User talk:Inthebeginning
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Evolution addition
Whenever you add such a substantial and controversial section to a Feature Article, make absolutely sure that you cite your information. In a scientific topic, these citations should be mostly scientific publications. This will ensure that your additions will not be immediately reverted.--Roland Deschain 18:58, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
- Please stop. All your unsupported additions are contradictory to the supported material found in the Evidence of evolution section. Also go through the archives. Most of your additions have been discussed and found lacking.--Roland Deschain 20:40, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
Found wanting - by what standard? Certainly not a scientific standard. When you use a diagram of creatures that are all living at the same time to prove common descend you are obviously lacking in critical scientific analysis skills. You also use a double standard. Any argument that supports evolution no matter how weak, for example the morphological argument, requires no sitation; yet anyone that has visited the Field museum in Chicago knows that science can not explain first life and this would require a citation. I have citations. I was only omitting them to see if you were capable of unbiased thought. You apparently are not.
You are the one who should stop. You are holding back good science.
[edit] Comments for you in Homosexuality and religion
Hello, Inthebeginning. I am not certain where the best place to carry on a conversation with you about your edits to Homosexuality and religion is, on the talk pge of the article or here, on your talk page. I have chosen to leave comments to you there. Sean Lotz talk 00:46, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
Yes, the talk page is better. I am all for a public debate and let the best information rise to the top. Inthebeginning 13:21, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Apology
Hello. I owe you a bit of an apology. Recently, I called your addition to Homosexuality and religion "twaddle." That was an inappropriate choice of word. I have an unfortunate tendancy to speak (or write) to total strangers as I do to my friends. "Twaddle" is a word I would use to a friend, but I had no place writing it to a stranger, whose name I don't even know. I ask your forgiveness. Though I do believe your comments are illogical and, of course, I think them inappropriate in that particular article, I could have expressed the idea better and more politely with perhaps "illogical and suppositious." I wish I had done so, and I ask your pardon. Sean Lotz talk 07:45, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] You will want to attend to this
Wikipedia_talk:Mediation_Cabal/Cases/2006-11-28_Homosexuality_and_religion_revert_war Sean Lotz talk 08:34, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
