Did you know the one Intelligent Design paper that appeared in a peer-reviewed journal was not peer-reviewed?



The paper by Stephen C. Meyer, "The origin of biological information and the higher taxonomic categories," in vol. 117, no. 2, pp. 213-239 of the Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington, was published at the discretion of the former editor, Richard v. Sternberg. Contrary to typical editorial practices, the paper was published without review by any associate editor; Sternberg handled the entire review process. The Council, which includes officers, elected councilors, and past presidents, and the associate editors would have deemed the paper inappropriate for the pages of the Proceedings because the subject matter represents such a significant departure from the nearly purely systematic content for which this journal has been known throughout its 122-year history. For the same reason, the journal will not publish a rebuttal to the thesis of the paper, the superiority of intelligent design (ID) over


evolution as an explanation of the emergence of Cambrian body-plan diversity. The Council endorses a resolution on ID published by the American Association for the Advancement of Science (http://www.aaas.org/news/releases/2002/1106id2.sht... which observes that there is no credible scientific evidence supporting ID as a testable hypothesis to explain the origin of organic diversity. Accordingly, the Meyer paper does not meet the scientific standards of the Proceedings.

We have reviewed and revised editorial policies to ensure that the goals of the Society, as reflected in its journal, are clearly understood by all. Through a web presence (http://www.biolsocwash.org) and improvements in the journal, the Society hopes not only to continue but to increase its service to the world community of systematic biologists.

5 Answers

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    Hardly a surprise.

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Not surprising. ID and peer review are not conducive.

    Christians and Ben Stein would claim that the peer review was biased, when the paper was shot down as faulty hypothesis.

  • 1 decade ago

    Peer-reviewed intelligent design is an oxymoron.

  • 1 decade ago

    christians have been playing fast and loose with terms like "fact", "theory", "truth", "proof", and "evidence" for years.

    they cannot be trusted to exhibit intellectual integrity, as their sky daddy tells them that knowledge is evil. instead, they attempt to use science to discredit science, usually with laughable results

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • 1 decade ago


    Thanks, I guess.

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.