Posted on 11/28/2004 9:20:18 AM PST by CHARLITE
OH, well, if studies say so. The great secret is out: liberals dominate campuses. Coming soon: "Moon Implicated in Tides, Studies Find."
One study of 1,000 professors finds that Democrats outnumber Republicans at least seven to one in the humanities and social sciences. That imbalance, more than double what it was three decades ago, is intensifying because younger professors are more uniformly liberal than the older cohort that is retiring.
Another study, of voter-registration records, including those of professors in engineering and the hard sciences, found nine Democrats for every Republican at Berkeley and Stanford. Among younger profs, there were 183 Democrats, six Republicans.
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
bttt
Now the sociology or history departments, that might be a different story all together.
As long as the math profs don't bring politics into the classroom. . .so be it.
but how COULD math geniuses be Liberal. ;) Math is absolute and Libs are relativists. Maybe they can stay in denial by avoiding astronomy and thoughts of Noah's Ark on Ararat....
The math professors probably aren't registered.
Lang happens to belong to the prestigious National Academy of Sciences. This organization is arranged so that each discipline has only so many membership slots. Whenever a slot becomes vacant, the discipline nominates a replacement; the entire NAS votes to approve the nomination by secret ballot. The prominent historian Samuel P. Huntington (The Clash of Civilizations) was nominated by the historians. Lang convinced the NAS to vote against Huntington, twice (1986 and 1987). Lang claimed that Huntington was a pseudo-scientist, and he claimed that Huntington's work was flawed if not dishonest.
From what I've seen of the N.A.S., it obtains govt. and mega-corporate monies and uses them for its own agendae, including evolutionary teaching. BIG money involved, very atheist and political from my observations.
Idiots in power tend to hire other idiots with the same thought processes.
Just shows where a little bit of education will get you.
I don't honestly know much about its politics. But I would be astonished if the biologists in the NAS did not support evolution. Evolution is considered to be the foundation of modern biology: the evidence for deep geological time and the evidence for common descent are overwhelming. (Mechanisms for evolution are where the only debates are happening: a very small minority of biologists argue that chance and necessity, that is, Darwinist natural selection, cannot explain speciation; intelligent design must have been involved.)
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.