Changes

Suggest moving this to Essay:Lenski Dialogue or Conservapedia:Lenski Dialogue, for two reasons.

 

 

Public scrutiny has obvious benefits, and none of them have given any reason for denying that scrutiny.  Journals and even government policy encourage or require it.  Ah, but [[evolutionists]] feel they can play by their own rules, and make public claims without making the data public.  Rest assured that no one here is fooled by this "make the claim but hide the data from the public" approach.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 11:23, 15 June 2008 (EDT)

 

 

I do think a request of examination of the alleged raw data is reasonable [[Theory of Evolution and Cases of Fraud, Hoaxes and Speculation|given the history of evolutionists fraud]].  In addition, we know know that [[Charles Darwin|Charles Darwin was deceitful regarding his public pronouncements regarding his worldview]] and he was actually an [[atheism|atheist]]. So given the history of [[deceit]] in connection with the evolutionary position and its promotion, I do think Andy is quite justified in requesting to see the raw data of Lenski's alleged work. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 00:14, 15 June 2008 (EDT)

 

: As I wrote above, I'm pretty sure the relevant data would be happily provided as soon as a request a bit more specific than "give me all the data" is given. Some particular weakness that Andy identified in Lenski's reasoning, perhaps? Or some experimental procedure that you deemed especially prone to mistake, or even forgery? What is this "skepticism" that has been "expressed" based on? Or is it some sort of... dogmatic skepticism?

 

 

::I had asked a question above that was never answered, so I'll repeat it here: Who does Conservapedia plan on retaining to review the data from on scientific basis?  It would be a lot more professional to select a qualified scientist or panel of scientists to do the job, and let them have a ''professional'' dialog with Prof. Lenski to review the raw data and conclusions.  This is just grandstanding - "You haven't delivered gigs and gigs of raw data as requested, so you're withholding data".  What it comes down to is that the CP leadership wants anything BUT a professional, qualified review of professor Lenski's work, because the outcome of that is not likely to be what they want.  This reminds me of Kent Hovind's "Evolution Challenge" - set up ridiculous demands, and then claim victory because reasonable people don't meet them. --[[User:DinsdaleP|DinsdaleP]] 11:07, 15 June 2008 (EDT)

 

== responses of creation scientists to Lenski matter ==

 

 

 

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/2008/06/14/news-to-note-06142008

One: As with your [[A thought for Christmas]] page, this is /not/ encyclopedic content. Two: It's spelled dialogue.

[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 23:48, 14 June 2008 (EDT)

:While you're at it, you might do well to explain to Lenski what exactly a "Conservapedia" is. Unless he really likes Lewis Black's "The conservatives think that YOU, THE PUBLIC, HAVE A LIBERAL BIAS." quote, he's unlikely to know. After all, this site gets most of its views from a small group of devout sysops and the snarkers over at RW. Godspeed. [[User:DannyRedful|DannyRedful]] 13:49, 13 June 2008 (EDT)

:While you're at it, you might do well to explain to Lenski what exactly a "Conservapedia" is. Unless he really likes Lewis Black's "The conservatives think that YOU, THE PUBLIC, HAVE A LIBERAL BIAS." quote, he's unlikely to know. After all, this site gets most of its views from a small group of devout sysops and the snarkers over at RW. Godspeed. [[User:DannyRedful|DannyRedful]] 13:49, 13 June 2008 (EDT)

:This is it.  This one is my favorite post.  Carafe has won Conservapedia, roll the credits.--[[user:TomMoore|<font color="#000066" >Tom Moore</font>]]^{[[User talk:TomMoore|fiat justitia ruat coelum]]} 01:49, 15 June 2008 (EDT)

:This is it.  This one is my favorite post.  Carafe has won Conservapedia, roll the credits.--[[user:TomMoore|<font color="#000066" >Tom Moore</font>]]^{[[User talk:TomMoore|fiat justitia ruat coelum]]} 01:49, 15 June 2008 (EDT)