|
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Jason Spaceman
Guest
|
 Posted: Mon May 21, 2007 11:02 am Post subject: Commentary: Bias over views or credentials? |
 |
|
From the article:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
By denying tenure to a controversial professor, Iowa State University
joined league with Darwinians and atheists seeking to blacklist
Intelligent Design proponents, its advocates say.
The university maintains the tenure denial was based on the
professor's teaching, service, scholarly publications and ability to
get research funding, and not his Intelligent Design advocacy. An
appeal is under way. Last week, the Ames Tribune jumped into what's
become a national debate, calling on ISU "to explain more fully the
reasons for his denial."
Bias is a serious charge. To demand that a university open its
personnel files to the public requires evidence of something improper,
which hasn't been demonstrated. There are two questions: whether ISU's
denial of tenure to astronomy professor Guillermo Gonzalez had
anything to do with his support for Intelligent Design, and whether it
should have.
On the first, ISU denies it did. Gonzalez himself hasn't publicly said
so and couldn't be reached for this column. But he has previously said
he was targeted by ISU faculty for his pro-Intelligent Design views,
and he's partly right.
After it came out in 2005 that he was a leader of that movement, more
than 400 faculty members at the state's three public universities
signed petitions, without mentioning Gonzalez by name, saying
Intelligent Design shouldn't be represented as science.
That's certainly stigmatizing, but was it a denial of free speech and
academic freedom? Depends on how you regard Intelligent Design.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Read it at
http://desmoinesregister.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070520/OPINION01/705200302/1035/OPINION
or http://tinyurl.com/2tsz78
J. Spaceman |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Desertphile
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue May 22, 2007 7:23 am Post subject: Re: Commentary: Bias over views or credentials? |
|
|
On Mon, 21 May 2007 04:46:39 -0400, Jason Spaceman
<notreally@jspaceman.homelinux.org> wrote:
| Quote: |
By denying tenure to a controversial professor, Iowa State University
joined league with Darwinians and atheists seeking to blacklist
Intelligent Design proponents, its advocates say.
|
"Darwinians and atheists." LOL! Gods that's funny. I once heard
David Duke insist it was white people who were being descriminated
against and abused by USA society.
--
http://desertphile.org
Desertphile's Desert Soliloquy. WARNING: view with plenty of water
"Why aren't resurrections from the dead noteworthy?" -- Jim Rutz |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Ken Shackleton
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue May 22, 2007 8:20 am Post subject: Re: Commentary: Bias over views or credentials? |
|
|
On May 21, 7:47 pm, JTEM <jte...@gmail.com> wrote:
| Quote: |
Ken Shackleton <ken.shackle...@shaw.ca> wrote:
Oh well......at least I am cute and cuddly
then.....
"Then," as opposed to "Now."
|
Then...and now..... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
JTEM
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue May 22, 2007 9:46 am Post subject: Re: Commentary: Bias over views or credentials? |
|
|
Ken Shackleton <ken.shackle...@shaw.ca> wrote:
| Quote: |
Then...and now.....
|
Well, I certainly can't accuse you of stating
the obvious... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Ron O
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue May 22, 2007 11:00 am Post subject: Re: Commentary: Bias over views or credentials? |
|
|
On May 21, 3:46 am, Jason Spaceman <notrea...@jspaceman.homelinux.org>
wrote:
| Quote: |
From the article:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
By denying tenure to a controversial professor, Iowa State University
joined league with Darwinians and atheists seeking to blacklist
Intelligent Design proponents, its advocates say.
The university maintains the tenure denial was based on the
professor's teaching, service, scholarly publications and ability to
get research funding, and not his Intelligent Design advocacy. An
appeal is under way. Last week, the Ames Tribune jumped into what's
become a national debate, calling on ISU "to explain more fully the
reasons for his denial."
Bias is a serious charge. To demand that a university open its
personnel files to the public requires evidence of something improper,
which hasn't been demonstrated. There are two questions: whether ISU's
denial of tenure to astronomy professor Guillermo Gonzalez had
anything to do with his support for Intelligent Design, and whether it
should have.
On the first, ISU denies it did. Gonzalez himself hasn't publicly said
so and couldn't be reached for this column. But he has previously said
he was targeted by ISU faculty for his pro-Intelligent Design views,
and he's partly right.
After it came out in 2005 that he was a leader of that movement, more
than 400 faculty members at the state's three public universities
signed petitions, without mentioning Gonzalez by name, saying
Intelligent Design shouldn't be represented as science.
That's certainly stigmatizing, but was it a denial of free speech and
academic freedom? Depends on how you regard Intelligent Design.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Read it athttp://desmoinesregister.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070520/OPIN...
orhttp://tinyurl.com/2tsz78
J. Spaceman
|
QUOTE:
John West is an associate director at the Seattle-based Discovery
Institute, a pro-Intelligent Design organization of which Gonzalez is
a senior fellow. West charged in a release that "Darwinian
fundamentalists" and evolution-defenders are out to deny scientists
the freedom "to do scientific research and question the Darwinian
hegemony." He says a campaign to demonize them is costing Intelligent
Design scientists their jobs.
END QUOTE:
This is pretty funny coming from a Discovery Institute con man. What
did Behe claim under oath in Dover? Didn't he claim that he didn't
think that it was up to him to test his ID notions? Didn't he admit
that he hadn't bothered to do any scientific ID research and that he
didn't know of anyone else that had? Didn't Minnich back him up on
that point? Wasn't it the Discovery Institute that didn't start their
scam Biologic Institute to "research" intelligent design until just
last year, after two of their fellows had to admit that they weren't
doing any ID research while under oath in Dover? Their ID scam
division of Renewal of Science and Culture had existed since 1995 and
they hadn't bothered to do any science. They funded a lot of fellows,
but they obviously didn't get jack for their money except dishonest
sound bites that they could scam the rubes with.
Should people that are members of dishonest scam outfits be lauded and
promoted throughout the nation? Who doesn't believe that the
Discovery Institute is involved in running a dishonest bait and switch
scam on creationist rubes at this very moment? They hawked teaching
the science of ID for a decade, but all that they are currently giving
the rubes is a creationist replacement scam that doesn't even mention
that ID ever existed. My guess is that even their supporters are
getting fed up with their dishonesty.
Ron Okimoto |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
