Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
→‎Two Questions for Aschlafly: comments from others: Put your research where your mouth is.
Line 521: Line 521:     
::::::::I made some edits showing the location of where their graduate degrees were awarded (this is important for those who receive degrees from non-accredited schools).  I would not cite NCSE anyway for they are only a PR group.  I will point out that 9 out of the 11 are PhDs, that is pretty high (over 80%)(while one of the two non-PhDs is a PhD candidate).  The question I might ask is how often do those of a non-related field write or evaluate a topic or paper?  This should also be asked about CMI and such.--[[User:Able806|Able806]] 10:58, 20 June 2008 (EDT)
 
::::::::I made some edits showing the location of where their graduate degrees were awarded (this is important for those who receive degrees from non-accredited schools).  I would not cite NCSE anyway for they are only a PR group.  I will point out that 9 out of the 11 are PhDs, that is pretty high (over 80%)(while one of the two non-PhDs is a PhD candidate).  The question I might ask is how often do those of a non-related field write or evaluate a topic or paper?  This should also be asked about CMI and such.--[[User:Able806|Able806]] 10:58, 20 June 2008 (EDT)
 +
::::::::: So which is the DI nearest to?  A scientific research lab or a PR group?
 +
::::::::: Okay Able806, you implicitly questioned the legitimacy of the qualifications of creationists.  So you now have a job: List, like I did and you expanded, the qualifications of the CMI staff ([http://creationontheweb.com/content/view/45/ here's] your starting point).  And when you've done that, tell us how many of those are from non-accredited schools.  Else you just might earn yourself a block for implicit accusations of dishonesty (that they are claiming to be something that they are not).  [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 11:15, 20 June 2008 (EDT)
    
: I read Lenski's paper, and as a trained microbiologist, I thought that it was both thorough and well done. His claims are backed by good data, namely that which was presented in the figures. I went through each of the figures after Aschlafly said that they were uninformative. Actually, they are basic figures that show the population explosion of the bacterial cultures after the Cit+ mutation occurred. These figures show that the cultures increased in size and mass at a given timepoint, being able to do so because they had evolved a mechanism to utilize a new nutrient, without the assistance of helper plasmids.
 
: I read Lenski's paper, and as a trained microbiologist, I thought that it was both thorough and well done. His claims are backed by good data, namely that which was presented in the figures. I went through each of the figures after Aschlafly said that they were uninformative. Actually, they are basic figures that show the population explosion of the bacterial cultures after the Cit+ mutation occurred. These figures show that the cultures increased in size and mass at a given timepoint, being able to do so because they had evolved a mechanism to utilize a new nutrient, without the assistance of helper plasmids.
nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW
13,254

edits

Navigation menu