From: Dawsonzhu@aol.com
Date: Fri Sep 26 2003 - 13:39:26 EDT
Allen Roy wrote:
> So, it appears that what we have is CRSQ which puts it's policies up front
> in a
> statement of belief, and, on the other hand, PSCF (and other journals) that
> discriminate against YECs without benefit of a formal belief statement.
> Which
> is more ethical?
>
In principle, I don't think ASA does discriminate against YEC papers. It
is more that the papers are not persuasive enough in the science. A number
of things get published in PSCF that I'm not sure I can agree with, but they
are still far more scholarly than what I usually see with creation science.
Now granted, the label "creationist" guarantees it to be an up hill climb
that
is bound to be _very_ severe --- indeed, much harder than Glenn Morton's
paper could every have been --- but I think if there were really a sound
case for YEC, it would be more likely to get an honest hearing here, than
almost anywhere else. CRSQ would simply reject any evolution views on
spot: no exceptions. I guess these are the rules and they follow them
to the letter, but it is another matter whether that is more ethical or not.
I do think Walt is very correct that we need to demonstrate a much better
demeanor toward people who espouse YEC views. Otherwise, we are just
like the rest of the world. Ridicule, taunt, flame, etc.
By Grace alone we proceed,
Wayne
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Sep 26 2003 - 13:39:43 EDT