You are probably familiar with the idea of making mountains out of molehills. If not, it's simply taking something relatively minor and turning it into something much larger. You see it quite often when raising teenagers -- where every little thing is the end of the world!
I don't know if you are familiar with this story, but bear with me, there is a modern aspect to this story. Way back in 1631 a printer was making reprints of the King James Bible. Now if you are even slightly familiar with the technology of the day, the printing press. It used something called 'movable type' to create the templates use for printing.
Don't mistakes happen sometimes? Charles I and the Archbishop of Canterbury was apparently pretty angry about it. But as I said, mistakes happen. Did they over react? I don't know, but I do know that half of the issue in learning from your mistakes is how you and the people affected handle errors.
Today when books contain errors we have it much easier. If the details are important to us, we can create and distribute an errata sheet. In fact here is the errata sheet to something not particularly important to me, but I know it was important to the Discovery Institute. It's the errata sheet for Stephen Meyers' Darwin's Doubt:
Yes, even the DI makes mistakes. In fact Meyers' book was so loaded with them, they even published a sequel book called 'Debating Darwin's Doubt' supposedly to address the many errors pointed out in the original book. There was quite a lot of criticism of the first book, as there should be when errors happen. However rather than learn from them, the DI simply repeated many of them in the second book, especially the lack of involvement of anyone with a paleontology background to address a book primarily about . . . paleontology..
Currently we have another error to talk about. It certainly falls under the heading of 'mistakes happen'. You might have heard something about it. Yes, there has been a lot of press about it. Nature is reporting that an online science journal, PLOS ONE messed up. Yes, they messed up, and they even admit it. PLOS ONE is an online journal that is:
"PLOS ONE gives researchers a faster path to publishing in a high-quality peer-reviewed journal. All work that reaches rigorous technical and ethical standards is published and freely and immediately available to everyone."Apparently, in a paper "Biomechanical Characteristics of Hand Coordination in Grasping Activities of Daily Living" by "Cai-Hua Xiong of Huazhong University of Science and Technology in Wuhan, China, and co-authors", contained:
"Hand coordination should indicate the mystery of the Creator’s invention"When contacted Cai-Hua Xiong stated:
When contacted by Nature, Xiong said that he was discussing the issues raised with his co-authors and would respond as soon as possible. He added, “Indeed, we are not native speakers of English, and entirely lost the connotations of some words such as ‘Creator’. I am so sorry for that.”
Do you think it would be possible for the Discovery Institute not to say something about this? Of course not! They are trying to get plenty of mileage about this, claiming censorship, among other things. Here are a few: