on your shoulder....
Posted on 03/11/2003 3:01:59 PM PST by Remedy
A university professor said she was asked to resign for introducing elite students to flaws in Darwinian thought, and she now says academic freedom at her school is just a charade.
During a recent honors forum at Mississippi University for Women (MUW), Dr. Nancy Bryson gave a presentation titled "Critical Thinking on Evolution" -- which covered alternate views to evolution such as intelligent design. Bryson said that following the presentation, a senior professor of biology told her she was unqualified and not a professional biologist, and said her presentation was "religion masquerading as science."
The next day, Vice President of Academic Affairs, Dr. Vagn Hansen asked Bryson to resign from her position as head of the school's Division of Science and Mathematics.
"The academy is all about free thought and academic freedom. He hadn't even heard my talk," Bryson told American Family Radio News. "[W]ithout knowing anything about my talk, he makes that decision. I think it's just really an outrage."
Bryson believes she was punished for challenging evolutionary thought and said she hopes her dismissal will smooth the way for more campus debate on the theory of evolution. University counsel Perry Sansing said MUW will not comment on why Bryson was asked to resign because it is a personnel matter.
"The best reaction," Bryson says, "and the most encouraging reaction I have received has been from the students." She added that the students who have heard the talk, "They have been so enthusiastically supportive of me."
Bryson has contacted the American Family Association Center for Law and Policy and is considering taking legal action against the school.
on your shoulder....
A virus is no more alive than a prion or a T-bone steak(or even Darwininian just-so stories).
Good analogy! You can think some, if not write.
I don't want Dr. Bryson silenced utterly. However, I'm not going to tell her university that they have to retain her in a position (Science and Mathematics Division head) if they're not comfortable that she can tell BS from science.
She is not a Darwininian. What you posted is a prerequisite for a Darwininian.
Seeing that it has perching claws for feet, feathers not scales, that the ankles and teeth can not be derived from a therapod, that it has a bird like breast bone, wings and jaw and that researchers from the Univ of Texas have found birds that supposedly date back 225 million years versus 150 million for archaeopteryx, well if it walks like a bird, flaps like a bird, is dressed like a bird and there were already birds around. I'd go with bird. What do you think it is?
Still there should be millions of examples of transitional forms not just a handful of possibilities. Where are the cogs and the dats. Where are the semi-vertebrates? Why don't they exist today? Why doesn't evolution go backwards as well as forward? Why are there any distinguishable species now? Shouldn't every living creature be a transitional form moving either up down the evolutionary scale?
Nobody has the answers just theories and hypothesis and no way to prove them. Ernst Mayr of Harvard even admits that much.
Still if you would like to point out how archaeopteryx is a transitional form, I am willing to discuss it with you.
Best Regards,
Boiler Plate
Complementarity placemarker.
And there is no cure for hanta virus now even after all these years. Science has been using the similarities of different species for research for thousands of years to learn more about diseases and anatomy. Aristotle would cut up animals to learn biology. This is nothing new. The evolutionists are like Clintonites who claim that everything that is worthwhile is due to evolution.
Further the whole claim of the article is false. It is easily disproven by the following article on Dna Help from a Deadly Fish . Where it shows that the fugu fish - long and far away extremely distant (as far as evolution goes) to humans has been giving tremendous help is helping scientists learn more about human DNA - including the discovery of over a thousand genes which the human genome project - the best that science could do - failed to discover.
The above proves two things:
1. Scientists, real scientists ignore evolution and go where the evidence and their instincts leads them.
2. That such an evolutionarily distant species has so much alike to humans shows that evolution is false. Such a distant species should be far too unrelated to us if evolution were true, however, it is not to be wondered that a Creator would use and reuse what worked in one species for the same purposes in another species just like an inventor would not reinvent the wheel but use it in further inventions.
So keep looking for something by which evolution has helped humanity. When you do, we will have to weigh it against how evolution has been detrimental to science and humanity in general (such as by giving scientific legitimacy to the mass murderers of over a hundred million people in the 20th century).
Did you read beyond the first sentence of my post, or have you read any of the other relevant posts?
The physics of impacts is well understood as is their numerical simulation.
Junior only gave me two choices Vade. So based upon the information I cited and images of the actual fossils, I am going with bird. Do you have a problem with that. Which one do you pick, therapod or bird? Thanks for the swell sketch.
Best Regards,
Boiler Plate
If it were not 'absolute' then it is fair and proper to disagree with it and yes to attack it. Real scientists do that to all theories all the time. It is only the PSEUDO-SCIENCE of evolution that does not allow for disagreement with its tenets as this article (and many others in the past) show.
Further, the whole claim that evolution is subject to scientific revision is total nonsense. The central theme of evolution is materialism. Like all materialism it does not even bother to tell us how things come about, how they are ordered, how they arise. They just posit a totally unscientific 'randomness' as the cause of all things. That is why evolution can teach us nothing and why it should be kept out of classrooms. It is not science to say that things just 'happen'. Science is about cause and effect, about how things happen and evolution has nothing to teach us about that.
Actually it's a timeless verity.
Perhaps they went to the Wizard of Oz and he gave them 'warm blood'?
This is the ridiculous nonsense that the evolutionists keep pushing on people. If necessity is the cause of all these changes then why is it that we still have examples of creatures which are identical to those of some 500 million years ago? How come that the mutations stopped for these creatures? Who told them to stop changing? Did not the environment change for all creatures or just for those which the evolutionists wanted to change?
Survival of the fittest only destroys, it is not the agency of creating anything.
Incoherent placemarker.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
