Siteadmin, Bureaucrats, Check users, nsAm_Govt_101RO, nsAm_Govt_101RW, nsAm_Govt_101_ta, nsJudgesRO, nsJudgesRW, nsJudges_talkRO, nsJudges_talkRW, nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW, oversight, Administrators
125,672
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 320:
Line 320: + +
Talk:Flaws in Richard Lenski Study (view source)
Revision as of 02:23, August 5, 2008
, 02:23, August 5, 2008→Science is self-correcting by nature: reply
:: Sigh... lack of time to read has gotten us all into trouble now and again, hasn't it? You'd likely agree that neither liberal nor conservative attitudes alone should disqualify people from searching from the truth. I'd agree. In fact, if there IS some kind of motive besides a genuine desire to see E. coli research advance, then why not state it outright and publicly, for instance in the letter to the PNAS? Seek the truth and also be honest and open about your motives! [[User:CPlantin|CPlantin]] 20:56, 4 August 2008 (EDT)
:: Sigh... lack of time to read has gotten us all into trouble now and again, hasn't it? You'd likely agree that neither liberal nor conservative attitudes alone should disqualify people from searching from the truth. I'd agree. In fact, if there IS some kind of motive besides a genuine desire to see E. coli research advance, then why not state it outright and publicly, for instance in the letter to the PNAS? Seek the truth and also be honest and open about your motives! [[User:CPlantin|CPlantin]] 20:56, 4 August 2008 (EDT)
::: Lenski's claims seemed incorrect to me. The more I looked at it, the more flaws that I saw. Liberals are awfully conspiracy-minded.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 22:23, 4 August 2008 (EDT)