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
125,790
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 173:
Line 173: + +
Talk:PNAS Response to Letter (view source)
Revision as of 20:56, October 31, 2008
, 20:56, October 31, 2008→Have we given up?: reply
Conservapedia should work on continuing to keep the Lenski study and its flaws in the news.
Conservapedia should work on continuing to keep the Lenski study and its flaws in the news.
Is there anything else we can do? Perhaps write to local officials about the misuse of public funds for studies like Lenski's, and also to complain about PNAS? --[[User:DRamon|DRamon]] 16:39, 31 October 2008 (EDT)
Is there anything else we can do? Perhaps write to local officials about the misuse of public funds for studies like Lenski's, and also to complain about PNAS? --[[User:DRamon|DRamon]] 16:39, 31 October 2008 (EDT)
: We exposed five fundamental flaws in the study, and told the truth. The truth doesn't care whether some refuse to accept it. There will ''always'' be people who deny the truth, particularly when they stand to profit from falsehoods. For now, I've moved onto more pressing issues on this site.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 16:56, 31 October 2008 (EDT)