Second law of thermodynamics evolution argument
#SECOND LAW OF THERMODYNAMICS EVOLUTION ARGUMENT PDF#
You can see an archived PDF of the article’s page on the journal’s website here. Now at this point, keep in mind Sewell’s paper had already successfully gone all the way through the peer-review process, had been accepted into the journal, and in fact was even available here online for purchase at the Applied Mathematics Letters website at the time the article was withdrawn. AML responded to vun Kannon, saying that they were withdrawing the manuscript. That in turn led to action by David vun Kannon from the “After the Bar Closes” forum, who wrote the editors at AML to point out the problem. AML apparently indicated acceptance of the manuscript to Sewell, leading to gloating on an IDC blog. Granville Sewell, a mathematician at the University of Texas at El Paso and “intelligent design” creationism (IDC) advocate, submitted a manuscript to Applied Mathematical Letters (AML) titled, “A second look at the second law”. So what can one make of a recent attempt to publish a batch of 2LoT religious antievolution as if it were a genuine scientific contribution? E. In a post titled “ A Journal Imposes Order, Rejects High Entropy Submission,” Elsberry crowed about how his faction was able to prevent the publication of Sewell’s paper: Thus, before Sewell even knew his paper had been withdrawn, one of the first persons to report this act of censorship was Wesley Elsberry–and he reported it gleefully, quite proud that his faction had successfully prevented the publication of a scientific paper that was critical of Darwinian evolution. Sewell and paid his attorney’s fees in the matter to the tune of $10,000.Īs further evidence of the journal’s misconduct, before Applied Mathematics Letters even notified Granville Sewell that his paper had been withdrawn, the journal told Darwin lobbyists about the withdrawal–activists who then went out and broke the story.
Sewell, it has now issued an apology to Dr.
Because of the journal’s inappropriate treatment of Dr.
As West reports, Applied Mathematics Letters withdrew his paper not because it found any errors in the paper, or because the paper was not peer-reviewed, but because it had received a protest from the Darwin lobby. Sewell is author of In the Beginning: And Other Essays on Intelligent Design as well as three books on numerical analysis and dozens of articles in respected journals. Now we have proof positive–from Wesley himself–that the Darwin lobby engages in this repugnant tactic.Īs John West has reported, the journal Applied Mathematics Letters has agreed to apologize after pulling a paper by University of Texas, El Paso mathematics professor Granville Sewell which was critical of Darwinian evolution. It seems like the first rule for many Darwin lobbyists is this: ‘stifle academic freedom for dissenting scientists at any cost, but don’t invite real scientific dialogue over these issues.’ If I recall correctly, Wesley did not confirm or deny my accusations that Darwin lobbyists have sought to prevent ID proponents from publishing. During the conversation, I said it seems unfair that the Darwin lobby alleges that intelligent design (ID) proponents don’t publish in the mainstream scientific literature ( an untrue charge), but then those same ID critics simultaneously work hard to prevent ID proponents from publishing in the mainstream scientific literature. A few years back I had a friendly lunch conversation with Wesley Elsberry, a longtime activist for Darwin and former staff member at the National Center for Science Education.