送交者: 张文远辽 于 2005-7-02, 17:01:37:
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v435/n7046/pdf/4351160a.pdf
Nature has long been staying "neutural". Why? Getting funds from the Church of England or the royals? Or they really think ID is some "real stuff"?
And not long before, they gave some stuff about dalia lama. Really made me turned my head away with disgust!
At least, I think today's Nature is not radically scientific as it was in the 50's. Or is this a result as "religious faith" today "is all too common in the scientific community"?