1,410
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 11:
Line 11: + + + + +
→Opinions on the Smithsonian Controversy: Adding section on Sternberg peer review controversy misnomer
Critics of teaching Intelligent Design (ID) in public schools have long argued that it is unscientific because no intelligent design paper had been published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal. David Klinghoffer commented in a Wall Street Journal opinion article: "Note the circularity: Critics of ID have long argued that the theory was unscientific because it had not been put forward in a peer-reviewed scientific journal. Now that it has, they argue that it shouldn't have been because it's unscientific."<ref>[[Smithsonian_Controversy#Sources|Klinghoffer 2005]]</ref>
Critics of teaching Intelligent Design (ID) in public schools have long argued that it is unscientific because no intelligent design paper had been published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal. David Klinghoffer commented in a Wall Street Journal opinion article: "Note the circularity: Critics of ID have long argued that the theory was unscientific because it had not been put forward in a peer-reviewed scientific journal. Now that it has, they argue that it shouldn't have been because it's unscientific."<ref>[[Smithsonian_Controversy#Sources|Klinghoffer 2005]]</ref>
== Sternberg Peer Review Controversy ==
This section is a stub. Please improve on it.
Smithsonian and other evolutionary scientists falsely charged that the Meyer paper was not peer reviewed.{{fact}} These allegations are responsible for the misnomer "Sterberg Peer review controversy," are a hot topic in the evolutionary blogosphere.{{fact}}<!-- This is true, but could be original research. -->
== References ==
== References ==