Winter solstice

[theophilus]

The unfortunate thing for anyone wishing to argue this way is that there are 10's of thousands of papers peer reviewed every single year which add further weight to the voracity of evolutionary theory.

This is one of the reasons we don't hear much about the evidence against evolution. Papers must be peer reviewed before they can be published and the peers who are doing the reviewing all believe in evolution. Here is an article which shows some of the problems with it:
http://www.scienceagainstevolution.org/v10i5n.htm

---

In the past we have discussed in detail how scientific journals have refused to publish original work by creationists, but later published essentially the same work by evolutionists. Here is a quick review.

The theory of plate tectonics was originally proposed by a creationist, but was rejected by the major scientific journals of the day. The only journal that would publish it was an obscure French journal. Later, when proposed by evolutionist Wegner (without the observation that movement of continental plates demonstrates the power of God), it was published (despite the lack of any plausible natural force capable of moving so much mass).

Guy Berthault’s paper on lamination of particles in a fluid flow was rejected by major scientific journals (because it explains how sedimentary rock is formed rapidly rather than over millions of years), so it had to be published in creationist technical journals. Twelve years later it was published by an evolutionist, without credit to Berthault, and without mentioning the obvious conclusion.

Mary Schweitzer isn’t a creationist, but she had to publish her discovery of unfossilized dinosaur bones in Earth magazine, rather than the respected scientific journals, because of the obvious impact to the theory of evolution. She was able to publish her research in respected scientific journals a decade later by saying that the bones really were millions of years old, despite not being mineralized, and that they were very similar to bird bone. The need for proof that dinosaurs evolved into birds was enough to sway the peers in favor of publication, despite the age problem.

Of course, the example that is probably freshest in your mind, involves the firing of the editor who dared to print a peer-reviewed article favorable to Intelligent Design in a journal associated with the Smithsonian Institution.

Peer prejudice is not limited to creationists. Graduate students don’t get much more respect. That’s why Nobel laureate Harold C. Urey had to blackmail Science into publishing a paper by his graduate student, Stanley Miller, about the origin of life.

---