Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 85 (8937 total)
27 online now:
AlexCaledin, caffeine, Dr Adequate, PaulK, Tangle, vimesey (6 members, 21 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: ssope
Happy Birthday: AdminPhat
Post Volume: Total: 861,770 Year: 16,806/19,786 Month: 931/2,598 Week: 177/251 Day: 6/59 Hour: 3/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   EXPELLED: No Intelligence Allowed - Science Under Attack
JonF
Member
Posts: 5473
Joined: 06-23-2003
Member Rating: 3.0


Message 228 of 438 (500588)
02-27-2009 2:14 PM
Reply to: Message 227 by shalamabobbi
02-27-2009 8:06 AM


Re: wedge or wedgy?
How in the hell did they get accreditation …?

They didn't.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 227 by shalamabobbi, posted 02-27-2009 8:06 AM shalamabobbi has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 229 by shalamabobbi, posted 02-27-2009 3:48 PM JonF has not yet responded

JonF
Member
Posts: 5473
Joined: 06-23-2003
Member Rating: 3.0


Message 315 of 438 (517084)
07-29-2009 12:14 PM
Reply to: Message 313 by traderdrew
07-29-2009 11:48 AM


Re: CSI and DNA
My rational thought thinks, do Darwinists not approach science with the perspective that a creator does not exist?

No, typically "Darwinists" do not approach science with the perspective that a creator does not exist. There are a few exceptions.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 313 by traderdrew, posted 07-29-2009 11:48 AM traderdrew has not yet responded

JonF
Member
Posts: 5473
Joined: 06-23-2003
Member Rating: 3.0


Message 332 of 438 (517241)
07-30-2009 1:47 PM
Reply to: Message 327 by Perdition
07-30-2009 11:28 AM


Re: CSI and DNA
As for this case, the article wasn't peer reviewed, which is against the rules. Whether it's ID, evolution, or fairy dust, the article HAS to be peer reviewed.

Sternberg said it was sent to three reviewers, who are still anonymous. There's no reason to believe he didn't. Many suspect that the reviewers were chosen specifically to accept the article without real review, or that there was not even a nominal review, but there's no extant evidence for those suspicions.

There definitely was (and is) a rule that all articles are to be reviewed by two editors, and Sternberg definitely broke that rule. The journal's press release said:

quote:
The Council, which includes officers, elected councilors, and past presidents, and the associate editors would have deemed the paper inappropriate for the pages of the Proceedings because the subject matter represents such a significant departure from the nearly purely systematic content for which this journal has been known throughout its 122-year history.

Edited by JonF, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 327 by Perdition, posted 07-30-2009 11:28 AM Perdition has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 333 by Perdition, posted 07-30-2009 2:01 PM JonF has not yet responded

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019