nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW
13,254
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 109:
Line 109: − ----+ +
Conservapedia talk:Lenski dialog (view source)
Revision as of 03:33, June 28, 2008
, 03:33, June 28, 2008→Reply to comments in archive: Break large section up.
::::::: Any "real" scientist can read the data from the paper and see that no data has been withheld. Just because you can't understand that the paper represents reams of data, doesn't mean you can summarily dismiss (and conclude that all "real" scientists should dismiss it as well) the paper on the basis that data has been withheld. As for Argon's "sermon", he addresses all of the points that have been made by others in a logical manner. I don't see how it is "displaced".-- [[User:Aaronp|Aaron]]
::::::: Any "real" scientist can read the data from the paper and see that no data has been withheld. Just because you can't understand that the paper represents reams of data, doesn't mean you can summarily dismiss (and conclude that all "real" scientists should dismiss it as well) the paper on the basis that data has been withheld. As for Argon's "sermon", he addresses all of the points that have been made by others in a logical manner. I don't see how it is "displaced".-- [[User:Aaronp|Aaron]]
== More replies to archived comments ==
:"''Why do you say that it does not support evolution?''" ([[Conservapedia talk:Lenski dialog/archive1#Questions for Aschlafly , not Bugler]] (Asked by JPohl of me):
:"''Why do you say that it does not support evolution?''" ([[Conservapedia talk:Lenski dialog/archive1#Questions for Aschlafly , not Bugler]] (Asked by JPohl of me):
See my post (now in the archive) dated 23:05, 16 June 2008 (search for that text).
See my post (now in the archive) dated 23:05, 16 June 2008 (search for that text).