Intelligent design
Out of context: Reply #399
- Started
- Last post
- 690 Responses
- KuzII0
That's interesting discipler. None of the peer-reviewed stuff on that disco link i posted holds water.
Just to take a couple of examples: Disco says that Michael Behe's book was peer-reviewed! But this is an out and out lie. Because, listen to this, this is the sum of the peer-review of Darwin's Black Box:
When Behe's publishers were unsure about publishing his book, the editor told his wife, who was a student in the class of this ultra-religious professor - Michael Atchison.
The editor's wife said, "hey why don't you ask my professor if you should publish." In Atchinson's own words "I received a phone call from the publisher in New York. We spent approximately 10 minutes on the phone. After hearing a description of the work, I suggested that the editor should seriously consider publishing the manuscript. I told him that the origin of life issue [which has nothing to do with evolution, -jml] was still up in the air. It sounded like this Behe fellow might have some good ideas, although I could not be certain since I had never seen the manuscript. We hung up and I never thought about it again. At least until two years later.
... In November 1998, I finally met Michael Behe when he visited Penn for a Faculty Outreach talk. He told me that yes, indeed, it was his book that the publisher called me about. In fact, he said my comments were the deciding factor in convincing the publisher to go ahead with the
book"Here's the link:
http://www.leaderu.com/real/ri99…
Does that honestly sound like peer-review to you? If not - why would the Disco Insti claim it was? I'm sure you find this shocking, so you must now admit DI is pretty damn dishonest, or atleast very liberal with the term "peer-review".
Furthermore, I went to this website
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entr…
It is the United States National Library of Medicine's website that contain's 15 MILLION Peer-reviewd scientific literature on life science and biomedical articles.
Do a search in its database and see what you find.
, enter “intelligent design” in quotation marks, which searches for the two words together. When I searched this produced 25 references, of which 13 were irrelevant to this discussion, five were news articles, six were critical of ID, and one was a historical review. “Irreducible complexity” in quotes gets five hits, one irrelevant and the others critical of ID.
Where is the peer-reviewed literature again?