Tag: Retraction Watch

^{Type
post

Author
David Klinghoffer

Date
September 2, 2026

Categories
Evolution
Intelligent Design
Tagged
, academia, C. W. Howell, Designer Science, discourse, Duke University, fabrication, fabulists, funeral pyre, Jason Arday, Jennifer Hammer, Joan Didion, Lehigh University, media, Michael Behe, New York University Press, publishers, race, Retraction Watch, science journals, Townhall, University of Cambridge, Vikings}

Academic Fabrication: Is the Case of Designer Science an Isolated One?

_{David Klinghoffer
September 2, 2026

Evolution, Intelligent Design

2}

"There are tales readily believed by scholars, 'in order to live' — because the ideological campus discourse is beyond question." Read More ›

^{Type
post

Author
David Klinghoffer

Date
September 1, 2026

Categories
Evolution
Intelligent Design
Tagged
, apology, ax-grinding, C. W. Howell, Casey Luskin, courtroom, deflection, Designer Science, editors, fabrication, harm, historical record, history, honor, intelligent design, intention, J.L.S., Michael Behe, mistake, motives, New York University Press, Retraction Watch, scholars, Science and Culture Today, skepticism, sloppiness, students}

Is It “Rude” to Point Out the Seriousness of C. W. Howell’s Defamatory, Fabricated Quote?

_{David Klinghoffer
September 1, 2026

Evolution, Intelligent Design

3}

A sincere apology, not merely acceding to the will of NYU’s legal team, would be "honorable." Read More ›

^{Type
post

Author
David Klinghoffer

Date
August 31, 2026

Categories
Evolution
Intelligent Design
Tagged
, academic publishers, C. W. Howell, Casey Luskin, cats, courtroom, Designer Science, evolution, fabrication, headline, intelligent design, intent, linchpin, Mars, Michael Behe, misquote, New York University Press, reporters, Retraction Watch, scholarship, sloppiness, smell test, telephone (game), testimony}

Retraction Watch Reports on Designer Science Fiasco, but Mischaracterizes It

_{David Klinghoffer
August 31, 2026

Evolution, Intelligent Design

3}

The headline is glaringly inaccurate. It says, “University press removes book about intelligent design for misquoting ID proponent.” Read More ›

^{Type
post

Author
Denyse O’Leary

Date
March 21, 2025

Categories
Bioethics
Psychology
Sociology
Tagged
, anxiety, college students, crying, Office of Naval Research, persistent scientific errors, prisoners, psychologists, public policy, Retraction Crisis, Retraction Watch, self-correcting, social psychology, Stanford University, University of Calgary}

Retract the Stanford Prison Experiment?

_{Denyse O’Leary
March 21, 2025

Bioethics, Psychology, Sociology

7}

Beware of wildly popular sociology that tells us that our public policy preferences are somehow embedded in human nature. Life was never as simple as that. Read More ›

^{Type
post

Date
February 24, 2024

Categories
Bioethics
Physical Sciences
Tagged
, data, economics, Elsevier, Gary Smith, Netherlands, New Zealand, Retraction Watch, science journals, United Kingdom, United States, University of Copenhagen, Zoom}

Data Can Appear in Science Journals — Out of Thin Air

_{Science & Culture
February 24, 2024

Bioethics, Physical Sciences

5}

While many researchers decried the results, University of Copenhagen econometrician Søren Johansen said something worth pondering. Read More ›

^{Type
post

Author
Denyse O’Leary

Date
August 13, 2023

Categories
Mathematics
Medicine
Neuroscience & Mind
Tagged
, Adam Marcus, COVID-19, honesty, John Ioannidis, Matt Ridley, neuroscientists, Retraction Watch, science, Stanford University, The Guardian}

Science Is Self-Correcting? Time for a Reality Check

_{Denyse O’Leary
August 13, 2023

Mathematics, Medicine, Neuroscience & Mind

5}

In the wake of the Stanford scandal, the reasons why science often ISN’T self-correcting are attracting much more attention. Read More ›

^{Type
post

Author
David Klinghoffer

Date
October 20, 2020

Categories
Fine-tuning
Intelligent Design
Scientific Freedom
Tagged
, cancel culture, censorship, COVID-19, disclaimer, intelligent design, Journal of Theoretical Biology, molecular machines, Ola Hössjer, peer-reviewed literature, researchers, Retraction Watch, scientists, Steinar Thorvaldsen}

Journal Finds It Can’t Keep a Good Pro-ID Paper Down

_{David Klinghoffer
October 20, 2020

Fine-tuning, Intelligent Design, Scientific Freedom

2}

As a reader points out, the paper is the journal’s No. 1 most downloaded article, beating out several others in the Top 10 about Covid and related hot topics. Read More ›

^{Type
post

Author
David Klinghoffer

Date
October 9, 2020

Categories
Biology
Fine-tuning
Intelligent Design
Tagged
, Adam Marcus, corruption, disclaimer, editors, Elsevier, Evolution News, incompetence, intelligent design, John West, Journal of Theoretical Biology, Ola Hössjer, Retraction Watch, science journals, scientists, Steinar Thorvaldsen}

Corruption Watch: Biology Journal Blames the Innocent, Turns ID Scientists into Fall Guys

_{David Klinghoffer
October 9, 2020

Biology, Fine-tuning, Intelligent Design

4}

For those who are always lecturing us about “Follow the science” and “Believe the scientists,” this episode should be an eye opener. Read More ›

^{Type
post

Author
Casey Luskin

Date
February 6, 2020

Categories
Evolution
Intelligent Design
Tagged
, __edited, Adam Marcus, evolution, evolutionists, Granville Sewell, hallucination, intelligent design, Retraction Watch, Second Law of Thermodynamics}

Getting “Intelligent Design” Backward

_{Casey Luskin
February 6, 2020

Evolution, Intelligent Design

2}

That framing is backwards, or perhaps upside-down, probably in order to make the paper by Granville Sewell sound unreasonable. Read More ›

^{Type
post

Date
February 5, 2020

Categories
Intelligent Design
Tagged
, __edited, Adam Marcus, Applied Mathematics Letters, autism, bioRxiv, coronavirus, Dilbert, Elsevier, entropy, evolution, Evolution News, Granville Sewell, India, intelligent design, junk science, Nautilus, peer review, Physics Essays, Retraction Watch, Scott Adams, Second Law of Thermodynamics, Why Evolution Is Different}

Retraction Watch Guys Hallucinate “Intelligent Design” Yet Again

_{Science & Culture
February 5, 2020

Intelligent Design

6}

A helpful formulation comes from podcaster Scott Adams, of “Dilbert” fame, who comments entertainingly on the political scene. Read More ›