# Retraction vs. Correction?

**URL:** <https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/retraction-vs-correction/9527>\
**Category:** Side Conversation\
**Tags:** Communication, Society\
**Created:** [February 8, 2020, 4:06pm UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/retraction-vs-correction/9527 "2020-02-08T16:06:27Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 11

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![swamidass](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discourse.peacefulscience.org/swamidass/32/3_2.png) [@swamidass](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/swamidass)\
**Post date:** [February 9, 2020, 8:55pm UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/retraction-vs-correction/9527/11 "2020-02-09T20:55:21Z")

</div>

> [@sfmatheson](#):
>
> Let’s be frank: you aren’t going to subject the pitiful Discovery Institute to this kind of scrutiny, are you?

Well, I do. Do you recall these posts?

- [Three Misrepresentations on Darwin Devolves' Back Cover](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/three-misrepresentations-on-darwin-devolves-back-cover/5237)

- [Behe's Trainwreck Response to Science](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/behes-trainwreck-response-to-science/4548)

> [@sfmatheson](#):
>
> Do you plan a series of posts calling on those authors and that organization to correct errors or retract falsehoods?

Well, yes I did, and I do. So I’m not sure what you are getting at here. In fact, I have regularly stated that ID has major problem with trust because they won’t retract anything. Though occasionally and rarely there are exceptions by one or two scholars, most of them never do. It is anti-scientific.

I pressed the case on ID scholars quite often. In the case of Behe, they were pretty unhappy with me, and he still did not retract (and is part of why we don’t see @Agauger here any more). I’m not exactly sure how you’ve come to the impression I use kid gloves on them.

The difference between DI and mainstream scientists is that I don’t expect DI to do right on these points, at least not for the most part, but do expect mainstream scientists to do right. Moreover, I don’t have credibility to call DI to the mat (as I often do) unless I’m willing to do the same to others in mainstream science.

> [@sfmatheson](#):
>
> Again, I agree that BL should be held to a higher standard, but that’s because it _deserves_ to.

I also agree with this. Honestly, my problem is not with BioLogos per se, or with the majority of scientist affiliated with them. It is with some (in my view) unscientific arguments and unscientific ways of managing errors that is hopefully confined to a few people and on the topic of population genetics. I suppose one reason I tend to react so strongly, on a personal level, is because it reminds of me of the dishonest versions of creationism (in this confined area, to be clear). That is not something I personally know how to tolerate from mainstream scientists yet.

---

_[View the full topic](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/retraction-vs-correction/9527)._