1,516
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 199:
Line 199: − :::: I am requesting that the authors of the paper respond to each of the flaws in this forum, and submit a revision or retraction of their paper if any are held valid.+
Talk:Flaws in Richard Lenski Study (view source)
Revision as of 14:39, July 21, 2008
, 14:39, July 21, 2008→Draft of PNAS Letters Response from Conservapedia
:::: - The lag time between the potentiating mutation in the largest experiment disproves Lenski's implicit assumption that it likely occurred in proximity with the occurrence of the Cit+ variant.
:::: - The lag time between the potentiating mutation in the largest experiment disproves Lenski's implicit assumption that it likely occurred in proximity with the occurrence of the Cit+ variant.
::: I am requesting that the authors of the paper respond to each of the flaws in this forum, and submit a revision or retraction of their paper if any are held valid.
Mr. Schlafly, please let me know if this is acceptable, and apply any revisions as you see fit, thanks. --[[User:DinsdaleP|DinsdaleP]] 10:38, 21 July 2008 (EDT)
Mr. Schlafly, please let me know if this is acceptable, and apply any revisions as you see fit, thanks. --[[User:DinsdaleP|DinsdaleP]] 10:38, 21 July 2008 (EDT)