Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

98678Re: Bacteria evolve; Conservapedia demands recount

Expand Messages
  • Alberto Monteiro
    Jul 1, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      David Hobby wrote:
      > 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!
      As if there were enough trolls in the Wikipedia...

      > There is an interesting question: Could Conservapedia just
      > 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.)
      I am not a lawier, but I guess Wikipedia's GPL license allows
      the copy of Wikipedia stuff to any other site that has
      similar licenses.

      > There are some thorny problems for religious fundamentalists,
      > even in mathematics. The only safe thing to do might be to
      > have a completely finitary mathematics, making no assumptions
      > about infinite objects whatsoever.
      Maybe a conservative math should ban all things that come
      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 the
      > 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:
      > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axiom_of_constructibility
      Conservapedia is quite poor in Math articles.

      > Large Cardinal Heresy, Maru
      OTOH, maybe a conservative math would be comfortable with an
      absolute universal set...

      Alberto Monteiro

    • Show all 19 messages in this topic