It's not a whitewash. The Smithsonian is not allowed to limit a person's off site activity unless the person ties the Smithsonian into the activity. It can do nothing about what Sternberg did as long as it did not involve the Smitsonian. Read the emails. They knew nothing at the time about the process involved at the PBSW. It appears the entire episode was initiated by NCSE complaints in August 2004 to SI and due to the fact that a paper mentioning ID had been published.
This is senseless discussion. I am certain nothing exists which can change your mind about the situation and you have not provided me with anything that would change my mind about the events that are categorized in the emails. So let's just end this on a friendly note. You believe what you believe, I believe that Sternberg was singled out at SI due to his offsite activity which SI admits is no factor in any treatment of their personnel to include RA's and RC's or visiting scientists.
Keep going "... after Sternberg purposely bypassed the normal peer review process." You seem to always forget that bit.
You believe what you believe, I believe that Sternberg was singled out at SI due to his offsite activity which SI admits is no factor in any treatment of their personnel to include RA's and RC's or visiting scientists.
You can believe that, I will follow the evidence, which says all of these claims of persecution are unfounded. I notice you didn't say anything about his blatantly false claims of persecution over turning in the keys and moving offices. We know for a fact that was a LIE. Yet you believe everything else.
You believe what you believe because you want to believe. If the ID movement can't get scientific credibility, it can't possibly be the fault of the IDers themselves, there must be persecution. Meanwhile, I wouldn't shed a tear if all of evolutionary theory were overturned tomorrow. As I've said before, I'd love to be the person to do it.