634
edits
Changes
Conservapedia talk:Evolution two (view source)
Revision as of 00:22, April 25, 2007
, 00:22, April 25, 2007A beginning
The first reference is to a college textbook I am using for my biology class, which also lists a basic structure that I sort of copied on the main page for the article. No, I most certainly do not agree with what is said in it (or of what the professor said in my class!), but it's still a bonafide example of what is needed here for the article. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 14:33, 24 April 2007 (EDT)
The first reference is to a college textbook I am using for my biology class, which also lists a basic structure that I sort of copied on the main page for the article. No, I most certainly do not agree with what is said in it (or of what the professor said in my class!), but it's still a bonafide example of what is needed here for the article. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 14:33, 24 April 2007 (EDT)
== A beginning ==
Chief, I have made a modest start (an introduction - perhaps in need of expansion) and the beginning of a history section. I have tried to be as neutral as I can. There are issues that arise out of neutrality however. For example, in the first paragraph I found myself using the phrase "God or gods" so as to include all the various religious versions of creation. I am not sure how this is likely to be received by those who favour the Christian creation (for example). Also, I have tried to use phrases such as "Natural selection ''proposes''..." so that I do not assert the proposition as settled fact.
Tell me what you think of the style and content so far and we can go from there.
I think that the structure you propose is pretty good. I foresee potential difficulties in the criticism sections as you and I work out which view gets the last word on any given point. But I am sure with some good will we can see it through to a successful result. --[[User:Horace|Horace]] <sup>[[Conservapedia:Requests_for_adminship#Support_2|Vote Horace for sysop]]</sup> 20:22, 24 April 2007 (EDT)