Richard Sternberg came under fire from Smithsonian scientists over an article questioning evolutionary theory.
Posted on 10/06/2005 12:32:21 PM PDT by NYer
A fellow Catholic is now being persecuted, in no small part, because of his religion.
You haven’t heard about it — nor are you likely to — precisely because it is just the kind of story the reigning media assiduously ignore. The powers-that-be are trying to round up scientist Richard Sternberg and hound him out of town (the town, in this instance being Washington, D.C.). All in the name of secularist ideology posing as science.
Before we turn to Sternberg’s interesting case, we should recall the recent clarifying words about evolutionary theory by Cardinal Archbishop of Vienna Christoph Schonborn in his now-famous New York Times op-ed, “Finding Design in Nature.”
“The Catholic Church, while leaving to science many details about the history of life on earth, proclaims that by the light of reason the human intellect can readily and clearly discern purpose and design in the natural world, including the world of living things. Evolution in the sense of common ancestry might be true, but evolution in the neo-Darwinian sense — an unguided, unplanned process of random variation and natural selection — is not. Any system of thought that denies or seeks to explain away the overwhelming evidence for design in biology is ideology, not science.” (emphasis added)
Sternberg is being driven out of his job as a Research Associate at the Smithsonian Institution’s National Museum of Natural History by ideologues.
A little background: Rick Sternberg is extremely well qualified for his position. He has two Ph.D.s in evolutionary biology — one in molecular evolution and the other in systems theory and theoretical biology. He has published more than 30 very technical articles in respected biological journals.
Everyone was quite happy with his work, both as staff scientist with the National Center for Biotechnology Information and as a research associate at the Smithsonian.
All was well until Sternberg, as managing editor of the Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington, allowed a technical paper critical of neo-Darwinism to be published: “The Origin of Biological Information and the Higher Taxonomic Categories,” written by Steven Meyer.
Meyer’s Ph.D. is in the history and philosophy of science from Cambridge University. He is an advocate of Intelligent Design.
Instead of engaging Meyer’s paper through argument, the powers-that-be simply dismissed it as religious tripe, and began attacking Sternberg with startlingly underhanded animus, doing anything they could to make his life miserable to indelibly soil his reputation and to drive him out the Smithsonian.
First, Smithsonian officials tried to remove him directly, charging that as managing editor he had violated the publication process. But Sternberg followed the procedure perfectly. He discussed publication with a fellow scientist at the Smithsonian, and before publication he had the article peer-reviewed by three molecular and evolutionary biologists — all with doctoral degrees.
Unable to trump up any legitimate charges, Smithsonian officials went after him indirectly, creating an intolerable work environment, smearing him with false allegations, pressuring the National Center for Biotechnology Information to fire him, and worst of all, investigating his personal religious and political beliefs behind the scenes.
The interesting thing in regard to this last skullduggery of prying into his religion is that Sternberg is not an advocate of Intelligent Design, but of the structuralist approach to biology. But the assumption of those “digging for dirt” was that, if he believed in God, then his skull was obviously soft enough to admit Meyer’s paper rather than reject it outright.
The U.S. Office of Special Counsel was called in to investigate. Its officials decided unambiguously in Sternberg’s favor, although officials at the Smithsonian have now stoutly refused to cooperate with the investigation. Small wonder, given their less-than-admirable methods of trying to destroy Sternberg.
Reading the Special Council’s report is an eye-opener. Before the Smithsonian stopped cooperating with the investigation, behind-the-scenes e-mail correspondence was gathered by investigators. It is clear from reading them that Smithsonian officials had little but contempt for religious believers:
“After spending 4.5 years in the Bible Belt,” said one,” I have learned how to carefully phrase things in order to avoid the least amount of negative repercussions for the kids. … The most fun we had by far was when my son refused to say the Pledge of Allegiance because of the ‘under dog’ part.”
Charming. The e-mails reveal what is truly behind the “careful phrasing” of these scientist-administrators. They are secularist ideologues with a barely suppressed disdain for believers.
“It is clear that I was targeted for retaliation and harassment explicitly because I failed in an unstated requirement in my role as editor of a scientific journal,” Sternberg contends. “I was supposed to be a gatekeeper turning away unpopular, controversial, or conceptually challenging explanations of puzzling natural phenomena. Instead I allowed a scientific article to be published critical of neo-Darwinism, and that was considered an unpardonable heresy.”
Interesting, isn’t it? Can you imagine a scientist of Sternberg’s stature being persecuted because he allowed a paper to be published that concluded evolution occurs as “an unguided, unplanned process of random variation and natural selection” and that consequently all notions of a Creator God are entirely groundless? Of course not. That’s orthodoxy. Or is it ideology masquerading as science?
One thing is for certain. Sternberg is still being persecuted behind the scenes for daring to allow science to question science.
ping
Scientist who didn't get the memo.
Ping
It is hard to really say how grateful I am to this guy, for standing firm against these guys. His antagonizers should be brought up on violations of the Civil Rights Act, and subject to personal lawsuit by Mr Sternberg. We live in such a crazy time, where the defenders of political correctness, are allowed to legally destroy everyone who is in their way, yet the legal system gives us a toy sword to use against them. Hope the guy hangs in there and they get skewered for their actions.
It is hard to really say how grateful I am to this guy, for standing firm against these guys. His antagonizers should be brought up on violations of the Civil Rights Act, and subject to personal lawsuit by Mr Sternberg. We live in such a crazy time, where the defenders of political correctness, are allowed to legally destroy everyone who is in their way, yet the legal system gives us a toy sword to use against them. Hope the guy hangs in there and they get skewered for their actions.
Cardinal backs evolution and "intelligent design"
Reuters - Science ^ | 2005-10-04
Posted on 10/04/2005 12:21:01 PM PDT by Junior
Vienna Cardinal Christoph Schoenborn said he could believe both in divine creation and in evolution because one was a question of religion and the other of science, two realms that complimented rather than contradicted each other.
Schoenborn's view, presented in a lecture published by his office on Tuesday, tempered earlier statements that seemed to ally the Church with United States conservatives campaigning against the teaching of evolution in public schools.
A court in Pennsylvania is now hearing a suit brought by parents against a school district that teaches intelligent design -- the view that life is so complex some higher being must have designed it -- alongside evolution in biology class.
"Without a doubt, Darwin pulled off quite a feat with his main work and it remains one of the very great works of intellectual history," Schoenborn declared in a lecture in St. Stephen's Cathedral in Vienna on Sunday.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1496517/posts
The Cardinal explains this, " Any system of thought that denies or seeks to explain away the overwhelming evidence for design in biology is ideology, not science.”
in the traditional Catholic way, "Science studies what is observable and scientists overstep the boundaries of their discipline when they conclude evolution proves there was no creator"
Science is not equipped to find or disprove a designer and it is obvious the good Cardinal understands this.
Unfortunately Richard Sternberg didn't. The man abused his position and cheated in order to insert his secterian views into a science journal. People like this do the cause of Christ harm.
I wanted to ping you to this article to hear your reaction to it. This describes the high tech lynching that even religious scientists(who other wise do excellent scientific work) may face if they step beyond the careful ideology of the Evolutionary Elites.
Note the section on e-mails. Note the under the radar investigation of Sternberg's back-ground. The pressure on him has been so great that he lost his wife to divorce on account of the politics of personal destruction.
Evolutionary Biology stands or falls based on experimental data and conclusions that can be falsified or tested and reliably reproduced. Time and discovery will ultimately direct the fate of evolutionary theory as a viable science. That has never been my real beef with evolutionists.
Having contempt and disrepect of traditional morality, the political gamesmanship of certain of the Evolutionary Upper crust is what I have a beef with. Its the disingenuous mind games that have folks such as the Kansas school board in an uproar. George Orwell's 1984 may have been describing the "newsspeak" of certain of the Scientific Elite. Sternberg was the victim of career killing high tech lynching...perhaps he and Justice Thomas can commiserate here!
Of course you have a Catholic with a Jewish name "Sternberg" so who knows if mis-directed anti-semitism isn't part of the issue here!
Why do you say that, in view of the following information from the article:
But Sternberg followed the procedure perfectly. He discussed publication with a fellow scientist at the Smithsonian, and before publication he had the article peer-reviewed by three molecular and evolutionary biologists — all with doctoral degrees.
Unless his position description specifically said, "You will not accept any articles that challenge Darwinian orthodoxy in any way," it appears to that he acted appropriately to the position.
This story was so huge ... but in article after article that I had read, they failed to mention he was Catholic.
The 'big picture' patterns just sort of rise to the surface don't they?
We've had several threads on this, back when it was news. Here's one: Smithsonian in uproar over intelligent-design article. Here's another, and it contains links to others:
Smithsonian Scientist's Complaint Backed [or "unsupported" -- about the Meyer ID article].
Of course you have a Catholic with a Jewish name "Sternberg" so who knows if mis-directed anti-semitism isn't part of the issue here!
Good ol' "Rick Sternberg" is actually named Richard von Sternberg.
Yes, it's very interesting. Since Catholicism is not generally associated with creationism - except for a few key points, the Church leaves most details up to personal judgment - one wonders exactly why this gentleman should be targeted with such hostility. I speculate that, in addition to his not holding the line on Darwinism, they were probably after him because he would be pro-life and opposed to gay marriage.
Interesting info, thanks.
The press seems to have dropped the "Von" part of his name...I wonder why that was?
Apparently the story is not over as the Smithsonian has stopped co-operating with Fed investigators who are looking into the apparent violations of Sternberg's civil rights. This story has some legs.
Still I just wanted to get your reaction.
With a German-aristocrat last name, who knows what kind of psychopath he might be? He could be a former concentration-camp guard, or worse!
Each side has a different story. Sternberg (or von Sternberg) says he's a martyr, and the Discovery Institute (the big promoter of ID) defends him:
Sternberg, Smithsonian, Meyer, And The Paper That Started It All.
On the other hand,the Smithsonian says he's a rogue:
Statement from the Council of the Biological Society of Washington regarding the publication of the paper by Stephen C. Meyer in Volume 117(2) of the Proceedings.
My opinion has no importance, really. I tend to distrust the Discovery Institute. But I'm not a witness, and I've made no independent investigation. So I don't know whether von Sternberg was acting properly. Scientists say there's nothing of value in the paper he published. I guess opinions vary.
When we let government take over "science", it eventually goes downhill.
Sternberg should have did his job and rejected the paper on the grounds that it's not science. He didn't. Instead he allowed the paper to be published as if it actually was science.
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.