…and this is a 
Schlafly wants to play rough now
Category: Creationism • Kooks
Posted on: July 4, 2008 9:40 AM, by PZ Myers
Andy Schlafly is one persistent fool. After harrassing Richard Lenski not once, but twice, prompting one of the best smackdowns on the intertubes, Schlafly now wants to take some vague sort of legal action against Lenski to get his own copy of every bit of data Lenski has generated in 20 years … data that he wouldn't understand, and which would include bacterial samples that he couldn't maintain, and requiring so much effort to collect (can you imagine having to go through 20 years worth of stored bacterial samples to create a copy?) that it would disrupt research in the lab to an unacceptable degree. That's what he wants, of course: he's a petulant incompetent who doesn't like the conclusions of research into evolution, and who has to be smarting over the international peals of laughter that have been made at his expense.
Here's the text of Schlafly's pretentious "challenge" (Sorry, I'm not linking to the Conservapædia fecal pond).
A Conservapedia challenge is an unsolved problem or task that offers the promise of bettering society when lawfully accomplished.
The first Conservapedia challenge is to find a legal means for obtaining public disclosure of Lenski's federally funded data.
I don't see how figuring out a legal strategy that will enable creationists to shut down biology labs with harassment will better society.
Politics
Comments
Maybe he could try actually reading his paper?
Posted by: Citizen Z | July 4, 2008 9:47 AM
IANAL, but supposing that someone does come up with a legal path for Schafly to follow to harass Lensky wouldn't the fact that this challenge was posted on Conservapaedia be excellent evidence that such a legal move on Schafly's part was malicious and an abuse of process?
If so then couldn't Lensky promptly countersue Schafly for harassment - or should he just take the high ground with yet another devastatingly polite smackdown of a letter?
Posted by: Lilly de Lure | July 4, 2008 9:51 AM
"No population evolved the capacity to exploit citrate for >30,000 generations, although each population tested billions of mutations."
Hypothesis:
I'm thinking it will take >30,0000 generations of Schlaflys to produce a decent human being.
Start the experiment!
Posted by: CalGeorge | July 4, 2008 9:53 AM
ARGH! Apologies to Richard Lenski for my misspelling of his name throughout my previous post!
Posted by: Lilly de Lure | July 4, 2008 9:55 AM
"A Conservapedia challenge is an unsolved problem or task that offers the promise of bettering society when lawfully accomplished."
Oh My. So many options:
Eliminate once for all any attempt to sneak creationism as science in the public school.
No more tax free pass to religion groups.
A 200% tax on most gas guzzling SUVs.
This is fun, I could go on all day.Damn work.
Posted by: JJ | July 4, 2008 9:55 AM
No! No breeding Schlaflys!
Posted by: Captain Mike | July 4, 2008 9:56 AM
Captain Mike said:
Thank you very much for lodging that mental image into my skull so soon after lunch!
Posted by: Lilly de Lure | July 4, 2008 9:58 AM
First off, Happy Birthday, Patricia! And to our great country!
Since moron Schlafly wants Lenski output of data, then give it to the demented creotard. But have it translated to Swahili, or the Albanian dialects or some other barely decipherable screed!
Posted by: Holbach | July 4, 2008 10:00 AM
Conservapedia is a treasure trove of unintentional humor. The real Conservapedia challenge is to be taken seriously. Not going to happen.
Posted by: Zeno | July 4, 2008 10:01 AM
It's already in science - to Schlafly that is a barely decipherable screed.
Posted by: Lilly de Lure | July 4, 2008 10:03 AM
Perhaps someone should phone Schlafly up and read the paper to him, since the relevant data he's squealing for are ALREADY THERE, dammit.
You'd have to read veeeery slowly, though, and do squeaky voices for the bacteria to keep him interested.
Posted by: MissPrism | July 4, 2008 10:03 AM
OT, but here's an online petition to crash:
http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/bbc_springer/index.html -- I'd advise people to sign it with fake e-mail addresses, these sort of sites tend to be spam-farms. The likelihood of it being acted on by the BBC is slim to nil, so if pharyngulites crash it with comments opposing the petition...
Posted by: MarkW | July 4, 2008 10:04 AM
Lenski's team should collect a few hundred pounds of dog shit and deliver it to Schlafly's office. "THERE'S your goddam bacterial samples, pal!"
Can't we have Schlafly declared an enemy combatant and locked into an iron mask?
Posted by: Sylvester McMonkey McBean | July 4, 2008 10:05 AM
#11 Actually, I think hand puppets are a better way to go when dealing with 2 year olds.
Posted by: Larry | July 4, 2008 10:06 AM
Posted by: Mystyk | July 4, 2008 10:09 AM
I still remember how our society changed from the discovery of nylon eating bugs.
Posted by: Dutch Delight | July 4, 2008 10:11 AM
Lilly de Lure @ 10 But of course! Perhaps if we took all the difficult words out and made it more easy for him to grasp as in, "See tree, leaf on tree, me want touch leaf, me moron Schlafly, duh!
Posted by: Holbach | July 4, 2008 10:12 AM
Larry - puppets! What a fantastic idea! I'm up for making some finger puppets, if someone else with more camera skills wants to make a video.
What characters do we need apart from Darwin, Lenski, Blount and Andy Schlafly in a dunce's cap?
Posted by: MissPrism | July 4, 2008 10:13 AM
Good. Schalfly can now demonstrate in court before an audience of dozens (about all who care) that he is indeed a psychotic moron. Hmmm, is this yet again another case of a fundie Death Cultist persecuting an evolutionary biologist? Rudi Boa was stabbed to death by one such in Australia.
Wait and see. I doubt this is a serious lawsuit and after a few headlines in the blogosphere it will probably be abandoned and forgotten.
There is a problem with filing frivolous lawsuits. They can themselves be considered legal torts (injuries). The relevant case law is malicious prosecution and abuse of the (judicial) process. If Schlafly pursues it, Lenksi should win and countersue the loon.
Posted by: raven | July 4, 2008 10:13 AM
Okay this was funny until the part that they wanted live lab samples of bacteria.....
I am neither a lawyer nor a biologist but something tells me that the system is not fucked up enough for these people to get their wish. Can someone experienced in these matters please reassure me?
Posted by: Feynmaniac | July 4, 2008 10:13 AM
I'm thinking it will take >30,0000 generations of Schlaflys to produce a decent human being.
Ugh, no. The thought of that many Schla-Flies extending that far into the future makes me feel slightly nauseous. I'm not sure the world could survive it. Anyways, it can't work: it requires that there be selective pressure towards decency and honesty. As long as its natural host, Credulus bigotae survives (and this seems assured), the Schla-Fly will always have a comfortable niche.
Posted by: Eamon Knight | July 4, 2008 10:14 AM
D'oh!
Posted by: Lilly de Lure | July 4, 2008 10:20 AM
While we are admiring slugs, Lenski's work has already been independently reproduced more or less. This is the most stringent test of a scientist's work, independent repetition. If Schafly could think, he would know that.
Hall isolated cit+ E. coli in 1982, way before Lenski. He says that it required 2 mutations. Given the methodological differences, plates incubated for a long time in a start and end point procedure versus serial liquid culture, he might well have missed one or more "potentiating" mutations.
Lenski's first mutation was "potentiating" but otherwise without phenotype. My wild guess is he picked up a mutator as 1/3 of his lines acquired a mut+ phenotype.
mutator=mutations causing higher mutation rates. Seen commonly when cultures are under severe physiological stress and possibly an example of "adaptive mutation."
Posted by: raven | July 4, 2008 10:20 AM
If in the off chance that the lawsuit doesn't get dismissed out of hand, I hope Lenski slaps a really large bill on Schlafly for the materials and wasted time.
Posted by: Yoo | July 4, 2008 10:21 AM
I think Lenski should comply. What could be better than delivering a collection of jam jars containing e-coli colonies to Conservapedia.
"Jar 1 contains the original colony, note the nutty, turd like flavour, quite different to the citrusy tang of generation 31,501"
Posted by: Quidam | July 4, 2008 10:28 AM
Lilly, it's really refreshing to see people admitting errors. Kudos.
Posted by: John Morales | July 4, 2008 10:29 AM
Holback said:
Personally I think that's far too kind - I'd be in favour of rallying as many pharyngulites as possible together for photocopying duties, copy all the relevant lab reports, raw data e.t.c and then arrange for the lot to be dumped on Schlafly's lawn.
And then send him the bill for delivery.
Posted by: Lilly de Lure | July 4, 2008 10:30 AM
I REALLY hope the courts see a problem with giving biohazardous material to religious fanatical organizations.
Posted by: Feynmaniac | July 4, 2008 10:34 AM
#26 Thank you John Morales - I just wish I didn't make quite so many spelling errors to admit too!
Posted by: Lilly de Lure | July 4, 2008 10:34 AM
Even though I'm an atheist, I just wish a massive hand would come down from the sky and give Schlafly a good slap.
Posted by: Matt | July 4, 2008 10:37 AM
How do you pronounce "Schlafly?" Does it rhyme with waffly?
Posted by: MissPrism | July 4, 2008 10:45 AM
I have a few questions:
A) Is Lenski really federally funded in any signifigant way?
B) Why does Shyster-Fly think that this is going to help is cause any?
Posted by: Brendan S | July 4, 2008 10:47 AM
Matt #30: Calvin (the cartoon character) said something along the lines of "It's hard to be religious when certain people are never incinerated by bolts of lightning" in reference to the bully Moe.
If this goes to court, I hope Schlafly finds out what it's like to be Clifford Shoemaker.
Posted by: chancelikely | July 4, 2008 10:50 AM
Boy, without a -80 freezer, those samples are really going to stink after a while.
I'm just guessing Schlafly doesn't have a -80. He'd probably kill himself with a LN2 backup system.
Posted by: MikeG | July 4, 2008 10:52 AM
Has anyone come up with an apt title for the illustration of the moron accompanying this post and many others? How about this: "RCL" - "Raving Creotard Lunatic" Can you imagine the insane gibberish emanating from that religion soaked dolt when confronted with implacable reason? And it is being puked in the form of glossolalia! Reminds me of the scene from the movie "Blazing Saddles" when the drunken incoherent saddle tramp gets up to voice his opinions at the town meeting and lets loose with a torrent of undecipherable gibberish, and one of the Johnson clan says, "Now who can argue with that?"
Posted by: Holbach | July 4, 2008 10:52 AM
Say, aren't these Conservapaedia types the same ones who always gripe and whine and moan about judicial activism when they don't like a court decision? And aren't they also often the ones who cry and bawl and mewl the loudest about undue government involvement in their affairs?
(scratches chin)
And here he is, trying to game the system because someone won't just knuckle under to his mad leet badassawesomeness. Should he have the brass cojones to actually pester the court with this nonsense, someone ought to file an amicus brief with those letters in it...
I'd like to say I'm surprised, but that would be a little white lie with bamboo sprinkles on top.
The MadPanda, FCD
(Happy Birthday, Patricia!)
Posted by: The MadPanda | July 4, 2008 10:55 AM
Perhaps by "legal means" he's simply ruling out illegal means. With followers like his, you can see why he'd need to spell that out.
Posted by: Moggie | July 4, 2008 10:56 AM
Don't fret, Lehli. Spellings are just phonetic approximations. Especially in names, where heterography is rampant.
Posted by: Xayniuh | July 4, 2008 10:56 AM
Holbach, I think it's a Gumby, one of the Monty Python characters who, despite being incredibly stupid, believed themselves to be capable of brain surgery.
Posted by: MissPrism | July 4, 2008 10:57 AM
This case may have some implications for the Schlafly hoo-hah. If these people are really demanding bacterial cultures, then maybe someone needs to be reporting Schlafly and his cohort to the relevant regulatory and/or law enforcement agencies. At the very least, Lenski needs to demand all of the regulatory documents (IBC minutes and protocol approvals, transport permits, MTAs, and the like). Maybe some documentation of the biosafety containment steps that Schlafly has in place. And so on.
Posted by: Art | July 4, 2008 10:57 AM
I wanna see Schalfly's legal precendence for this case.
[QUOTE]"Your honor, he wouldn't show me the data and I really need to see it so that I can prove he's wrong."
"What's you're scientific expertice?"
[i]Insert cricket sound here.[/i][/QUOTE]
Posted by: JStein | July 4, 2008 10:58 AM
Eamon Knight @#21
I am old school, so I still cringe when someone says nauseous when they mean nauseated. OED agrees with this new usage, but like I say, I'm old school. Just saying.
Posted by: Ignorant Athiest | July 4, 2008 10:58 AM
Matt @ 30 How about something more realistic, as falling into a sinkhole or other natural event. I am sure they are a lot more numerous than your nebulous wish.
Posted by: Holbach | July 4, 2008 10:59 AM
Moggie, I read it like that too, then dismissed the thought as paranoid... but maybe it isn't. They really are demented.
Posted by: MissPrism | July 4, 2008 11:02 AM
Anyway, uh... didn't Lenski already detail how and under what conditions the data (and samples) would and could be obtained? Ash Fly is only proving what a moron he is. I especially love how he never fails to utilize that wingnut red-cape phrase "Federally funded". Hey, Androo, the Executive branch of the US Governemnt is "Federally funded", yet I don't see you screaming and crying and threatening legal action to increase its accountability or transparency.
The Conservatedium Challenge: To find a single ounce of intelligence or integrity in that steaming pile of offal.
Posted by: Kseniya | July 4, 2008 11:04 AM
Posted by: llewelly | July 4, 2008 11:10 AM
If he wants it, I say send it over.
Remove everything that he might not want to share.
Gather everything that's digital text, and fax it over, let him pay for it.
Gather everything that's on paper, make a copy and bury his car with it.
Gather everything biologic, pour it in a barrel and dump it on his lawn, then call whatever agency deal with the permit
Gather all audio, video, computer models and email them over.
Then charge him for everything.
Or better yet, tell him where can pick it up, and charge him storage costs until he does.
Posted by: Alcari | July 4, 2008 11:14 AM
@#31 "Schlafly".. pronunciation guide : [id-ee-uht]
Posted by: peter | July 4, 2008 11:20 AM
Miss Prism @ 18
Yes, please also include Larry Fafarman.
Posted by: Benjamin Franklin | July 4, 2008 11:21 AM
I dont own 'my' data. The university does (there can be fights over it when students/profs leave a uni).
The university also owns 'my' grants.
So technically, Schalfly will be 'suing' the Michigan State, not Lenski. lol!
Posted by: ERV | July 4, 2008 11:23 AM
Schlafly could reproduce Lenkski's work quite easily. E. coli K12 is ubiquitous and commercially available for a nominal fee from many supply companies.
It would take undergraduate levels of microbiology expertise and simple equipment, incubators, freezers, autoclave, scales for weighing and so on.
Repetition of another's work is far more stringent than just reviewing someone else's data. Which he couldn't understand anyway.
In any case, Lenski's work has already been pre hoc repeated by another researcher, independently. Really, Schlafly is just being a jerk to be a jerk.
Posted by: raven | July 4, 2008 11:23 AM
mutator=mutations causing higher mutation rates. Seen commonly when cultures are under severe physiological stress and possibly an example of "adaptive mutation."
Speaking of idiots and mutators, Dave Scot of UD is making a hooplah over an "error" in the first paragraph of Lenski's paper. Lenski speaks of selection being driven by "random mutation", whereas Scot insists that non-random mutation should be considered as well. Scot then goes on to cite a paper where mutational rates/regions vary according to stress. According to Scot, mutations that are restricted to something less than the entire genome can no longer be considered "random".
Scot should google "mutational hotspot". He'd get about 263,000 hits.
Posted by: ngong | July 4, 2008 11:31 AM
For Brendan S @32
"I have a few questions:
A) Is Lenski really federally funded in any signifigant way?"...
Just as a note, historically, almost all serious academic work (in the USA, al least), is supported by grants from the Federal government. Published work lists this grant support in the acknowledgements. The paper under discussion from Dr. Lenski's lab acknowledges support from the NSF and a Defense Fun Bio grant for this work. A scientist of Dr. Lenski's stature is likely to have multiple grants from several different funding agencies to support the work of his laboratory (and incidently to financially support, through negotiated "indirect costs", the institution at which the work is performed).
Posted by: mikkle | July 4, 2008 11:33 AM
Hang on - Schlafly's asking people to send him E. Coli. That's the same bug as causes gastroenteritis, peritonitis, nasty urinary tract infections...
I say, send him a truckload. Hell, my kitchen sink hasn't been unblocked for a week, I'll get some in the post tonight!
Posted by: yunshui | July 4, 2008 11:34 AM
How do you pronounce "Schlafly?" Does it rhyme with waffly?
Posted by: MissPrism
Despite the spelling, it is pronounced shit-fly.
Posted by: Janine ID | July 4, 2008 11:38 AM
Time flies like an arrow, Schlafly's like a turd.
Posted by: Moggie | July 4, 2008 11:42 AM
I think Schlafly has lost a lot face and feels he needs to recover some of it, or find a more face saving way to fail. ERV # 50 is right, MSU owns the cultures and data. I can see Schlafly suing Lenkski, and the case being tossed due to ownership issues. That way Schlafly can point to the "activist court" as his scapegoat. If he does sue MSU and wins (unlikely), I'm reasonably sure that the courts will make sure NIH protocols are followed, and only send the cultures to somebody who can handle them properly, and has the proper safeguards in place.
Posted by: Nerd of Redhead | July 4, 2008 11:47 AM
I posted my first win to this challenge (made shortly after the challenge came up) to my blog No Latitude. Someone pointed Schlafly to this on the talk page, but he stated that I gave *too* much unnecessary information, and he wasn't satisfied. He wanted answers to his questions on Lenski's page.
So I followed up and answered them as best I could, and sent most of the questions back for clarification.
I certainly hope for my win. If you want to see my responses, click the link below. I'm clearing my mantle already in anticipation!
Posted by: No Latitude | July 4, 2008 11:59 AM
Really even most of the nutters at Conservapedia realize Schlafly is out of line. There's a ton of dissent over there about over there as well.
Schlafly just keeps repeating over and over in his comments that he wants the data "for public scrutiny" and not so he or anyone at conservapedia can do any sort of analysis. Which is exactly what Lenski has made available...his paper is free to be read by anyone. Of course the original materials might only be really accessible to scientists, but that's a matter of practicality, not conspiracy. But that's his mindset - this study does not agree with his beliefs and so he assumes everyone in the scientific community is involved in some sort of conspiracy.
What he's asking for just makes no sense whatsoever - even were this to go to trial it would get thrown out immediately as Schlafly cannot be anything but vague about what he is asking for. And what would even happen if he won? He'd get a bunch of materials that he would have no hope of analyzing without the scientists which i'm sure he would assume are in on the conspiracy.
Posted by: Chris Nowak | July 4, 2008 12:00 PM
A day in the life of Dr. Rufus T. Lenski-
Schlafly: Your Excellency, I really don't know what to say.
Lenski: I wouldn't know what to say if I was in your place, maybe you can suggest something.
You do suggest something. To me you suggest a baboon.
I'm sorry I said that. It isn't fair to the rest of the baboons.
Schlafly: This man's conduct is inexcusable
PZ: Gentlemen!
Lenski: I did not come here to be insulted.
Schlafly: You Swine!
Lenski: Come again?
Schlafly: You worm!
Lenski: Once more.
Schlafly: You upstart!
Lenski: That's it!
Lenski slaps Schlafly
Schlafly: I'm afraid this regrettable occurrence may plunge our NOMAs into war. I've said enough. I'm a man of few words.
Lenski: I'm a man of one word. Scram!
Lenski: A man doesn't live who can call a Lenski an upstart.
Schlafly leaves
Lenski: Good Day, my sweet.
PZ: Your Excellency, I must speak to you.
Lenski: I'll see you at the theater where they're showing Expelled. I'll hold your seat till you get there. After you get there, you're on your own.
Pharyngula minion: His Excellency's car!
Pharyngula minion: His Excellency's car!
Done with apologies and eternal gratitude towards Groucho et al.
Posted by: Benjamin Franklin | July 4, 2008 12:11 PM
Wasn't some poor microbiologist harrassed by the FBI/department of homeland security/ministry of truth for mailing some harmless bacto samples to an artist friend?
That pretty much means that Schlalflyl is encouraging a felony by demanding samples sent to him. Someone should look into that.
Posted by: Sili | July 4, 2008 12:11 PM
Thanks for the shoutout PZ! There's a post linked from that one talking about how Sxhlafly tosses around the law just to threaten people; I think this is another one of those times. Its amazing how someone can be so preachy about biblical morality (stone teh gheys!!) while still thinking that lying for Jesus and tossing around phony lawsuits is an ok thing to do.
Posted by: Ames | July 4, 2008 12:13 PM
While they're at it, someone put into Schlafly's hands a science textbook that is not from a place like The Discovery Institute, and does not contain the phrase, "Evolution is just a theory."
Maybe with a little help, Schlafly can understand that peer-review does not mean that someone else setup and repeated the same experiment over the same period of time before publication.
Posted by: No Latitude | July 4, 2008 12:15 PM
@ #60:
Excellent though she was, I don't really see PZ as Margaret Dumont.
Posted by: Moggie | July 4, 2008 12:19 PM
Moggie-
Your'e right. The beard has got to go.
Posted by: Benjamin Franklin | July 4, 2008 12:22 PM
If he files a lawsuit, he would lose badly. But I think he has no other choice. There have been tons of negative reviews on that site of his, and he knows that everyone is watching him closely, creationists and normal people alike.
So he has to try, even if to save face to the rest of the readers of that site of his. And yes, he will lose badly. But of course then he can write a huge rant on that page of his about how unconstitutional and stupid and liberal the judge was (Behe's rant about Jones comes to mind). So he will probably sue, unless he is afraid Lenski will counter him. Consider it a move of the desperate... or the delusional.
To people like me, he is just showing off what he really is: an idiot who, when given a proper whopping of a counterargument, reverts to a state most resemblant to a dung throwing monkey (see the pathetic entry on Lenski on his page for proof). Quite amusing, for as long as the glass wall is high enough.
Posted by: Arno | July 4, 2008 12:22 PM
30 000 generations of Schaflys to evolve a decent human being?
Assuming that the average generation time over the history of our species is somewhere between 15 and 35 years, then there hasn't been 30 000 generations of H. sapiens yet! In fact, 30 000 generations ago might even be before our last common ancestors with Neanderthals.
Actually, this explains a great deal. . . .
Posted by: amphiox | July 4, 2008 12:22 PM
I get so irate when these idiots act like this. They have an unwarranted sense of entitlement (funny that, conservatives that decry entitlement acting entitled - who thought they could be SO hypocritical...) to things they have no business or expertise even talking about, let alone questioning in their exquisitely ignorant and intolerant ways. Schlafly demanding data from a "federally-funded scientist" is like a speeding driver demanding to be let go after getting pulled over because he pays the cop's salary. This sentiment is just oozing from every pore of their argument. They have nothing to go on, so they'll glom onto the money issue because everyone's tax dollars goes to it, and jump up and down like a petulant screaming child in need of discipline. They are dishonest 100%, and ho no intention of listening, only muddying the works up. They are the most pernicious of malcontents because they do not seek actual resolution, only disruption for their petty fairy tale cause.
I know this is all obvious, but dammit, I can't stop getting angry at this bullshit.
Posted by: BlueIndependent | July 4, 2008 12:24 PM
He's a bloke, it's probably something cock-related. Someone give him a penis-gourd, maybe that'll shut him up and stop him harasing working scientists.
Greg's an anthropologist, he's bound to have a few lying around.
Posted by: Peter Mc | July 4, 2008 12:28 PM
Then do what I do when you're angry.
Take out the wit and snarkiness, and use it to point out how asinine these people are. Showcase that their holier-than-thou attitude is really, deep down, hilarious.
Beat down giants with humor, and you'll win.
Posted by: No Latitude | July 4, 2008 12:29 PM
If only Lenski could just send him a vial of the damn bacteria and let him figure out what to do. But I guess these things have to be regulated.
Posted by: Epistaxis | July 4, 2008 12:35 PM
Could the president order to have Schlafly's testicles crushed if he does not read Lenski's paper?
Posted by: AndreasB | July 4, 2008 12:41 PM
Benjamin Franklin @ 60 Ha!, no apologies for "Duck Soup", but with the eternal gratitude to Groucho and the boys and poor eternally put-upon Margaret Dumont! One of their best! A gem from the movie I wish Lenski would apply to moron Schlafly: "I've got a good mind to go out and join a club and beat you over the head with it" Ha!, do I have your attention now you dimwit?
Posted by: Holbach | July 4, 2008 12:53 PM
I must object. Swahili is far from barely decipherable. It's a mix of Arabic and various Bantu languages, and as a lingua franca that likely had its roots in a pidgin or creole over a thousand years ago, most of the more difficult and uncommon phonemes have been weathered away over time (for instance, though it retains the noun class structure of Bantu languages, it is unlike most of them in that it is not tonal). Though fluency in Swahili requires one to be familiar with the myriad sayings and idioms that flavour the language, a working proficiency can be gained in as little as a month, and speakers of Spanish will find their accents praised by native Swahili speakers.
Elimu haina mwisho!
Posted by: Brownian, OM | July 4, 2008 12:56 PM
Michigan State University is not small potatoes. We're talking about a major land-grant research university that can afford a veritable stable of attorneys. What does Schlafly think will happen if he starts buzzing around the head of one of MSU's most prominent and productive researchers, threatening to hobble his work with ignorant and frivolous legal hassles?
Schlafly's about to run afoul of a Schla-fly-swatter. Gotta hand it to the guy; his masochism must know no bounds.
Posted by: Julie Stahlhut | July 4, 2008 1:05 PM
Brownian, OM @ 74 Yes, but will Schlafly grasp it?
Posted by: Holbach | July 4, 2008 1:06 PM
I doubt that Schlafly will follow through with a lawsuit. This is just internet saber rattling. Or in the creos case, clown hat rattling.
There are major questions of legal standing, probable cause, jurisdiction and so on. Not to mention that frivolous lawsuits can be torts themselves, malicious prosecution and abuse of the judicial process. He could find himself being countersued for legal fees and damages and end up owing Lenski big money as well as an apology.
Not to mention he could buy E. coli K12 for a few bucks and repeat the experiments himself. Which have already been repeated in 1982 by another researcher.
This is such a stupid and unprofitable line of action that even a moron such as Schlafly will figure it out. Only an idiot would pursue it much farther. Hmmmm, well I guess we will see if Schlafly is a moron or an idiot.
Posted by: raven | July 4, 2008 1:21 PM
Yes, but will Schlafly grasp it?
Who knows? He's gotta be fluent in at least one language, and it sure doesn't seem to be in English.
Posted by: Brownian, OM | July 4, 2008 1:22 PM
Sabre rattling. I like that metaphor. His target is equipped with a Tomahawk missile, an Abrams Tank, and a M-16, and he tries to threaten him with a sabre.
Now that is dedicated conservatism.
Posted by: amphiox | July 4, 2008 1:33 PM
Has anyone shown Shitfly his ED article? It might give him something better to worry about.
Posted by: Dustin | July 4, 2008 1:34 PM
Swahili is far from barely decipherable.
I'm sure it is to Schlafly. He has enough trouble with English.
Posted by: Cheezits | July 4, 2008 1:38 PM
I think the good doctor should go Peter Venkman and 'sue your ass for wrongful prosecution' should Schlafly actually try and start a lawsuit.
Posted by: Adam Morrison | July 4, 2008 1:41 PM
Actually this is really good news.
The more Schlafly keeps this in the public attention the better. It's a really good lab demonstration of evolution. The more he publicises it the better, I really hope he does take it court, it will raise the profile of this experiment even higher.
Posted by: Bob M | July 4, 2008 2:01 PM
Schlafly seems to be going through so much trouble when there's already a standard creotard response to this kind of research: "The E. coli are still E. coli. That's just microevolution. You baby-eating Darwinists should call us back when the E. coli in your lab dishes turn into crocodiles, or ducks, or possibly a transitional croco-duck. Or baby humans. But please don't eat the baby humans before we get a chance to analyze it in Jesus Lab. Righteously yours, Kirk Comfort Schlafly.
Posted by: AL | July 4, 2008 2:04 PM
I've been thinking. (Oh, stop groaning.)
Instead of poking fun of Schlafly, we should be promoting him as a model of anti-science conservatism, the kind we're trying to fight (Besides, given his borderline literacy, taunting him is like taunting the recalcitrant foreign exchange student: sure, he's an asshole, but of what use are clever jibes he can't comprehend?) He didn't like the perceived 'liberal bias' of Wikipedia, so what did he do? Rip off their software and start his own bastard version. He didn't like Lenski's conclusions, so what does he do? Demand that Lenski allow him to do the same thing with his data. He's the perfect model Conservative: whiny and petulant, unable to create anything on his own, and all the while sucking on the teat of legitimate workers to a degree that would make the most system-abusing, I'll-blow-you-in-an-alley-for-rock junkie sit up in the gutter and say, "God man, try to show a little dignity, willya?"
Get the fucker to run for president in four years' time. Get him on a podium, a platform, anywhere where the world can hear the bullshit he's trying peddle ('borrowed' from Mommy, of course), and then we stand up and point out the Mad Max-like dystopia that leeches like him are trying to create where science and technology are artifacts left in the hands of belligerent troglodytes to use until they break and no one left knows how to fix.
Then, once the rest of the world finally gets it, we turn our attention to Schlafly himself and break his fucking nose--harsh, I know, but in my experience it's the only thing schoolyard bullies like him understand.
Posted by: Brownian, OM | July 4, 2008 2:13 PM
The DVD version of Expelled is now listed on Amazon at http://www.amazon.com/Expelled-No-Intelligence-Allowed/dp/B001BYLFFS/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&s=dvd&qid=1215114339&sr=8-4 . Comments are enabled, so if you've seen it feel free to express your opinion. Only two comments so far.
Posted by: Ken McKnight | July 4, 2008 2:16 PM
For the curious, the phrase 'elimu haina mwisho' is a Swahili folk saying meaning 'education has no ending.' You're damn right Schlafly wouldn't be able to decipher that in any language.
Posted by: Brownian, OM | July 4, 2008 2:18 PM
Intellectual terrorism, pure and simple.
Posted by: hje | July 4, 2008 2:21 PM
Comments are enabled, so if you've seen it feel free to express your opinion.
I've not seen Expelled, but I see its content whenever I close my eyes, get caught in a blackout, or stare at a blank wall in an unlit, windowless room at midnight. Does that count?
Posted by: Brownian, OM | July 4, 2008 2:21 PM
Holbach @8,
But have it translated to Swahili, or the Albanian dialects or some other barely de