This was not unexpected. As you probably know, paleontologist Phil Senter has been producing a number of anticreationist papers that are quite a bit more creative than the usual anticreationist drivel. In 2010, he published a paper critical of statistical baraminology in Journal of Evolutionary Biology, which I blogged about. Then I wrote a response, and to my shock JEB published it, which I also blogged about. Then Phil published a response to my response, which I blogged about thirteen months ago.
That was the last time I mentioned this little exchange, since it took that long to do the largest statistical baraminology study ever in order to address what I felt were misconceptions about baraminology. If you'd like more detail on the content of that project, you can check out my abstract from this year's Origins conference (the last one in this PDF).
This time, though, the JEB editor was not so favorable, and he declined to send my paper out for review. I totally understand his position. The manuscript I wrote was not exactly within the scope of what JEB publishes. It was mostly about an obscure method used almost exclusively by American creationists. That's not of great interest to the European Society for Evolutionary Biology. So no gripes there.
I am, however, at a loss about what to do with the paper. I really don't want to rewrite the whole thing for publication in a creationist journal, but I'm not sure where else to send it. I would welcome suggestions (as long as it's not NCSE Reports). Please email me if you have any good ideas.
Feedback? Email me at toddcharleswood [at] gmail [dot] com.