Thursday, March 17, 2016



Darwin would have a problem if he tried to publish his "Origin of Species" today.  Sara Kaplan of the Washington Post authored an article in today's Kalamazoo Gazette (Page A6, March 17, 2016) entitled "Science meets God in CreatorGate" that described the establishment science uproar over the use of the term Creator in describing the long evolutionary process of the formation of the human hand.

The Chinese authors' article had "Creator" used in a translation describing the amazing natural evolutionary process of formation of the human hand.  It was too close to the use of Creator in Creationism and Intelligent Design arguments that are anathema to many in science.  Their article was in PLOS One (a free online open access journal in which PLOS stands for Public Library of Science).

Applied prejudice and retractions

If such diligence in seeking strict conformance to rules and prejudices of science had been applied to Darwin, he would have had to retract his first edition of his book.  As it was he took out one of his references to the Creator in the final sentence of later editions of his book.  see

If the people demanding retraction, which already has happened, knew the scientific atrocities infecting some revered studies in their scientific disciplines that have not to my knowledge been retracted, they would hang their heads in shame.  I have described some of the errors in two such articles needing retraction in a post that my records indicate has only had about ten direct entries in almost three years as measured by use of the following entry

The lull in the Creation/Evolution debate [ ]  may be temporarily over but the cognitive dissonance aspect of it will probably make peaks and valleys of concern continue.

Too bad I don't have the Twitter and Facebook skills to respond to critics of the PLOS One article.

Joseph G. Engemann    Kalamazoo, Michigan     March 17, 2016

No comments:

Post a Comment