How to Publish Peer Reviewed Creationist 'Research'

Slate has the goods on the style manual for Answers Research Journal, which is "a professional, peer-reviewed technical journal for the publication of interdisciplinary scientific and other relevant research from the perspective of the recent Creation and the global Flood within a biblical framework." One problem with the Slate commentary: many peer-reviewed journals allow authors to suggest reviewers, provided there are no conflicts of interest. It's still pretty funny though:

As an extra incentive to participate, those with "a reason for not wanting their biographical details publicized on the AiG website" (such as seeking tenure at an institution with more rigorous notions about scholarship) may use a "pen name" (Page 2). In a recent ARJ microbe forum, two "independent scholars" (purportedly, Ph.D.s at "prominent research facilities in the eastern part of North America") submitted abstracts under the pseudonyms "Luke Kim" and "Ira Loucks" because they "prefer to keep their creationist credentials hidden for the moment until they achieve more seniority."

It's like little children dressing up in their parents' clothes in the attic....

More like this

So, Answers in Genesis cranked out the first issue of its new journal, and with all deliberate speed! It's remarkable. I'm guessing that creation research doesn't take quite as long as, say, real science. The pilot issue is a true testament to the idiocy of the Creation Cult. I guess we have to…
Looking for "cutting-edge research that demonstrates the young earth model, the global Flood, the non-evolutionary origin of the species, and other evidences that correlate to the biblical accounts"? The ICR has launched the International Journal of Creation - "a professional peer-reviewed journal…
Want to publish something? Worried that you don't actually have a lab or an opportunity to do real research? Never fear, the Institute for Creation Research has put out a call for papers, and anyone can get published there! (Well, just about anyone. I doubt that anything I submitted under my name…
I was on the way out the door for a vacation when the journal Nature published its much-anticipated report on the results of its open peer review experiment, but I did want to offer a few comments on the report, even if I'm arriving to the discussion a bit late. Peer review, of course, is the gold…

Hmm. Do you have to use the "Blogging About Peer-Reviewed Research" tag/icon when rebutting ARJ articles?

No: Curch burning Ebola boys provides an icon with which discussions of pseudo-scientific ID-creationism crap may be labelled as "Blogging on Pseudo-Scientific Douche-Bags".