RE: [asa] Is Peer-Review the Be All and End All of Science?

I am defending neither Denyse nor ID. However, what do you Christians
understand by the statements that "God created the universe and sustains
His creation?"

Moorad

________________________________

From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On
Behalf Of Michael Roberts
Sent: Friday, November 17, 2006 5:43 AM
To: Pim van Meurs; Janice Matchett
Cc: asa@calvin.edu
Subject: Re: [asa] Is Peer-Review the Be All and End All of Science?

Frankly I take no notice of any of Denyse O'Leary's journalistic capers
as she is remarkably slipshod in all she writes.

Oh for the day when ID has just one little nugget of scientific
argument!

Peer reviewing does have its faults as all of us know of papers which
have got through the net and shouldn't and vice versa. It's also
happened to many of us.

Michael

        ----- Original Message -----

        From: Pim van Meurs <mailto:pimvanmeurs@yahoo.com>

        To: Janice Matchett <mailto:janmatch@earthlink.net>

        Cc: asa@calvin.edu <mailto:asa@calvin.edu>

        Sent: Friday, November 17, 2006 4:00 AM

        Subject: Re: [asa] Is Peer-Review the Be All and End All of
Science?

        So now ID is whining that peer review is broken or that peer
review is not that important. Perhaps if ID could point to any non
begging ID relevant papers? But of course they cannot and thus have to
find an alternative explanation as to why ID remains scientifically
vacuous.

        Behe's refused 'paper' was about a 'rebuttal' , Meyer's paper
about the Cambrian was of dubious quality.

        On Nov 16, 2006, at 2:49 PM, Janice Matchett wrote:

        Someone just posted this on FR. ~ Janice :)

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Fri Nov 17 08:52:23 2006