Do evolutionists silence the critics?

Do "evolutionary scientists" (for lack of a better term) silence or censure critics of evolutionary theory?

Yes.

If so, how?

Many ways. No one is suggesting a conspiracy because one is not needed. Lack of funding, rejection of a paper going through peer-review, and refusal to publish are all ways in which silencing can occur. Also, journalists can publish articles full of nonsense, and Scientific American can publish it's list of "10 common creationist mistakes". (a straw man article) Much of this results from perception (that is where the straw men come from) and some is organizational inertia, some is people using poor arguments (often popularizers) and the rest is based on the evolutionary scientist's personal experiences.

And, why does this not happen in other fields of study (or does it)?

It does. Research into continental drift prior to the 1960's, sun-centered solar system, oxygen instead of phlogiston...
 
Upvote 0

seebs

God Made Me A Skeptic
Apr 9, 2002
31,914
1,529
18
Saint Paul, MN
Visit site
✟55,225.00
Faith
Seeker
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Hmm. Can you offer me a reason to believe that papers are failing peer-review because they're opposed to someone's pet theory, rather than because they're not very good papers?

The creationist papers I've read have always had *painfully* obvious, glaring, errors in their basic mathematics or logic, or simply false statements.
 
Upvote 0

Morat

Untitled One
Jun 6, 2002
2,725
4
48
Visit site
✟12,690.00
Faith
Atheist
In one of the big Evo/Creation court cases (I believe the one over a teacher's dismissal for teaching Creationism), a creationist witness from one of the bigger Creationist groups (ICR or AIG) tried to claim they were constantly refused publication.

So the prosecuter asked how many papers they'd had submitted, to what journals, and the reasons given. The witness couldn't remember. The judge asked that the groups in question file the requested information.

They didn't. They hadn't actually submitted a paper, ever. (I can think of one Creationist paper that got published, offhand. Gentry's Po Halo work. Wasn't such a mystery, however).

It's amazing how seldom you get published, when you don't submit a paper.
 
Upvote 0
If a paper fails peer review, does that not tell you something.
I mean, if you didn't make the cut for the basketball team do you say "I wasn't up to the standard", or "They are out to get me"?

Depends on how grown up you are. Creationism is still in its adolescence in America - and a rocky one at that.
 
Upvote 0

lucaspa

Legend
Oct 22, 2002
14,569
416
New York
✟32,309.00
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Private
Originally posted by Matthew Many ways. No one is suggesting a conspiracy because one is not needed. Lack of funding, rejection of a paper going through peer-review, and refusal to publish are all ways in which silencing can occur.

NIH lists all grants that are submitted.  Do you see any grants submitted on ID or creationism?  How can they be rejected if they are not submitted?  The same applies for peer-reviewed papers. Although Gentry's papers on radiohaloes were published in Science, weren't they?  When creation "scientists" were asked in the 1982 trial to produce rejection notices of peer-reviewed papers, they couldn't.

Dembski has stated that he doesn't do peer-reviewed work. Why? Because they don't pay royalties.  He gets royalties from his books, after all.

It does. Research into continental drift prior to the 1960's, sun-centered solar system, oxygen instead of phlogiston... 

The first -- continental drift -- is simply untrue.  A minority of geologists continued to do research and publish on plate tectonics from the time the theory was first proposed. 

The second -- sun centered solar system -- is because there is nothing new to publish.  It is already well-established that the sun is the center of the solar system.  Journals are for new findings, not continued support of already well-supported findings. That is a reason why transitional series of fossils aren't published; they are no longer new.

The last isn't published because the theory of phlogiston has been falsified.  It is false.  Therefore, what is there to publish about it? 
 
Upvote 0

kaotic

Learn physics
Sep 22, 2002
4,660
4
North Carolina, USA
Visit site
✟14,836.00
Faith
Agnostic
Politics
US-Democrat
Originally posted by Athlon4all
[q]If so, how?[/q]Sadly, because Satan snares those who are convinced. Satan is involved especially in Evolution "scientists," much more in other areas, because those other areas are closer to true science (observable, repeatable facts).

Do you know that almost all scientists are Christians even the ones that are in the field of evolution?
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

ZiSunka

It means 'yellow dog'
Jan 16, 2002
17,005
284
✟38,767.00
Faith
Christian
Originally posted by Late_Cretaceous
Do "evolutionary scientists" (for lack of a better term) silence or censure critics of evolutionary theory? If so, how? And, why does this not happen in other fields of study (or does it)?

No, they just ignore or scoff at anything that does not support their own hypotheses or theories. They don't actively censure, they just mock at what they don't themselves believe. If they can't effectively mock something, they just ignore it. Very childish really, but effective. They just say something isn't worth considering and it goes away (in their own minds).
 
Upvote 0

notto

Legend
May 31, 2002
11,130
664
54
Visit site
✟22,369.00
Faith
United Ch. of Christ
Originally posted by Athlon4all
[q]If so, how?[/q]Sadly, because Satan snares those who are convinced. Satan is involved especially in Evolution "scientists," much more in other areas, because those other areas are closer to true science (observable, repeatable facts).

Do we need to reject geology and archeology as well because of the snares of Satan? Each of these has evidence against YEC and the flood.

How about physics and astronomy? Same deal?

I guess just to be safe, we should reject all of science (and most of history).

Satan . . . :(
 
Upvote 0
No, they just ignore or scoff at anything that does not support their own hypotheses or theories. They don't actively censure, they just mock at what they don't themselves believe. If they can't effectively mock something, they just ignore it. Very childish really, but effective. They just say something isn't worth considering and it goes away (in their own minds).

This is a convenient belief to hold if you are an evolution denier. Is it true?

I don't think it is. Can you give me any good reason to believe you?
 
Upvote 0

Athlon4all

I'm offline indefintely
Feb 6, 2002
525
2
37
Visit site
✟15,965.00
notto,

Yep. Satan ultimately is responsible for all the ungodliness in this world. He's the one who said "I Will..." and tempted Adam and Eve in the garden. This is not to say that man couldn't have rejected him, man could've but he chose to follow Satan. The remedy is now here, Jesus Christ, offering you and all life ("Jesus said unto him "I am the way the truth and the life"), and giving you the power to overcome Satan.


EDIT: Oh
I guess just to be safe, we should reject all of science (and most of history).
Quite the contrary. True science never contradicts the Bible. Your "science" is the science that I Timothy 6:20 speaks of "O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane <I>and</I>
vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called: "
 
Upvote 0

notto

Legend
May 31, 2002
11,130
664
54
Visit site
✟22,369.00
Faith
United Ch. of Christ
Originally posted by lambslove
No, they just ignore or scoff at anything that does not support their own hypotheses or theories. They don't actively censure, they just mock at what they don't themselves believe. If they can't effectively mock something, they just ignore it. Very childish really, but effective. They just say something isn't worth considering and it goes away (in their own minds).

It's hard to ignore data and theories that have not submitted themselves to the peer review and publishing process.

Can you give one example where peer reviewed data has been submitted and ignored or mocked?

It is childish to suggest that science does not need to hold to a standard of repeatable, testable data in its observations. It is childish to say that "we are being ignored and mocked" when creation scientists won't even play the game but instead go to the courtroom and the voters to try to get their theories into the classroom. Shouldn't they have to play by the same rules as all the rest of the science that is there?

We can't treat unsubstantiated claims as science. If we do, science has no value.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
Satan ultimately is responsible for all the ungodliness in this world. He's the one who said "I Will..." and tempted Adam and Eve in the garden.

hmmm..

So, since evolution denial is ultimately a deception, would it be considered ungodly? And if so, would that not put Satan in the Creationist court? Yes, I know most creationists are Christians, but so are most scientists..

Apparently, Satan has hold of one of these two groups of Christians. Is it true that a house divided against itself cannot stand? Is that why some Christians are anti-science?
 
Upvote 0
Originally posted by lambslove
I am a scientist and see it happen almost daily.

That's about the best answer I could have hoped to get. Do you travel with lots of scientists or mostly the ones in your university? Which university is&nbsp;it, by the way? Whose lab do you work in? What is your area of research?

I'd like to know if what you see happening every day is representative of the behavior of scientists as a group - that's why I ask..
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Athlon4all

I'm offline indefintely
Feb 6, 2002
525
2
37
Visit site
✟15,965.00
Is that why some Christians are anti-science?
Any Christian who is anti-scientific should nto be towards true science, which as I said in the above post, never contradicts God's Word. What true Christians should be is anti towards your science, the science that is not based on fact but belief, and the science that elevates sceince above the LORD Jesus.

Apparently, Satan has hold of one of these two groups of Christians.
And anyone who rejects God's Word (wether Creation or Christ) is being decieved by Satan and drawn away by selfish desires. Satan has a hold over anyone who rejects the truth.
Is it true that a house divided against itself cannot stand?
This is true, and thats why you see how degraded the Church is today. But, there still is a believing remnant, that will stand, because we are founded on the Eternal, Living Word of God, Jesus Christ.
 
Upvote 0