Difference between revisions of "Talk:Disputed evidence for evolution"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Rob Pommer (talk | contribs) (New page: One would think if the sentence leading to the first quote reads: '''Noted evolutionist Stephen Gould wrote the following regarding Ernst Haeckel's work in a March 2000 issue of Natural Hi...) |
(blogs are not widely regarded as authoritative) |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
The cite at the end doesn't point to ANY issue of ''Natural History'' but to http://www.creationism.org/caesar/haeckel.htm | The cite at the end doesn't point to ANY issue of ''Natural History'' but to http://www.creationism.org/caesar/haeckel.htm | ||
Odd. [[User:Rob Pommer| Rob Pommer]]<sub>[[User_talk:Rob_Pommer|TALK]]</sub> 13:04, 29 March 2007 (EDT) | Odd. [[User:Rob Pommer| Rob Pommer]]<sub>[[User_talk:Rob_Pommer|TALK]]</sub> 13:04, 29 March 2007 (EDT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | :Should we be citing a blog, anyway? --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 14:05, 29 March 2007 (EDT) | ||
Latest revision as of 18:05, March 29, 2007
One would think if the sentence leading to the first quote reads: Noted evolutionist Stephen Gould wrote the following regarding Ernst Haeckel's work in a March 2000 issue of Natural History: The cite at the end doesn't point to ANY issue of Natural History but to http://www.creationism.org/caesar/haeckel.htm Odd. Rob PommerTALK 13:04, 29 March 2007 (EDT)
- Should we be citing a blog, anyway? --Ed Poor 14:05, 29 March 2007 (EDT)