[orwin]

As controversial as gravity, in that some mechanisms aren't understood yet, and physicists still search gravitons.

Still, not a 'controversial' topic unless you participate in scientific seminars.

[raxxorraxor]

Controversial just means the topic to be in dispute. It is a question of semantics and precision of language. In that regard the flag on a wiki site is certainly justified.

[orwin]

Is the gravity article controversial then? And the article on particle physics?

At least be consistent, I mean, please.

[raxxorraxor]

Because that isn't comparable. Evolution is controversial because it collides with a lot of other beliefs. Particle physics and gravity generally don't, if only because people aren't familiar with the intrinsics...

[orwin]

I don't see why it's that different? I mean, gravity and just basic physics contradict the Bible way more than evolution, no?

[raxxorraxor]

Ever saw a preacher dispute gravity? This stopped being intellectually honest for quite a while now...

[yjftsjthsd-h]

What in the Bible is at odds with gravity?

[orwin]

All of genesis? Young earth specifically (unless Christian's god created the moon with initial velocity).

I've read an article from a Hindi that basically explained how their religion was much more science-proof than the monotheisms. Also, looking into Ramadan for weird reasons, I recently found an article about how the Coran was more scientific-friendly than the bible, with example from the new testament.

Both where cherry picked bull* but I should have kept the links, it was quite fun and I probably would have had more examples.