Re: More fusillades in the ID wars

Dick Fisher wrote:

"The editor should have had the good sense to recognize an
article that lacks any positive evidence for what it asserts, and should
never have run the article in the first place. He is expected to exercise
editorial judgment after all. He embarrassed the institution and damaged
its credibility. "

 
So only articles that have positive evidence are worth writing? Do you actually have the same criteria for articles that have nothing to do with science/creationism? What evidence do you have that he embarassed the institution and damaged its credibility? Is that just your opinion or do you have something to back it up?

I think the point that you are missing, is that the response to this articles publication was a severe overreaction. And, it seems to me, the reason for this overreaction is the atheistic/materialistic paradigm that dominates our culture. And that is the reason we should be supportive of its publication. Like I said before, this was a review article. Argue about its scientific claims if you want, but do not hang the editor for publishing it.

What chance does anyone, anywhere now have of publishing an article about design, even if it is scientfically accurate and rigorous?
Received on Tue Feb 1 22:59:36 2005