Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Creationists launch their own peer reviewed 'science' journal

  1. Jan 24, 2008 #1
  2. jcsd
  3. Jan 24, 2008 #2


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    I suppose this is to answer the criticism that they don't have any peer reviewed works. The problem is that all their reviewers are said to be sympathetic to the cause, in which case what is the point other than trying to pull the wool over the gullible publics eyes.
  4. Jan 24, 2008 #3


    User Avatar
    Homework Helper
    Gold Member

    Wow, this is disturbing. It is scary to think how many lawmakers could be fooled by one of these "peer-reviewed" articles.
  5. Jan 24, 2008 #4
    The only problem I have with it is that they call it "science". Other than that, more power to them.
  6. Jan 24, 2008 #5
    Finally, Darwinists will no longer stand in the way of epic strides in the field of Creationism.

    Err... wait, what is there to discover again? I thought they did all of their research by reading an old book...
  7. Jan 24, 2008 #6


    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    That's one problem that I've always had with the term 'peers'. You're acquitted/convicted by a jury of your 'peers'. 'Peer' simply means one in a similar situation, an equal in society. I could have thousands of 'peer reviewed' papers if any of my peers could remain sober long enough to read one. :rolleyes:
  8. Jan 24, 2008 #7


    User Avatar
    Homework Helper
    Gold Member

  9. Jan 24, 2008 #8
    How can you say you have a problem with them calling it "science" and "more power to them" in the same breath?

    No. No power to them.
  10. Jan 24, 2008 #9


    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    It's a wonderful irony that it really is peer reviewed.
  11. Jan 25, 2008 #10

    Hey, if they want make a museum for The Flintstones, more power to them. Just don't call it science.
  12. Jan 25, 2008 #11
    Again, no power to them.
  13. Jan 25, 2008 #12
    C'mon! A museum for The Flintstones???
  14. Jan 25, 2008 #13
    I dont want a damn thing paid for by creationists in my country. Period. Not even if it feeds starving orphans, because they will point and say: "look, we feed starving orphans were not that bad".
  15. Jan 25, 2008 #14


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    I agree. The problem is, it doesn't stop at the creationist museum. There's a teacher at my daughter's school who always refers to evolution as "just a theory," whenever the subject comes up. Since she teaches Biology I imagine it would come up rather frequently.

    As you might guess, the teacher is VERY religious.
  16. Jan 25, 2008 #15
    While that it is true, let's be clear here--most xtians don't believe in fundamentalism. There are over 1.1 billion Catholics on the Earth. I went to Catholic school for 17 years and was always taught evolution, and never 1 shred of creationism. Creationists are simply insane, they are the minority when compared to other xtians.
  17. Jan 25, 2008 #16

    jim mcnamara

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Just a theory - there are words in Science that do not mean the same thing in comm parlance. Theory is one of them.

    (thanks again to Zz for this link...)
  18. Jan 25, 2008 #17
    Launching a peer reviewed journal is a good tactical move for the creationists. Articles will likely be screened to include those that support the pre-established conclusion, of course. If the editors allow a debunking article, it will likely be one that can be interpreted and mitigated. This will allow them to show that not all authors agree on everything, therefore creationism must be real science. What is troubling is that for some lawmakers, if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck...
  19. Jan 25, 2008 #18
    Making a creationist museum is like making a museum that supports Holocaust denial. It just should not happen.
  20. Jan 25, 2008 #19

    D H

    Staff: Mentor

    The First Amendment certainly gives them the right to publish this garbage and the right to call it "peer-reviewed". Freedom of speech means acknowledging that everybody has the right to have their say, especially those who hold views exactly counter to your own views. So, more power to them.

    Freedom of speech also means have the right to educate the scientifically-illiterate decision makers that this is anything but science and anything but true.
  21. Jan 25, 2008 #20
    The problem is, im not holding a 'view'. Its a fact. What they are doing is disingenuous.
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?