Talk:Creationism versus Science (website)
This article needs some new information; perhaps even a series of rebuttals to Mr. Wong's claims, much like the Index to Creationist Claims. Anyone else? Scorpionman 23:58, 9 April 2007 (EDT)
Sure. He has a long series of anti-Flood claims on his article on Flood geology.--Nlawrence 08:27, 10 April 2007 (EDT)
- Not to mention all the "Biblical immorality" claims he has. Scorpionman 10:56, 24 April 2007 (EDT)
I'll start work on a response to his unique claims under his Flood geology article. By unique I mean ones we haven't really answered yet.--Nlawrence 14:04, 24 April 2007 (EDT)
- But not ones which aren't answerable. All of the nonsense he posts is answerable. Scorpionman 20:28, 24 April 2007 (EDT)
Of course.
I might make subsections of article Flood geology(CreationTheory) article, since he devides it in different sections.What say you?
I'll also rename the articles to fit the guide lines. The site name needs to be after the article name.--Nlawrence 15:49, 25 April 2007 (EDT)
Site name
The site title is not CreationTheory, but Creationism versus Science. This page will need to be moved to Creationism versus Science (site), and the associated pages moved to a title based on the response page title conventions, which is - article title (Creationism versus Science).
Then we'll need to redirect any creationtheory pages to the page about Creation theory. --Mr. Ashcraft - (talk) 10:56, 26 April 2007 (EDT)
Page merge
I've merged the two pages and edited out most of the specific references to the author.
We want to be careful to attack the content of the site and not the person.
--Mr. Ashcraft - (talk) 11:34, 27 April 2007 (EDT)
Getting back to work on this project.
I got slightly side tracked to due several factors. I will start working on this forgotten task right away!--Nlawrence 15:31, 22 August 2007 (EDT)
Mr Wong has changed the site
The site and many of the URL's have been changed. 6-day creationism is now renamed young earth creationism and so on. I will start making changes now. --Nlawrence 14:11, 9 September 2007 (EDT)
Morality
It seems to me that, since most of his "science" arguments have already been answered in the section on Talk.Origins archive, we should focus more on his "Biblical Morality" section, which hasn't exactly been answered yet here. Scorpionman 15:34, 1 October 2007 (EDT)
Agreed. I will get to it when I have the time. I started a "to do list" and that isn't number one. I want to finish my Oard article first.
Have we considered writing a page on Wong's FAQ?--Nlawrence 15:51, 1 October 2007 (EDT)
- That, my friend, is an excellent idea. But first, we should take care of his "Biblical Morality" section. Scorpionman 11:25, 3 October 2007 (EDT)
- P.S. Kind of funny how he only attacks the Bible as being immoral, but not any other religious book (such as the Koran) Scorpionman 11:25, 3 October 2007 (EDT)
- Did anyone happen to note that Mr. Wong gambles and watches pornographic films, and defends them of all things?? Small wonder he's so opposed to Biblical "immorality!!" Scorpionman 10:15, 4 March 2008 (PST)
Probability
Has anyone checked out Mr. Wong's article [1] Interesting, no? Could a monkey type a page of Shakespeare if he types it one word at a time, as the series of articles implies? Scorpionman 14:07, 29 February 2008 (PST)
- Anyone typing Shakespeare does so one word at a time -- one letter at a time, in fact. But I read recently about an experiment with a bunch of monkeys banging away at a computer keyboard. In the fifty pages (?) or so that they produced, not one single word appeared, not even the indefinite article "a". :-) ~ MD "Webster" Otley (talk) 17:35, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
- And perhaps this article [2] might need a refutation Scorpionman 14:31, 29 February 2008 (PST)
Is Michael Wang a Chinese?
Because a lot of Chinese people have Wang as a last name. —unsigned comment by clark (talk • contribs)
