User talk:Vistronic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Your recent edits of Creationism
Welcome to Wikipedia. I'm sorry but I had to revert your recent changes to the Creationism article; exactly what changes to the introductory paragraphs of the article are being discussed at length on the Talk pages. Please first seek consensus there before making substantial changes to the article. BTW- you do realize that the Scopes trial was 80 years ago right, in 1925? Exactly how is that relevant to how the modern scientific community views creationism?--FeloniousMonk 07:47, 4 Oct 2004 (UTC)
[edit] I support an accurate expression of the "creationist" point-of-view
I will refrain from characterizing what is happening on Creationism. However, I want you to know that I support your being able to present an accurate expression of the "creationist" point-of-view on the Creationism page, even when it opposes my personal point-of-view. I appreciate your recent efforts. Might I make a suggestion? Is it possible for you to put your submissions through a spell checker before you "Save the page"? Maybe you could copy and paste them to your word processor, if your word processor has a spell checker. Alternatively, you might give me blanket permission to correct the typos in your submissions. Welcome aboard! :)) ---Rednblu 16:40, 4 Oct 2004 (UTC)
[edit] Thank you for your Input
Hello, Thank you for your input. I have started a thread to discuss said revision again thanks. The scopes trial is a important marker to any serious discussion on creationism the arguments that were brought forth (or would have been if the Judge allowed ) are very similar to the basic concepts. Now the facts have changes YES. But the basic assumptions are very much still there. 1. EVO, Modern, Scientific Method, Realism. 2. CREO, Faith, Scripture, (and implied by EVO narrow, Bigot, Fundie, yadda, yadda)
Oh yes the scopes trial is very realevent IMHO.
---
I agree that the Scopes trial demonstrated the pattern of "attempting to keep the competition from teaching their theory." But in that case, it was the creationists who attempted to ban the teaching of evolution.
I suggest that a better case to make your point--that scientists consider the debate to be serious--would be better illustrated by a modern case in which the scientists attempted to ban the teaching of creationism. I refer you to the 1987 Edwards_v._Aguillard case where a biology teacher and a bunch of other evolutionists sued to ban the teaching of creationism in biology classes. I like your arguments and will help you make them even if they disagree with my personal point-of-view. :)) See you later. ---Rednblu 15:34, 5 Oct 2004 (UTC)
---
In regards to spell checking thankyou... I now have installed a spell checker, but feel free to correct any word I missed, I know since are interface is words spelling errors look bad and give a bad impression.... and I am already pushing uphill on this topic anyways it appears!
Cheers, Vis.
