Difference between revisions of "Talk:Speed of light"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Tmtoulouse (talk | contribs) |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
I understand that basic paradigm of the site, but nowhere is it clearly defined to be that the purpose of this site is to provide a young earth creationist view point on every article that might be remotely applied. Try the creationwiki for that. I think that most articles that are not DIRECTLY related to the subject at hand should may just bypass the ramifications of "age". Sticking a "this is a problem but YEC organization Answers in Genesis has this press release to describe why its not really problem" on the end of a bunch of random articles will look silly. Yes having silly articles got this site attention, but the hope is to eventually prove the mockers WRONG not right. [[User:Tmtoulouse|Tmtoulouse]] 12:03, 9 March 2007 (EST) | I understand that basic paradigm of the site, but nowhere is it clearly defined to be that the purpose of this site is to provide a young earth creationist view point on every article that might be remotely applied. Try the creationwiki for that. I think that most articles that are not DIRECTLY related to the subject at hand should may just bypass the ramifications of "age". Sticking a "this is a problem but YEC organization Answers in Genesis has this press release to describe why its not really problem" on the end of a bunch of random articles will look silly. Yes having silly articles got this site attention, but the hope is to eventually prove the mockers WRONG not right. [[User:Tmtoulouse|Tmtoulouse]] 12:03, 9 March 2007 (EST) | ||
| + | ::With respect I was simply offering a explanation of events that is consistent with a biblical interpretation and providing a appropriate reference. I fail to see the problem. | ||
Revision as of 17:42, March 9, 2007
I understand that basic paradigm of the site, but nowhere is it clearly defined to be that the purpose of this site is to provide a young earth creationist view point on every article that might be remotely applied. Try the creationwiki for that. I think that most articles that are not DIRECTLY related to the subject at hand should may just bypass the ramifications of "age". Sticking a "this is a problem but YEC organization Answers in Genesis has this press release to describe why its not really problem" on the end of a bunch of random articles will look silly. Yes having silly articles got this site attention, but the hope is to eventually prove the mockers WRONG not right. Tmtoulouse 12:03, 9 March 2007 (EST)
- With respect I was simply offering a explanation of events that is consistent with a biblical interpretation and providing a appropriate reference. I fail to see the problem.