Conservapedia gets roasted by evolutionary scientist

[Savonarola]

In the light of undeniable evidence for the arising of new traits via mutation, Andy Schlafly -- head honcho of Conservapedia, a right-wing, anti-evolution propaganda wiki -- loudly challenged article author Dr. Richard Lenski to release the data for his experimentation.

Here's the catch: the data was released when Lenski published the article in the first place.

Lenski sent a polite response to Schlafly's first letter, but Schlafly followed up with a slanderous second request and accusations of dishonesty. In fact, it seemed to be asking for the entirety of the data recorded over the duration of the experiment, which has spanned twenty years.

Lenski proceeded to rip Schalfly a new one, beating him at his own game. Read the entire exchange here.

[rubbar]

This made me lol. I'd be too embarrassed to leave that up on the website. It's even funnier to read the talk page.

I wonder what they would have done/would do if they actually received a strain of the bacteria. Judging by the letters alone the Creationist doesn't know anything about scientific standards or methods.

Lenski certainly didn't spare any politeness in the post-scripts. Which, I think, is good because it pointed out quite abit of fallacies on Schlaflys part.

I have a curious question, why is the concept of science so beyond the grasp of so many people? It's rather simple. . .

[RobertMadewell]

This is so funny. Andy Schlafly asked Lenski for the proof of his claims in the first letter. Lenski replied and told Schlafly where he could download the paper for free. And in the second letter, Schlafly asked again for ths data. Andy Schlafly ignored Lenski's paper which probably contains the "data" that he wants. This is a typical fundy tactic to make the professor look noncompliant. Probably the paper was way to technical for Andy Schlafly. I have a hard time reading scientific papers myself.

I now have a favorite quote from this exchange.

"It is as though a person (creationist) thinks that God must have the same limitations when it comes to creation as a person who is unable to understand, or even attempt to understand, the world in which we live. Isn’t that view insulting to God?" -Richard Lenski

[Savonarola]

This made me lol. I'd be too embarrassed to leave that up on the website.

1) I don't think Schlafly is intelligent enough to realize how hard he got his ass kicked.
2) Notice that Lenski promised to make a big deal out of it if he didn't post the exchange in its entirety. I know that a non-creationist has it mirrored somewhere in case Conservapedia tries any funny business. That said, it's already out, so maybe there's little to stop them.
On the minus side, this is giving Conservapedia some attention (i.e. free advertising).

I wonder what they would have done/would do if they actually received a strain of the bacteria.

They'd tell the university and the CDC to get Lenski's privileges revoked. He's not allowed to send cultures to uncertified people.

Judging by the letters alone the Creationist doesn't know anything about scientific standards or methods.

Well of course; why do you think he's a creationist?

I have a curious question, why is the concept of science so beyond the grasp of so many people? It's rather simple. . .

Because those people have been taught (and are therefore content to) get their answers from an old book and refuse to ask questions or test or investigate. It's the antithesis of science.

[Savonarola]

Probably the paper was way to technical for Andy Schlafly.

I think a napkin is way too technical for Andy Schlafly

[rubbar]

On the minus side, this is giving Conservapedia some attention (i.e. free advertising).

I have a curious question, why is the concept of science so beyond the grasp of so many people? It's rather simple. . .

Because those people have been taught (and are therefore content to) get their answers from an old book and refuse to ask questions or test or investigate. It's the antithesis of science.

I'd hope it'd be a negative advertising but some people are to thick to realise the weight of what Lenski said in the PS alone!

And complacency should have come to mind sooner -.-

I've heard creationists say "I understand Natural Selection, but I don't understand evolution--I didn't come from a monkey!" I know Natural Selection isn't the only mechanism by which Evolution operates, but isn't that like seeing one head to a seven headed dragon?