Changes

== Smithsonian Controversy ==

== Smithsonian Controversy ==

The Smithsonian controversy began with backlash over the publication of an article written by an [[intelligent design]] proponent in a peer-reviewed scientific journal loosely affiliated with the Smithsonian Institution ([[Smithsonian Institution|SI]]),<ref>[[Smithsonian_Controversy#Sources|Powell 2005, p=A19]], [[Smithsonian_Controversy#Sources|Hagerty 2005]], [[Smithsonian_Controversy#Sources|Sounder Staff Report 2006]]</ref> contrary, according the the publisher, to the journal's "typical" process of also having an associate editor involved in the peer-review process.<ref name="statement">[http://www.biolsocwash.org/id_statement.html Statement from the Council of the Biological Society of Washington]</ref>  An article titled ''The origin of biological information and the higher taxonomic categories'' by [[Intelligent Design]] advocate [[Stephen C. Meyer]] was published in the in the August 4, 2004 volume of ''Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington,'' (PBSW)<ref>{{cite|Meyer|2004|p=213-239}}</ref>  [[Richard Sternberg]] was the managing editor at the journal, and also a Research Associate at the [[Smithsonian Institute|Smithsonian Institute's]] National Museum of Natural History ([[National Museum of Natural History|NMNH]]), and the issue was the last he was to work on (he had previously announced his resignation from PBSW).

The Smithsonian controversy began with backlash over the publication of an article written by an [[intelligent design]] proponent in a peer-reviewed scientific journal loosely affiliated with the Smithsonian Institution ([[Smithsonian Institution|SI]]),<ref>[[Smithsonian_Controversy#Sources|Powell 2005, p=A19]], [[Smithsonian_Controversy#Sources|Hagerty 2005]], [[Smithsonian_Controversy#Sources|Sounder Staff Report 2006]]</ref> contrary, according the the publisher, to the journal's "typical" process of also having an associate editor involved in the peer-review process.<ref name="statement">[http://www.biolsocwash.org/id_statement.html Statement from the Council of the Biological Society of Washington]</ref>  An article titled ''The origin of biological information and the higher taxonomic categories'' by [[Intelligent Design]] advocate [[Stephen C. Meyer]] was published in the in the August 4, 2004 volume of ''Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington,'' (PBSW)<ref>[[Smithsonian_Controversy#Sources|Meyer 2004, p 213-239]]</ref>  [[Richard Sternberg]] was the managing editor at the journal, and also a Research Associate at the [[Smithsonian Institute|Smithsonian Institute's]] National Museum of Natural History ([[National Museum of Natural History|NMNH]]), and the issue was the last he was to work on (he had previously announced his resignation from PBSW).

Controversy ensued within hours of publication,<ref>{{cite|Powell|2005|p=A19}}</ref> with senior Smithsonian scientists referring to Sternberg as a "shoddy scientist" and a "closet Bible thumper."<ref>{{cite|Powell|2005|p=A19}}</ref>  Eugenie Scott, executive director of the National Center for Science Education ([[National Center for Science Education|NCSE]]), a think-tank that promotes evolution, defended the Smithsonian:  "They don't care if you are religious, but they do care a lot if you are a creationist,"<ref>{{cite|Powell|2005|p=A19}}, Statement to Washington Post reporter</ref> and "Some <nowiki>[</nowiki>scientists<nowiki>]</nowiki> probably did speak intemperately,"<ref>{{cite|Hagerty|2005}} Recorded statement to [[National Public Radio]]</ref> out of frustration and annoyance over Sternberg's role.

Controversy ensued within hours of publication,<ref>{{cite|Powell|2005|p=A19}}</ref> with senior Smithsonian scientists referring to Sternberg as a "shoddy scientist" and a "closet Bible thumper."<ref>{{cite|Powell|2005|p=A19}}</ref>  Eugenie Scott, executive director of the National Center for Science Education ([[National Center for Science Education|NCSE]]), a think-tank that promotes evolution, defended the Smithsonian:  "They don't care if you are religious, but they do care a lot if you are a creationist,"<ref>{{cite|Powell|2005|p=A19}}, Statement to Washington Post reporter</ref> and "Some <nowiki>[</nowiki>scientists<nowiki>]</nowiki> probably did speak intemperately,"<ref>{{cite|Hagerty|2005}} Recorded statement to [[National Public Radio]]</ref> out of frustration and annoyance over Sternberg's role.