New Scientist Magazine has taken a serious lurch to the right by censoring an article that was perceived to be anti-creationist.

The article, titled “How to spot a hidden religious agenda” started with the following:

As a book reviews editor at New Scientist, I often come across so-called science books which after a few pages reveal themselves to be harbouring ulterior motives. I have learned to recognise clues that the author is pushing a religious agenda. As creationists in the US continue to lose court battles over attempts to have intelligent design taught as science in federally funded schools, their strategy has been forced to… well, evolve. That means ensuring that references to pseudoscientific concepts like ID are more heavily veiled. So I thought I’d share a few tips for spotting what may be religion in science’s clothing.

This being the internet, a copy is still available online here. The article argued that there were words that made creationist material immediately identifiable (via The Examiner) including:

Scientific Materialism
The invocation of Cartesian dualism
Misguided interpretations of quantum physics (also a “New Age” giveaway)
The terms “Darwinism” or “Darwinist” (scientists refer to “evolution” and “biologists”)
Referring to natural selection as “blind”, “random” or an “undirected process”

New Scientist said only that they had pulled the article after receiving a complaint (note, singular). I guess even a leading Scientific journal which Wikipedia describes as “liberal” isn’t immune to the religious right.

(thanks to Kyle Brady for the tip)