117
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 176:
Line 176: + +
Debate:Can Conservapedia Succeed? (view source)
Revision as of 05:01, December 19, 2007
, 05:01, December 19, 2007→The Annals of the World
::The name of the site is irrelevant. Unless wikipedia changes it's name to "ifyoudontlikesciencegoawayapedia" then Conservapedia would consider changing their name. --[[User:Puellanivis|Puellanivis]] 23:54, 18 December 2007 (EST)
::The name of the site is irrelevant. Unless wikipedia changes it's name to "ifyoudontlikesciencegoawayapedia" then Conservapedia would consider changing their name. --[[User:Puellanivis|Puellanivis]] 23:54, 18 December 2007 (EST)
:::Well, you equated my belief or lack of belief in the Bible to my ability to give meaningful comment on this site - which, by it's name, is a 'conservative wikipedia'. For your point to be relevant, this site would need to be a 'Christian fundamentalist wikipedia' instead, and thus should change it's name. So which is it - is it relevant, or not? [[User:Zmidponk|Zmidponk]] 00:01, 19 December 2007 (EST)
==When liberals spend time refuting an idea ... it's already a success==
==When liberals spend time refuting an idea ... it's already a success==