I am always fascinated by the need of the Darwinian community to have the approval of their peers in order to justify their views. Many times in debates they fall back on the need for peer reviewed articles to measure the legitimacy of an idea. If you take this stand point, would you accept an article if it were published in a peer reviewed journal that allows articles on creation science or articles pointing to the legitimacy of Intelligent Design?
Does the publishing of articles that you do not agree with remove the authority of peer review from a journal? Who has to give their stamp of approval on a journal to give it the gold seal of legitimacy? Does it matter if an article is printed in a scientific journal if it is published in a book?