| Revision as of 06:01, 25 February 2004 editAndrewa (talk | contribs)Administrators61,996 edits cut and paste long dialogue to new member← Previous edit | Revision as of 08:31, 12 March 2004 edit undo211.28.8.24 (talk)No edit summaryNext edit → | ||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
| ---- | ---- | ||
| All the anti-Cubic arguments in the "Time Cube" article are actually wrong and can be easily refuted. However, rather than correct the article myself, I will simply invite any free thinkers who are interested in learning the Truth to debate Time Cube on the |
All the anti-Cubic arguments in the "Time Cube" article are actually wrong and can be easily refuted. However, rather than correct the article myself, I will simply invite any free thinkers who are interested in learning the Truth to debate Time Cube on the <strike>Time Cube forum</strike>. No closed-minded Academian pedants, please. | ||
| UPDATE: The forum is out of commission. However I may discuss Time Cube on user talk pages, like I did with Andrewa. | |||
| ---- | ---- | ||
Revision as of 08:31, 12 March 2004
See Talk:Time Cube/Delete for a past discussion on whether this article should have been deleted.
All the anti-Cubic arguments in the "Time Cube" article are actually wrong and can be easily refuted. However, rather than correct the article myself, I will simply invite any free thinkers who are interested in learning the Truth to debate Time Cube on the Time Cube forum. No closed-minded Academian pedants, please.
UPDATE: The forum is out of commission. However I may discuss Time Cube on user talk pages, like I did with Andrewa.
Archived debate: Andrewa vs. TIME CUBE
Moved to Talk:Time Cube/User talk archive as it's a dialogue 38 kilobytes long. Andrewa 06:01, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)