I have been working on a journal article, thanks. It should be submitted for that peer review process creationists hate so much within a week. And I peer reviewed an article by another researcher this week as well. And I have three major lectures in March for which I am preparing.
But thanks for asking.
But, since you’re here, could you be telling us what science text books it is that have been prepared for the day when the Creationists force the state and local education boards to approve religiously oriented science classes in the public schools? Those text books have to be prepared before anything else can happen, you know. And have the books been reviewed and accepted by the various regional accreditation associations?
A text book? Sure, that's easy -- Of Pandas and People. But I don't think I would consider it as a science text book. And of course, there was this problem with a speed bump in Dover. Perhaps the problem is its evolution: Creation Biology (1983), Biology and Creation (1986), Biology and Origins (1987), and finally Of Pandas and People (1987) -- after the U.S. Supreme Court issued the Edwards decision. Details
I’m not going to advert to one of your favorite putdowns and suggest that you need to read for comprehension. Instead, I’ll simply observe that my question went to a great deal more substance than simply the name of a textbook. Your answer responds to none of the specs detailed in my query and ducks the issue entirely. The answer was unpalatable, so in the typical fashion of politics you rattled the keys on your board, but produced only noise. You and Senator Schumer could change places without a noticeable drop off in the quantity of bovine excrement on either side.
”that peer review process creationists hate so much . . .”
Who is it that objects to ‘peer review’? I’ve read objections to the abusive uses that ‘peer review’ has been put to, those abuses perhaps being rightly understood or wrongly understood (surely there are examples of both), but that’s another issue. And oh, how you do love to scramble your issues, thereby, we observe, utilizing another common political tactic.
Everyone in this forum recognizes the value of the peer review process. Everyone also understands that Liberals will abuse any process, subverting it to their own purposes (all the while blaming everything on their intended victims). They often claim as their motive that they are “doing it for the children.” In the same fashion, you claim that you are “doing it for science.” Do you not understand that no one is fooled by your ‘St. Joan at the stake’ schtick? We all recognize the Liberal bada-bing you practice. We see it every day, in a hundred ways. We all know who it is that has a strangle hold on academia and, growingly, on every aspect of our lives. It is not Christians and it is not Conservatives.
When you report to your masters, what is it you hope to get from them? A share in the power, or merely to be left alone to do your work? You had better hope it is the former, because the latter will never happen. It turns out to be the case, indeed, that Ayn Rand accurately prophesized the ultimate plight of America’s science community in her philosophical work Atlas Shrugged. So tell us, Dr. Stadler, how does it feel to be the lackey of Marxist/Socialist zealots?