Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 403: Line 403:  
# What do you plan to do with his "raw" data should you receive it?
 
# What do you plan to do with his "raw" data should you receive it?
 
The answers to these two questions will tell much about your intent and your character. [[User:AndyMann|AndyMann]] 18:34, 17 June 2008 (EDT)
 
The answers to these two questions will tell much about your intent and your character. [[User:AndyMann|AndyMann]] 18:34, 17 June 2008 (EDT)
 +
::So your answers are
    +
# you "skimmed" it
 +
# you won't do anythnig with the "raw data"  should he send it to you
 +
Thank you for your honesty. I hope your readership takes these answers in their full measure. [[User:AndyMann|AndyMann]] 19:30, 17 June 2008 (EDT)
 +
[[User:AndyMann|AndyMann]] 19:30, 17 June 2008 (EDT
 +
 +
 +
===  Two Questions for Aschlafly: comments from others===
 
*I don't believe it will be hard to gain interest from creation scientist organizations/individuals and ID theorists in regards to reviewing the raw data.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 19:21, 17 June 2008 (EDT)
 
*I don't believe it will be hard to gain interest from creation scientist organizations/individuals and ID theorists in regards to reviewing the raw data.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 19:21, 17 June 2008 (EDT)
−
===  Two Questions for Aschlafly: comments from others===
      
:I know your question was not directed at me, but isn't the point of public release that it would be open to ''everyone'' to examine; ie - that this isn't solely about Aschlafly? I doubt if there is anyone on this site who would be capable of understanding Lenski's raw data, if it were to be made available, but that is not a reason to oppose the public release of the data ''per se'', is it? If released publicly, anyone capable of understanding it can see it for themselves, and those who cannot understand it will be unaffected. What's wrong with that?[[User:Eoinc|Eoinc]] 18:44, 17 June 2008 (EDT)
 
:I know your question was not directed at me, but isn't the point of public release that it would be open to ''everyone'' to examine; ie - that this isn't solely about Aschlafly? I doubt if there is anyone on this site who would be capable of understanding Lenski's raw data, if it were to be made available, but that is not a reason to oppose the public release of the data ''per se'', is it? If released publicly, anyone capable of understanding it can see it for themselves, and those who cannot understand it will be unaffected. What's wrong with that?[[User:Eoinc|Eoinc]] 18:44, 17 June 2008 (EDT)
17

edits

Navigation menu