Professor Dumped Over Evolution Beliefs

http://headlines.agapepress.org/archive/3/112003a.asp ^ | March 11, 2003 | Jim Brown and Ed Vitagliano

[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.

[VadeRetro]

H. Rudolphensis is rattling around in search of a home along with mesonychus, Lucy has turned back into a chimp, and Neanderthal is scratching his head wondering where his children went.

So now Lucy's a chimp? Was her knee found a mile from her head? Is Java Man just an orangutan? Is your subscription to Creation Ex Nihilo up to date? Anyway, you skipped a few. (Feel free to ignore any that were already known in 1859.)

[Con X-Poser]

balrog666: Tell us about any "scientific theory" that has been magically transformed into a "scientific fact".

Junior: Evolution, the change of organisms over generations, is an observed fact.

There you go 666, one of your comrades just transformed it right before your eyes. Be sure to thank him for making you look foolish.

Creationists hardly need to post on this thread, the evolutionists are doing a fine job of refuting one another ;-)

[Con X-Poser]

Data: Of course YOU can explain abiogenesis to us, can't you? Tell us how an oxygen free atmosphere allowed the proper sequences to combine without and ozone (oxygen) layer to stop the destructive UV radiation.

Think: What about deep underwater vents, where sunlight can't reach, let alone UV radiation?

Ah, there's no oxygen in deep water, huh?

I see the evolutionary 'puddle' has been upgraded to "deep water" in a vain effort to avoind the things which are destructive to the building blocks of life.

[gomaaa]

Well, gomaa fell into a lawyerly trap. Bad gomaa! Darwin Central will hear about this!

Oops! Well, I guess I've doomed the Theory of Evolution.

This is a perfect example of what happens when you don't look too closely at what is being presented to you. You might accidentally dismiss it because you misinterpret it when in fact it's a perfectly good theory! ;)

[VadeRetro]

Post 647 still has "No replies." As for your artless misconstruction of 820, how will you twist 821?

[VadeRetro]

You might accidentally dismiss it because you misinterpret it when in fact it's a perfectly good theory! ;)

Another fiendish pitfall by the Master of Hocus-Pocus.

[Con X-Poser]

<< Ninety-eight percent of Miller's results were poisionous to life (tar and carboxylic acid). >>

Not only that, he had to cheat and separate the amino acids he did produce, lest they be destroyed if left in their natural surroundings. No doubt there was a laboratory near the first living cell that arose out of dead matter, so it could be separated from its environment, lest it die.

BTW, if Miller had been succesful, he would've proved an INTELLIGENT DESIGNER can CREATE life. That's what we've been saying all along.

[balrog666]

Junior: Evolution, the change of organisms over generations, is an observed fact.

It is. Do you disagree with the obvious here?

Still that doesn't make the "Theory of Evolution" a fact - it's still "just" a scientific theory.

Can you tell the difference? Come on speak up where BP couldn't, can you tell the difference?

[PatrickHenry]

Two hydrogen atoms meet ...
One says, "I've lost my electron."
The other says, "Are you sure?"
The first replies, "Yes, I'm positive."

[Junior]

You're either a moron or a liar. If you'd read the rest of the post, you notice wherein I defined the theory of evolution. Ah, but misquotation is a hallmark of creation "science" so why should I have expected anything more from you?

[Con X-Poser]

<< The fact that creationists must rely on such dishonest tactics speaks of the weakness of their claims. >>

You mean like the fact that you show us artist renditions of extinct creatures and CLAIM they are transitions? Or the fact that you have never seen the process you profess to believe?

Or maybe the fact that even evolutionists recognize how ridiculous abiogenesis is (formerly called spontaneous generation), and do cartwheels to attempt to divorce the ORIGIN from their theories on (ahem!) origins?

Or maybe the fact that you use changes resulting from the rearranging or loss of genetic information as proof that evolutionary changes requiring new information could happen?

Of course we know how honest Piltdown man was for 40 years, and how honest Haeckel's embryo drawings were for 140 years, and how honest gluing peppered moths to trees was, and how honest archaeoraptor was. One wonders how many others we don't know about?

[Junior]

Thanks. We've had differences, but we're still on speaking terms.

[VadeRetro]

Watching you read up a thread is exactly like watching gore3000 doing the same thing. I keep thinking I see your lips moving.

[longshadow]

The first replies, "Yes, I'm positive."

OUCH!

Patrick; that was painful!

[Con X-Poser]

<< To: Con X-Poser - Watching you read up a thread is exactly like watching gore3000 doing the same thing. I keep thinking I see your lips moving. >>

Wow. What an answer. Full of factural material and unassailable logic, with a generous helping of your "better arguments" (ad hominem). How can I possibly refute it?

[Junior]

Watching you read up a thread is exactly like watching gore3000 doing the same thing. I keep thinking I see your lips moving.

Both use the same sentence structure and same arguments. The only difference is, one posts in blue and the other doesn't. Makes me wonder ...

[VadeRetro]

Well, one's a YEC and one says he isn't. (But has at one time or another rejected most of the evidences for an old earth: radiometric dating, paleontology, the geologic column ...)

[VadeRetro]

paleontology, the geologic column ...

Hates the Big Bang, too, but may have claimed to accept starlight from farther than 10K light-years out.

[Lurking Libertarian]

Going home placemarker.

[PatrickHenry]

End-of-session placemarker.