RE: [asa] The Myth of the Rejected ID Paper

From: Behnke, James <james.behnke@asbury.edu>
Date: Mon Jul 07 2008 - 20:41:36 EDT

There are a few ID friendly journals available on the web now. http://biologicinstitute.org/ and http://www.answersingenesis.org/arj are two. You can judge the quality of the research there.
 
Jim Behnke
 
 

________________________________

From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu on behalf of PvM
Sent: Mon 7/7/2008 7:43 PM
To: Donald F Calbreath
Cc: ASA list
Subject: Re: [asa] The Myth of the Rejected ID Paper

So despite there being a pro-ID peer reviewed journal, which failed
due to lack of content, the argument is now that the Discovery
Institute website surely must have some relevant material.

Your claim is that I am in denial and yet the facts seem to be
strangely on my side. Perhaps you may want to take your own advice
more seriously.

Please tell us what journals refuse to consider ID papers.

So far the accusation appears to be nothing more than intellectual
laziness on the part of ID proponents to actually present the research
and/or supporting evidence.

On Mon, Jul 7, 2008 at 4:36 PM, Donald F Calbreath
<dcalbreath@whitworth.edu> wrote:
> The ID journal you mentioned has been replaced by other material. Go to the Discovery Institute web site and look around a little. It's all right there. You still are in denial that the major journals refuse to consider ID papers. Ask them yourself or look at their stated editorial policies. Then tell me the accusation is "not credible". Do the research.
>
> Don Calbreath
> ________________________________________
> From: PvM [pvm.pandas@gmail.com]
> Sent: Monday, July 07, 2008 4:29 PM
> To: Donald F Calbreath
> Cc: ASA list
> Subject: Re: [asa] The Myth of the Rejected ID Paper
>
> Yes, that's the easiest excuse for having no ID research published.
> But of course ID has its own peer reviewed journal PSCID and after a
> few publications it went defunct due to lack of content.
>
> If ID can show scientific contributions, journals will publish it.
>
> The deck stacking accusation is just not credible.
>
> On Mon, Jul 7, 2008 at 4:17 PM, Donald F Calbreath
> <dcalbreath@whitworth.edu> wrote:
>> And where would ID supporters get their papers published? The major scientific organizations have declared ID to be "persona non grata" by definition. So who would consider a paper that suggested that ID was credible? Sems to me that the deck is stacked against ID research getting published most places.
>>
>> Don Calbreath
>> ________________________________________
>> From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On Behalf Of David Campbell [pleuronaia@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Monday, July 07, 2008 12:48 PM
>> To: ASA
>> Subject: Re: [asa] The Myth of the Rejected ID Paper
>>
>> I'm also curious about the myth of the accepted ID paper, i.e. the
>> claim that published papers prove the scientific credibility of ID and
>> then when you look them up the publication is obscure and peculiar.
>> Is someone actively searching the world for places to publish that are
>> unlikely to give the same scrutiny as a conventional journal that
>> focuses on evolutionary biology? I've certainly tried more than one
>> journal for a particular paper, but I want it to be somewhere that
>> people can find it.
>>
>>
>> --
>> Dr. David Campbell
>> 425 Scientific Collections
>> University of Alabama
>> "I think of my happy condition, surrounded by acres of clams"
>>
>> To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
>> "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
>>
>>
>> To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
>> "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
>>
>
>
> To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
> "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
>

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Mon Jul 7 20:41:43 2008

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon Jul 07 2008 - 20:41:43 EDT