Sujet : Re: Lenski experiments: an important correction
De : arkalen (at) *nospam* proton.me (Arkalen)
Groupes : talk.originsDate : 10. May 2024, 23:00:49
Autres entêtes
Organisation : A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID : <v1m5ej$1jc0p$1@dont-email.me>
References : 1 2
User-Agent : Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.14.0
On 10/05/2024 23:05, Ernest Major wrote:
On 10/05/2024 21:31, Arkalen wrote:
I recently found out that Richard Lenski of the eponymous long-term E.coli evolution experiment had a blog, and in it I found a correction I thought was relevant to the way those experiments are typically invoked as evidence in evolution/creationism debates:
>
https://telliamedrevisited.wordpress.com/2024/04/01/a-small-correction/
>
I hope we'll all have the integrity to take this new information into account properly.
Did you look at the date? I suspect it's an April Fool. (Or did you identify it as an April Fool, and ran with it?)
I did eventually figure it out but I'm embarrassed to admit which paragraph it was at.
(also the previous post isn't at the same date but I also suspect isn't completely in earnest. I think maybe Richard Lenski might be a funny guy)
(EDIT I'm keeping the previous parenthetical for integrity's sake but the previous post actually *is* at the same date. How am I such a, um, what's the term again, "hard-working student")
>
>
"Since transferring the LTEE to Jeff Barrick’s lab at UT-Austin in 2022, we’ve been going over the old lab notebooks, making sure everything looks good. It turns out, though, that I made a small error when I started the LTEE back in 1988. I thought that transferring 10 ml into 10 ml was a hundred-fold dilution because there’s a 0 right there after each of the 1s, and 100 has two zeros. QED: a hundred-fold dilution. Right?
>
Well, it turns out I was a bit off. That’s only a two-fold dilution because, apparently, the correct way to do the math is 10 / (10 + 10) = 1/2. Who knew? New math, I guess. Anyhow, everyone in the lab thought I had figured it out, since I was the perfesser, and they just kept doing the same thing all these years. So instead of 75,000 generations, it was only something like 11,250 when we sent the ^H^H^H^H^H^Hstupid amazing LTEE to Taxes. Oh well, still a big number.
>
We also discovered another tiny error. You know, I always thought some ^H^H^H^H^H^Hsucker hard-working student came in and did the transfers on weekends and holidays. I never quite knew who it was, but I figured someone did the ^H^H^H^H^H^Hunpaid ^H^H^H^work transfers. Well, it turns out, not so much. OK, never. Fridays were ok at 40%, and Mondays were even better at 53%. On Tuesdays, we maxed out at 73%. Not bad! We trailed off a tad at 59% and 47% on Wednesdays and Thursdays.
>
Anyhow, after correcting for these tiny oversights, the LTEE had gone past 4,300 generations before we sent it down to Taxes. Speaking of Taxes, I hope I don’t get audited again this year. But I hear you can stall if you’re a big shot. Being a PI qualifies, right?"
>