Conservapedia talk:Arguments creationists shouldn't use

It is of course only about a quarter finished, not brilliant scholarship (mainly just cut and paste) and not brilliantly formatted. Perhaps its also not terribly interesting. Is this worth going on with ?--Damo2353 05:53, 9 July 2008 (EDT)
 * Mind if I play about with it a bit?--Bobbing up 05:55, 9 July 2008 (EDT)
 * I'd say it's just as worthy as many of the articles in the Conservapediaspace. It is interesting, which makes it a keeper in my book.   05:58, 9 July 2008 (EDT)

Very good and useful idea, Damo2353. Thanks! P.S. Before reading the page, I thought you were writing about Al Gore = Al G. = AlG... (Editor at) CP:no intelligence allowed 05:59, 9 July 2008 (EDT)
 * Sure, it could sure use a bit of playing with. It's meant as an article, certainly not an essay.--Damo2353 06:00, 9 July 2008 (EDT)
 * Might be interesting to include CreationWiki as well.--Bobbing up 06:31, 9 July 2008 (EDT)
 * To be fair to them, there aren't that many hits. Maybe they've been through the same exercise. Was surprised not to find the "Darwin Eye" one.  It's used over and over again. --Bobbing up 07:06, 9 July 2008 (EDT)
 * I'm getting tired of this now. Anybody else want to do a bit?--Bobbing up 07:11, 9 July 2008 (EDT)

Holy crap!
"Dubois renounced Java man as a ‘missing link’" Would ya look at that... I am a missing link in evolution! Javascap 07:14, 9 July 2008 (EDT)

Move
CP Space? I assume so but let's try out this "rule of three" :P This is ONE. That's ONE!  A rmondiko V  User_Talk:Armondikov 16:40, 9 January 2009 (EST)
 * I think that this page is in CP space because it mostly shows examples used by conservapedia. I think that this page should be moved out of CP space and examples from around the internet should be shown. NapalmEagle (talk) 16:59, 31 March 2013 (UTC)