Re: Dawkins & Coyne in _The Guardian_


"allanm" <allangmiller@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1126266036.682165.251730@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> Glenn wrote:
> > "allanm" <allangmiller@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> > news:1126109412.305316.273970@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > >
> > > Glenn wrote:
> > > > "Bobby D. Bryant" <bdbryant@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> > > > news:dfii3n$gea$2@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > > On Mon, 05 Sep 2005, "Al" <almond@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > "Herb Huston" <huston@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> > > > > > news:11hombravc27741@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > > >> In article <dfgeh6$h7e$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
> > > > > >> Al <almond@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > > >> >A critique of the Dawkins and Coyne article.
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> >"If ID really were a scientific theory, positive evidence for it,
> > > > > >> >gathered through research, would fill peer-reviewed scientific
> > > > > >> >journals".
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> >We have seen what happens to those who appeal to peer review on
> > > > > >> >this NG, "The Smithsonian affair".
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> >"This doesn't happen. It isn't that editors refuse to publish ID
> > > > > >> >research. There simply isn't any ID research to publish".
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> >This is untrue.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Full bibliographic references, please.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > > Scientist punished for Intelligent Design article, federal probe
> > > > > > confirms
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Aug. 19 (CWNews.com) - A federal government investigator has
> > > > > > confirmed that a scientist suffered harassment at the Smithsonian
> > > > > > Institution because he agreed to publish an essay on Intelligent
> > > > > > Design in a scientific journal that he edited.
> > > > >
> > > > > Yes, the "investigator" is a political hack giving an opinion outside
> > > > > his jurisdiction.
> > > > >
> > > > > ID seems to thrive on dishonesty.
> > > >
> > > > You misspelled "Evolutionists", Hack boy. And that his jurisdiction would
not
> > > > allow him unlimited cooperation and access, among other powers, means
> > *nothing*.
> > > > >
> > > > > Oh, and where's all that publishable ID research you wer talking about?
> > > > >
> > > > "Publishable", eh. Where in the hell do you freaks come from?
> > > >
> > > > Here's just a fraction of the papers that IDers produce:
> > > > http://www.iscid.org/pcid/2004/3/1/pcid_contents_2004_3_1.php
> > > >
> >
http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/index.php?command=view&id=2680&program=CSC%20-%20Scientific%20Research%20and%20Scholarship%20-%20Science
> > > > http://www.iscid.org/papers/Wells_TOPS_051304.pdf
> > >
> > > I only read the third all the way through, but it's a classic of
> > > muddle-headed thinking. You berate 'evolutionist loons' for the
> > > conclusions they draw based on scant data, yet reference such hopeless
> > > tosh with approval.
> >
> > You don't see any "approval" above, loon. Not even scant data. Yet you
conclude
> > that my motives were to endorse these articles referenced.
>
> My mistake. The assumption that a creationist presents creationist
> articles because he endorses them still seems fair to me, but then I am
> a world famous loon, therefore incapable of making an accurate
> inference.
>
> >
> > What if I criticized ID literature the way you can imagine I do evolutionist
> > literature.
>
> If you actually said anything substantive on either matter, it would be
> a help.
>
Why, I did. In effect, I responded to "This doesn't happen. It isn't that editors
refuse to publish ID research. There simply isn't any ID research to publish" by
providing references to ID articles, which may be regarded as research. I'd say
you provide evidence that you think some of the articles to be research, as you
characterize a third of them as "thinking" and imply conclusions based on data.
Your "substantive" appears for all the world like a never-ending
take-it-on-the-road game of inferring this and that about what consitutes
"publishable", "research" and "thinking", but what I have contributed is data
showing that IDers *do* produce articles, *do* have material suitable to publish,
and that they *do* attempt to publish in the public domain.




.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Bye Bye Oil, hello HHO gas
    ... have the pdf file of the paper along with the Journal name but you will ... have to look it up on Google as I don't have that link with me right ... journal that his articles appear in. ... Not one reference to them from any sort of recognized unaffiliated ...
    (rec.crafts.metalworking)
  • Re: Creating a COM object
    ... If you add a reference to the COM object an interop class will be created in ... Find great Windows Forms articles in Windows Forms Tips and Tricks ... > If I use javascript or vbscript it works. ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.languages.csharp)
  • Re: Beware of who you cite as an authority
    ... sites and their articles as Reference material. ... I have cited Peer review articles, ... Are you in a position of high authority, ... for the "right" reasons. ...
    (misc.health.alternative)
  • Re: Logic, Godel, Mathematics, etc., and AUTHORSHIP
    ... Most of my articles presented here are taken from work in progress ... I feel badly for the faculty at UCC who have to put up with you. ... else is obliged to reference and give you credit for. ... Posting to a Google Group or Usenet Group ...
    (sci.logic)
  • Re: A Newton-like description of gravity, representing curved space-time.
    ... GR community, for those a gadzillion books ... and articles are available. ... frames of reference. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)