it is all but incomprehensible that in 2010, any American scholar, particularly one of his academic distinction, could be so harshly bullied for stating an opinion consonant with current scientific orthodoxy.
I hope we can all agree with Dreher's opposition to bullying. But what about Dreher's and Waltke's high regard for "current scientific orthodoxy"?
Can we no longer confront the data on our own? Must we have evolutionists dictate the message? If only Waltke was familiar with the current scientific data, rather than the current scientific orthodoxy.
This deference to scientific orthodoxy is a consistent theme. From textbooks to church sermons it is a convenient way around the science. Imagine appealing to the "current scientific orthodoxy" to promote blood-letting or alchemy. Nonetheless, textbooks now routinely inform students that scientists now believe evolution is a fact, rather than explain just why it is evolutionists believe this. That would be rather awkward.