Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 8: Line 8:     
:: If you supported public scrutiny of the data, then you would send Lenski an email requesting it.  That you have not, and will not, speaks volumes about your view.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 16:40, 15 June 2008 (EDT)
 
:: If you supported public scrutiny of the data, then you would send Lenski an email requesting it.  That you have not, and will not, speaks volumes about your view.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 16:40, 15 June 2008 (EDT)
 +
 +
:::...to me, it says that I'm not a biologist, and doubt I could fairly evaluate it if I received it.  I know the degree of training it has required for me to achieve my present position, and I lack the hubris to think I could exercise equivalent powers of discrimination in a field so unrelated to my own.  I'm not faulting you - maybe you have a degree in biochemistry, for all I know!  But I know that I am not capable of fairly evaluating in context the raw data of biological experiments.  My view is not a multi-book set: there's only one volume to it, and it's humility and appreciation of the credentials of the qualified.--[[user:TomMoore|<font color="#000066" >Tom Moore</font>]]<sup>[[User talk:TomMoore|fiat justitia ruat coelum]]</sup> 17:19, 15 June 2008 (EDT)
    
== Request of Examination of raw data is reasonable given the history of evolutionist fraud ==
 
== Request of Examination of raw data is reasonable given the history of evolutionist fraud ==
789

edits

Navigation menu