Talk:Human origins

Untitled

I disagree with having a redirect from human origins to human evolution. I think Wikipedia should give more attention (than it has) to religious ideas such as Young Earth Creationism (which I personally disagree with) and Old Earth Creationism (which I agree with).

If we do this, of course, we should be careful not to give any impression that we (as an encyclopedia) are endorsing any view, as this would violate NPOV. Nor should we give the impression that scientific community (in general) - or any significant minority of individual scientists - give any more support for non-materialist positions than they actually do.

We must be fair and impartial, not partisan. --Uncle Ed 19:41, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is a link to the alternative supernatural explanations at the top of the human evolution page. However, the scientific explanation is the only one backed by verifiable, reliable sources, so has to be given precedence under Wikipedia's core policies. Tim Vickers 22:43, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am stunned that this page is essentially empty. The religious and scientific views are not irreconcilable for one thing. But even if they were, an overview of both should be given here with appropriate links. Moreover, there are probably more than just two ways to slice this topic, which is another reason to have something intelligent here. Petersburg (talk) 02:14, 19 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Added a few more alternative interpretations, expanded existing ones and emphasized default choice. Any thoughts? Petersburg (talk) 01:48, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Untitled

Contents