DWA: Yes, that might get uncomfortable to dwell on what might be seen as a screw up by "peers".

I don't think that either Sternberg or Meyers are considered peers by most people involved in research. A lot of scientists were dismayed that discussion was closed as they saw an opportunity to have it out with an IDeist in a controlled manner; something often difficult as most IDeists tend to plead direct to the public and scrupulously avoid getting stuck in situations where they may have to defend and support their claims. Sound familiar?

DWA: Along with fairly natural human Darwinoid impulses at achieving and maintaining dominance, or when something for whatever reason makes one possibly look bad, that situation may be evaded by various hypocricies.

That certainly describes your behavior here.

DWA: A hypocricy, as we see in the political arena as well, allows someone to avoid confrontation over a matter that is not really settled conclusively, may not even be amenable to total settlement.

Much the same as the way you always try to take the discussion to some distant solar system when things aren't going your way.

DWA: I will continue to be sympathetic with cyanidefreak when he wryly asserts that scientists are liars. After all, it would be unrealistic to try to believe that "scientists" are really different from anyone else in the "normal" ego defense and in their self-assertion temptations toward avoiding embarassment. That is, naturally wanting to evade unflattering or disadvantageous manifestations.

Yes, they are human, but the peer-review process does hold them to a higher standard than politicians or agnostic-bulletin-board-posters. They don't laways get it right, but at least they have to defned their research against obvious challenges if they want their work published, and afterwards as well, if they want to be taken seriously.

DWA: In brief: The more messianic (?minority) of scientists may be blind to some of their failings. Rationalizations and flawed theories then proliferate.

Your fantasy or plausible reality? Some recent examples?

DWA: Other scientists remain silent as an expedient unwritten code to not throw stones, since they too may be living in glass houses.

Oh, you mean like the paper casting doubt on the tyrannosaurishness of chickens? You do have a short memory, don't you?