Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
sorry Dan
Line 843: Line 843:  
Anyway back to my question, are you now satisfied in the response? [[User:DanielB|DanielB]] 08:15, 24 June 2008 (EDT)
 
Anyway back to my question, are you now satisfied in the response? [[User:DanielB|DanielB]] 08:15, 24 June 2008 (EDT)
   −
"Given the remarkably short time between submission of his PNAS manuscript and its acceptance (only 14 days), I doubt his paper even had meaningful peer review..." "It's unscientific for others to repeat as true an unverified claim based on concealed data..." Both of these quotes, Mr. Schlafly, imply that Lenski falsified his data and collaborated in an elaborate conspiracy to get his paper published! You already assume that Lenski was fraudulent with his data when you said this! How is that not accusing him of fraud? -- [[User:Aaronp|Aaronp]]
+
"Given the remarkably short time between submission of his PNAS manuscript and its acceptance (only 14 days), I doubt his paper even had meaningful peer review..." "It's unscientific for others to repeat as true an unverified claim based on concealed data..." Both of these quotes, Mr. Schlafly, imply that Lenski falsified his data and collaborated in an elaborate conspiracy to get his paper published! You already assume that Lenski was fraudulent with his data when you said this! How is that not accusing him of fraud? -- [[User:Aaronp|Aaronp]] Also, sorry to distract from your question, Daniel. Andy, please answer Dan first. Thank you.
    
== The Missing Link ==
 
== The Missing Link ==
99

edits

Navigation menu