1,516
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 9:
Line 9: + + + +
no edit summary
:Of course, imagine the better quality dialog you might have had if you'd waited until now to contact Lenski with specific questions based on a thorough reading of paper. In any case, as I mentioned previously (message now gone), if you're convinced of what you've written, by all means please fire off your letter --Argon 14:33, 1 August 2008 (EDT)
:Of course, imagine the better quality dialog you might have had if you'd waited until now to contact Lenski with specific questions based on a thorough reading of paper. In any case, as I mentioned previously (message now gone), if you're convinced of what you've written, by all means please fire off your letter --Argon 14:33, 1 August 2008 (EDT)
==Being "Substantive"==
::Well, I guess we can rule out a new [[Conservapedia Challenge]] - having a qualified expert in experimental statistics defend Aschlafly's statistical issues from the criticisms in the PNAS response. Time to move on, as he said. --[[User:DinsdaleP|DinsdaleP]] 23:08, 14 September 2008 (EDT)