Re: More fusillades in the ID wars

From: Dick Fischer <dickfischer@earthlink.net>
Date: Wed Feb 02 2005 - 11:54:22 EST
Jack Syme wrote:

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?

ID is foisted off as a "scientific theory" while it meets no tests, and has not a shred of positive evidence, same as YEC, same as PC.  As such, none of these religiously motivated notions have a place in scientific publications.  Editors of such publications should know that articles they publish must meet at least some measure of scientific criteria lest they confuse or lose their readership base.  PSCF, Zygon and other such journals cross the line, but they have a stated religious agenda.

I have no idea whether or not the Smithsonian was embarrassed by the article or even the aftermath.  There is the potential for harm to their reputation which clearly exists if they publish creationist literature just as there is if they put up exhibits touting flood geology.

But my main grievance against ID is that it asserts that God, or some invisible intelligence (and how disingenuous is that) is pulling the switches in the progression of life.  So when Alzheimers entered the world, which requires me to take daily medication by the way, He (or he) apparently had something more important to do.  Or maybe He (or he) just screwed up.  It is the dark implications of ID that irritates me, and no one bothered to think about that.

What chance does anyone, anywhere now have of publishing an article about design, even if it is scientfically accurate and rigorous?

What chance is there that design proponents will come up with some positive evidence?

Dick Fischer  - Genesis Proclaimed Association
Finding Harmony in Bible, Science, and History
www.genesisproclaimed.org
Received on Wed Feb 2 11:55:45 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Feb 02 2005 - 11:55:46 EST