Posted on 05/28/2007 5:44:20 PM PDT by SirLinksalot
There is evidence for intelligent design in the universe." This does not seem like an especially radical statement; many people believe that God has revealed himself through creation. Such beliefs, however, do not conform to politically correct notions in academia, as Professor Guillermo Gonzalez is learning the hard way. An astronomer at Iowa State University, Professor Gonzalez was recently denied tenure—despite his stellar academic record—and it is increasingly clear he was rejected for one reason: He wrote a book entitled The Privileged Planet which showed that there is evidence for design in the universe.& nbsp; Dr. Gonzalez's case has truly distressing implications for academic freedom in colleges and universities across the country, especially in science departments.
Dr. Gonzalez, who fled from Cuba to America as a child, earned his PhD in astronomy from the University of Washington. By academic standards, Dr. Gonzalez has had a remarkable career. Though still a young man, he has already authored sixty-eight peer-reviewed scientific papers. These papers have been featured in some of the world's most respected scientific journals, including Science and Nature. Dr. Gonzalez has also co-authored a college-level text book entitled Observational Astronomy, which was published by Cambridge Press.
According to the written requirements for tenure at the Iowa State University, a prospective candidate is required to have published at least fifteen peer-reviewed scientific papers. With sixty-eight papers to his name, Dr. Gonzalez has already exceeded that requirement by 350%. Ninety-one percent of professors who applied for tenure at Iowa State University this year were successful, implying that there has to be something seriously wrong with a candidate before they are rejected.
What's wrong with Dr. Gonzalez? So far as anyone can tell, this rejection had little to do with his scientific research, and everything to do with the fact that Dr. Gonzalez believes the scientific evidence points to the idea of an intelligent designer. In fact, as World Magazine has reported, at least two scientists in the Physics and Astronomy Department at the Iowa State University have admitted that intelligent design played a role in their decision. This despite the fact that Dr. Gonzalez does not teach intelligent design in any of his classes, and that none of his peer-reviewed papers deal with the subject. Nevertheless, simply because Gonzalez holds the view that there is intelligence behind the universe, and has written a book presenting scientific evidence for this fact, he is considered unsuitable at Iowa State.
What is the state of academic freedom when well qualified candidates are rejected simply because they see God's fingerprints on the cosmos? Isn't the Academy supposed to be a venue for diverse views? Aren't universities supposed to foster an atmosphere that allows for robust discussion and freedom of thought? Dr. Gonzalez's fate suggests that anyone who deigns to challenge conventional orthodoxy is not welcome in the club.
In the future, will scientists who are up for tenure be forced to deny that God could have played any role in the creation or design of the universe? Will Bible-believing astronomers be forced to repudiate Psalm 19, which begins, "The heavens declare the glory of God; the skies proclaim the work of his hands"? Will faithful Catholics be required to reject the teaching of Vatican I, which said that God "can be known with certainty from the consideration of created things, by the natural power of human reason..." Just where will this witch hunt lead?
The amazing fact is that, even as many science departments are working overtime to forbid professors from positing that there is evidence for intelligent design in the universe, more and more scientists are coming to this conclusion. The Discovery Institute has compiled a list of over seven-hundred scientists who signed the following statement: "We are skeptical of claims for the ability of random mutation and natural selection to account for the complexity of life. Careful examination of the evidence for Darwinian theory should be encouraged." The list of scientists who find good reason to doubt the strictly materialistic Darwinism that is currently scientific orthodoxy is growing every day.
It seems that many scientists and academicians who hold views contrary to Dr. Gonzalez have concluded that the best way to avoid debate about the evidence for intelligent design is to simply deny jobs to those who will not affirm their atheistic worldview. The fact that these scientists, who are supposedly open to following the evidence wherever it leads, have resorted to blatant discrimination to avoid having this conversation speaks volumes about the weakness of their position. They realize their arguments are not sufficient to defeat the intelligent design movement and they must, therefore, shut their opponents out of the conversation. All the evidence suggests that it is unjust that Dr. Gonzalez was denied tenure and that this ruling should be overturned on appeal. Nevertheless, what happened to Dr. Gonzalez is a reflection of the growing strength of the intelligent design movement, not its weakness.
--------------------------------------------
Ken Connor is Chairman of the Center for a Just Society in Washington, DC and a nationally recognized trial lawyer who represented Governor Jeb Bush in the Terri Schiavo case.
I exist and can prove I exist to you. It is not scientific, but it is philosophical-
You know I exist. Proof complete. Now reciprocate that with a scientific explanation.
Mission Statement
Discovery Institute’s mission is to make a positive vision of the future practical. The Institute discovers and promotes ideas in the common sense tradition of representative government, the free market and individual liberty. Our mission is promoted through books, reports, legislative testimony, articles, public conferences and debates, plus media coverage and the Institute’s own publications and Internet website.
Current projects explore the fields of technology, science and culture, reform of the law, national defense, the environment and the economy, the future of democratic institutions, transportation, religion and public life, government entitlement spending, foreign affairs and cooperation within the bi-national region of “Cascadia.” The efforts of Discovery fellows and staff, headquartered in Seattle, are crucially abetted by the Institute’s members, board and sponsors.
That may be what they say in public, but how about the Wedge Strategy? That document was somehow leaked. One telling passage:
We are building on this momentum, broadening the wedge with a positive scientific alternative to materialistic scientific theories, which has come to be called the theory of intelligent design (ID). Design theory promises to reverse the stifling dominance of the materialist worldview, and to replace it with a science consonant with Christian and theistic convictions.Sure sounds like they are pushing religion under the guise of ID, doesn't it? What a surprise: they aren't doing science after all!
And what about replacing the philosophical approach of science (naturalism) with some new "Christian and theistic" approach?
Just think of all the existing sciences that would have to be "replaced" under such a system:
That is not proof that you exist. Your posts might be generated by a computer. You may be dead and someone is using your account.
“You know I exist. Proof complete. Now reciprocate that with a scientific explanation.”
ok, do this for me. Poke yourself in the eye.
The so-called “wedge strategy” of the Discovery Institute is really no different than the “strategy” of atheists (and communists) to use the purely naturalistic theory of evolution to promote atheism and communism. Karl Marx said so himself:
“Although it is developed in the crude English style, this [Darwin’s book On the Origin of Species] is the book which contains the basis in natural history for our view.” —Karl Marx
So next time you regurgitate your crap about the “wedge strategy,” I hope you to mention this too, or you are giving only half the story. But certainly I won’t be holding my breath waiting for objectivity from you.
Just to add one more point to my previous post.
The “wedge” strategy seems to really bother you when it is used by Christians, but when it is used by atheists and communists, you don’t seem to care. What the hell are you doing here on FR? I suggest you take a long hike and give a reprieve from your constant barrage of crap.
I am merely trying to show that science and conservatism are compatible. The left is fond of saying conservatives are anti-science, and I hope my posts show that to be just another of their lies.
I suggest you take a long hike and give a reprieve from your constant barrage of crap.
Sorry, I'll remain here as long as I am allowed.
*Might be*
But the fact remains, you know it’sme, and that I exist.
What you lack is scientific evidence. You shall continue to lack it. Exactly my point.
And what would that prove scientifically, to you about my existance?
“And what would that prove scientifically, to you about my existance?”
Wouldn’t prove anything to me except that you are silly. It would prove to you that you exist.
The point is that your premise is silly. There are many many things that science cannot explain. That doesnt mean they don’t exist it merely means we don’t understand enough about the universe to explain it.
IMO, I don’t think our brains are capable of understanding everything in the Universe. Further that those people who profess that science is the end all to be all are not only dangerously arrogant but are also significantly less wise then they think.
Some brains are not capable of understanding 9th grade biology.
Geology--those fools can't get the age of the Grand Canyon right. GONE!
Archaeology--can't find any evidence of a global flood. GONE!
Astronomy--that big bang stuff, and all those really old ages. GONE!
Genetics--all those similarities to chimps, and common descent. GONE!
Egyptology--those Egyptians didn't notice the global flood. GONE!
Planetary sciences--all those annoying facts we can't explain away. GONE!
Radiometric dating--those fools can't get the dating right either. GONE!
Biology--they started that evilution stuff and figured out how the eye developed. GONE!
Paleontology--millions of inconvenient fossils that are all fakes. GONE!
Physics--that pesky 2nd Law of Thermodynamics. GONE!
Linguistics--can't get the development of languages right. GONE!
You might think this is an exaggeration, but I sure wouldn't want to do science under the Discovery Institute's "Christian and theistic" approach."
Ah, the old, reliable fallacy of 'Appeal to Consequence of a Belief'.
And that's ignoring the fact that the 'consequences' aren't true in the first place, but don't let that get in the way of a good fallacious 'argument'.
“Some brains are not capable of understanding 9th grade biology.”
And some are so arrogant they think they are wise. Your argument isn’t building your case.
And religion explains that gravity works to keep people from flying off the earth?
“And religion explains that gravity works to keep people from flying off the earth?”
Does science explain why gravity works?
Science is a subset of the overall picture.
If you wanted to understand how gravity works, would you pick up a bible or would you pick up a physics book?
“If you wanted to understand how gravity works, would you pick up a bible or would you pick up a physics book?”
Neither really explains how gravity works. Physics books will say they think its attraction at the atomic level but they aren’t really sure.
The Bible says God made it. That gives me the why. The how is fascinating to discuss but I doubt we’ll see Star Trek gravity generators anytime soon.
But then again, you aren't seeking the TRUTH, so this is understandable.
It does?
Neither really explains how gravity works. Physics books will say they think its attraction at the atomic level but they aren’t really sure. The Bible says God made it
Physics books go into great detail on the equations used to model gravity but all you need to go about your daily life is to think "God made it". Congratulations.
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.