Ham's pet scientist caught in lie about Citrate evolution

Hot topics in delusion and rationalization.
the_ignored
Posts: 711
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2004 8:05 am
Location: Right where I'm not supposed to be.

Ham's pet scientist caught in lie about Citrate evolution

Post by the_ignored »

Too bad that this didn't get shot down during the debate itself. Or did it? I never watched.

Here is the video link. Watch Ham's pet Andrew Fabitch. Note the link to a blog post by Lenski and his grad student where they themselves call Fabitch out.
The second argument was more direct. Both Ham and Fabich asserted that the Cit+ function did not evolve because using citrate did not involve “any kind of new information … it’s just a switch that gets turned on and off.” (Fabich went on to state that this “switch” is what we reported. That is emphatically not true. It beggars belief that anyone, much less a trained microbiologist, could actually read our 2012 paper, where we reported the genetic basis of Cit+, and come away thinking this.) Variations on that wording are often used by creationists who discuss the citrate work because it implies that Cit+ arose because of a pre-existing regulatory switch and involved no evolution at all. But that simply is not the case – that wording, dare I say it, is a lie.
robinson
Posts: 16027
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 2:01 am
Title: Pretty much dead already
Location: USA

Re: Ham's pet scientist caught in lie about Citrate evolution

Post by robinson »

I miss Ham