Conservapedia

Changes

User talk:RSchlafly (view source)

Revision as of 23:53, September 3, 2007

170 bytes added ,  23:53, September 3, 2007
requesting your opinion on twin primes
Line 60: Line 60:     
:: Your presumptions are incorrect. Evidence for and against the modern synthesis is irrelevant. The article is just about some simple definitions. I have posted on the Talk pages an example of how your own text contradicts your own sources. [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 15:04, 1 September 2007 (EDT)
 
:: Your presumptions are incorrect. Evidence for and against the modern synthesis is irrelevant. The article is just about some simple definitions. I have posted on the Talk pages an example of how your own text contradicts your own sources. [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 15:04, 1 September 2007 (EDT)
 +
 +
== [[Twin Primes]] question ==
 +
 +
Roger, do you think there are an [[infinite]] number of [[twin primes]]?  Do you think it is provable (though obviously not proven yet)?
Aschlafly
Anthony, Irenaeus, Siteadmin, apieditor, Bureaucrats, Check users, nsAm_Govt_101RO, nsAm_Govt_101RW, nsAm_Govt_101_ta, nsJudgesRO, nsJudgesRW, nsJudges_talkRO, nsJudges_talkRW, nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW, oversight, Administrators
126,231

edits

Retrieved from "https://www.conservapedia.com/Special:MobileDiff/285665"