Angry Scientists: Publishing on Intelligent Design
By: Sean Pitman
From a discussion with “Professor Kent”:
Did you actually read the comments I posted of other scientist who have been continually blocked from publishing such ideas in mainstream literature? – Sean Pitman
And yet there are creationists who can do so. You never know until you try.
There are no publications by creationists or intelligent design theorists in mainstream literature specifically promoting the need for intelligent design to explain various features of living things… except for one. That one paper was published by Stephen Meyer, in 2004, in the peer-reviewed journal Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington. The title of Meyer’s paper was, “The Origin of Biological Information and the Higher Taxonomic Categories” and can be reviewed here:
http://www.discovery.org/a/2177
This paper makes very similar arguments to the one’s I’ve been presenting on my own website, in forums like this one, and in my new book, “Turtles All the Way Down: Questions on Origins“.
What is particularly interesting about Meyer’s paper, however, is the reaction to its publication by mainstream scientists. It wasn’t without passion, even anger, that’s for sure…
Dr. Richard Sternberg, the editor of the journal at the time, was subjected to harassment and discrimination in an effort to force him out as a Research Associate. In fact, NMNH officials demoted Dr. Sternberg to the position of Research Collaborator.
In emails exchanged during August and September 2004, NMNH officials revealed their intent to use their government jobs to discriminate against scientists based on their outside activities 
regarding evolution. For example, Dr. Hans Sues, Associate Director for Research and Collections, suggested in emails on August 30, 2004, and again on September 9, 2004, that Dr. Sternberg would never have been appointed as an RA if Smithsonian officials had known about his non-governmental activities regarding evolution. Sues even blamed the scientist who nominated Sternberg as a Research Associate for not adequately investigating his background: “Sternberg is a well-established figure in anti-evolution circles, and a simple Google search would have exposed these connections.” The clear implication was that had a background check been conducted on Sternberg’s non-governmental activities, he would have been barred from being a Research Associate. Given the attitudes expressed in these emails, scientists who are known to be skeptical of Darwinian theory, whatever their qualifications or research record, cannot expect to receive equal treatment or consideration by NMNH officials.
In November of 2004, Dr. Sternberg filed a complaint with the U.S. Office of Special Counsel (OSC), the agency charged with “protecting federal employees and applicants from prohibited personnel practices, especially reprisal for whistleblowing.” The OSC eventually found evidence to corroborate Dr. Sternberg’s complaint, concluding that “[i]t is… clear that a hostile work environment was created with the ultimate goal of forcing” Dr. Sternberg out of the Smithsonian.
For further information on this story see:
http://www.discovery.org/a/2399
http://www.evolutionnews.org/2006/12/the_house_government_reform_su002968.html
For an interesting video review of this story see:
http://www.youtube.com/user/SkepticalChristian
So, it seems like you simply are not aware of the intense bias against anyone who questions fundamental aspects of Darwinism – especially with regard to the creative potential of the mechanism of RM/NS.
It is also interesting to note, given this background, that the science professors at La Sierra University only allow students to use papers published in mainstream peer-reviewed literature or books published by mainstream authors in their classes (see Dr. Paul Giem’s report of LSU’s science courses here). It would be a big step forward if Meyer’s paper on the origin of biological information (or his new book, Signature in the Cell) were also made part of the required reading in LSU’s upper division science courses. After all, Meyer’s paper was actually published in a mainstream peer-reviewed journal (at great personal cost to Dr. Sternberg)…
As an aside, note that Stephen Meyer has a new book out, Signature in the Cell that is excellent – the best I’ve personally read on the topic. I highly recommend anyone who is interested in such ideas to read this book. – Sean Pitman
