I’ve suggested it’s a strategy on the part of people who trash ID-friendly books unread: The reviewer who fails to read the book is not, in a Darwin-obsessed community, held responsible for spreading misinformation. Indeed, the community wants him to do it, to avoid conflict between with their worldview and reality.
The problem is, that only explains why he isn’t censured for his action. A more critical question is why would a scientist or scholar actually volunteer to do it? And, for a free copy of The Nature of Nature , that’s our contest question.
Go here. and enter in the comments box.
Second award offer:
Yes, this contest riffs off “What do you call a guy who reviews/trashes a book without reading it?”
Some good suggestions there, and because Discovery Institute’s “Ayala-ing” won’t make the New Urban Lexicon, we must come up with something catchier.
It you put your suggestion for a name here, not to worry. It’ll be considered along with the ones entered in the combox below.
Contest judged: Saturday June 4, 2011.