Scientific paper sees design by a creator in the human hand. Problem, the paper retracted this opinion, but . . . . .

Editor's notes:   Scientific paper sees design by a creator in the human hand.  Problem,  the paper retracted this opinion,  but   . . . . .  not before allowing for a discussion of the problematic issue at hand  (pun intended).  Look,  what science does not want to admit is this:  the human hand,  a leaf from a maple tree,  animal bone structure,  a human brain,  all look like they came from design.  I mean,  they all have inter-relating structures necessary to the existence of said hand, leaf, bone structure or brain.  You can't have one feature without the others,  hence the appearance of design.  I have listened to scientists admit that a leaf,  for example,  "certainly looks as if it was the product of thoughtful creationist process."  And that is the problem the godless scientific community has:  this world,  our solar system,  the universe,  all have structure specific to thoughtful design.  I mean a 1956 Chevy Bel Air didn't just happen and its very structure argues for that point.  In the art world,  so specific is the reality of design,  that experts can tell you which artist painted which picture.  But,  suddenly,  none of this is true for the design features of our world.  Kind of nuts,  no? 

A recent scientific paper on the movement of the human hand has faced strong criticism for referring to a 'Creator' throughout.

The paper, titled: 'Biomechanical characteristics of hand coordination in grasping activities of daily living' was written by a team of four researchers, three from Huazhong University in China, and one from Worcester Polytechnic Institute in Massachusetts.

Published in the PLOS ONE journal, the fairly conventional study looked at the mechanics of how we grasp things, and involved the measurement of the hand movements of 30 participants.


However, members of the scientific community have demanded the paper be retracted, for its several perceived references to the pseudoscientific theory of intelligent design and a possibly divine 'Creator'.
In the opening sentences of the study, it claims the link between muscles and hand movements is the product of "proper design by the Creator."

Later, it says human hand coordination "should indicate the mystery of the Creator's invention," and concludes by again claiming the mechanical architecture of the hand is the result of "proper design by the Creator."

Naturally, the multiple references to intelligent design in a reputable journal like PLOS ONE have stoked anger in the scientific community, and many people, including researchers who work as editors for the publication, are now calling for it to be retracted.

Commenting below the study, the journal's staff apologised that the language referring to a 'Creator' was not addressed during the paper's evaluation.  (text source:  the Independent).