Re: [asa] taking a hiatus

From: Nucacids <>
Date: Mon Jan 05 2009 - 14:39:30 EST

Re: [asa] taking a hiatusHi dennis,

You are right. I was just stepping back to look at the bigger picture.

Of course, peer review is not perfect. It is not uncommon for an author to receive completely different evaluations of the same article from different peer reviewers. I always think of the real peer review happening after publication, not before publication. But maybe that's just me.


  Hi Mike,

  The issue I have is that Groothius's main points are made by bare assertion, without any supporting documentation from the literature (even pro-ID literature). He carries on his discussion as if there were no wider discussion of his ideas, even though the points he asserts are highly contentious.

  The assertion that ID "gives science another tool for empirical investigation" is flawed without supporting examples. The best that can be said is that ID might provide such means in the future, although then it would behoove Groothius to discuss why it has not to date, and rebut why critics say it never will. Bare assertion of a main point essential to the thesis of an article is sloppy scholarship and should not appear in a peer-reviewed journal.


To unsubscribe, send a message to with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Mon Jan 5 14:40:00 2009

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon Jan 05 2009 - 14:40:00 EST