And could only grouse about it later:
In its September 21 issue, the Journal of Theoretical Biology published a major peer-reviewed article on fine-tuning in biology that favorably discusses intelligent design…
The article by Thorvaldsen and Hössjer appeared online in June. But we didn’t want to speak about it publicly until after its “official” publication date, because we knew that once Darwinists found out, they would try to have the article cancelled.
John G. West, “Despite Darwinists’ Cancel Culture, Intelligent Design Has a Breakthrough in Biology Journal” at Evolution News and Science Today
Sure, because in an age when even New Scientist is reframing the discussion of evolution, Cancel Culture is pretty much all the Darwinians have got.
Here’s the paper (open access). Download it in case the Darwinians get the upper hand and it gets withdrawn or something.
Sure enough, after Darwinists discovered the article, they succeeded in obtaining a “disclaimer” from the journal’s editors, who proclaimed their bias against ID. But the disclaimer actually made publication of the article all the more significant. It meant that the article survived peer-review and was accepted for publication despite the open hostility of the journal’s top editors!
John G. West, “Despite Darwinists’ Cancel Culture, Intelligent Design Has a Breakthrough in Biology Journal” at Evolution News and Science Today:
Like we said, download it. It might be the most useful thing the Journal has published all year.
Here’s the Abstract:
Fine-tuning has received much attention in physics, and it states that the fundamental constants of physics are finely tuned to precise values for a rich chemistry and life permittance. It has not yet been applied in a broad manner to molecular biology. However, in this paper we argue that biological systems present fine-tuning at different levels, e.g. functional proteins, complex biochemical machines in living cells, and cellular networks. This paper describes molecular fine-tuning, how it can be used in biology, and how it challenges conventional Darwinian thinking. We also discuss the statistical methods underpinning fine-tuning and present a framework for such analysis
The boffins can trash papers they don’t like but they can’t make the fine-tuning go away. That’ll unfortunately make them all the crazier. But then the rest of us just have to get even wiser.