The other day I asked, "can positing the existence of a Creator be a legitimate scientific hypothesis?"
"The presence of a creative deity in the universe is clearly a scientific hypothesis. Indeed, it is hard to imagine a more momentous hypothesis in all of science." -- Richard Dawkins.
Some guy named Dawkins thinks so. Now, apparently, so does the International Journal of Design & Nature and Ecodynamics.
"A peer-reviewed paper, "Information and Entropy -- Top-Down or Bottom-Up Development in Living Systems?," by University of Leeds professor Andy McIntosh in the International Journal of Design & Nature and Ecodynamics expressly endorses intelligent design (ID) via an exploration of a key question in ID thinking:
The ultimate question in origins must be: Can information increase in a purely materialistic or naturalistic way? It is not satisfactory to simply assume that information has to have arisen in this way. The alternative of original design must be allowed and all options examined carefully." Source: EN&V.
Ha! Obviously not a real science journal! (Oh, wait -- it is).
Ha, ha! Obviously not peer-reviewed. (Oh, wait -- it was).
Now, the only question is how long it will be before the darwinian scientific community circles the wagons and shames/shuns this journal?