Try and keep it scientific.
I don't particularly adhere to either extreme. I'm convinced that evolution has been proven valid, however I'm not opposed to the idea that there may have been "nudges" given to the development of life and the universe. For example, I think that the Fine-tuned Universe idea is worth further investigation. I'm not so arrogant as to think that I have all the answers, and I think it is worth while to look at alternatives.
However, my main point is that the scientific community is acting like a bunch of thugs when they are reduced to trying to ruin a man's career because he does not toe the line with their thinking. I'd like to see you defend that.
No, the "scientific community" is not "acting like a bunch of thugs".
A *few* people have treated Sterberg poorly. Do not be so foolish as to confuse a few people with the entire "scientific community".
when they are reduced to trying to ruin a man's career because he does not toe the line with their thinking. I'd like to see you defend that.
I'm not defending the behavior, BUT you are grossly misrepresenting their motivation. They are not attacking Sternberg because he "does not toe the line with their thinking". They are attacking him because he was intimately involved with violating ordinary standards of scholarship -- standards which many people take very seriously. In short, they are going after him for what they feel is a serious PROFESSIONAL failure on Sternberg's part. There are right ways and wrong ways to address such failures, though, and some have crossed the line between the two. But don't misrepresent their reasons.