|Wesley R. Elsberry
Joined: May 2002
I haven't heard back from Marks concerning my correspondence. I did send another note showing where I had publicly pointed out the error that obviates their analysis in the "Active Information" essay on the "evolutionaryinformatics.org" website, that time about five years ago.
It will be interesting to see what calculus they use on their decision. Do they continue to try to publish a paper with a long-known error that is critical to their analysis, such that they take the very public fallout that will assuredly follow? Or do they remove the bogus essay from their website, admitting that they can't get the description of the simplest of evolutionary computation pedagogical examples right, despite getting clues about it seven years ago? In the first case, it is likely that they will be looking at another tainted, and perhaps retracted, publication, much like Meyer 2004b. In the second case, they end up self-retracting 2/3rds of the content of the "Evolutionary Informatics Laboratory", snatching the rug out from under IDC cheerleaders bashing Baylor University over censoring the wonderful scientific content of the EIL.
Tough call, I know. In the first case, they blow any pretense to scientific integrity. In the second case, they blow most of their credibility (such as it is). Of course, IDC cheerleaders don't appreciate the first and obviously don't care about the second, which makes choice 2 the clear winner if all one cares about is the IDC followership. Choice 1 would contrariwise be evidence that at least one of the pair still cares something for the scientific process.
"You can't teach an old dogma new tricks." - Dorothy Parker