Joined: April 2007
|Quote (Bob O'H @ Mar. 05 2012,10:09)|
|I sent this email to one of the senior editors at Springer on the 27th Feb:|
(I'm not sure if you're the correct person to contact about this, if
you're not, could you pass this on to whoever is responsible).
I've just found out about your forthcoming book "Biological Information:
This has the potential to be a controversial text (as the editors are
all active in pushing Intelligent Design), so I'm wondering why it's
being published as an engineering text, rather than biology: it would
seem to be a better fit there.
Thanks in advance.
and got a reply from a different senior editor on the 28th:
thank you for your important mail concerning the planned book
"Biological Information: New Perspectives".
The book has been acquired and reviewed by our experienced series
editors of the book series "Intelligent Systems Reference Library"
so it was a natural choice to publish it there under the umbrella of
applied sciences. Thank you for your very valuable remark concerning
Intelligent design, we will doublecheck the situation with the reviewers
and the book editors and definitely will add a suitable Biology code.
Which I read as saying that they weren't previously aware of the ID link.
The reply I obtained was similar.
"[...] 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 -