[editor-surveyor]

Fear those that fear the truth. Soon, evolution will be defended by the military standing guard over the classroom.

[editor-surveyor]

Political correctness to the hilt!

[trisham]

I'm amazed at this.

[ndt]

So ID now needs legislation to force real scientists to listen to them. Thats rich.

[Keflavik76]

A new dark age falls on scientist and researchers that dare to think outside the box. It sad that people that say they believe in free speech are the first to stifle it. In the words of Bob Dylan:


I ain't gonna work on Maggie's farm no more.
No, I ain't gonna work on Maggie's farm no more.
Well, I wake in the morning,
Fold my hands and pray for rain.
I got a head full of ideas
That are drivin' me insane.
It's a shame the way she makes me scrub the floor.
I ain't gonna work on Maggie's farm no more.



"In November, 2005, for example, National Public Radio reported that it had talked with 18 university professors and scientists who subscribe to intelligent design. Most would not speak on the record for fear of losing their jobs. One untenured professor at Kennesaw State University in Georgia wrote that talking to NPR would be, quote, 'the kiss of death.' Another said, 'There is no way I would reveal myself prior to obtaining tenure,'" the report found.

[Cicero]

No one is more bigoted than a politically correct leftist. And that's basically what the Smithsonian has turned into. No shadow of dissent or questioning is allowed.

[Dog Gone]

Soon, evolution will be defended by the military standing guard over the classroom.

Be sure to ping me when the first Marine forces a kid to learn evolution at the point of a gun.

[RunningWolf]

That was a extremely hostile situation he had forced upon him.

The cult of evolution at the core is as anti-science 3d reich medicine.

[RunningWolf]

a campaign of harassment and smears against evolutionary biologist Richard Sternberg, whose only 'crime' was his honest skepticism of Darwinian dogma," said West. "It's outrageous that the federal government would sanction such blatant discrimination. This is clearly an infringement of Dr. Sternberg's free speech rights."

Sternberg, according to the report, said it's now clear he was "targeted for retaliation and harassment" specifically because he allowed publication of an article critical of neo-Darwinism "and that was considered an unpardonable heresy."

Seem similar behavior closer? /sarc>

[RunningWolf]

"NMNH officials have made clear their intent to prevent any scientist publicly skeptical of Darwinian theory from ever being appointed as a Research Associate, no matter how sterling his or her professional credentials or research.

[Keflavik76]

If anybody is seriously wondering about the evidence for Intelligent design, Reasons to Believe has a great web site filled with resources. In many ways it takes more faith to believe that we evolved from some primordial soup then in Intelligent Design.

http://www.reasons.org/

[metmom]

ping

[RunningWolf]

Some modern and great genetic scientists have turned away from their atheism and blind acceptance of darwinist dogma

The scientist who led the team that cracked the human genome has posited that such discoveries bring man "closer to God."

Francis Collins, director of the U.S. National Human Genome Research Institute, says that unraveling the human genome gave him a first-hand view of the handiwork of the Almighty.

In his forthcoming book, "The Language of God," he explores one of the most amazing discoveries of the modern era – that life is actually encoded with a mind-boggling amount of information written out in a clearly understandable language. Needless to say, information and language are not the byproducts of random chemical reactions or other godless evolutionary mechanisms.


Like the renowned former atheist Antony Flew – who announced last year that recent scientific discoveries had convinced him of the existence of a creator-god – Collins grew up believing in evolution and had no interest whatsoever in the "God" question. He states: "I was very happy with the idea that God didn't exist and had no interest in me."

But by surrendering to God, was he abandoning science? Not at all, as even an article about him in the Sunday Times in Britain acknowledged. The Times pointed out: "Collins joins a line of scientists whose research deepened their belief in God. Isaac Newton, whose discovery of the laws of gravity reshaped our understanding of the universe, said: 'This most beautiful system could only proceed from the dominion of an intelligent and powerful being.' Although Einstein revolutionized our thinking about time, gravity and the conversion of matter to energy, he believed the universe had a creator."

We must remember, after all, that the scientific method itself was developed in a distinctly Christian culture (Europe at the end of the Middle Ages) and was advanced for two primary Christian purposes – for the glory of God and the benefit of mankind. These early scientists believed that because God was rational and orderly, and a Lawgiver to boot, the universe had to be rationally arranged in an orderly manner with fixed laws, which in turn meant it could be both studied and understood by His created beings. And that's precisely what they found – rather than the chaotic world that would exist if evolution were true.

Furthermore, many of the greatest pioneers of science – including the founders of whole branches of science (Newton, Pascal, Boyle, Faraday, Pasteur, etc.) – were Bible-believing Christians. Newton wrote far more on theology than he ever did on science, and observed that the sun was at the proper distance from Earth to give us the right amounts of heat and light. "This did not happen by chance,".

Scientists have since discovered dozens of such equations throughout the universe that, if any one of them were off by the smallest of fractions, life on our planet would be unsustainable. So it turns out the heavens really do declare the glory of God, as the Bible said all along. It's no wonder Kepler defined science as "thinking God's thoughts after Him."

[shuckmaster]

Hey, it's in WND so it has to be true! - NOT

[RunningWolf]

From the article I read that it amounts to the Smithsonian Institution has imposed a religious test on scientists who work there.

And apparently its rampant throughout other taxpayer supported academic venues.

"In another case, the president of the University of Idaho issued a letter forbidding faculty from teaching alternatives to Darwin's theory in science classes there. The widespread hostility of many scientists to criticisms of Darwinian theory makes further violations in this area by federally-funded institutions likely,"

[Moorings]

There is only one god evolution, and his prophet is Darwin. /sarcasm

[DaGman]

Well, the Smithsonian is about science. This guy is about his religion as is his right. Unfortunately, regardless of the amount of letters behind the guy's name, he is perpetuating the fairy tale of creationism which is counter to the Smithsonian's mission of advancing verifiably true science. If he wants to write about creationism, he needs to go find somewhere else to do it. He fails to understand that he represents the Smithsonian regardless of the day or night and when he writes (or edits or whatever) about creationism, it undermines the credibility of the mission of the Smithsonian.

And this is not a case of bigotry, plain and simple.

[ThinkPlease]

Time for some fact-based evidence. Lets get away from the facts that this report is not been entered into Congressional record, so WNDs claim that this came from congress is far overblown. It came from two people who happens to be members of congress, and each have strong links to the Discovery Institute. So much for that 'independent report'! Biased report is more like it!

From this link comes this analysis(by a real honest-to-god biologist and everything!):

There's some am-a-a-a-a-zing stuff in the appendix to the Rep. Souder staff report that the Discovery Institute is talking up.

The DI spin and the Congressional report spin are each severely divorced from reality. When one looks at the content of the appendix of documents and emails, one learns a lot about the character of Richard von Sternberg that Sternberg probably would have preferred stay out of public sight. Here are some of the things that reading the emails and other documents provided tell us:

Sternberg "requested" a grant or "any funding vehicle" from the Smithsonian in the amount of $300,000 to compensate for his claimed year of lost work. (he was denied, as the Smithsonian doesn't disburse grants) [p.11]

Sternberg ignored requests to return hundreds of specimens in his office space to the collections. [pp.16,27]

Sternberg had failed to properly curate 10 to 12% of specimens in his possession by not replenishing alcohol as the preservative agent. [p.27]

Sternberg's space contained specimens that had not been checked out according to established procedures. [p.16]

Sternberg's office space contained specimens apparently from other institutions without records in the transaction management system. [pp.48-49]

Sternberg handled specimens in another person's office without permission. [p.16]

Sternberg ignored requests to return most of the over 50 books and periodicals he had checked out from the Smithsonian library. [pp.27,48]

Sternberg falsely told someone that he had notified library staff about his overdue materials. [p.28]

Sternberg had removed Smithsonian books from the premises, contrary to Smithsonian policy. [p.48]

Sternberg was simply confused when he thought that he had no Smithsonian sponsor. [p.11]

The issue about keys that Sternberg raised was a red herring; the Smithsonian had gone to a badge system to control physical access, and Sternberg received a badge. [pp.11-12]

Sternberg ignored requests that he return his keys even after the switchover to the badge system. [p.12]

Far from losing his research affiliation with the Smithsonian, Sternberg received another invitation for a three-year period to go from 2006 to 2009. [p.13]

The issues over moving offices that Sternberg raised are shown to be completely explained by the general and widespread movement of staff to accommodate physical renovation and departmental re-organization. [pp.36,38-39]

Sternberg was listed by his Smithsonian affiliation in promotional materials for a talk on ID scheduled in Helsinki in 2004, contrary to Smithsonian policy concerning research associates. [pp.16-17,41,44,48]

Sternberg had a prior history as an editor guiding research papers that were substandard into print in PBSW. [p.20]

Sternberg's prior editorial lapses included leaving a submitted manuscript overlong without action. [p.37]

Sternberg permitted the Meyer paper to be published even though it did not conform to the PBSW formatting standards. [p.37]

Sternberg made "calamitous and inaccurate" statements on his web site. [p.47]

Sternberg agreed in a meeting with his supervisor that his possession of a master key to Smithsonian facilities was "unnecessary and inappropriate". [p.48]

While Sternberg was the primary editor for PBSW, there was a year in which authors submitted complaints about the handling of 17 different manuscripts. [p.52]

Two Mexican authors believed the managing editor, Sternberg, was predisposed against Latin-American authors. [p.52]

Sternberg has a history of saying one thing and doing another. [p.57]

Sternberg's access to freshwater crabs in the collections was restricted due to his destruction of many specimens. [p.57]

Sternberg failed to utilize on-site Smithsonian expert on Cambrian period paleontology and PBSW Associate Editor Brian Erwin in selecting reviewers for Meyer 2004b. [p.73]

Sternberg made "bad judgment calls" in his editorship at PBSW. [p.74] ---

And this is all in a 'friendly' report that's supposed to DEFEND the man! Well done, Souder and Santorum, way to ensure that your martyr never gets a job in the field again (which, of course, is their desire all along, how else is he supposed to get martyrdom!).

[longtermmemmory]

Remember the Smithsonian has REEKED of politics spining the real science.

They OPPOSED ORVIL AND WILBER WRIGHT BEING DECLARED FIRST IN POWERED FLIGHT!

They propagandaed the Enola Gay Exhibit.

They SCRUBBED the Natural science museum of "male dominance" in order to be more sensitive to feminists rather than science.

It is no surprise that the only good the Smithsonian does is physical preservation. The explanation is best left to the sources outside of the PC investation of the Smithsonian.

[MEGoody]

A new report from the U.S. House of Representatives has condemned officials at the Smithsonian Institution for imposing a religious test on scientists who work there.

Some evols sure hate it when you point out the politics behind the theory of evolution. It's a dirty little secret they want to keep hidden.