I do not have a philosophically opposing view so that is absurdly wrong. I am just waiting for him to retract an obvious mistake, like most scientists would. I just want to sort it out with him and make some progress.
1 Like
Yes that was the lie told by Sternberg and repeated unofficially by a scientifically illiterate YEC Congressman.
Here is the statement from the Biological Society of Washington itself on the matter.
The paper by Stephen C. Meyer, âThe origin of biological information and the higher taxonomic categories,â 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 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
Highlighting mine.
ETA: I should add none of that changes the fact Meyerâs paper was pure handwaving garbage and universally rejected by virtually every real paleontologist on the planet.
2 Likes