A scientific journal caved in to pressure from evolutionists and retracted an article about the human hand that mentions “the Creator” three times.
On January 5, the journal “PLOS ONE” published a peer-reviewed article titled “Biomechanical Characteristics of Hand Coordination in Grasping Activities of Daily Living.” The article, which was written by a team of Chinese and American scientists, explores the complex design and coordinated movements of the human hand.
“The human hand is an amazing instrument that can perform a multitude of functions,” the scientists wrote, later explaining that hand movements “are enabled by a highly complex structure, with 19 articulations, 31 muscles and more than 25 degrees of freedom.”
However, the scientists’ paper included something not frequently found in peer-reviewed scientific journals: multiple references to “the Creator.”
“The explicit functional link indicates that the biomechanical characteristic of tendinous connective architecture between muscles and articulations is the proper design by the Creator to perform a multitude of daily tasks in a comfortable way,” the scientists wrote in their paper’s abstract.
“[H]and coordination affords humans the ability to flexibly and comfortably control the complex structure to perform numerous tasks,” they later explained. “Hand coordination should indicate the mystery of the Creator’s invention.”
The scientists made one final mention to the Creator in their paper’s final paragraph.
“In conclusion, our study can improve the understanding of the human hand and confirm that the mechanical architecture is the proper design by the Creator for dexterous performance of numerous functions following the evolutionary remodeling of the ancestral hand for millions of years,” they stated.
Although the paper was published in early January, it wasn’t until last week that evolutionists noticed the references to the Creator and publicly called for the paper’s retraction.
“It’s not acceptable to publish an article like this to be full of assertions about a ‘creator,’ especially since it does nothing to back up this claim at all, and just highlights a poor understanding of evolution by the authors, and a very sloppy job done by both the reviewers and the editor,” one commenter wrote on the “PLOS ONE” website. “To salvage the reputation of this journal, this article should be retracted, and the future services of the reviewers and editor declined.”
Others referred to “PLOS ONE” as an “absolute joke of a journal” for publishing the paper. In response, the journal blamed inadequate peer review for the controversial Creator references, apologized for the “errors” in the paper, and officially retracted the article on Friday.
“Following publication, readers raised concerns about language in the article that makes references to a ‘Creator,’ and about the overall rationale and findings of the study,” a statement on the “PLOS ONE” website said. “… the PLOS ONE editors consider that the work cannot be relied upon and retract this publication.”
As “PLOS ONE” scrambled to retract and denounce the scientists’ mentions of the Creator, others noted the antagonism toward the passing references to God. Bryan Fischer of the American Family Association suggested in an online blog post that scientific journals today are influenced by “evolutionary propaganda.”
“The complexity of everything in the universe, from the tiniest subatomic particle to the furthest galaxy, proclaims loudly and unmistakably that all of it is the work of a powerful, intelligent and design-oriented Creator,” Fischer wrote. “As the Scriptures say, ‘What can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. For his invisible attributes, namely his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made’ (Romans 1:19-20).”