Changes

174 bytes added ,  12:12, April 4, 2007
Line 108: Line 108:     
::Nor, of course, is it an article to spout off every crank theory as to why Genesis should be believed. It should reflect the research - ''all'' of it. But I see that it has now been locked, presumably in order to prevent that. And so Conservapedia moves yet further down the inevitable path of self-discreditation... --[[User:Petrus|Petrus]] 05:47, 4 April 2007 (EDT)
 
::Nor, of course, is it an article to spout off every crank theory as to why Genesis should be believed. It should reflect the research - ''all'' of it. But I see that it has now been locked, presumably in order to prevent that. And so Conservapedia moves yet further down the inevitable path of self-discreditation... --[[User:Petrus|Petrus]] 05:47, 4 April 2007 (EDT)
 +
 +
:::If you can successfully prove God doesn't exist, then I'll revert your edits.  If not, Wikipedia is down the street.  [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 08:12, 4 April 2007 (EDT)
 +
 
:::It can't reflect ''all'' the research; it has to be selective and only reflect the most relevant and accurate research.  Of course there will still be disputes about what qualifies, but a lot of the "research" is not worth including.  [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 06:30, 4 April 2007 (EDT)
 
:::It can't reflect ''all'' the research; it has to be selective and only reflect the most relevant and accurate research.  Of course there will still be disputes about what qualifies, but a lot of the "research" is not worth including.  [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 06:30, 4 April 2007 (EDT)
Block, Siteadmin, SkipCaptcha, Upload, Automoderated users, delete, edit, Moderators, move, protect, rollback, Administrators
27,336

edits