Discovery Institute's "400 Scientist" Roster

So, Dr. Frank, what area of study did you get your scientific degree in, and have you ever or do you currently work as a professional scientist in any field related to Evolutionary Science?Can you please also provide a few citations of your relevant peer-reviewed work in the field?Thanks in advance.

Getting a degree in hydraulics, for example, makes one less an expert in the ToE than say someone with a degree in Biochemistry.Also, getting a PhD and then never working with theory, as a professional scientist, also makes one less credible when critiqing theory.All of the real, practicing scientists I know readily admit to ignorance and lack of appropriate expertise of many other branches of science and wouldn't dream of pronouncing the foundational theories of other fields as invalid.

Are you a evangelical or charismatic Christian?...or adhere to some other religion or Christian sect which has a conflict with Biological Evolution?

Do you have any expertise in Evolutionary science?

quote:

---

I am aware how some folks mis-use the list. This does not invalidate the need for it. In particular, I am interested in the list's effect upon Discovery Institute itself. If one plans to make scientific claims, and then plans to get scientists to endorse those claims...and continue to endorse those claims, one will first very carefully examine those claims.

---

The sole purpose of the list is to misuse it for religious and political ends.That is transparent upon it's face.

quote:

---

Kind of like peer-review, eh?

---

Actually no, not like peer review.You are not a "peer" to anyone working in Evolutionary science as far as I can tell.Would you send one of your papers for review and potential publication to, say, a journal that concentrates upon Population Genetics?Of course not, because those reviewers wouldn't have any expertise in your field, and thus wouldn't be "peers".

quote:

---

For example, I have read Science magazine cover-to-cover for over twenty years now...and 'stability' is not the word I would use to describe the current evolutionary paradigm.

---

So, you only read Science to get your information about Evolutionary science?

quote:

---

Simply pick up any textbook older than 20 years, and the differences between the current paradigm and the older one(s) are readily apparent. 'Evolution' paradigms have undergone major shifts throughout the last 100 years in light of new data.

---

That is true for almost every branch of science, not just Biology, and not just the ToE.Yet why is the DI (and you) singling out the ToE for criticism?

quote:

---

Thus, my point that science should be taught as a process, not a static collection of facts. Those who teach it dogmatically do the scientific enterprise a disservice.

---

Agreed.Then why not talk about the teaching of ALL science instead of mentioning ONLY the Biological Theory of Evolution?

Mostly, I am interested in your thoughts on message 112 in this thread.This message has been edited by schrafinator, 10-18-2005 09:37 AM