peer review
BIO-Complexity Paper: Why Chaitin’s Mathematical “Proof” of Darwinian Evolution Fails
Codes Within Codes: How Dual-Use Codons Challenge Statistical Methods for Inferring Natural Selection
Sign of the Times: Nobel Prize-Winning Biologist Refuses to Submit Papers to Top-Tier "Luxury" Science Journals
Citation Counts Are Challenged as Metric of Scientific Merit

The Fabric of Nature: Michael Denton’s New BIO-Complexity Paper Argues for “Laws of Form” Finely Tuned for Life
Peer-Reviewed Pro-Intelligent Design Articles and the “Insurrection” Against Journal Impact Factors
Peer-Reviewed Science: There Isn’t “Plenty of Time for Evolution”

More on How We Can Know Intelligent Design Is Science

Pseudoscience, Eugenics, and Demarcation
Look here: A physicist who seems to understand the demarcation problem proceeds to demarcate “pseudoscience” on his own authority. Alex Wellerstein reviewed a book on pseudoscience that explicitly warns about the challenge of differentiating between science and pseudoscience. Wellerstein, of the Center for the History of Physics, American Institute of Physics in Maryland, wrote in the Oct. 12 issue of Science this summary of what Michael D. Gordin said about the “demarcation problem” in his new book, The Pseudoscience Wars: Immanuel Velikovsky and the Birth of the Modern Fringe. Velikovsky’s cosmic catastrophism is, for Gordin, also a case study on the famously intractable demarcation problem, the difficulty of coming up with firm criteria for what separates science from nonscience, or Read More ›