Dammit. I hate it when I’m right. Andy Schlafly of Conservapedia is planning on suing Lenski.
About a week ago, I predicted that Andy Schlafly may consider suing Lenski to get access to the data from his e. coli citrate experiment: despite Lenski’s willingness to give his data to a certified biologist, since Schlafly’s pride is now in issue, Andy wants a personal victory, and he’ll do anything he can to get it. Well, now Schlafly has issued the first “Conservapedia challenge,” urging his crack squad of stormtroopers homeschoolers to look for a way to sue Lenski into giving his data to someone who won’t understand it. Personally, I don’t think there’s a way: Lenski’s not a “public agency” within the meaning of FOIA (5 U.S.C. 522). But, for the sake of those of you that care, I’ll do some research on my own time and report back. Stay tuned.
In the meantime, look out world. Andy Schlafly, armed with legal knowledge, a personal score to settle, and NO sense of honesty whatsoever, is a scary thing. He has no honor and, as I’ve said, regardless of whether he has a case, he won’t hesitate to use his limited grasp of law to bludgeon you. He may be all bark and no bite, but a lawyer’s bark has been known to cost money in and of itself.
Update: the debate rages. It seems Schlafly’s just bluffing… again. I’m SHOCKED! If you’re just coming to this post, please take a look at the comments: as one of the posters there points out, Schlafly’s intense desire to stare down anyone that looks at him – evinced in this whole Lenski debacle, and his conduct at Conservapedia – can all probably be explained by his ardent desire to please mommy. He is the last of three boys, a second-career lawyer who abandoned a good electrical engineering job… it all screams “LOOK AT ME, MOM. AREN’T I GOOD?”
The hell of it is that transparency and collegiality in data sharing are good things in principle.
Unfortunately, the process of requesting data has been so abused by the likes of Schlafly and McIntyre’s flying monkeys that it has fallen into disrepute.
Nowadays, when I hear party #1 demand belligerently that party #2 disclose his data, I automatically assume that party #1 is an ignorant blowhard for whom ideological point-scoring ranks much higher than the dispassionate search for truth.
Posted by jre | July 3, 2008, 11:52 amThe one upside to Schlafly suing is that it would ruin what little standing he has in the legal world (assuming he had any in the first place).
Posted by Radioactive afikomen | July 3, 2008, 11:54 amOh, dear. Now he’s going to have to sue you, too, for pointing out that he is not honest. (Of course, I hear that a statement is not libelous if it’s true.)
Posted by Zeno | July 3, 2008, 12:07 pmIf he sues me, I’ll laugh all the way to his disbarment proceedings :-).
And answering an earlier question, my avatar is Bucky from Get Fuzzy just because… I don’t know. I might want to change it some day, but to what? Hmmm.
Posted by Ames | July 3, 2008, 12:11 pmWhy not use a shot of Gregory Peck as Atticus Finch (from To Kill a Mockingbird)?
Posted by Radioactive afikomen | July 3, 2008, 1:00 pmOh, my.
Posted by Blake Stacey | July 3, 2008, 1:19 pmSchlafly is just…absolutely…incredible. This is just inane. I wonder how Prof. Lenski will take this.
Posted by Joy Wang | July 3, 2008, 4:30 pmI sincerely hope this idiocy becomes another black eye for creationism, and that the Academy starts giving some firm public support to Prof. Lenski. Ames, I’m thinking about writing a letter to a research journal so that more scientists are aware of the situation – perhaps we can collaborate.
Posted by James F | July 3, 2008, 5:29 pmAschafly is a lawyer with a BS in electrical engineering. If Lenski gives him a sample of bacteria, what could Aschafly do with it? Dump it in a cottage cheese container and stick it in the refrigerator?
Posted by JoJo | July 3, 2008, 8:03 pmi think the more interesting story is A.S. being phyllis’s youngest son and the one who works most doggedly trying to please her …
it’s like, “look at me, mommy! please pay attention to me! i know your first child — your first son — is gay, but i’m still here … PLEASE PAY ATTENTION TO ME!!!!”
never underestimate the family psychology. i think it explains A LOT about every move A.S. has made (at least as reported by, you, ames, as i, admittedly had never heard about A.S. or conservapedia before your posts hit … though, i DID always know about phyllis’s gay son …)
Posted by didionsmommy | July 3, 2008, 8:11 pmWhy sue?
He can just repeat the experiment. All he needs is some e. coli.
Hell, I can poop them out for him if he wants.
Posted by didionsdaddy | July 3, 2008, 9:37 pmJames, I’d LOVE to collaborate. That’d be awesome. AND, great comments to this thread. I mentioned you all above the line :-).
And, DD, that’s what a normal person would do. Andy’s not a normal person…
Posted by Ames | July 3, 2008, 10:49 pmExcuse me, but what kind of electrical engineer was he if he has trouble grasping a basic concept of the square root of -1 (also known as “i”, the imaginary number)? Even with his creepy brother Roger having a PhD in math!
See:
http://rationalwiki.com/wiki/Conservapedia:Conservapedian_mathematics#A_Digression_on_Complex_Numbers
That is a basic concept required for differential equations, electrical circuits… and well… reality! And then there is Euler’s formula! Presently reading:
Amazon.com: An Imaginary Tale: The Story of "i" [the square root of minus one] (9780691127989): Paul J. Nahin: Books
Posted by HCN | July 4, 2008, 1:11 amI’d just like to point out this comical part of the Conservapædia Lenski talk page. These kinds of sites are always good for a laugh:
“This man is nothing but a farce
Why must we, the children of God, even acknowledge this liberal atheist (as if there is any other form of an atheist) on our glorious site? We are only feeding his overinflated ego by doing so.”
Posted by Sir Jebbington | July 4, 2008, 12:32 pmWow … a lawyer has to ask a bunch of creocons to act as his legal research team?
I suppose in the interest of accuracy I’d best modify that to “alleged lawyer.”
Even Phyllis must be thinking “Boy shoulda stuck to electrons.”
Posted by Metro | July 4, 2008, 1:14 pmLet’s take up a collection to deliver the data, as hard copy, in raw binary.
Yeah, it’ll cost a lot, and sacrifice a forest of trees, but we’ll get to look all expectant about Schlafly’s results now that he has the data he requested.
Posted by Denis Loubet | July 4, 2008, 4:21 pmI am impressed by his idiocy. Even at my High School, which is full of idiots, almost none can hope to compete with Assfly’s incompetence.
Posted by ibyea | July 4, 2008, 4:27 pmI wait for the day when he dissolves conservapedia and comes out to say “Haha, it was all an elaborate hoax. You didn’t believe anyone could be so stupid, did you?” in a giant gotcha moment.
He does a mighty good job at pretending, though.
Posted by Anonymous Coward | July 4, 2008, 8:44 pmHah, yes! Anonymous, I’ve thought the same for a very long time, but he ALWAYS tops himself. In fact, one of the subtle joys in life is creating an account under a new IP address and trying to use their own language without sounding like a parodist, and being called out for it. It’s IMPOSSIBLE.
It just proves 1,000 over how indistinguishable Schlafly is from parody.
Posted by Ames | July 4, 2008, 10:14 pmI would like to see Schlafly’s qualifications (e.g. biology courses he’s taken since 9th grade) listed somewhere, preferably next to Lenski’s qualifications, to point out the incredibly obvious fact that Schlafly has absolutely no place questioning any scientific article, whatsoever. I hate that no one seems to point out that our years of training as scientists seems to count for nothing!! All those years of graduate school, all those courses in biochemistry, metabolism, organic chemistry, really all we were doing is being brainwashed into becoming liberal atheists by our professors (themselves nothing more than preachers of BIG SCIENCE). Nevermind that we are curing diseases, sending spacecraft to the outer reaches of the solar system, and generally making this planet a little better place to live. Can someone point out that if you have never taken a science class, you have no place criticizing scientific results you don’t like?? If Schlafly does not like Lenski’s results, he can start by getting himself a PhD from an accredited university.
Posted by Monika | July 5, 2008, 2:11 amCheck the dialog pages and the history of the Lenski pages. One bit of data that Schlafly claimed wasn’t supplied was the concentration of glucose used in the experiments. That information was actually presented on the very first page of the paper. See how Aschlafly deleted my entries and references to that bit of allegedly missing data.
If he’s going to claim that Lenski is withholding data, then he’s going to have a hard time demonstrating he’s made a good faith effort to find it first.
Posted by Argon | July 5, 2008, 9:40 amYeah, I see you over there, you’re doing well :-). Andy’s trying FOIA now. WTF.
Posted by Ames | July 5, 2008, 10:53 amHe hasn’t done an MTA. He truly doesn’t seem to appreciate that one can replicate most of the work, including the crucial ‘replay experiments’, if one has those strains in hand. Or maybe he’s trying to save face. The good thing is that it appears that even the ‘regulars’ there (of which I’m certainly not), know how bad it looks.
Q: Are all the younger Schlaflys employed by the Eagle Forum?
Posted by Argon | July 5, 2008, 2:52 pmI’ve just posted an article on this looking at Schlafly’s real strategy, my thesis being that in attacking his science skillz (or lack thereof) we’re slightly missing the point here.
http://layscience.net/?q=node/170
Posted by Martin | July 6, 2008, 11:14 amArgon – Lenski published the recipe for the media elsewhere:
https://myxo.css.msu.edu/ecoli/dm25liquid.html
But it’s a variation on Davis Minimal broth … so Andy is probably going to complain that the data is incomplete because he has to look up the recipe for DMB.
Posted by lazygardens | July 6, 2008, 1:02 pmYes, I gave that link to Schlafly days ago as have others since then. He dismissed the links as a classic internet diversion tactic. Go figure: Not only doesn’t he understand the paper (never having read it), but he doesn’t even know where to go to find the relevant information.
He’s out hunting Heffalumps.
Posted by Argon | July 6, 2008, 2:40 pm“Lenski to get access to the data from his e. coli citrate experiment: despite Lenski’s willingness to give his data to a certified biologist”
I find it interesting that there is no chat about “certified biologists” interested in the data presented by Lenski. It appears that ID and Creationists are more interested in the data than evolutionary scientists themselves.
Posted by Michael | July 8, 2008, 12:43 pmHello!
I am a lady of 22, I found you hear and picked interest in you.
My name is Joy .I wish to be in love relationship with you
and may be discover ourselves as real partners for life. Please send your email address in my inbox ;; And not site please
With this email adderss( joy200muoka@yahoo.com )
Thanks from my heart;
Yours in love,
Joy.
Posted by joynice | July 10, 2008, 12:33 amNew page to enjoy:
http://www.conservapedia.com/Flaws_in_Richard_Lenski_Study
Wherein Andy tries to expose flaws in the paper but again reveals comprehension problems.
Posted by Argon | July 13, 2008, 3:43 pmWait… The “data” in question is a significant number of samples of Ebola… right?
And Schlafly is untrained to safely handle said virus, correct?
Hell, I say Lenski gives it to him.
Posted by ProtoMeTheUs | July 18, 2008, 2:10 amI don’t think Schlafly has any idea at all what the data actually are, nor does he care. He’s just trying to make Lenski look bad by making it seem like he won’t “release the data”. It’s basically the “Richard Dawkins is not a professor” Situation all over again.
I’m guessing this is some sort of underhanded lawyer tactic.
Posted by lanfranc | July 18, 2008, 5:26 am