Changes

Jump to: navigation, search

Talk:Letter to PNAS

64 bytes added, 01:25, July 28, 2008
I would hope that you would at least run this letter past a sympathetic scientist (someone from DI?) before you submit it, to confirm that these format concerns are legitimate.--[[User:Brossa|Brossa]] 20:10, 27 July 2008 (EDT)
::Brossa has made several excellent points. I would add that there is a disconnect between your primary claim and the list. You should rethink your thesis statement or choose different "flaws" that fit it better, since your primary claim that the flaws "negate [the paper's] claim that E. Coli bacteria underwent an evolutionary beneficial mutation" does not follow from those listed. With your flaws, with the possible exception of #2 4 depending on interpretation(and even then, where did the undetected Cit+ cells come from?), you are arguing against historical contingency, not whether or not Cit+ cells evolved. In other words, the flaws you claim are questions of mechanism, i.e. the dynamics of how the Cit+ cells arose, but your thesis statement questions whether or not they arose at all from Cit- populations. So even if those flaws were true, they would not negate the "evolutionary beneficial mutation" as you say but rather just historical contingency as a path to it. [[User:Kallium|Kallium]] 21:23, 27 July 2008 (EDT)
==How about this
109
edits