User talk:198.208.159.14

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: ~~~. Four tildes (~~~~) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome!

i liked your text -- don't get me wrong -- it was accurate and cited and good. so i didn't erase it -- i left it intact, and put it in the "views on the supernatural" section, just below. it's got to be listed with all the other views on the supernatural -- putting it all by itself at the top gives it a special place which violates the npov policy. good work, man! keep it up! Ungtss 17:42, 10 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Parapsychology and a loss of faith

"Folie a deux" being a shared delusion, this only applies if the phenomenon does not exist. Controlled studies suggest that it does, so the only delusion would have to be continued strong disbelief counter to the evidence. As for the title you gave here, "Parapsychology and a loss of faith", quote a study which says parapsychologists or believers in the paranormal have less faith.

Also, please clean up the Scientific American portion of Parasychology where you posted, "But amatuer conjuror and friend of Houdini, Joseph Rinn, while dressed in black, crawled under Palladino's table and described her table lifting method." It would be more encyclopedic if instead of making such a cryptic comment, you just said what Joseph Rinn claimed that the lifting method was. Cortonin 21:14, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)

"If I gave away Palladino's lifting method it would spoil the magic." That's all fine, but leaving mystery like that is not appropriate for an encyclopedia entry on parapsychology, since parapsychology is a scientific field. (Please sign your talk posts with four tilda's.) Cortonin 22:23, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)

[edit] ==Intelligent design==

I reverted your edits to Intelligent design because they were phrased in a particularly casual, unencyclopedic fashion. "So what if 50,000 people die of infectuous diseases every day" is not a valid argument in any debate. Additionally, you do not clearly present a link between the argument for Intelligent design and diseases, which would be important. NOTE: I normally do not respond to anonymous comments on my Talk page; just to let you know- if you want to continue this discussion with me you will have to create a Wikipedia account to post further on my Talk page. --DropDeadGorgias (talk) 22:30, Feb 11, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] pre-scientific bible-writing

I don't have a problem with the idea that you might want to call bible-writers, and religious leaders who consider such writings "inspired", but not only is the word "pre-scientific" poorly defined, but the inclusion of your phrase in the Bible article added absolutely nothing of value to the article. In writing circles, it's what we call "deadwood". Encyclopedic writing should consist more of quality than quantity. We're not counting words here. Tomer TALK 19:48, Apr 11, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] partial deletion of picture caption at Africa

Thanks for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and has been reverted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thanks. - BanyanTree 22:22, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../1/9/8/User_talk%7E198.208.159.14.html"