98678Re: Bacteria evolve; Conservapedia demands recount
- Jul 1, 2008David Hobby wrote:
>As if there were enough trolls in the Wikipedia...
> Hi. Thanks for pointing out the status of the Conservapedia.
> I'd say it's a good thing, since I don't really want the
> authors trying to edit Wikipedia!
> There is an interesting question: Could Conservapedia justI am not a lawier, but I guess Wikipedia's GPL license allows
> copy articles on non-controversial subjects from Wikipedia?
> Maybe if they included an attribution in 6-point type?
> (I'm shaky on exactly what the public license for Wikipedia
> content says.)
the copy of Wikipedia stuff to any other site that has
> There are some thorny problems for religious fundamentalists,Maybe a conservative math should ban all things that come
> even in mathematics. The only safe thing to do might be to
> have a completely finitary mathematics, making no assumptions
> about infinite objects whatsoever.
from Satan, like those evil imaginary numbers or even the
blasphemous sqrt(2). If the Creator can make sqrt(2) rational,
who is Man to deny it?
> If you go the latter route, I'd recommend assuming theConservapedia is quite poor in Math articles.
> Axiom of Constructibility, which states that "the only
> sets that exist are the ones required by the other axioms
> of set theory". There doesn't seem to be an entry on
> Conservapedia, yet:
> Large Cardinal Heresy, MaruOTOH, maybe a conservative math would be comfortable with an
absolute universal set...
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>