RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (10) < [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... >   
  Topic: Biological Information: New Perspectives, The Springer Book Flap< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Posts: 1999
Joined: April 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 05 2012,14:16   

Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ Mar. 05 2012,07:45)
Over on TheologyWeb, "Jorge" had posted a bit of information about conference. He had requested that the moderators delete his thread, which they did. Then "Tiggy" posted a copy of "Jorge"'s post. "Jorge" has requested that that be taken down. I'll post it here, just in case TheologyWeb is inclined to remove it.


You last visited: Today at 09:18 AM
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:18 AM.
Forum Science Building Natural Science 301
Springer gets suckered by creationist pseudoscience

Page 1 of 3123LastResults 1 to 15 of 43
Thread: Springer gets suckered by creationist pseudoscience
Enrolled: January 17th, 2004 Posts: 7,680
 Male  personal  x
Amen 806 Times in 529 PostsTiggy
Thread Owner
March 3rd 2012  12:48 PM
Post: #1
Springer gets suckered by creationist pseudoscience
This particular bit of Creationist dishonesty needs to be archived.

Jorge recently started a thread, then for some reason demanded that it be deleted:

Jump to Post Originally posted by Jorge


1. I had promised you that the two papers that I co-authored would soon be published, remember?

Well, publication has occurred and release is supposed to be very soon - within days. However ...

2. ... we may be witnessing in real time another episode of 'EXPELLED'.  

3. The Proceedings from the symposium, contained in a book titled Biological Information: New Perspectives,
is now encountering the usual attempts at censorship practiced by the 'Thought Police' -- you know, the
type of censorship that the Evo-Faithful loudly deny happens at all.  

4. This was strictly a scientific symposium -- I know, I was there from start to finish.
Every paper was scrutinized to be/remain science ... pure science.

5. The publisher is Springer-Verlag. I assure you, the papers were heavily peer-reviewed.
But guess what? They now want to do additional peer-review because of "complaints". OMG !

6. The Evo-Faithful complain that intelligent design isn't science "because it's not peer-reviewed."
When it is peer-reviewed, they say, "It shouldn't have been peer-reviewed because it's not science."

Now where did I put my shotgun?  

7. In passing, do you see why I use the term "dishonest" as often as I do? Do you? Huh? Do you? It fits!  

8. Lastly, wanna guess who's already involved?
Yup, you guessed it, the NCSE : the 'witch' and her broomstick.

9. More details here :

10. This could turn ugly, very ugly ... stay tuned ...


Turns out the DI and Jorge are attempting to cover up the latest bit of Creationist dishonesty.

The IDCers submitted this batch of "papers" from Jorge's recent Intelligent Design Creation conference to Springer in book form called Biological Information: New Perspectives. Apparently the work was deliberately misrepresented as being from a conference sponsored by Cornell, not merely held on the Cornell campus in publicly available rental space.

The book was mistakenly tentatively accepted by some junior editors at Springer based on the Cornell name. When the truth of the matter became clear, Springer pulled the advance notice of the book.

As reported by Allan MacNeill at Panda's thumb:


From the very few bits of information I have been able to gather, the “symposium” was apparently held in the Statler Auditorium in the School of Hotel Administration at the Ithaca campus. Unlike most of the large lecture halls at Cornell, the Statler Auditorium can be rented by outside groups for non-university functions. I know this because I have performed there with the Ithaca Ballet, which used to rent the hall for their local performances. Ergo, it appears that John Sanford and the symposium organizers rented the hall and are now claiming that the event was somehow “a Cornell event” rather than an event held in a rented hall at Cornell.

Statler Auditorium has almost 900 seats, but in looking at the housing reservation at one of the links above, there were apparently only 42 attendees (and that may also include the presenters), so the auditorium would have looked a little…well, shall we say “sparse”?


Lots more info at

Springer gets suckered by creationist pseudoscience

Update on Springer “Biological Information: New Perspectives” Volume

and here


Score one for science this week. Evolutionary biologists were horrified by the news that a scholarly press was going to publish a work in favor of intelligent design. But a spokesman for the publishing house confirmed to Inside Higher Ed Wednesday that the book’s publication is on hold as it is subjected to further peer review.

Earlier this week, the Panda’s Thumb, a blog about evolutionary theory, posted an item about a forthcoming book from Springer called Biological Information: New Perspectives. The blog-poster and other commenters said the book was a compilation of articles by creationists and intelligent-design proponents and Springer had no business publishing such "creationist pseudoscience."

Eric Merkel-Sobotta, executive vice president of corporate communications at Springer in Germany, said in an e-mail, that the initial proposal for the book was peer-reviewed by two independent reviewers. “However, once the complete manuscript had been submitted, the series editors became aware that additional peer review would be necessary,” Merkel-Sobotta said. “This is currently underway, and the automatically generated pre-announcement for the book on Springer has been removed until the peer-reviewers have made their final decision.”

full story

Looks like the DI has gone into full damage control / spin mode.

My guess is that Cornell found out about how its name was being misused and threatened to sue the pants off the DI and the folks who dishonestly misued the connection. All across the web Creationist sites like this one are now erasing all mention of Cornell and issuing disclaimers for CYA purposes.

Too funny!

- T

As someone who has publicly commented on this issue, I find "Jorge"'s "shotgun" comment above to be a palpable threat. I consider this "fair use" of his commentary.

Tiggy re-posted Jorge's post which drives Jorge mad:
I do not know why this thread / OP is still active. I have TWICE requested the mods to remove it.

I requested that they remove my thread and they complied. In Tiggy's typical unethical style, he
circumvented the intent of the law by reposting in his own thread my OP -- an OP that had been
previously REMOVED by the mods.

I am hereby requesting for the THIRD TIME that the moderators of this forum remove this thread
or at the very least my words (Items 1-10) which have previously been deleted from this forum.

Thank you.

(emphasis by Jorge)

Luckily the moderators denied to delete Tiggy's thread because he only cited what Jorge already disclosed.

"[...] the type of information we find in living systems is beyond the creative means of purely material processes [...] Who or what is such an ultimate source of information? [...] from a theistic perspective, such an information source would presumably have to be God."

- William Dembski -

  297 replies since Mar. 05 2012,07:36 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (10) < [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... >   

Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

[ Read the Board Rules ] | [Useful Links] | [Evolving Designs]