24
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 132:
Line 132: + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
no edit summary
:Nice compromise. Thanks. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] <sup>[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]</sup> 12:03, 15 July 2010 (EDT)
:Nice compromise. Thanks. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] <sup>[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]</sup> 12:03, 15 July 2010 (EDT)
==Article assumes huge bias that are irrelevant to content==
They state that "Galileo Galilei and Isaac Newton, believed in God" despite the fact that
:this has nothing to do with science as
::science is a process, not people
::Christianity is mundane enough to irrelevant regardless
It says "and many were creationists although the ideas of evolutionism or Darwinism were not yet popular", despite the fact that evolution wasn't formally theorized until the time they were popular.
I'd also like to point out, since Conservatives apparently love quotemining and playing the game of picking names:
'''DARWIN WAS A CHRISTIAN.'''.
There have been many statements that Science and Christianity don't need to be conflicting (and yet you're portraying Science as an atheistic canker). These statements have been made both by Churches and Scientific Institution.
Science isn't Atheistic- Scientists tend to be Atheistic (because for the purpose of science, which needs testable, disprovable, observable results, there is no God. That's faith, not science.)
Two consecutive sentences are completely flawed in any accuracy that is helpful to the reader. I think this article should be reevaluated.
[[User:Valuables|Valuables]] 21:12, 8 August 2011 (EDT)