1,792
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 23:
Line 23: − Line 39:
Line 38: + +
→Peer review of his ideas: add ref to new paper
==Peer review of his ideas==
==Peer review of his ideas==
During Behe's testimony at the trial of ''[[Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District]]'', opponents of intelligent design made the objection that this concept has not been published in peer-reviewed journals. Behe testified that his book was subjected to peer review as rigorous as that of journals:<ref>http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/dover/day12am.html#day12am177</ref>
During Behe's testimony at the trial of ''[[Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District]]'', opponents of intelligent design made the objection that this concept has not been published in peer-reviewed journals. Behe testified that his book was subjected to peer review as rigorous as that of journals:<ref>http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/dover/day12am.html#day12am177</ref>
Critics claim that the peer review for Behe's book was not as thorough as journal peer review, yet fail to make meaningful comparison to the questionable peer review done for pro-evolution papers published in journals.
Critics claim that the peer review for Behe's book was not as thorough as journal peer review, yet fail to make meaningful comparison to the questionable peer review done for pro-evolution papers published in journals.
Behe has recently published a peer-reviewed paper on the observation of evolutionary mutations. Prominent evolutionist Jerry Coyne has praised it, but warned that creationists may draw the wrong conclusions.<ref>http://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2010/12/12/behes-new-paper/</ref> Behe has responded to Coyne.<ref>http://www.evolutionnews.org/2010/12/the_first_rule_of_adaptive_evo041811.html</ref>
==Notes==
==Notes==