Why Are Darwinists Scared to Read Signature in the Cell?

[buffalo]

The Big Bange DM+

DNA
Plants
Animals
People

What accounts for the radical change?

The question is, why did matter start adapting to survive? For all we know, the intelligent designer was some alien with a chemistry lab. (But where did the alien come from?) And why do so many scientists want to avoid asking the question?

Hmm- the DNA code - where did this language come from?

All codes and languages come from a mind.

 

[reggieM]

My question related to why creationists are complaining about scientists not reading Signature in the Cell when the Discovery Institute has deliberately engaged in underhanded trickery to achieve exactly that end.

Apparently, scientists will only read books that they get for free?

Beyond that, your question is easily answered by the article posted. The complaints are not that scientists simply haven’t read the book – but that they offer negative reviews and comments about the book (as you did) without having read it (or intending to read it).

 

[ricmat]

And what about offering to send a review copy and then never sending one? What adjective would you use to describe that tactic?

An oversight?

How about not reading the book but publishing a negative review on it. What adjective would you use to describe that tactic?

 

[ricmat]

Critics would do bankrupt if they had to purchase all the books they reviewed- why should this one be different?

Perhaps he lives near a library.

 

[tjm190]

Apparently, scientists will only read books that they get for free?

Beyond that, your question is easily answered by the article posted. The complaints are not that scientists simply haven’t read the book – but that they offer negative reviews and comments about the book (as you did) without having read it (or intending to read it).

If someone said “Oh, I’ll send you a free copy of this” would you go out and buy it? If it didn’t come, then would you say they had been intentionally deceitful?

 

[Just_Lurking]

An oversight?

“Sleazy” was the word that came to my mind.

 

[ricmat]

My question related to why creationists are complaining about scientists not reading Signature in the Cell when the Discovery Institute has deliberately engaged in underhanded trickery to achieve exactly that end.

OK - so the book is now out in publication. Anyone can buy it. Anyone can read it at the library. There is “no longer” any underhanded trickery to keep people from actually reading it.

So read it.

I would still like to see an ACTUAL scientific criticism of any claim in the book. Perhaps there are some out there, but I haven’t seen any yet.

 

[tjm190]

Perhaps he lives near a library.

You’ve yet to explain why a group would offer to send a work, have that offer be accepted, and then fail to do so unless they were attempting to be deceitful.

 

[Just_Lurking]

Beyond that, your question is easily answered by the article posted. The complaints are not that scientists simply haven’t read the book – but that they offer negative reviews and comments about the book (as you did) without having read it (or intending to read it).

I’ve made no comments about the book, either negative or positive. All my comments (as opposed to the blog I quoted) have strictly related to the sleazy tactics of the Discovery Institute.

 

[reggieM]

If someone said “Oh, I’ll send you a free copy of this” would you go out and buy it? If it didn’t come, then would you say they had been intentionally deceitful?

If someone said that they’d send me a free book, I’d try to be courteous if it did not arrive.

As the person sending a book (this is usually not done by the author but by the publishing house) the rash conclusion that there was some “deceit” involved would confirm to me that the potential-reviewer is not objective or balanced enough to offer a worthwhile review anyway.

Why the hostility?

 

[Just_Lurking]

There is “no longer” any underhanded trickery to keep people from actually reading it.

And the Discovery Institute has achieved their goal of raising the sales of Signature in the Cell by delaying negative scientific reviews. There is no longer anything thing that can be done about that - It’s not like people can return the book and have the book’s rank lowered.

 

[ricmat]

You’ve yet to explain why a group would offer to send a work, have that offer be accepted, and then fail to do so unless they were attempting to be deceitful.

You will have to ask them. I can think of many reasons other than jumping to the conclusion that deceit was at hand. I mean, really, they knew the book was going to come out publicly at some point. There is no point in temporarily hiding the book from anyone.

Perhaps they didn’t get their order on time. Perhaps the shipment went to the wrong address…

You seem to be pursuing this course of attacking the person/organization/motives rather than the book because you can’t find anything wrong in the book.

 

[ricmat]

And the Discovery Institute has achieved their goal of raising the sales of Signature in the Cell by delaying negative scientific reviews. There is no longer anything thing that can be done about that - It’s not like people can return the book and have the book’s rank lowered.

You’ve been eating too much fruit cake.

You’re a math guy. The book has a lot of math in it. Why don’t you get it from the library (thereby not raising the sales of the book, or affecting it’s rank), and comment on it? After you’ve read it, of course, instead of before you’ve read it.

BTW - you seem to be very upset that the book is selling well. Why is that?

 

[buffalo]

They could always go to the library and get a copy.

Materialists really do not have answers for what goes on in the cell. The complexity, the communication, moving of materials, is simply too much to explain. To get there from the simplest cell to the complex cell would take more time and moves from chance to design.

In addition it is now understood that the cells were complex right from the beginning.

The post-darwin era is upon us.

 

[reggieM]

I’ve made no comments about the book, either negative or positive. All my comments (as opposed to the blog I quoted) have strictly related to the sleazy tactics of the Discovery Institute.

I pointed this out to you just a moment ago:

They haven’t got any novel arguments for their case…

You judged the book negatively without having read it (how do you know that there are no novel arguments in the book?).

It appears to me that you wouldn’t be able to give the book an objective, unbiased review anyway – you’ve obviously pre-judged it. I’m concerned that you didn’t even recognize that in what you wrote only moments ago.

 

[Just_Lurking]

You’re a math guy. The book has a lot of math in it. Why don’t you get it from the library (thereby not raising the sales of the book, or affecting it’s rank), and comment on it? After you’ve read it, of course, instead of before you’ve read it.

I spend my spare time looking for workable methods to detect intelligent design in discrete objects. So you can probably guess why I no longer waste my time reading the ID literature.

BTW - you seem to be very upset that the book is selling well. Why is that?

I’m not upset one way or the other. I’m pointing out that the Discovery Institute had a (successful) motive for their actions, which seem to have had an intelligent force behind them rather than being the result of an accidental oversight.

 

[Just_Lurking]

You judged the book negatively without having read it (how do you know that there are no novel arguments in the book?).

As I stated in post #11, and restated in post #18, PZ Myers said that, not me.

 

[tjm190]

If someone said that they’d send me a free book, I’d try to be courteous if it did not arrive.

As the person sending a book (this is usually not done by the author but by the publishing house) the rash conclusion that there was some “deceit” involved would confirm to me that the potential-reviewer is not objective or balanced enough to offer a worthwhile review anyway.

Why the hostility?

The book was successfully sent to other reviewers was it not? It just so happens that those likely to take issue with its material did not receive it? Quite a convenient oversight.

 

[tjm190]

You will have to ask them. I can think of many reasons other than jumping to the conclusion that deceit was at hand. I mean, really, they knew the book was going to come out publicly at some point. There is no point in temporarily hiding the book from anyone.

Perhaps they didn’t get their order on time. Perhaps the shipment went to the wrong address…

You seem to be pursuing this course of attacking the person/organization/motives rather than the book because you can’t find anything wrong in the book.

I’m wondering why you would attempt to delay allowing those who would take issue with the books content access, unless you were afraid of their critiques. My library does not stock the book- in our last discussion we seemed to establish that the book didn’t make a thorough calculation about the odds of life occurring without design- what else might it offer?

 

[reggieM]

As I stated in post #11, and restated in post #18, PZ Myers said that, not me.

Ok – I didn’t see where the text was quoted. But are you being a bit deceptive here by attacking the book through Myers’ words and then denying that you criticized it?