Sternberg Replies


Richard von Sternberg has created this website to reply to the various criticisms of his editorial judgment in publishing Stephen Meyer's ID paper in The Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington.

I read with great interest what he had to say, and I have posted a reply in this post over at EvolutionBlog. It seems to me that at times his phrasing is just a bit too cagey, and his reply leaves me wondering about a number of things.


I think it is funny that Sternberg claims that he was the most qualified editor to review the paper. IIRC, one of the associate editors is a paleozoologist (or something similiar). He or she is definately more qualified to review a paper on the Cambrian explosion than Sternberg. The paper is so flawed that we can only conclude that the material was beyond the expertice of the people who reviewed it.

There is an easy way to solve this problem. Submit a refutation to the journal, and see if it is fiarly reviewed and accepted. Many journals have published things that turn out to be horsehocky (spoon-bending, cold fusion, dilution of something 120 powers of ten and retaining properties, etc.) In most of those cases, the proper remedy is an article refuting the nonsense. Let’s just someone do it.

Well Frank, you are correct. Have you looked over “Meyer’s Hopless Monster” yet?

The other question I have is whether or not it would be suitible for a small sytematics journal.

I doubt PBSW will publish a response to Meyer (2004). They want this to go away.

I think the reputation of the journal would be irreparably compromised if they didn’t publish a refutation.

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by Jason Rosenhouse published on September 27, 2004 7:28 PM.

Vatican Accepts Evolutionary Science was the previous entry in this blog.

Celebrate your right to read is the next entry in this blog.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.



Author Archives

Powered by Movable Type 4.381

Site Meter