Author
|
Topic: Skeptic newsletter, June 1, 2004 (Read 905 times) |
|
rhinoceros
Archon
Gender: 
Posts: 1318
Reputation: 8.40
Rate rhinoceros
My point is ...
  
|
 |
Skeptic newsletter, June 1, 2004
« on: 2004-06-01 20:09:55 » |
 |
In the latest Skeptic newsletter: An interesting book review on intelligent-design creationism and more about the famous prayer-pregnancy fraud.
Intentional Deception: Intelligent Design Creationism
A review of
"Creationism’s Trojan Horse: The Wedge of Intelligent Design"
by Barbara Forrest and Paul R. Gross
http://www.skeptic.com/eskeptic06-01-04.html#2
ABOUT SIX YEARS AGO the editor of a national journal in the biological sciences sent me a manuscript to referee that purported to review the literature on the evolution of melanism in peppered moths. No new data were presented. The author had not published in this field previously, and had not produced any research of his own. But science is an open enterprise, and anyone who has something valid to offer should be welcomed and encouraged. So, I read it with care, and offered this commentary to the editor:
I have served as a reviewer of manuscripts submitted to biological journals for over 30 years...and in all of that time I have never encountered a manuscript with so many errors. Some of this can be attributed to poor scholarship...and some might be attributed to differences of opinion.... This happens. Certainly I’ve made my share of errors in print. Who hasn’t? But this essay...is different. His ‘errors’ tend to be of selective omission and appear to be consistently crafted to support his arguments. I think this tactic is more common in the field of law in which the objective is to win the argument rather than to find the truth. To readers not intimately familiar with the primary literature in this field it might appear that [he] has assembled a strong indictment against the widely held view that natural selection is chiefly responsible for the temporal and geographic variations observed in peppered moth populations. [The] list of references cited in his essay is both long and impressive. But based on his account of this work in his essay, I am left wondering whether he has actually read the papers and books he cites, or whether he has read them carefully. Perhaps my impression is wrong; perhaps he has mastered the literature in this field. If so, then I am forced to entertain the disquieting notion that [his] distortions of the controversies in this field have been deliberate. Whatever the cause, ignorance or dishonesty, [his] essay certainly does not qualify as objective scholarship.
My critique went on for seven more pages, enumerating in detail my specific complaints. Instead of making corrections and submitting a revision to the journal, that author posted his rejected manuscript, still brimming with the same errors, on the Internet! Later, a much abridged but still error-ridden version appeared as an op-ed piece in The Scientist, escaping the scrutiny of peer reviewer. And, unrepentant, that same author incorporated yet another version of his essay as a chapter in his book, an overly ambitious and mendacious attack on evolution published in 2000.
At the time I refereed the original manuscript I was unaware that its author was affiliated with the Discovery Institute, an organization promoting “intelligent design” (ID) creationism. I did suspect he was hiding an agenda, but my job was to review his science, not his motives. My arguments were directed solely at his flagrant misrepresentation of the literature in my field. When it comes to debating points of science with the scientists who do the actual work, ID creationists might as well challenge Yo-Yo Ma to a cello contest. At least that’s what I thought until I read Creationism’s Trojan Horse: The Wedge of Intelligent Design, by Barbara Forrest and Paul R. Gross, a book that documents in painstaking detail the recent history and ongoing programs of neo-creationists who seek to subvert science education and transform society. They might have titled their book after Al Franken’s Lies (And the Lying Liars Who Tell Them), since it features practitioners of ID creationism masquerading as scientists hoping to be taken inside the cloistered walls of academe.
<snip>
Prayer Study Story Breaks Nationally!
http://www.skeptic.com/eskeptic06-01-04.html#3
|
|
|
|
|
the.bricoleur
Archon
Posts: 341
Reputation: 8.43
Rate the.bricoleur
making sense of change
 
|
|
Re:Skeptic newsletter, June 1, 2004
« Reply #1 on: 2004-06-03 12:09:46 » |
|
Great! thanks for that rhino.
I have added an article from infidels.org to the BBS - here
take care and control
the bricoleur
|
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
