CreationWiki - Recent changes [en]

CreationWiki:Recommend feature

2012-05-17T02:30:10Z

Gospel

2012-05-17T02:21:37Z

More than a Theory: Revealing a Testable Model for Creation

2012-05-17T01:53:05Z

Review:

Hugh Ross

2012-05-17T01:36:52Z

Publications:

Essay:Music is a Divine gift

2012-05-17T00:47:00Z

Category:Essay

2012-05-17T00:45:12Z

Radiometric dating

2012-05-16T18:30:49Z

Common Decay Series:

Nuclear power

2012-05-16T18:29:27Z

Redirected page to Nuclear energy

Radiometric dating

2012-05-16T18:28:59Z

Types of Radiometric Dating:

Uranium

2012-05-16T18:28:27Z

Radiometric dating

2012-05-16T18:25:36Z

Common Decay Series:

Talk:Neanderthal

2012-05-16T17:59:36Z

Professor Reiner Protsch von Zieten:

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:59, 16 May 2012
Line 73:		Line 73:

	:Okay, I just made the changes! I actually added more detail and a quote because I decided this was a major event after all, as I found more sourcing. The section should be pretty well sourced now. I even found some sources from ''Nature'' and ''Science'' although without a subscription one can only see short abstract descriptions of a few lines. The whole Nazi thing is gone though as it wasn't really relevant to Neanderthals. --[[User:Jzyehoshua\|Jzyehoshua]] 01:40, 6 May 2012 (PDT)		:Okay, I just made the changes! I actually added more detail and a quote because I decided this was a major event after all, as I found more sourcing. The section should be pretty well sourced now. I even found some sources from ''Nature'' and ''Science'' although without a subscription one can only see short abstract descriptions of a few lines. The whole Nazi thing is gone though as it wasn't really relevant to Neanderthals. --[[User:Jzyehoshua\|Jzyehoshua]] 01:40, 6 May 2012 (PDT)
		+	::The page still maintains that the said fossil was Neanderthal. Even the quoted text says no such thing.
		+	{{cquote\| This, at least, is what Professor Reiner Protsch von Zieten - a distinguished, cigar-smoking German anthropologist - told his scientific colleagues, to global acclaim, after being invited to date the extremely rare skull.\|cquote}}
		+	:: They are just saying Prof. Reiner who was proven to be a fraud said so.
		+	{{cquote\|Prof Protsch's work appeared to prove that anatomically modern humans and Neanderthals had co-existed, and perhaps even had children together. This now appears to be rubbish\|cquote}}
		+	:: Here Thomas Terberger is clearly referring to the specimen as Homo sapiens. He just says Prof Reiners claims would have appeared Homo sapiens and neanderthals lived together in Germany. And it would be better to cite from scientific journals than newspapers. [[User:EvilFlyingMonkey\|EvilFlyingMonkey]] 10:59, 16 May 2012 (PDT)

	== References ==		== References ==
	<references/>		<references/>

Uranium-Lead dating

2012-05-16T17:39:43Z

User talk:Ashcraft

2012-05-16T16:13:07Z

Help:

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:13, 16 May 2012
Line 274:		Line 274:
	I am working on the portuguese portals and I don´t know how to make an portuguese portal icon like this:		I am working on the portuguese portals and I don´t know how to make an portuguese portal icon like this:

-	Creationwiki portals.png	+	[[file:Creationwiki portals.png\|right\|150px]]

	If you can help the text is:		If you can help the text is:

User talk:Ashcraft

2012-05-16T14:40:42Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:40, 16 May 2012
Line 286:		Line 286:

	[[User:Luiz Alexandre Silva\|Luiz Alexandre Silva]] 07:25, 16 May 2012 (PDT)		[[User:Luiz Alexandre Silva\|Luiz Alexandre Silva]] 07:25, 16 May 2012 (PDT)
		+
		+	== some questions ==
		+
		+	Are we allowed to comment on pages that are projects of students? I mean those with do not edit this page template on top of them? There was a factual error in the page about [[Niels Bohr]]. It said he died a Lutheran but he was an atheist. I posted it on talk page but no one has corrected it yet. Are non creationists to correct such errors themself? It has nothing in connection with evolution or creationism. --[[User:EvilFlyingMonkey\|EvilFlyingMonkey]] 10:05, 1 May 2012 (PDT)
		+
		+	== about the soon-to-be deleted pages ==
		+
		+	You can delete the pages by that user if you like. The main reason I'd put so much effort into editing them was because I didn't want to disrespect your authority to be the final judge on deleting content. So my solution to my problem with what I saw as a guy of a particular religious persuasion promoting his own heresy, was to provide the correct (what I've come to see as correct, anyway) information on the same page, so that visitors to that page wouldn't be misled.
		+
		+	Pardon my long-winded reply. You can go ahead and delete them. It would probably be more convenient to start from scratch, the next time someone wants to write about that topic. :) -[[User:EriK\|EriK]] 07:40, 16 May 2012 (PDT)

User talk:Ashcraft

2012-05-16T14:25:36Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:25, 16 May 2012
Line 266:		Line 266:

	Are we allowed to comment on pages that are projects of students? I mean those with do not edit this page template on top of them? There was a factual error in the page about [[Niels Bohr]]. It said he died a Lutheran but he was an atheist. I posted it on talk page but no one has corrected it yet. Are non creationists to correct such errors themself? It has nothing in connection with evolution or creationism. --[[User:EvilFlyingMonkey\|EvilFlyingMonkey]] 10:05, 1 May 2012 (PDT)		Are we allowed to comment on pages that are projects of students? I mean those with do not edit this page template on top of them? There was a factual error in the page about [[Niels Bohr]]. It said he died a Lutheran but he was an atheist. I posted it on talk page but no one has corrected it yet. Are non creationists to correct such errors themself? It has nothing in connection with evolution or creationism. --[[User:EvilFlyingMonkey\|EvilFlyingMonkey]] 10:05, 1 May 2012 (PDT)
		+
		+	==Help==
		+	Hi Ashcraft,
		+
		+	I would like to ask you a huge favor.
		+
		+	I am working on the portuguese portals and I don´t know how to make an portuguese portal icon like this:
		+
		+	Creationwiki portals.png
		+
		+	If you can help the text is:
		+
		+	'''CriaçãoWiki'''
		+	'''Portais'''
		+
		+	Thank you very much
		+
		+	God bless you
		+
		+	[[User:Luiz Alexandre Silva\|Luiz Alexandre Silva]] 07:25, 16 May 2012 (PDT)

Template:Browsebar

2012-05-16T13:17:30Z

William Penn

2012-05-16T11:54:31Z

Free will

2012-05-16T08:55:58Z

Dualism:

History

2012-05-16T03:42:44Z

Human evolution

2012-05-16T01:55:27Z

Geographic origin:

Portal:Biography/Selected article

2012-05-15T21:48:16Z

Talk:FABNAQ

2012-05-15T19:59:49Z

Removed Answer:

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:59, 15 May 2012
Line 80:		Line 80:
	::[[User:Philip J. Rayment\|Philip J. Rayment]] 04:59, 15 May 2012 (PDT)		::[[User:Philip J. Rayment\|Philip J. Rayment]] 04:59, 15 May 2012 (PDT)
	:::Good points by Temlakos and Philip J. Rayment about why any Christians are Evolutionists. The new answer I think does help dispel the question's implication that most Christians are Evolutionsts, as most weekly church attenders are clearly Young Earth Creationists, and a large percentage of those attending almost weekly/monthly are as well. That should be a majority of church attenders, and thus Christians, one would think.		:::Good points by Temlakos and Philip J. Rayment about why any Christians are Evolutionists. The new answer I think does help dispel the question's implication that most Christians are Evolutionsts, as most weekly church attenders are clearly Young Earth Creationists, and a large percentage of those attending almost weekly/monthly are as well. That should be a majority of church attenders, and thus Christians, one would think.
-	:::Additional information is needed to address why any Christians are Evolutionists, however. Points could be made about how scientific evolution has become socially popular and is upheld as fact by the government-subsidized education industry, or how the Scopes Trial swayed public opinion without ever subjecting evolutionary theory to serious scrutiny; only mocking the Bible's claims of the supernatural without ever proving Evolution in any way, shape, or form. One could also point to books like Hugh Ross' "The Fingerprint of God" that argue Big Bang theory actually proves a Creator, and new claims that evolution and the Bible are compatible. Many people are after all afraid to go against what's considered socially popular, which is why so few people vote for 3rd party candidates even though disapproval of both the Republican and Democrat parties are at all-time ~~lows~~. --[[User:Jzyehoshua\|Jzyehoshua]] 11:50, 15 May 2012 (PDT)	+	:::Additional information is needed to address why any Christians are Evolutionists, however. Points could be made about how scientific evolution has become socially popular and is upheld as fact by the government-subsidized education industry, or how the Scopes Trial swayed public opinion without ever subjecting evolutionary theory to serious scrutiny; only mocking the Bible's claims of the supernatural without ever proving Evolution in any way, shape, or form. One could also point to books like Hugh Ross' "The Fingerprint of God" that argue Big Bang theory actually proves a Creator, and new claims that evolution and the Bible are compatible. Many people are after all afraid to go against what's considered socially popular, which is why so few people vote for 3rd party candidates even though disapproval of both the Republican and Democrat parties are at all-time highs. --[[User:Jzyehoshua\|Jzyehoshua]] 11:50, 15 May 2012 (PDT)

Transitional form

2012-05-15T19:57:06Z

Recent controversies:

Talk:FABNAQ

2012-05-15T18:50:53Z

Removed Answer:

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:50, 15 May 2012
Line 79:		Line 79:
	::The now-removed answer was too simplistic, so I'm not suggesting a reversion to that.		::The now-removed answer was too simplistic, so I'm not suggesting a reversion to that.
	::[[User:Philip J. Rayment\|Philip J. Rayment]] 04:59, 15 May 2012 (PDT)		::[[User:Philip J. Rayment\|Philip J. Rayment]] 04:59, 15 May 2012 (PDT)
		+	:::Good points by Temlakos and Philip J. Rayment about why any Christians are Evolutionists. The new answer I think does help dispel the question's implication that most Christians are Evolutionsts, as most weekly church attenders are clearly Young Earth Creationists, and a large percentage of those attending almost weekly/monthly are as well. That should be a majority of church attenders, and thus Christians, one would think.
		+	:::Additional information is needed to address why any Christians are Evolutionists, however. Points could be made about how scientific evolution has become socially popular and is upheld as fact by the government-subsidized education industry, or how the Scopes Trial swayed public opinion without ever subjecting evolutionary theory to serious scrutiny; only mocking the Bible's claims of the supernatural without ever proving Evolution in any way, shape, or form. One could also point to books like Hugh Ross' "The Fingerprint of God" that argue Big Bang theory actually proves a Creator, and new claims that evolution and the Bible are compatible. Many people are after all afraid to go against what's considered socially popular, which is why so few people vote for 3rd party candidates even though disapproval of both the Republican and Democrat parties are at all-time lows. --[[User:Jzyehoshua\|Jzyehoshua]] 11:50, 15 May 2012 (PDT)

CreationWiki:Translation

2012-05-15T17:57:18Z

CreationWiki:Statistics

2012-05-15T17:45:56Z