Conservapedia - User contributions [en]

Elephant

2007-03-13T04:04:16Z

DDG: -vandalism

{{Delete Notice}}

According to the origins theory model used by creation scientists, modern elephants, like all modern animals, originated in the Middle East and are the descendants of the two founding members of the modern elephants that were taken aboard Noah's Ark prior to the Great Flood. According to microevolution, the two present species could easily have developed from one original pair.

The related fossil species, like other fossils, represent those that were not taken into the Ark.

Talk:Quote mining

2007-03-13T03:58:53Z

DDG: various uses

==Usage of the term?==
I'd never heard it before. Some Googling and a look at [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quote_mining the corresponding Wikipedia article] give me the distinct impression that it is commonly used by evolutionists against creationists, but that it is ''not commonly used in any other context.'' It also seems to be a fairly recent coinage.

Thoughts? [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 06:55, 8 March 2007 (EST)

:I have heard this term before, but only ever used by evolutionists as an attack on creation researchers. It was apparently coined on the evolutionist discussion group Talk.Origins. CreationWiki [http://creationwiki.org/Quote-mining has a response to this]. Perhaps for balance, the sample "mined" quote could be changed from Darwin to an example of an evolutionist quoting, say, Dembski, out of context? [[User:Rich P|Dr. Richard Paley]] 07:55, 8 March 2007 (EST)

::Surely 'balance' would be having both? [[User:Tsumetai|Tsumetai]] 08:01, 8 March 2007 (EST)

:::Not if it's really ''used'' only in one direction. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 08:38, 8 March 2007 (EST)

::::Good point. [[User:Tsumetai|Tsumetai]] 08:54, 8 March 2007 (EST)

::Maybe we could change it to a more abstract (and made-up) example that emphasizes the point while at the same time simply telling the context in which the term is often used (Evolutionists accusing Creationists of doing so, possibly with the reply by Creationists as Richard gave it - I haven't checked that link)? The quote strikes me as needlessly complicated, especially for an example that is supposed to make a point clear. --[[User:Sid 3050|Sid 3050]] 08:33, 8 March 2007 (EST)

:::Actually, what triggered my comment was that I was ''planning'' to find or concoct an example that did not involve either evolution or creationism, but if I'm correct that the phrase is used only in the evolution/creationism dispute—and, as [[User:Rich P|Dr. Richard Paley]] notes, only in one direction—such an example would be misleading, because it wouldn't be illustrating the actual way the term is used. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 08:35, 8 March 2007 (EST)

:::(MAD Magazine once had a very funny article about the way in which movie advertising takes reviewers' quotes out of context.) [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 08:37, 8 March 2007 (EST)

::::I suspect you're right; while the phenomenon is fairly ubiquitous, the 'quote mine' tag seems to be a neologism more or less unique to this case. [[User:Tsumetai|Tsumetai]] 08:54, 8 March 2007 (EST)

I attempted to solve some of the issues here by using a quote where the subject, Dembski, wrote a response to being accused of quote mining. Are people more comfortable with this arrangement or should we keep looking for another solution? [[User:Tmtoulouse|Tmtoulouse]] 13:16, 8 March 2007 (EST)

: No, I don't think that Dembski story solved anything, because you have done a little quote mining yourself in order to tell it the way that you did. You ran together 2 quotes that are really 5 pages apart. [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 13:49, 8 March 2007 (EST)
::It was the only reliable source that had responded to a quote mine so I ran with it with out realizing that they were separated, my mistake, I have reverted to the old quote and weaved in your information, removing the now irrelevant text. [[User:Tmtoulouse|Tmtoulouse]] 14:02, 8 March 2007 (EST)

But the new example isn't an example of "quote mining," it's an example of plain old "quotation out of context." Unless you can find a reference that says it's ever referred to as "quote mining" outside of talk.origins, CreationWiki, and other discussions specifically of evolution/creationism. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 14:35, 8 March 2007 (EST)

Yea, yea, but quote mining is the collection of "out of context quotes" but I know what you are getting at though. I do not think there is anyway to save this page on conservapedia, all the material will be way to tendentious because of the dichotomy of creation/evolution. So I say we just nuke the whole darn thing!

Now I am not convinced that its not salvageable at wikipedia but I will take that up there :) [[User:Tmtoulouse|Tmtoulouse]] 14:54, 8 March 2007 (EST)

:(In case people don't understand: I nominated "Quote mining" for deletion on Wikipedia on the grounds that it's not yet in dictionaries or what Wikipedia considers to be reliable published sources. Tmtoulouse or you or I can do some original research and confirm that it's widely used in a few specific places, such as the USENET newsgroup talk.origins, and that it's used primarily in the context of the evolution/creationism debate, but I don't think you can find that information in a published source meeting WIkipedia's reliable source guidelines. I could well be wrong...) [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 15:01, 8 March 2007 (EST)

::There is also developing a more general use. It is perhaps rather bold to start with the most contentious topics, but the two examples show how it can be used to support various types of argument. If it is an invalid method of argument, and yet creationists use is, where can they be shown this is a more friendly place than here?[[User:DDG|DDG]] 23:58, 12 March 2007 (EDT)

Talk:Massachusetts liberal

2007-03-13T03:49:17Z

DDG: over - specific

So, would it be at all relevant that Massachusetts has the lowest divorce rate[http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0923080.html], one of the lowest crime rates. [http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/macrime.htm], [http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/], [http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/uscrime.htm], one of the lowest murder rates [http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?did=169&scid=12] and (I don't have a citation at the moement) one of the lowest adultery rates? [[User:JoshuaZ|JoshuaZ]] 02:56, 4 March 2007 (EST)
::This is indeed overspecific on some of their errors. [[User:DDG|DDG]] 23:49, 12 March 2007 (EDT)

Talk:Sex

2007-03-13T03:23:07Z

DDG: in the Bible...

I'm confused as to why this page has been blocked. I am aware that its probably subject to much vandalism, but there is a valid reasoning behind allowing it.--[[User:Elamdri|Elamdri]] 22:47, 11 March 2007 (EDT)

:Even though the page could be an informative article, it is forbidden (currently) under commandment 3 of [[The Conservapedia Commandments]]. It's not "family-friendly". --[[User:Hojimachong|'''Hojimachong''']][[User_Talk:Hojimachong|talk]] 22:48, 11 March 2007 (EDT)

Funny, isn't that how families are made? :D --[[User:Gulik|Gulik]] 22:50, 11 March 2007 (EDT)

:Quite XD. --[[User:Hojimachong|'''Hojimachong''']][[User_Talk:Hojimachong|talk]] 22:51, 11 March 2007 (EDT)

Personally, I feel its possible to make a family-friendly page about sex, but I respect the decision.--[[User:Elamdri|Elamdri]] 22:52, 11 March 2007 (EDT)

:I concur. --[[User:Hojimachong|'''Hojimachong''']][[User_Talk:Hojimachong|talk]] 22:53, 11 March 2007 (EDT)

This page is [[Special:Whatlinkshere/Sex|linked to]] from The [[Ninteenth Amendment]] of the US constitution, and from [[Choice]], but not from [[abortion]]. Which of these are "[[family friendly]]"? --[[User:Scott|Scott]] 23:38, 11 March 2007 (EDT)

I too find it interesting that [[abortion]] is considered family friendly but sex itself isn't. [[User:Sulgran|Sulgran]] 23:40, 11 March 2007 (EDT)

:I think this needs to be taken up with Aschlafly. It is clean, can be family-friendly, and is biblically described (we can use the song of Solomon, perhaps?) --[[User:Hojimachong|'''Hojimachong''']][[User_Talk:Hojimachong|talk]] 23:46, 11 March 2007 (EDT)

:I think the general reason is that the page has been targeted by vandals ten times. [[User:MountainDew|MountainDew]] 23:48, 11 March 2007 (EDT)

Well, if the page was created it could always be protected, and users could post ideas on this talk page. I really think it needs inclusion; It's awfully important, and doesn't have to be amoral or obscene or anything like that. --[[User:Hojimachong|'''Hojimachong''']][[User_Talk:Hojimachong|talk]] 23:50, 11 March 2007 (EDT)
:Check with Aschlafly first. [[User:Geo.plrd|Geo.]] 00:08, 12 March 2007 (EDT)

::I was planning on it. --[[User:Hojimachong|'''Hojimachong''']][[User_Talk:Hojimachong|talk]] 00:09, 12 March 2007 (EDT)

I just want to ask... does anyone else think the place holder there is sort of funny? Anyways, I hope a page about this gets made, because quite frankly it's silly to pretend it doesn't exist, and I'm sure a family-friendly article can be made, as said before. --[[User:Ronnyreg|Ronnyreg]] 22:13, 12 March 2007 (EDT)

"Male and female created He them." Genesis 1:27
"And Adam knew Eve his wife, and she conceived... 4:1 [[User:DDG|DDG]] 23:23, 12 March 2007 (EDT)

Leucoplasts

2007-03-13T03:14:50Z

DDG: expand a little

'''Leucoplasts''' are subcellular [[Organelle]]s found in plant cells, that store [[starch]]es or [[oil]]s. They are non-pigmented, in contrast to other plastids such as the [[chloroplast]]
Lacking pigments, leucoplasts are not green, and are predictably located in roots and non-photosynthetic tissues of plants. <ref>Wile, Dr. Jay L. ''Exploring Creation With Biology''. Apologia Educational Ministries, Inc. 1998</ref>

==References==
<references/>

[[Category:Biology]]

Capitalism

2007-03-13T03:11:39Z

DDG: clearer

{{stub}}
Capitalism is the economic system which became dominant in the Western world after the end of [[feudalism]]. In this system, most of the means of production are privately owned and income is distributed largely through the operation of markets. Capitalism is widely attributed to [[Adam Smith]], often called "The Father of Capitalism." Modern-day capitalist thought isalso influenced by later thinkers. Some, such as [[John Maynard Keynes]], have greatly modified the original theory.

Adam Smith

2007-03-13T03:10:24Z

DDG: copyed

Adam Smith, generally considered the fundamental economist upon whose work modern [[capitalism]] is based, was born in Kirkcaldy, [[Scotland]] in 1723 and was raised by his widowed mother. Smith entered the [[University of Glasgow]] at the age of fourteen and then attended [[Balliol College]] at [[Oxford]] for six years until he graduated at the age of twenty-three. Adam returned to Scotland, and delivered a series of lectures which were very well-received. Smith was appointed first chair of logic in 1751 at the University of Glasgow and later then chair of moral philosophy in 1752. In 1764, Adam Smith left the academy to tutor the young Duke of Buccleuch. They lived and traveled in [[France]] and [[Switzerland]] for two years. The duke had given his teacher a comfortable life pension, so Adam Smith retired to Kirkcaldy and began writing his book, An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations. In 1778 Smith was appointed to a post as commissioner of customs in Scotland and went to live with his mother in Edinburgh. He died there on July 17, 1790, after a painful illness and was buried in the Canongate Kirkyard, Royal Mile, Edinburgh. Smith is hailed as the one who discovered the [[Invisible Hand]], and explained the theoretical bases of free enterprise.

== Links ==
*[[Economics Lecture One]]
*[[Libertarian]] thinking

[[Category:Biographies]]
[[Category:Economics]]

Scotland

2007-03-13T03:08:35Z

DDG: wording

Scotland is a country in the [[United Kingdom]]. Scotland is famous for kilts and the possible existence of the Loch Ness monster (which--if it exists-- would presumably be a [[dinosaur]]).

Dinosaur

2007-03-13T03:07:07Z

DDG: /* Dinosaurs and Creationism */

The word '''dinosaur''' was coined in 1841 by Richard Owen<ref>http://www.trueauthority.com/dinosaurs/about.htm</ref>, from the [[Latin]] for "terrible lizard" (fututor). Dinosaurs were a group of large [[reptiles]] that previously lived in abundance on Earth.

The overwhelming scientific consensus is that dinosaurs lived from 230 million until 65 million years ago and that they are all currently extinct (however [[birds]] are considered by scientists to be descended from early [[therapod]] dinosaurs). They claim the [[fossil]] evidence supports this theory. Many Creationists dispute this, claiming that the dating methods used to judge the age of the fossils are not always precise and that there are gaps within the fossil record itself. However, no mainstream scientist supports th Creationist view.

==Dinosaurs, Evolution and Creation==
===Humans and Dinosaurs Coexisting===

Some claim there are a number of lines of evidence that point to dinosaurs and man coexisting. <ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/dinosaurs.asp</ref> <ref>http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/3061/</ref> For example, trained scientists have reported seeing a live dinosaur.<ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v15/i4/dinosaurs.asp</ref> A thousand people reported seeing a dinosaur-like monster in two sightings around Sayram Lake in Xinjiang according to the Chinese publication, China Today. <ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v15/i4/dinosaurs.asp</ref> An expedition which included Charles W. Gilmore, Curator of Vertebrate Paleontology with the United States National Museum, examined an ancient pictograph which is claimed to point to dinosaurs and man existing <ref>http://www.creationism.org/swift/DohenyExpedition/Doheny01Main.htm</ref><ref> http://www.christiancourier.com/articles/read/the_hava_supai_dinosaur_carving</ref>. The World Book Encyclopedia states that: "The dragons of legend are strangely like actual creatures that have lived in the past. They are much like the great reptiles [dinosaurs] which inhabited the earth long before man is supposed to have appeared on earth. Dragons were generally evil and destructive. Every country had them in its mythology." <ref>http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/FAQ25.html</ref> The Nile Mosaic of Palestrina, a second century piece of art, is said to appear to be a piece of artwork that shows a dinosaur and man coexisting. <ref>http://www.s8int.com/dinolit2.html</ref> This is quite hard evidence.

Since 565 A.D. there are reports about the Loch Ness Monster (Nessie by birth), a large Monster living in Loch Ness, near Inverness, Scotland. People who saw Nessie described the Monster as it would look similar to a dinosaur. In the life story of St. Columba, there is an account of him driving off a monster attacking a Pict. Some have taken this to refer to the Loch Ness Monster.

An alternate theory for the inclusion of dinosaurs within many cultures is the existence of fossils. Ancient people, unaware that the ancient fossils uncovered by erosion were of extinct animals, attributed the bones to living, magical creatures. This would explain the importance of dragons in Chinese culture - there are a large number of dinosaur and dragon fossils to be found in China.

===Dinosaurs and Birds===

As a number of feathered dinosaur fossils have been discovered, and the similiarity in the bone structure between birds and dinosaurs, scientists contend that modern birds are a descendant of dinosaurs.

===Dinosaurs and Creationism===

Some [[Christians]] reject the [[Theory of Evolution]] and the current science community consensus of the age of the earth. Of those Christians who reject evolution, the [[Creationism | Young Earth Creationists]] believe, based primarily on Biblical [[sources]], but also drawing on [[archeological]] and fossil evidence, that dinosaurs were created on the 6th day of the [[Creation Week]]<ref>''Genesis'', 1:25</ref> as a final addendum to the wonders God created, approximately 6,000 years ago; that they lived in the [[Garden of Eden]] in harmony with other animals, eating only plants<ref>''Genesis'' 1:29-30</ref>; that pairs of various dinosaurs were taken onto [[Noah's Ark]] during the [[Great Flood]] and were preserved from drowning<ref>[http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2001/dinos_on_ark.asp "Were dinosaurs on Noah’s Ark?"], ''Answers in Genesis''</ref>; that fossilized dinosaur bones originated during the mass killing of the Flood<ref>[http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v21/i1/dinosaurbones.asp "Dinosaur bones—just how old are they really?"], ''Creation'' 21(1):54–55, December 1998</ref>; and that some descendants of those dinosaurs taken aboard the Ark still roam the earth today<ref>[http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v15/i4/dinosaurs.asp "Are dinosaurs alive today?"], ''Creation'' 15(4):12–15, September 1993</ref>, even though none of the six billion people currently residing on the planet have seen them. It should be noted that none of these claims have been backed by any serious scientific research, and rely almost wholly either on the infallibility of the Bible, or on human speculations based to a greater or lesser degree upon the Biblical account.

Because the term only came into use in the 19th century, the [[Bible]] obviously does not use the word "dinosaur." However, they are alleged to be mentioned in numerous places throughout the biblical account. For example, the '''behemoth''' in [[Job]] and the '''leviathan''' in [[Isaiah]] are sometimes said to be references to dinosaurs, although they could have been references to any large animal of the time<ref>[http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v15/i2/behemoth.asp "Could Behemoth have been a dinosaur?"], ''TJ'' 15(2):42–45, August 2001</ref> such as hippopotomi and crocodiles <ref>http://www.answersincreation.org/job4041a.htm</ref>.

==References==
<references/>