Re: When peer review is really peer pressure

From: Huxter4441@aol.com
Date: Wed Apr 19 2000 - 13:08:17 EDT

  • Next message: Cliff Lundberg: "Re: When peer review is really peer pressure"

    In a message dated 4/18/00 4:01:41 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
    ssclark@facstaff.wisc.edu writes:

    << >[snip]
    >Yes, those "objective scientists"...engage in conspiracy-theory type
    paranoia
    >to paint ID as creationism, use rhetoric to elevate it to something
    >that "endangers" the university, and then scare people by trying to
    >equate Bill Dembski with Bob Jones University....They are simply
    >reacting to their own simple-minded and hysterical labelling,
    >but, of course, are too "objective" to realize this.
    >
    >But throughout all this, what really catches my eye is this...the
    >scientific community is not able to seriously
    >contemplate and weigh questions about natural history and ID.
    >When a concern about reputation shapes how we approach questions,
    >we're not dealing with that idealistic notion of objection science.
    >We're not talking peer review, we're talking high school-like peer pressure.
     
     
     So, how do you reconcile these two paragraphs? On one hand you complain
     about scientists using the "broad-brush" approach to paint ID into a
     creationist corner. Then you return the favor and use the broad-brush to
     tarnish the whole scientific community. >>

    Simple - in IDism, anything goes!



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Apr 19 2000 - 13:08:57 EDT