BrianC wrote:I truly believe that science should have learned by now that since theories always change, having an open mind keeps a happy fellowship!
This is such a gross misunderstanding of the scientific method, I don't know where to begin. Science is ALWAYS open to new hypotheses. This is the fundamental concept of scientific thought; Einstein said, "No amount of experimentation can ever prove me right; a single experiment can prove me wrong." But the scientific method requires that one can test a hypothesis. It requires that a scientific finding be repeatable by other scientists. Scientific experimentation should be objective. It should be fully disclosed so other scientists can retest and confirm the findings. It should interpret experimental data without bias.
The issue at hand is that the conclusions in The Cave Book were not reached by using the scientific method. This isn't a discussion about whether creationist theory or evolutionary theory are correct. It's a discussion about whether a scientific organization should promote a publication that claims to be a scientific document written by an expert but does not make use of the scientific method (and in fact discards overwhelming evidence contrary to its conclusion). The answer is that some portion of our organization -- be it a majority or a minority, we don't know for sure -- is extremely uncomfortable with this, and as such we are no longer to offer it. The fact that several involved in this thread would prefer to ignore our input and write us off as "PC" is disconcerting.
This isn't censorship; censorship would be trying to ban the book, or keep it from being sold at book retailers. What it is, rather, is a decision not to sell a publication that appears somewhat contrary to our mission statement and might serve to undermine the vailidity of the truly scientific documents the NSS is responsible for, such as JCKS.