Most times I see it referenced, it's "Biological Society of Washington, Smithsonian Institution." I could be wrong. In any case, what does this have to do with anything? What he did showed him to be an irresponsible scientist.
Again, he was "kicked out".
Um, no. His status as Associate wasn't renewed (remember, his sponsor was dead so he wasn't there to renew Sternberg anymore), but he was continued as a Collaborator despite his violations of policy and mistreatment of artifacts. As a Collaborator, he still has an office and access to what he needs, he just doesn't work as closely with SI personnel. This is a normal occurrence.
NCSE has ABSOLUTELY NO REASON to contact any supervisory personnel of the Smithsonian.
You get to have your position at the SI by virtue of being a scientist in good standing. Misconduct brings disrepute upon the entire SI. Thus engineering the publication of an inferior-grade paper for a friend was of interest to the SI staff. Too bad you don't think they should have been contacted, because the NCSE is the one that said to leave his personal beliefs and creationist work out of it, warning them to make decisions solely based on his scientific work.
No it didn't. It demonstrated that he did not please NCSE.
Um, no. His status as Associate wasn't renewed (remember, his sponsor was dead so he wasn't there to renew Sternberg anymore), but he was continued as a Collaborator despite his violations of policy and mistreatment of artifacts
The "kicked out" refers to the fact that NCSE was involved. It is indisputable that NCSE proactively sought retribution against Sternberg.
because the NCSE is the one that said to leave his personal beliefs and creationist work out of it,
Yeah right. /sarc
Sternberg is not a creationist. Nor does he necessarily believe in ID as many characterize it. From his website...
I am an evolutionary biologist ...
I think that neo-Darwinian theory is at best a very limited framework for understanding the development, organization, and disparity of fossil and recent taxa, as it formally pertains to the fixation and loss of gene variants in populations. Evolutionary genetics leaves open the central issue of how the one dimensional genotype can specify the four dimensional phenotype. The approach I am taking to this problem is a variant of structural realism, by which I mean that biological phenomena are manifestations of logico-mathematical structures. This perspective is orthogonal to the origins debate, if you will, because all historical actualities are understood to be space-time instances of pre-existing non-temporal possibilities. Within this context one can accept all that is empirically valid in evolutionary biology, while not axiomatically dismissing the position that structures as well as their “real” instantiations have an intelligent cause. My position asserts that the cosmos is fundamentally intelligible in such a way that it can be logically, mathematically, and scientifically recognized to be such; and moreover--following Proclus--that the universe emanates from Nous (mind). In this sense my thinking is compatible with intelligent design broadly defined.[emphasis mine]