随着生物进化论共同体驾驭他们的战车转圈子拚死战斗以捍卫自己的事业和声誉，并以挽救他们的唯物主义哲学圣杯，现在的科学革命正在升级。生物进化论共同体 对他们视为“ 叛徒” 的科学家们显示异常猛烈的攻击。

For example, Dr. Richard Sternberg, editor of Proceedings, a peer reviewed journal of the Smithsonian Institution, published a paper by Stephen Meyer, a noted intelligent design scientist. Meyer argued in his paper that the theory of intelligent design better explains the origin of genetic material than do the materialistic theories of evolution. The National Center for Science Education (NCSE) criticized the article as "substandard science." Then, when the peer reviewers praised the quality of the paper, the NCSE flip-flopped. Subsequently, the evolution establishment turned their guns on Dr. Sternberg and his journal. Sternberg had expressed no support for Meyer's views. All he did was to publish the paper.

举例来说，理查德· 斯滕伯格博士（ Dr. Richard Sternberg ），史密森学会（Smithsonian Institution）有审查过程的学报编辑，发表了著名生物智能设计科学家斯蒂芬 ·迈尔（ Stephen Meyer ）的一篇论文。迈耶在其论文中争辩说生物智能设计论能比唯物主义的进化理论更好地解释了原产地的遗传物质。科学教育 全国中心（ National Center for Science Education --NCSE ）批评这篇文章 “不合格的科学 ”。 那么，当审稿人称赞该篇论文的质量， NCSE装糊涂。 随后，生物进化论共同体把枪指向斯滕伯格博士（Dr. Sternberg ）和他的杂志。 斯滕伯格表示，不支持迈耶（Meyer ）的意见。他唯一 所做的就是发表了该篇论文。

理查德 ·斯滕伯格博士

The Biological Society of Washington accused Sternberg of "bad judgment" and distanced themselves from Sternberg and his journal. Nature magazine called Proceedings a "low impact journal." Sternberg's colleagues at the Smithsonian retaliated against him in various ways. They threatened to change his working conditions, investigated his professional competence, and spread misinformation about him to parties outside the Smithsonian. The US Office of Special Counsel investigated the scandal and found all of Sternberg's claims of persecution to be true, and all the allegations against him to be false. [Sources: Crosswalk.com, (9/17/05), Nationalreview.com (8/16/05), and a live interview with Sternberg on the O'Reilly Factor.]

华盛顿的生物学学会（Biological Society）指责斯滕伯格（ Sternberg ）“ 判断错误 ”，并与斯滕伯格和他的杂志拉开了距离。《自然》杂志称学报为 “低影响期刊 ”。 斯滕伯格（ Sternberg）在史密森学会的同事以各种方式对他报复。 他们扬言要改变他的工作条件，调查他的专业才干，并向史密森学会以外的人散布关于他的错误信息。 美国特别律师办公室对这个丑闻展开调查，发现斯滕伯格申诉自己受到受迫害全部是事实，而对他的所有指控都是虚假的。 来源： http://www.crosswalk.com （ 9/17/05 ），http://www.nationalreview.com （8/16/05 ），以及斯滕伯格在 O'Reilly Factor 节目中现场接受的采访。]

Interestingly, none of Sternberg's persecutors said anything about the concepts, arguments, or facts in Meyer's paper. The old guard of the prevailing paradigm has lost interest in debating scientific questions. They are interested in punishing traitors to their cause and silencing the advocates of opposing models.

有趣的是，斯滕伯格的迫害者中没有任何人谈到迈耶论文的概念、争论或事实。普遍范式 老一代卫道士对讨论科学问题已经失去了兴趣。 他们的兴趣在惩治对他们事业的叛徒以及使对手模型的提倡者闭嘴。

接续篇：-> 13) Conclusion 结论