+:I removed the protection from the page. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 10:00, August 25, 2025 (EDT)
-News item: [http://questionevolution.blogspot.com/2011/12/our-question-evolution-campaign.html Houston, we have anti-evolution campaign lift off]
-[[File:Rocket.jpg|200px|right]]
-{{clear}}
-== Factual error ==
-Evolution itself has been confirmed as fact.  The mechanism of evolution is what's still theory.  Someone might want to fix this.[[User:Factcheck47|Factcheck47: Making sure Conservapedia stays Trustworthy]] 14:56, 18 December 2011 (EST)
-:I disagree, evolution has never been confirmed as fact. I suggest having a look at [[Counterexamples to Evolution]] --[[User:PhilipN|PhilipN]] 17:39, 18 December 2011 (EST)
-::No, I'm quite serious, evolution itself (the concept that species change gradually over millions of years) has been proven as fact.  The only thing that's a theory now is the mechanism of evolution.  Just Google "Evolution in the Galapagos" and you can see for yourself.  Also, most of the articles I've visited on Conservapedia are rife with inaccuracies, so I'm afraid an outside source is required if you want me to take your counter-claim seriously. [[User:Factcheck47|Factcheck47: Making sure Conservapedia stays Trustworthy]] 12:57, 19 December 2011 (EST)
-:::I agree with FactCheck that referencing a Conservapeida page would be almost as bad as referencing a Wikipedia page, and that obviously I don't think anyone denies micro-evolution; it has been proven. However, I don't think saying, "Someone might want to fix this" is very constructive at all. Why don't you fix it? I don't believe that fact that FactCheck really wants to make sure "Conservapedia stays Trustworthy," in fact, I would speculate that Factcheck isn't a conservative at all. Most likely an atheist. Of course, this entire topic needs massive revision. [[User:Scottma|Scottma]]
-::::He can't fix it because one of the sysops has protected this page and refuses to unprotect it. Mainly to prevent the massive revision it badly needs. --[[User:HarryPagett|HarryPagett]] 10:36, 21 December 2011 (EST)
-== Evolution as a theory or hypothesis ==
-As you can see from Karajou's image [[File:ScientificMethodflowchart.jpg|here]], the word "theory" indicates that evolution has been backed up by experimental evidence. However, this is not the case. I propose removing references to evolution as a theory and replacing with references to it as a "hypothesis", which is what it fits under. [[User:NickP|NickP]] 18:06, 21 December 2011 (EST)