686
edits
Changes
Conservapedia talk:Evolution two (view source)
Revision as of 13:03, April 24, 2007
, 13:03, April 24, 2007→Suggestions
:There will be a section of works on each. For example, pro-evolution will have a listing of works by Stephen Jay Gould, Bob Bakker, Darwin, Huxley, etc, and the creation will have works by Morris, Gish, and others. As much as possible I want to see works done by those who are clear experts in the field, and which can be found in many libraries across the country. If there are sources which are not used, then a "for further reading" section will be added. Such standards will also include links.
:There will be a section of works on each. For example, pro-evolution will have a listing of works by Stephen Jay Gould, Bob Bakker, Darwin, Huxley, etc, and the creation will have works by Morris, Gish, and others. As much as possible I want to see works done by those who are clear experts in the field, and which can be found in many libraries across the country. If there are sources which are not used, then a "for further reading" section will be added. Such standards will also include links.
:I'm also going to avoid the "pro-" or "anti-" words as well; they each involve a negative as well as a personal tone, and we have to be as neutral as possible. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 08:49, 24 April 2007 (EDT)
:I'm also going to avoid the "pro-" or "anti-" words as well; they each involve a negative as well as a personal tone, and we have to be as neutral as possible. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 08:49, 24 April 2007 (EDT)
Karajou, I am very happy that you are taking the time to do this. I have pointed out on several other pages that a lot of the science (evolutionary biology) articles do not provide information that students could use to pass exams and as reference material. The pro or anti stances ruin the usefullness of these articles and tend to waterdown the meaning of the terms. Let me know how I can help in any way.--[[User:Tims|TimS]] 09:03, 24 April 2007 (EDT)