An EvC research project

High quality information is essential for our debates here at EvC. Very often in the scientific threads, citations are needed to buttress a point.Evolutionists can sometimes offer something from a peer-reviewed journal, but give no credence whatever to creationist websites. Creos are sometimes very frustrated when a favoured argument on AiG, for example, is answered with nothing but ridicule and a link to the corresponding rebuttal at TalkOrigins’ FAQ.Well, if creation science really is proper science, it should be able to get into peer-reviewed journals, right? Any creationist scientist would love to get published in Science, right? But it doesn’t happen.Because it’s balderdash, say the evos. Bias and narrowmindedness! say the creos. It can’t be denied that authors attached to prestigious mainstream scientific institutions have less trouble than others in getting published.Deadlock, it would appear. I wish to humbly suggest a modest proposal for a research program to help settle this question.It will proceed as follows:

• Creos put their heads together and come up with a shortlist of work which in their view really merits publication .
• A published scientist working at an evolutionist institution approaches the psychology or anthropology department at their institution, explaining the facts of the case and suggesting a collaborative paper.
• The scientist fronts for the creationist research, submitting it to a variety of publications.
• The papers are accepted , or not.
• The creationists can have the merits of their work reviewed without fear of paradigm prejudice.
• The psychologist/anthropologist can also make an assessment of the fairness of the process.
• They and the scientist get to co-author a paper, with lots of media if they play it right.

A win/win situation? Any volunteers?[This message has been edited by Chavalon, 12-30-2002][This message has been edited by Chavalon, 12-30-2002]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chavalon:
A win/win situation?

---

It sounds good, but you'd have to get countless factions of creationists to agree to a scenario, and that isn't going to happen.Just for an example, every creationist on this board has a different story.------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com

So are you saying that similar protestations by the evolutionist John Grehan on TAXACOM (net site) over publishing his paper on Galapagos and Croizat is "baldersdah".I was not reading creationist literature, at all, in the early 80s, and you can see that John took some solace in the battles of creationism against a very intransigent gentleman society of elite evolutionists who not only cause Croizat to be "banished" but after brought back from the fringe by AMNH to be once again put into the dead fossil issue from which it never recovered desptie SOME ACUTAL INTEREST that exists in this literature from a purely phenomenological standpoint. I cant post in journals BECAUSE I was prevented (or "prohibited" would be a better word)from getting the degree that would enable me to "travel" in the circles that produce such peer-reviewed work. I was furious to find how well Morris had documented this state of education which as a teen-ager WAS NOT EVIDENT but as misnomer of the teacher who knew less evolution than I did as the student. At "higher education" the whole thing rotted from inside. Morris said that Mayr was trying to correct us that evolution is not theory but fact during the same time-frame that a psychiatrist was not inhibited from using (against my will and involutarily and even actually almost WITH FORCE) legal fact finding methods to show that my views on EVOLUTION (not creation) were DELUSIONS. This only makes sense (it may not be true) if evolution is not only not THIS fact nor found but that the theory itself is false. At lest this was one state's evidence knowingly or not of the power we so easily talk of today while in the mean time my own supervisor (who reverred Mayr) Morris captured to quote with was "Evolutionists still disagree about the precise mechanisms of evolution in nautre, but they have nevertless given overwhelming support to Darwin's belief that desgin in nature results from purely mechanistic causes. As Jacques Monod, and E.O.Wilson, and many other biolgists have pointed out, modern evolutionary biology has shattered the hope that some kind of designing..."This is simply just false and isnot the kind of precise information that we need for debates here yet this seems to be the quality or standard Chavalon to which you request we have. Provine disagrees with Mayr on some points about nonadaptive variation and the desgin of purely mechanistic causes perhaps but by priveleding the names o fMOnod and Wilson to whom MAYR (and no one else I am aware of) avers Provine SLANTS the reading AGAINST the kind of Field Biology my classical genetists grandfather taught first in Western NY who also communicated with MAYR in his time being pricipally an ornithologist. What was shatterd for instance was my PAID FOR education. Siting Olby's Mendel is good enough to deal with Provine from within biology but this is only good for the student who is permitted to remain in that domain of taught teaching of evolution. We are dealing in C/E with a larger issue to which evolutionists are often "out of their" 1,000 leagues under the sea to which the points of win/win are even more singular and piercing.So the problem is not getting "high quality" info but putting up with the new net style of communication that if we survive what in the workd is more and more difficult to deal with without an belief in GOD such as we are, we survive whether with the guy who could observe but not theorize very well or not.My guess is that science is just begging to feel what Einstein did all along and that the continuation of Maxwell and Faraday has not been completed but can be if random thoughts are follwed by pricipled protocols.

Btw, Tranquility Base once asked this Indonesian termite taxonomist to search for created kinds via gene family/protein-fold studies. I'm still considering!