nsTeam1RO, nsTeam1RW, nsTeam1_talkRO, nsTeam1_talkRW
13,818
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 35:
Line 35: − − − Unfortunately the peer review for Behe's book, ''Darwin's Black Box'', was not as rigorous as he had previously thought. It was further established a few minutes after the above testimony was given that one of the reviewers did not read the book and only gave his approval based upon Behe's reputation. In fact this same reviewer provided the deciding factor for publication. − − :Q. She advised her husband to give me a call. So unaware of all this, I received a phone call from the publisher in New York. We spent approximately ten minutes on the phone. After hearing a description of the work, I suggested that the editor should seriously consider publishing the manuscript. ... In November 1998, I finally met Michael Behe when he visited Penn for a faculty outreach talk. He told me that, yes, indeed, it was his book that the publisher called me about. In fact, he said my comments were the deciding factor in convincing the publisher to go ahead with the book. Interesting, I thought. − − −
Undo revision 407946 by Special:Contributions/Jimmy (User talk:Jimmy) -- Specific source needed for review
:A. No, I did not. I gave my editor at the Free Press suggested names, and he contacted them. Some of them agreed to review. Some did not.
:A. No, I did not. I gave my editor at the Free Press suggested names, and he contacted them. Some of them agreed to review. Some did not.
==Notes==
==Notes==