[StJacques]

As so frequently happens, I get to an ID thread long after it has run its course.

Let me make one point very clear. Meyer's paper is absolute garbage. Most of the arguments I would make to point this out have already been addressed, so I will not repeat them.

So instead I will put up a challenge to any supporters of ID here on this thread.

Just name one scholarly contribution Stephen C. Meyer has made to the general body of knowledge about the development of complex life in the aformentioned paper that can withstand the test of real scientific scrutiny.

It has already been shown that, contrary to repeated assertions made on numerous threads that Meyer's article underwent an appropriate process of peer review, that it did not. So the question as to "what does this paper contribute to the general body of knowledge?" is indeed valid. We therefore have every right to ask for someone to identify that contribution for us.

I will be gone for most of the rest of the evening, but I'll check in tomorrow and across the ensuing days.

And, for the record, I did read the entire article a few months back and I have my own set of notes. It doesn't fly by a long shot.

[StJacques]

Sorry Patrick, I meant to ping you on the above list, but I believe I forgot.

[DannyTN]

Here is a link to the Biological Society of Washington, demonstrating that the article was indeed published there first. Biological Society of Washington