Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 85 (8950 total)
102 online now:
Newest Member: Mikee
Post Volume: Total: 867,006 Year: 22,042/19,786 Month: 605/1,834 Week: 105/500 Day: 2/61 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   All Time Classic Creationist Pwnage (Re: Conservapedia and A. Schlafly vs. R. Lenski)
Granny Magda
Member
Posts: 2381
From: UK
Joined: 11-12-2007


Message 1 of 22 (473166)
06-27-2008 1:09 PM


I thought that this might be of interest to members.

http://www.badscience.net/2008/06/all-time-classic-creationist-pwnage/

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, www.badscience.net 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

Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by Alasdair, posted 06-27-2008 1:38 PM Granny Magda has not yet responded
 Message 3 by Deftil, posted 06-27-2008 4:08 PM Granny Magda has not yet responded
 Message 4 by Dr Jack, posted 06-27-2008 6:47 PM Granny Magda has responded

Alasdair
Member (Idle past 4089 days)
Posts: 143
Joined: 05-13-2005


Message 2 of 22 (473173)
06-27-2008 1:38 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Granny Magda
06-27-2008 1:09 PM


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.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Granny Magda, posted 06-27-2008 1:09 PM Granny Magda has not yet responded

Deftil
Member (Idle past 2795 days)
Posts: 128
From: Virginia, USA
Joined: 04-19-2008


Message 3 of 22 (473187)
06-27-2008 4:08 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Granny Magda
06-27-2008 1:09 PM


oh snap! yes that exchange delivers on the pwnage!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Granny Magda, posted 06-27-2008 1:09 PM Granny Magda has not yet responded

Dr Jack
Member (Idle past 444 days)
Posts: 3507
From: Leicester, England
Joined: 07-14-2003


Message 4 of 22 (473215)
06-27-2008 6:47 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Granny Magda
06-27-2008 1:09 PM


quote:
Lenski's latest response to a request for his data is revealing ... about Lenski's attitude. Take a good look at the attitude our tax dollars are paying for.

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.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Granny Magda, posted 06-27-2008 1:09 PM Granny Magda has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 5 by randman, posted 06-27-2008 6:58 PM Dr Jack has not yet responded
 Message 6 by subbie, posted 06-27-2008 7:50 PM Dr Jack has not yet responded
 Message 8 by Granny Magda, posted 06-28-2008 8:29 AM Dr Jack has not yet responded

randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3238 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 5 of 22 (473219)
06-27-2008 6:58 PM
Reply to: Message 4 by Dr Jack
06-27-2008 6:47 PM


growing public opinion of evos
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.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by Dr Jack, posted 06-27-2008 6:47 PM Dr Jack has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 7 by Deftil, posted 06-27-2008 8:19 PM randman has not yet responded
 Message 9 by Granny Magda, posted 06-28-2008 8:41 AM randman has not yet responded
 Message 10 by Alasdair, posted 06-28-2008 2:05 PM randman has responded

subbie
Member (Idle past 83 days)
Posts: 3509
Joined: 02-26-2006


Message 6 of 22 (473227)
06-27-2008 7:50 PM
Reply to: Message 4 by Dr Jack
06-27-2008 6:47 PM


quote:
Do those at Conservapedia, and those that support it, actually feel they lost the exchange? I doubt it.

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


This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by Dr Jack, posted 06-27-2008 6:47 PM Dr Jack has not yet responded

Deftil
Member (Idle past 2795 days)
Posts: 128
From: Virginia, USA
Joined: 04-19-2008


Message 7 of 22 (473230)
06-27-2008 8:19 PM
Reply to: Message 5 by randman
06-27-2008 6:58 PM


Re: growing public opinion of evos
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.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by randman, posted 06-27-2008 6:58 PM randman has not yet responded

Granny Magda
Member
Posts: 2381
From: UK
Joined: 11-12-2007


Message 8 of 22 (473317)
06-28-2008 8:29 AM
Reply to: Message 4 by Dr Jack
06-27-2008 6:47 PM


What Does This Achieve?
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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by Dr Jack, posted 06-27-2008 6:47 PM Dr Jack has not yet responded

Granny Magda
Member
Posts: 2381
From: UK
Joined: 11-12-2007


Message 9 of 22 (473322)
06-28-2008 8:41 AM
Reply to: Message 5 by randman
06-27-2008 6:58 PM


Re: growing public opinion of evos
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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by randman, posted 06-27-2008 6:58 PM randman has not yet responded

Alasdair
Member (Idle past 4089 days)
Posts: 143
Joined: 05-13-2005


Message 10 of 22 (473355)
06-28-2008 2:05 PM
Reply to: Message 5 by randman
06-27-2008 6:58 PM


Re: growing public opinion of evos
What are you referring to by the actions of the Smithsonian?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by randman, posted 06-27-2008 6:58 PM randman has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 11 by NosyNed, posted 06-28-2008 2:13 PM Alasdair has not yet responded
 Message 12 by randman, posted 06-28-2008 3:13 PM Alasdair has responded

NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8868
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003
Member Rating: 7.2


Message 11 of 22 (473356)
06-28-2008 2:13 PM
Reply to: Message 10 by Alasdair
06-28-2008 2:05 PM


Simthsonian
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.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by Alasdair, posted 06-28-2008 2:05 PM Alasdair has not yet responded

randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3238 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 12 of 22 (473362)
06-28-2008 3:13 PM
Reply to: Message 10 by Alasdair
06-28-2008 2:05 PM


Re: growing public opinion of evos
Their behaviour, characterized as a "witchunt" by the Washington Post, towards someone working there that published an ID paper.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by Alasdair, posted 06-28-2008 2:05 PM Alasdair has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 13 by Alasdair, posted 06-28-2008 3:44 PM randman has not yet responded
 Message 14 by Alasdair, posted 06-28-2008 3:47 PM randman has responded

Alasdair
Member (Idle past 4089 days)
Posts: 143
Joined: 05-13-2005


Message 13 of 22 (473366)
06-28-2008 3:44 PM
Reply to: Message 12 by randman
06-28-2008 3:13 PM


Re: growing public opinion of evos
What if they had published an alchemy or astrology paper?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by randman, posted 06-28-2008 3:13 PM randman has not yet responded

Alasdair
Member (Idle past 4089 days)
Posts: 143
Joined: 05-13-2005


Message 14 of 22 (473369)
06-28-2008 3:47 PM
Reply to: Message 12 by randman
06-28-2008 3:13 PM


Re: growing public opinion of evos

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by randman, posted 06-28-2008 3:13 PM randman has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 15 by randman, posted 06-28-2008 3:53 PM Alasdair has responded

randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3238 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 15 of 22 (473372)
06-28-2008 3:53 PM
Reply to: Message 14 by Alasdair
06-28-2008 3:47 PM


Re: growing public opinion of evos
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.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by Alasdair, posted 06-28-2008 3:47 PM Alasdair has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 16 by Alasdair, posted 06-28-2008 6:15 PM randman has not yet responded

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019