Replies

You've not provided any evidence from the university outlining his substandard performance.

Here, but you'll need a subscription. It gives him high marks in publishing while doing postdoc at UT and UW, "It looks like it slowed down considerably. It’s not clear that he started new things, or anything on his own, in the period he was an assistant professor at Iowa State." The article also states his low grant rate and lack of graduate students completing their work.

In any case what did the opposition hope to achieve except something counter to academic freedom?

For the publications, academic excellence and prestige. For the students, well, students completing their doctoral work is kind of one of the reasons the school exists. For research grants, schools rely on those for income, plus big grants are likely to produce big results, which brings prestige, which brings more grants... That's how universities work. That's how the tenure system works. If he didn't like it then he shouldn't have been in that line of work.

Your other questions are red herring.

The other questions go straight to the heart. ID proponents are screaming persecution and don't want to see that he was denied tenure for solid academic reasons. It hurts your case. You also can't stand back and look at this rationally to see how this is just like a liberal playing the race card. It looks like IDers would like ID proponents to be a protected class, and I hate protected classes.

There is the rather significant fact that no one involved in hiring and firing decisions can defend their position in public. Whatever their reasons, they cannot discuss them without violatint confidentiality. The “victims” are not bound by any such rules.

But if the victims really are victims, rather that people of diminished competence, let them take it to coure. Perhaps the evilutionists will face another Waterloo.

Like Dover.

But if you want to know whether discrimination is pervasive, there is a large population of PhD level people who signed the Discovery Institute’s statement on the inadequacy of evolution. Let’s see how their careers are going.

Here, but you'll need a subscription. It gives him high marks in publishing while doing postdoc at UT and UW

I specifically asked for evidence from the university since it involves ISU. I don't think Richard Monastersky fits that description. In any case, why should I accept his opinion over yours?

Not to introduce a red herring, but I am glad you support my point in another discussion with this statement ...For research grants, schools rely on those for income, plus big grants are likely to produce big results, which brings prestige, which brings more grants... That's how universities work.

Your contention is all well and good, but I think that evidence should show a significant rise in the parameters you mentioned at ISU due to the results of the anti-academic freedom campaign involving Avalos against Gonzalez. This significant rise should be over whatever other changes are evident in those parameters at other universities.

It looks like IDers would like ID proponents to be a protected class, and I hate protected classes.

Well, I think your feelings color your view. I don't hate Darwinists, I just think they are wrong. I also think that they, the Darwinists, are protected.