User talk:Jhampson4

Unsubstantiated WP:SOAP lacking any substantiation returned to sender

Creation-evolution controversy article paints a distorted picture of the debate

This article lacks credible neutrality in every paragaph and describes the controversy over evolution as one between Science and conservative Christianity. This is an omission of facts which is used to buttress the pro-evolution position, as if to say there is no *scientific* disagreement with evolution. There is a growing body of skeptics in scientific and academic circles who have no relation to conservative Christianity who have become dissatisfied with many tenets of evolution, primarily the mechanism of evolutionary change at the biomolecular level. Unfortunately, this article does not even mention this non-religious, pro-scientific group of professionals. Until they are adequately represented, this article will remain selective in its presentation of data, and vulnerable to charges of partiality and bias. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jhampson4 (talk • contribs) 09:17, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Vague rants lacking any specific complaints and lacking any evidence of misrepresentation of the facts are ubiquitous on evolution-related article talkpages -- and get very little toleration. Please read WP:TALK, WP:UNDUE & WP:NPOVFAQ. Your assertions are quite simply not substantiated by the facts. Hrafn^Talk_Stalk 10:11, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

If you are referring to the two popular works by Michael Behe, his 'contributions' to science have been thoroughly discredited by actual specialists in the areas of The Edge of Evolution and Darwin's Black Box. The creationist political agenda (the Wedge strategy) has produced no science that challenges evolution. Please refer to reliable sources before bringing up complaints such as this. WLU (talk) 12:06, 23 November 2007 (UTC)