Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

Put Up, or Shut Up!

Share
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Flipboard
Print
Email

There’s breaking news today about the Hadley CRU in England which had its emails and data banks hacked into. CRU is the acronym for ‘Climate Research Unit’. Seems that some of the emails show some possible collusion when it came to producing and supporting data that didn’t fit into GW science. Some interesting quotes. How about this one:

“This was the danger of always criticising the skeptics for not publishing in the “peer-reviewed literature”. Obviously, they found a solution to that–take over a journal! So what do we do about this? I think we have to stop considering “Climate Research” as a legitimate peer-reviewed journal. Perhaps we should encourage our colleagues in the climate research community to no longer submit to, or cite papers in, this journal. We would also need to consider what we tell or request of our more reasonable colleagues who currently sit on the editorial board…What do others think?”

Isn’t this ineteresting: the way to marginalize the critics is to keep them away from the journals and claim that none of the critic’s views have been “peer-reviewed”. Doesn’t this sound familiar?

Speaking of sounding familiar, how abou this . . .

Climatologists say they will only take Mr. McIntyre seriously if he creates his own temperature reconstructions and submits them for peer review. But the best science should stand up even to outside scrutiny. And if Mr. McIntyre has a credibility problem with climatologists, climatologists’ predictions are increasingly viewed skeptically by the public.

That’s right: Put up, or shut up. That is, unless someone can come up with a “theory” which can replace Darwinism, their criticism will never be taken seriously.

Looking at these quotes, is it any wonder, then, that we here at UD have steadily pointed to what is going on in climate science as a proxy for what is happening in the evolutionary debates? Maybe it’s time to “take over a journal”!

But, of course, then they’ll just simply collude in saying that the journal has lost all its value—it’s lost its credibility. Humpf!

Comments
Make it a PDF only Journal, call it the world's first green journal, get lots of publicity. :)Gods iPod
November 20, 2009
November
11
Nov
20
20
2009
02:31 PM
2
02
31
PM
PDT
I think you might be right. Starting up a new journal may be the solution. And who would the authors be?
Among the authors would be those undertaking ID's working research program like the work being done at the Biologic Institute, the Evolutionary Informatics Lab and others. This research has to be published somewhere otherwise there's little point doing it. If existing journals won't take it, the only solution is to found one which will. If resources exist to create textbooks adequate for schools then there should be enough to create an outlet for the research programs.waterbear
November 20, 2009
November
11
Nov
20
20
2009
01:45 PM
1
01
45
PM
PDT
So today the "case closed", "proven", "believed by all credible scientists", theory of Anthropogenic Global Warming has died. May the "case closed", "proven", "believed by all credible scientists", theory of Evolution be next.Gods iPod
November 20, 2009
November
11
Nov
20
20
2009
01:29 PM
1
01
29
PM
PDT
You can start a journal all you want, but no one will read it if it is marginalized. Parapsychology has been producing high quality research, higher quality and more rigorous than regular psychology, but it is still not mainstream. It is marginalized. The peer-review process is a joke.Collin
November 20, 2009
November
11
Nov
20
20
2009
01:18 PM
1
01
18
PM
PDT
One thing that is interesting is to see how science is done, socially. I post the following from Ruse's Evolution Wars not as a criticism of the processes that took place, but as evidence that any good scientific movement also requires sociological components - it is not enough to have the best idea, you must also have political clout, and this is how the synthetic theorists achieved it in the first half of this century (p. 130ff):
Founding a scientific discipline is a bit like Pascal's Wager. if you go through the motions, then you and others will start behaving in it. And to this end, you need good university jobs, you need students, you need journals (preferably with lots of esoteric language), you need associations (that you and your pals are in and others are not), you need grants and other monies, you need supporters, and you need to shove it to your enemies and detractors....For a start, they moved into plum university posts and once there brought their friends in too...A journal, Evolution, was started, with Mayr as the first editor. Firm guidelines were put in place. The obvious esoteric language was mathematics, and even though Dolnhansky and Mayr would not have known a symbol if their sisters had married one, care was taken to see that their students were properly trained, and associates with mathematical skills were dragooned into coauthoring papers. Dohzhanslty wrote a whole series of Drosophila articles with Sewall Wright: articles-which he understood the first lines and the last lines and absolutely nothing in between... There was not one of them who had not turned to evolution in the first place to find the meaning of life, hoping especially to discover the implications of an evolutionary approach for our own species...But the synthetic theorists knew that, if they were to upgrade their science, they had to keep their evolution-as-profesional-science separate from their evolution-as-secular-religion (not so very secular in Dobnhanakfs case). So what they did was to write two series of books! The first series was the professional series: lots of talk about models and causes and quantification and so forth. Not a whiff of culture or social values. Then there was the second series: openly writing for the general reader...with a couple of final chapters on life and its total meaning.
johnnyb
November 20, 2009
November
11
Nov
20
20
2009
01:14 PM
1
01
14
PM
PDT
This dredged up a thought from the dusty recesses of my mind. I seem to recall that there was a journal published by ARN at one time. For the life of me, I can't remember the name. Does anyone remember and know if it is still active?hummus man
November 20, 2009
November
11
Nov
20
20
2009
01:07 PM
1
01
07
PM
PDT
Somehow the fact that supreme bias is at work amongst certain scientists in a way that is coordinated, and which is then directed towards the views of scientists with whom this group disagrees, seems to meet with your approval. Why’s that?
I don't understand why you think such a thing meets with my approval. Trying to force doctrine or ideology to triumph over patient observation and logical deduction is deplorable, but I don't see that the published extracts of the hacked e-mails in fact show that such a thing has happened at the CRU.
And who would the authors be? Scientists who publish their laboratory work anonymously so as not to have their careers destroyed.
Laboratory work - anonymous or otherwise - would certainly take ID a long way forward. I'm glad such work is available though saddened that the authors feel the need to hide their identities. Where has this been published? Also many scientists such as Dr Dembski, Meyer, Berlinski, Behe, Gonzalez, Sternberg, and the many signatories of the Dissent From Darwinism statement are quite comfortable to counter the current paradigm under their own names. So there should be some people willing to publish.waterbear
November 20, 2009
November
11
Nov
20
20
2009
01:00 PM
1
01
00
PM
PDT
waterbear: I think you might be right. Starting up a new journal may be the solution. And who would the authors be? Scientists who publish their laboratory work anonymously so as not to have their careers destroyed. Somehow the fact that supreme bias is at work amongst certain scientists in a way that is coordinated, and which is then directed towards the views of scientists with whom this group disagrees, seems to meet with your approval. Why's that?PaV
November 20, 2009
November
11
Nov
20
20
2009
12:18 PM
12
12
18
PM
PDT
Maybe it’s time to “take over a journal”! Or start your own. Once a journal has been established the quality of published work will speak for itself.waterbear
November 20, 2009
November
11
Nov
20
20
2009
11:28 AM
11
11
28
AM
PDT
1 2

Leave a Reply