Hot on the heels of the recent furore over New Scientist’s “Darwin was Wrong” cover, which for a week or so set the blogosphere alight with accusations and counter-accusations, the magazine has bowed to what is presumably religious/creationist pressure and pulled an article in which book reviews editor Amanda Gefter outlined how she identifies publications with a creationist agenda.  Fortunately a copy of the web page has been kept.

The article identifies a series of tips to identifying texts with a creationist agenda – many such texts try to conceal this through weaselly words:

Gefter concludes by saying, “It is crucial to the public’s intellectual health to know when science really is science. Those with a religious agenda will continue to disguise their true views in their effort to win supporters, so please read between the lines.”

Too true, and it will be interesting to know quite who was upset by the article, and why.  Having looked at it, it’s not obvious what the problem is.

Hat tip –

Tags: ,

No comments

Comments feed for this article


Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>