[jennyp]

Perhaps the author wasn't keen on being quoted...

If true, why publish at all?

To be able to say that ID has been published in a scientific journal, of course. It's just filling out a bullet item in their standard list of talking points, nothing more.

[PatrickHenry]

Let us assume that an ID article has indeed appeared in a peer reviewed journal. I've got doubts, but let's say that it happened. Now what? Is there any scientific (verifiable, testable) evidence for ID? Any at all? Is there any scientific way to test the "theory" of ID (that is, could ID be falsified)? And if the answer to these questions is "no," then what are we talking about? Just a journal with low standards.

[BMCDA]

To be able to say that ID has been published in a scientific journal, of course.

Well, then I guess we can't use this argument in the future ;^)

BTW, there is also a review of Meyer's paper by Wesley R. Elsberry on "The Panda's Tumb": Meyer's Hopeless Monster.

[aruanan]

To be able to say that ID has been published in a scientific journal, of course. It's just filling out a bullet item in their standard list of talking points, nothing more.

Sounds as though you know more about your idea of ID than about ID.