Rodsgarden

I noticed a misleading claim in the article on Creation Science. It claimed that Creation Science rejects Uniformitarianism. I clarified the paragraph by identifying it as a claim by opponents and included two quotes from "The Genesis Flood" to clarify their actual view: that they only reject the claim by Hutton and Lyell that the rates of geological processes has never changed. David Souza quickly undid my revision claiming that I put "undue weight on a deceptive fringe source" "The Genesis Flood" published in 1961 is recognized as the foundational book of the modern creation science movement. How can you have an intelligent discussion of creation science if you will not consider the actual views of its founders? How can you evaluate the truth of their position if you only allow their opponents to put words in their mouths? My revision did not distort the original meaning of the paragraph. It only added clarifying details which were direct quotes from the original source book. Rodsgarden (talk) 19:48, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi Rodsgarden. If you have concerns about an edit you've made, you should take it to the discussion page of that article. (Go to the article, and click on "Talk" at the top left). No other editors will see this comment you've posted; I only can because the page was added to my watchlist when I welcomed you to the site. All the best, Jess_talk|_edits 20:03, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Welcome

Hello, Rodsgarden! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. You may benefit from following some of the links below, which will help you get the most out of Wikipedia. If you have any questions you can ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are already excited about Wikipedia, you might want to consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field when making edits to pages. Happy editing! Jesstalk|edits 19:24, 10 November 2010 (UTC) Getting Started The five pillars of Wikipedia • Tutorial • Your first article How to: edit a page • upload an image Getting Help Frequently Asked Questions Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention Policies and Guidelines Neutral point of view • Reliable sources Verifiability • Citing sources • No original research What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style • Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry Copyrights • Policy for non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability The Community Community Portal • Adopt-a-user program Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • Resolving disputes Build consensus • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists Things to do Be bold in editing • Help develop an article Maintenance • Peer review • Requested articles Join a WikiProject • Translating articles Cleaning up: General • Spam • Vandalism Miscellaneous Categories • Disambiguity • Stubs User pages • Talk pages Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

On uniformitarianism

Thanks for this comment, this is something you should take up on the article talk page, as suggested above. Also, please add new topics at the bottom of the page, as I've done here: new topics added at the top of a talk page will just be moved to the bottom. . . dave souza, talk 20:38, 10 November 2010 (UTC)