stevestory
Posts: 13407
Joined: Oct. 2005
|
| Quote | #
I have encountered critics of William Dembski claiming that his works have never been peer-reviewed, and hence lack credibility.
While I have not not been able to determine the validity of this claim, I have also not been able to verify whether Darwin’s Origin of Species (or any other work) has ever been peer-reviewed.
I know that Darwin was honoured, medalled, praised, granted, dedicated, and even buried in the Abbey. While these are certainly wonderful things, I would like to see a definitive list of hard peer-review credentials (or at least the 19th century equivalents)
If his works were to be (post-humously) peer-reviewed today, would ID advocates be included? Who would be considered Darwin’s peers, and what would be the likely outcome? Has anyone proposed this kind of validation?
I will stop short of outright Darwin-bashing, but really it seems his works have been held to a different standard than most.
Comment by bigtalktheory — March 15, 2006 @ 6:50 pm
|
Heh priceless. Where do they get these people.
|
