|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 59 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,927 Year: 4,184/9,624 Month: 1,055/974 Week: 14/368 Day: 14/11 Hour: 2/1 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: All Time Classic Creationist Pwnage (Re: Conservapedia and A. Schlafly vs. R. Lenski) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Granny Magda Member Posts: 2462 From: UK Joined: Member Rating: 4.1 |
I thought that this might be of interest to members.
All time classic creationist pwnage – Bad Science It is a record of an exchange between Richard Lenski, a biologist working on the emergence of new traits in populations of e-coli and Andrew Schlafly, the editor of Conservapedia. Mr Schlafly starts this off by demanding that Lenski provide him with data to back up his research, despite the fact that the data is already available. It degenerates from there... Suffice to say that Lenski does a sterling job of making Schlafly look foolish, second only to Schlafly himself. The site this is on, Bad Science is well worth a look generally and I'm sure that it will appeal to sceptically minded folks. I recommend it. Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Added the "(Re: Conservapedia and A. Schlafly vs. R. Lenski)" part to the topic title. Mutate and Survive
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Alasdair Member (Idle past 5780 days) Posts: 143 Joined: |
Conservapedia is always worth a laugh. Go browse the sections on homosexuality and atheism!
The funny thing is that Schlaf is obviously thinking that the data looks like an 8th grader's science project with a few easy numbers and chart that he can demolish, rather than likely something that you would have to be a graduate student in biology to even begin to understand! Edited by Alasdair, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Deftil Member (Idle past 4486 days) Posts: 128 From: Virginia, USA Joined: |
oh snap! yes that exchange delivers on the pwnage!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Jack Member Posts: 3514 From: Immigrant in the land of Deutsch Joined: Member Rating: 9.2 |
quote: they say. I dunno, it's all very well cheer leading but did it actually achieve anything? Do those at Conservapedia, and those that support it, actually feel they lost the exchange? I doubt it.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
randman  Suspended Member (Idle past 4930 days) Posts: 6367 Joined: |
What such exchanges are increasingly producing is a growing mistrust and negative feelings towards evo proponents. Take the Meyer paper saga. Most evos here feel justified by the actions of the Smithsonian. Most non-evos are appalled by their actions.
How about the public? Well, when you have liberal media such as the Washington Post calling it a witchunt by secular Darwinists, you know the game is up. Maybe not right away, but I suspect within about 9-10 years you will see a backlash in funding and many things towards evos (NeoDarwinists), and frankly, they've brought it on themselves as far as I am concerned.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
subbie Member (Idle past 1285 days) Posts: 3509 Joined: |
quote: Does any extremist ideologue ever think they've ever lost any exchange? Of course not. However, as Lenski points out, there are others following the exchange, and one hopes that they learn something. Those who would sacrifice an essential liberty for a temporary security will lose both, and deserve neither. -- Benjamin Franklin We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Deftil Member (Idle past 4486 days) Posts: 128 From: Virginia, USA Joined: |
What such exchanges are increasingly producing is a growing mistrust and negative feelings towards evo proponents. If this particular exchange produces anything other than a mistrust of and negative feelings towards Mr. Schlafly in anyone, then they probably don't have very good critical thinking skills. In the exchange Prof Lenski is very up front, and indeed his paper with the relevant information was online the whole time. This exchange is little more than an embaressment for Mr Schlafly.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Granny Magda Member Posts: 2462 From: UK Joined: Member Rating: 4.1 |
What does this achieve? Well, not much I suppose. My main motivation in posting it was that I thought it was bloody funny and I figured others might agree. Seriously though, I think that the Conservapedia crew are deeply unpleasant and that one of the best ways to combat such pompous blow-hards is ridicule. Schlafly does a good job of making himself look stupid. That's his look out. All I'm doing is passing on the correspondence.
Mutate and Survive
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Granny Magda Member Posts: 2462 From: UK Joined: Member Rating: 4.1 |
I never expected you to be amused by it randman. It wasn't really aimed at you to be honest.
Suffice to say that given the hectoring, self-important and deeply ignorant tone of Schlafly's original letter and the bandying around of slanderous accusations of fraud on his website, I'm surprised that Lenski managed to be as polite as he was. Schlafly was asking for a dressing down and he got one. The thing is, I don't see how diplomacy is going to help either side in this debate. I see little room for compromise. Evolution is either real or it is not. Ditto for creationism. This one is going to carry on creating acrimony and I don't see how that can be avoided.
I suspect within about 9-10 years you will see a backlash in funding and many things towards evos Time will tell. I can't say I'm especially worried. Mutate and Survive
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Alasdair Member (Idle past 5780 days) Posts: 143 Joined: |
What are you referring to by the actions of the Smithsonian?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NosyNed Member Posts: 9004 From: Canada Joined: |
What are you referring to by the actions of the Smithsonian? Something about which the actual facts have been given more than once but those facts are undigestable to some individuals.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
randman  Suspended Member (Idle past 4930 days) Posts: 6367 Joined: |
Their behaviour, characterized as a "witchunt" by the Washington Post, towards someone working there that published an ID paper.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Alasdair Member (Idle past 5780 days) Posts: 143 Joined: |
What if they had published an alchemy or astrology paper?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Alasdair Member (Idle past 5780 days) Posts: 143 Joined: |
http://www.expelledexposed.com/index.php/the-truth/sternberg
Is this who you are referring to?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
randman  Suspended Member (Idle past 4930 days) Posts: 6367 Joined: |
How anyone can read the emails and see the behaviour of the Smithsonian over this and still defend it is beyond me. Why take some time to look into the real facts for yourself instead of some evo propoganda paper. Keep in mind the Washington Post isn't a conservative, creationist dominated paper. When even they are denouncing mainstream evos at the Smithsonian, you know it had to be bad, very bad, as the email exchanges and attempts to defame and smear the guy showed.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024