nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW
13,254
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
mLine 1:
Line 1: − __TOC__ − == The atheist and/or evolutionary view == − − Before a revert war breaks out: '''The theory of evolution is not atheistic.''' It makes ''no statement whatsoever'' about the existence of a higher power. One can believe in a higher power and also believe that evolution caused the origin of species on Earth. '''Don't confuse "not Christian" with "not theistic."''' Furthermore, being atheistic does not necessarily mean one subscribes to the theory of evolution. --[[User:Rspeed|Rspeed]] 17:34, 8 September 2008 (EDT) − Line 206:
Line 201: + + + +
New topic goes at the end.
== Uncatagorized ==
== Uncatagorized ==
I am also interested in why it is only kangaroos that have been described in baraminological terms in Conservapedia. Correct me if I am wrong, but is there any other animal at all, marsupial or otherwise, that has been given this bizarre treatment? And if not, why not? Surely, every article on an animal should have a similar note on the musings of these tireless researchers? [[User:MylesP|MylesP]] 00:49, 7 March 2008 (EST)
I am also interested in why it is only kangaroos that have been described in baraminological terms in Conservapedia. Correct me if I am wrong, but is there any other animal at all, marsupial or otherwise, that has been given this bizarre treatment? And if not, why not? Surely, every article on an animal should have a similar note on the musings of these tireless researchers? [[User:MylesP|MylesP]] 00:49, 7 March 2008 (EST)
:MylesP, your bigotry does you no favours. Some of your questions are valid and I would be happy to answer them, but your sarcasm and putting "scientists" in "scare quotes" as though they are not really scientists is abusive ad hominem, and referring to a scientific discipline that you don't agree with as "hocus-pocus" is arrogance as well. Therefore, you don't deserve an answer. In fact, you've earned yourself a short block [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 04:11, 7 March 2008 (EST)
:MylesP, your bigotry does you no favours. Some of your questions are valid and I would be happy to answer them, but your sarcasm and putting "scientists" in "scare quotes" as though they are not really scientists is abusive ad hominem, and referring to a scientific discipline that you don't agree with as "hocus-pocus" is arrogance as well. Therefore, you don't deserve an answer. In fact, you've earned yourself a short block [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 04:11, 7 March 2008 (EST)
== The atheist and/or evolutionary view ==
Before a revert war breaks out: '''The theory of evolution is not atheistic.''' It makes ''no statement whatsoever'' about the existence of a higher power. One can believe in a higher power and also believe that evolution caused the origin of species on Earth. '''Don't confuse "not Christian" with "not theistic."''' Furthermore, being atheistic does not necessarily mean one subscribes to the theory of evolution. --[[User:Rspeed|Rspeed]] 17:34, 8 September 2008 (EDT)