Conservapedia:Schlafly Scrutiny

From RationalWiki

Schlafly Scrutiny is a debate tactic used heavily by Andrew Schlafly during the Lenski Affair. The term was actually coined by another conservapedian who was attempting to explain to Andy why he was being unreasonable.[1]

It consists of making unreasonable demands of scientists whose discoveries challenge your incredibly blinkered belief system, and accusing them of fraud when they fail to do so. In the case of Richard Lenski, Andy demanded that he turn over years of notes and gigabytes, perhaps even terabytes, of data to the "public" (apparently meaning any Tom, Dick, or Harry who asks), regardless of how expensive and costly such a process would be, and whether or not the people requesting it were even qualified to evaluate it. A few slightly less insane conservapedians merely demanded that he give them samples of citrate-absorbing E. coli that they had neither the facilities to store, nor the qualifications to study.

Schlafly Scrutiny is distinguished from real scrutiny by the fact that real scrutiny merely requires the scientist to summarize his data, and explain his method so that other scientists can recreate and confirm his results.[2]