Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Sauron · 04-03-2003, 08:14 PM

I'm looking for a link that I ran across awhile back.

Basically, it showed someone's efforts at searching high and low, trying to find evidence that creationists even bother to *submit* papers for peer review. His result was that only 1 or 2 have been submitted in several decades.

I searched talkorigins.org, but couldn't find it.

Does anyone here have it?

Thanks.

The Lone Ranger · 04-03-2003, 10:42 PM

You might find the McLean v. Arkansas Board of Education case worthy reading.

It's somewhat dated, but Judge Overton, in response to the Creationists' claims that "evolutionists" are suppressing evidence for creationism, asked them to present an example of even one paper that had been submitted to a mainstream science journal by a creationist and rejected for any reason whatsover. They could provide no examples.

From the judgement:

Quote:

The scientific community consists of individuals and groups, nationally and internationally, who work independently in such varied fields as biology, paleontology, geology, and astronomy. Their work is published and subject to review and testing by their peers. The journals for publication are both numerous and varied. There is, however, not one recognized scientific journal which has published an article espousing the creation science theory described in Section 4(a). Some of the State's witnesses suggested that the scientific community was "close-minded'' on the subject of creationism and that explained the lack of acceptance of the creation science arguments. Yet no witness produced a scientific article for which publication has been refused. Perhaps some members of the scientific community are resistant to new ideas. It is, however, inconceivable that such a loose knit group of independent thinkers in all the varied fields of science could, or would, so effectively censor new scientific thought.

(emphasis added)

Cheers,

Michael

Sauron · 04-03-2003, 11:53 PM

Thanks, Michael!

EON_1 · 04-05-2003, 11:35 AM

SAURON:

You might be referring to two studies conducted by H.P. Cole and E.C. Scott, on the subject of whether creationists have published in the peer-reviewed scientific literature, referenced here: http://helios.physics.uoguelph.ca/su...es/scor108.htm

Citations: Cole, H. P., and E. C. Scott. Creation Science and scientific research. Phi Delta Kappan, April 1982: 557-558.
Scott, E. C. and H. P. Cole. The elusive scientific basis of creation "science". The Quarterly Review of Biology, 60 (1), March 1985: 21-30.

I spoke with Glenn Branch of the NCSE back in December about these studies. In addition to providing the above citations, he added the following:

"As far as I know, there have been no more recent studies along these lines (though there have been of "intelligent design"; cf. Gilchrist's, to which an update is planned). With the availability of on-line article databases, it would be quite easy to replicate the 1982 study; the 1985 study would be more difficult."

Some excerpts from Bunce and Hunt discussing the 1985 study:

"Cole and Scott searched 1000 scientific journals for a three year period for the names of board members, research associates and other members of the creation research societies. Six names of published scientists emerged but in no case had they published on creationism."

...

"Cole and Scott surveyed 68 scientific journals that had recorded 135,000 submitted manuscripts in three years. Of all of these only 18 dealt with the scientific basis of creationism. Of the 18 papers, 12 went to one journal on scientific education. It is true that most of these papers were rejected by the journals but in almost every case the referees cited the poor and amateurish presentation and the lack of scientific method and argument."

As noted above, there is also a page on the NCSE's site discussing Intelligent Design in the same vein: "The Elusive Scientific Basis of Intelligent Design," by George W. Gilchrist. The URL is: http://www.ncseweb.org/resources/rnc...12_30_1899.asp.

Hope that helps.

Regards,
EON

04-03-2003, 08:14 PM	#1
Sauron Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: In the dark places of the world Posts: 8,093	Creationists, peer review, and submitting papers I'm looking for a link that I ran across awhile back. Basically, it showed someone's efforts at searching high and low, trying to find evidence that creationists even bother to submit papers for peer review. His result was that only 1 or 2 have been submitted in several decades. I searched talkorigins.org, but couldn't find it. Does anyone here have it? Thanks.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

04-03-2003, 11:53 PM	#3
Sauron Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: In the dark places of the world Posts: 8,093	Thanks, Michael!

04-05-2003, 11:35 AM	#4
EON_1 Junior Member Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: New York Posts: 7	SAURON: You might be referring to two studies conducted by H.P. Cole and E.C. Scott, on the subject of whether creationists have published in the peer-reviewed scientific literature, referenced here: http://helios.physics.uoguelph.ca/su...es/scor108.htm Citations: Cole, H. P., and E. C. Scott. Creation Science and scientific research. Phi Delta Kappan, April 1982: 557-558. Scott, E. C. and H. P. Cole. The elusive scientific basis of creation "science". The Quarterly Review of Biology, 60 (1), March 1985: 21-30. I spoke with Glenn Branch of the NCSE back in December about these studies. In addition to providing the above citations, he added the following: "As far as I know, there have been no more recent studies along these lines (though there have been of "intelligent design"; cf. Gilchrist's, to which an update is planned). With the availability of on-line article databases, it would be quite easy to replicate the 1982 study; the 1985 study would be more difficult." Some excerpts from Bunce and Hunt discussing the 1985 study: "Cole and Scott searched 1000 scientific journals for a three year period for the names of board members, research associates and other members of the creation research societies. Six names of published scientists emerged but in no case had they published on creationism." ... "Cole and Scott surveyed 68 scientific journals that had recorded 135,000 submitted manuscripts in three years. Of all of these only 18 dealt with the scientific basis of creationism. Of the 18 papers, 12 went to one journal on scientific education. It is true that most of these papers were rejected by the journals but in almost every case the referees cited the poor and amateurish presentation and the lack of scientific method and argument." As noted above, there is also a page on the NCSE's site discussing Intelligent Design in the same vein: "The Elusive Scientific Basis of Intelligent Design," by George W. Gilchrist. The URL is: http://www.ncseweb.org/resources/rnc...12_30_1899.asp. Hope that helps. Regards, EON

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.