Difference between revisions of "Talk:Conservapedia challenge"
(New page: A challenge! Very well, Sir, I accept! I am not a rich man and would be unable to handle all the data accumulated over twenty years. Neither do I think it acceptable to enjoin a publicall...) |
(reply) |
||
| Line 19: | Line 19: | ||
Regards | Regards | ||
Tony Lloyd (User:TonyLloyd | Tony Lloyd (User:TonyLloyd | ||
| + | |||
| + | : Your "offer" is fascinating but also self-contradictory. On the one hand you imply that there are voluminous data ("spend the large sums required to send such a large amount of data"), but on the other hand you suggest that Lenski may not have any such data! You also seem to misunderstand or ignore the purpose and benefits of public scrutiny, as the data are not merely for me ("your hypothesis" and "data that would test it") but for all the public who paid for the data.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 13:18, 3 July 2008 (EDT) | ||
Revision as of 17:18, July 3, 2008
A challenge! Very well, Sir, I accept!
I am not a rich man and would be unable to handle all the data accumulated over twenty years. Neither do I think it acceptable to enjoin a publically funded organization to spend the large sums required to send such a large amount of data without a defined public benefit.
Let us, then, agree a hypothesis that can be tested by ' 'some' ', of Prof. Lenski's unpublished data. I will then procure from said Professor either:
1) That very data, which I will then deliver to you, or
2) An admission from the Professor that he does not have that data
If I succeed you will: 1) procure me one pint of Fuller's "London Pride" at the Nicholson's pub in the Strand, London, and display a picture of me drinking it on the front page of Conservapedia. 2) Publish a statement on the front page of Conservapedia stating that you accept Professor Lenski's honesty and professionalism.
I await: 1) Your hypothesis 2) The data that would test it 3) Your "prize" should I fail
Regards Tony Lloyd (User:TonyLloyd
- Your "offer" is fascinating but also self-contradictory. On the one hand you imply that there are voluminous data ("spend the large sums required to send such a large amount of data"), but on the other hand you suggest that Lenski may not have any such data! You also seem to misunderstand or ignore the purpose and benefits of public scrutiny, as the data are not merely for me ("your hypothesis" and "data that would test it") but for all the public who paid for the data.--Aschlafly 13:18, 3 July 2008 (EDT)