Changes

Richard Lenski is best known for his 20-year old E. coli experiment in which he claims to have captured [[evolution]] in progress, saying that bacteria made minor changes in the long-term laboratory study while insisting that it was not due to contamination.   

Richard Lenski is best known for his 20-year old E. coli experiment in which he claims to have captured [[evolution]] in progress, saying that bacteria made minor changes in the long-term laboratory study while insisting that it was not due to contamination.   

Lenski, in making the conclusion that E. coli evolves, completely owned Conservapedia creator Andy Schlafly, who thinks he somehow knows more than Lenski about cells, and who is stuck in his own little world where he is right and everyone who disagrees with him is wrong. After being owned by Lenski and everyone who he complained to about the incident, Schlafly retreated to this crazy, untruthful site, where he teaches innocent children that evolution is a myth, gays are the devil, liberalism is a mental disorder, and Atheists are evil, despite doing far more good than any Christian has ever done.  

Lenski, in making the conclusion that E. coli evolves, completely owned Conservapedia creator Andy Schlafly, who thinks he somehow knows more than Lenski about cells, and who is stuck in his own little world where he is right and everyone who disagrees with him is doomed to an eternity in Hell. After being owned by Lenski and everyone who he complained to about the incident, Schlafly retreated to this crazy, untruthful site, where he teaches innocent children that evolution is a myth, gays are the devil, liberalism is a mental disorder, and Atheists are evil, despite doing far more good than any Christian has ever done.  

The 2008 paper he co-authored was [[peer review]]ed in 14 days, sparking obvious questions regarding potential problems <ref>See [[Conservapedia talk:Lenski dialog]].</ref> about the thoroughness of the review.  The statistical analysis in Lenski's paper has been criticized for having serious flaws.<ref>See [[Flaws in Richard Lenski Study]].</ref>

The 2008 paper he co-authored was [[peer review]]ed in 14 days, sparking obvious questions regarding potential problems <ref>See [[Conservapedia talk:Lenski dialog]].</ref> about the thoroughness of the review.  The statistical analysis in Lenski's paper has been criticized for having serious flaws.<ref>See [[Flaws in Richard Lenski Study]].</ref>