Changes

::::: Data should be made available to peer reviewers.  If I'm reading the dates on the front of this particular paper correctly, I think peer review was a mere 15 days or so.  Looks to me like a rubber-stamp process for this subject matter despite making claims that were reported as being newsworthy.

::::: Data should be made available to peer reviewers.  If I'm reading the dates on the front of this particular paper correctly, I think peer review was a mere 15 days or so.  Looks to me like a rubber-stamp process for this subject matter despite making claims that were reported as being newsworthy.

::::: The raw data have to already be in a form that allows collaborative work, so I don't see that as much of an obstacle.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 16:47, 19 June 2008 (EDT)

::::: The raw data have to already be in a form that allows collaborative work, so I don't see that as much of an obstacle.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]]  

 

:::::: This is absurd.  ASchlafly, all you are doing is wasting a good man's time.  You may as well write to Boeing and ask them for full data on the 747 because you don't believe it can fly, and you would like to have the data so independent scientists can verify that flight is possible.  Yes, public funds went into the research, but the normal review process was completed and unless you have specific allegations you wish to make, you should back off and stop making a fool of yourself.  Since you no ability whatsoever to comprehend this data and have proposed no-one who is, Prof. Lenski would be irresonsible to the public purse if he were to gather and release any data.  This is a total farce.  [[User:AGeologist|AGeologist]] 17:05, 19 June 2008 (EDT)