Re: Revisiting Rivista

On Thu, 02 Jun 2005 19:18:49 -0700 Pim van Meurs <pimvanmeurs@yahoo.com>
writes:
> On Panda's Thumb, John M. Lynch reports
> (http://www.pandasthumb.org/pt-archives/001114.html)
>
> Today, the DI proudly announced
>
<http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/index.php?command=view&id=2627&p
rogram=CSC%20-%20Views%20and%20News>
>
> that "[f]or the second time in nine months, an article explicitly
> applying intelligent design theory to scientific research has been
> published in an internationally respected biology journal -- despite
>
> Darwinists' claims that this never happens." This leads one to
> wonder
> about the status of /Rivista/ within the biological community? While
> it
> may be "one of the oldest biological journals in the world" (1919
>
<http://www.tilgher.it/%28m0h1zb55der2y545b3unsq55%29/index.aspx?lang=eng
&tpr=4&act=&lnk=>),
>
> I would argue that it is neither "internationally respected" nor
> influential.
>
> Read more over at Stranger Fruit
> <http://darwin.bc.asu.edu/blog/?p=351>.
>
> Seems that in addition to Wells' paper being mostly unrelated to
> Intelligent Design other than an ad hoc argument that a 'design
> perspective' was helpful in formulating ideas (scientists have done
> this
> for centuries), Rivista itself seems to be somewhat oversold by the
> DI
> PR department.
>
>
>
I read the abstract and was underwhelmed. Wells says that the centriole
functions as a turbine because it has three sets of three tubules. But a
turbine requires more than blades. Where's the housing? But let me
simplify matters to suggest that it acts as a fan, a simpler structure. I
know of no pair of fans (centriole at each pole) that will force a line
up between them, for there has to be a return of whatever is being moved.
But apparently Wells has never heard of circulation. Maybe we can
nominate him for the Ignoble Prize.
Dave
Received on Fri Jun 3 00:13:01 2005