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

From: Rich Blinne <>
Date: Mon Jul 07 2008 - 21:07:55 EDT

On 7/7/08, PvM <> wrote:
> 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.

That and greed:

> Baylor's Mr. Dembski also has little interest in publicizing his research
> through traditional means. "I've just gotten kind of blasť about submitting
> things to journals where you often wait two years to get things into print,"
> he says. "And I find I can actually get the turnaround faster by writing a
> book and getting the ideas expressed there. *My books sell well. I get a
> royalty*. And the material gets read more."

This was in 2001. The article continues:

> Undeterred, Mr. Dembski has simply carved out another route. This month,
> the International Society for Complexity, Information, and Design was born.
> In a news release, the group is described as a "cross-disciplinary
> professional society that investigates complex systems apart from external
> programmatic constraints like materialism, naturalism, or reductionism." As
> with established academic organizations, this one offers conferences,
> postdoctoral fellowships, research grants, and a journal, *Progress in
> Complexity, Information, and Design.*
> Mr. Dembski, Mr. Behe, Jed Macosko, Mr. Nelson, and Mr. Minnich are fellows
> of the new society.

Hmm. Let's see what the journal has been up to. Last issue, November 2005.

What was happening in November 2005? Why the Dover trial!

Pim said:

> Please tell us what journals refuse to consider ID papers.

Don't hold your breath. There's never, ever, any evidence. I've asked for
names, titles, and journals but all I hear is crickets. Donald wants to poll
the journals but he really should be polling his ID colleagues. He should
ask them have you ever rejected by a scientific journal and which ones and
how many times? What rationale for rejection was given? Did you re-submit it
to another journal? Why didn't you publish in ISCID if you were completely
shut out?

As for the Biological Institute they don't seem to have thier own journal
(their site name has been registered since 2005). Rather, their first study
is on PLOSOne. Last week Nature had a story about how PLOSOne was just a
money-maker for PLOS as a low-value dumping ground where their is little or
no peer review. Many people on the net thought this was an unfair
characterization given that Nature competes against PLOS. Well, here's
evidence that maybe Nature was right. First the study

Stylus: A System for Evolutionary Experimentation Based on a
Protein/Proteome Model with Non-Arbitrary Functional Constraints

And so far, there hasn't been any peer review for this study save this.

> The I Ching is a combinatorily constructed binary code which has been
> applied to characterizing the DNA code to some extent. See
> and
> or Google on I Ching DNA.
> The four acids are linked to binary digrams. By combining these one can
> obtain hexagrams. These can be inverted, or
> also manipulated with standard gate logic such as XOR.
> They also are structured as an onion is, with inside to outside.
> The Tai xuan jing (Tia Hsuan Ching) is a base 3 system which can be related
> to the I Ching and is also structured in the thesis-antithesis-synthesis
> form on four levels.
> See
> - Roger Clough

Rich Blinne
Member ASA

To unsubscribe, send a message to with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Mon Jul 7 21:08:13 2008

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon Jul 07 2008 - 21:08:13 EDT