Posted on 04/29/2003 10:43:39 AM PDT by Remedy
Texas Tech University biology professor Michael Dini recently came under fire for refusing to write letters of recommendation for students unable to "truthfully and forthrightly affirm a scientific answer" to the following question: "How do you think the human species originated?"
For asking this question, Professor Dini was accused of engaging in overt religious discrimination. As a result, a legal complaint was filed against Dini by the Liberty Legal Institute. Supporters of the complaint feared that consequences of the widespread adoption of Dini’s requirement would include a virtual ban of Christians from the practice of medicine and other related fields.
In an effort to defend his criteria for recommendation, Dini claimed that medicine was first rooted in the practice of magic. Dini said that religion then became the basis of medicine until it was replaced by science. After positing biology as the science most important to the study of medicine, he also posited evolution as the "central, unifying principle of biology" which includes both micro- and macro-evolution, which applies to all species.
In addition to claiming that someone who rejects the most important theory in biology cannot properly practice medicine, Dini suggested that physicians who ignore or neglect Darwinism are prone to making bad clinical decisions. He cautioned that a physician who ignores data concerning the scientific origins of the species cannot expect to remain a physician for long. He then rhetorically asked the following question: "If modern medicine is based on the method of science, then how can someone who denies the theory of evolution -- the very pinnacle of modern biological science -- ask to be recommended into a scientific profession by a professional scientist?"
In an apparent preemptive strike against those who would expose the weaknesses of macro-evolution, Dini claimed that "one can validly refer to the ‘fact’ of human evolution, even if all of the details are not yet known." Finally, he cautioned that a good scientist "would never throw out data that do not conform to their expectations or beliefs."
The legal aspect of this controversy ended this week with Dini finally deciding to change his recommendation requirements. But that does not mean it is time for Christians to declare victory and move on. In fact, Christians should be demanding that Dini’s question be asked more often in the court of public opinion. If it is, the scientific community will eventually be indicted for its persistent failure to address this very question in scientific terms.
Christians reading this article are already familiar with the creation stories found in the initial chapters of Genesis and the Gospel of John. But the story proffered by evolutionists to explain the origin of the species receives too little attention and scrutiny. In his two most recent books on evolution, Phillip Johnson gives an account of evolutionists’ story of the origin of the human species which is similar to the one below:In the beginning there was the unholy trinity of the particles, the unthinking and unfeeling laws of physics, and chance. Together they accidentally made the amino acids which later began to live and to breathe. Then the living, breathing entities began to imagine. And they imagined God. But then they discovered science and then science produced Darwin. Later Darwin discovered evolution and the scientists discarded God.
Darwinists, who proclaim themselves to be scientists, are certainly entitled to hold this view of the origin of the species. But that doesn’t mean that their view is, therefore, scientific. They must be held to scientific standards requiring proof as long as they insist on asking students to recite these verses as a rite of passage into their "scientific" discipline.
It, therefore, follows that the appropriate way to handle professors like Michael Dini is not to sue them but, instead, to demand that they provide specific proof of their assertion that the origin of all species can be traced to primordial soup. In other words, we should pose Dr. Dini’s question to all evolutionists. And we should do so in an open public forum whenever the opportunity presents itself.
Recently, I asked Dr. Dini for that proof. He didn’t respond.
Dini’s silence as well as the silence of other evolutionists speaks volumes about the current status of the discipline of biology. It is worth asking ourselves whether the study of biology has been hampered by the widespread and uncritical acceptance of Darwinian principles. To some observers, its study has largely become a hollow exercise whereby atheists teach other atheists to blindly follow Darwin without asking any difficult questions.
At least that seems to be the way things have evolved.
I am sorry if I stymie your rigid close-minded thought process
Didn't have anything to do with the link to ConservaBabes, did it?
You are correct. I partake of the actions that I complain about in others. I am not proud of this. It is far too easy to fall into the anti-intellectual trap of insults, bold unsupported know-it-allisms, and silly victory dances (your last message is supporting evidence for this position)
The only really good thing that happened was the eclipse.
Just because you don't understand what I am talking about - that does not mean I say nothing.
True, but the fact that you say nothing means that you say nothing. If you have something to say, an affirmative statement of what you believe, feel free to post it.
Far from thinking "evilution is bunk," Walter Hearn is a notorious (among creationists) Theistic Evolutionist.
Hearn was an important figure in the American Scientific Affiliation, a professional organization of evangelical Christian scientists. The modern "creationist" movement took shape back in the 60's when Henry Morris and a number of other members bolted the ASA (in protest of its liberal stance on evolution -- although many ASA'ers were progressive creationists -- and "geological ages") and established the Creation Research Society.
Getting desperate, are we MM?
Like what. Be specific. I think we are all very tired of your baseless accusations (and insults and know-it-allisms). Please present MY personal idea of evolution that does not jibe with reality. HINT: you better back it up with supporting evidence (like quotes) – you know-it-all types are always trying to pretend you can read minds. (BTW: exactly HOW MUCH of evolution do you think falls into the category of “reality” – again, please be specific unless you are nothing more that a disrupter)
You've been deconstructed 400 times by now and some of us (not me, I admit) have patiently tried to spell it out for you that we are talking biology here.
400 times – can you provide evidence for this accusation – or is it just more intellectually dishonesty – man, you are on a roll.
Once again you are wrong – I was responding to a thread about the origin of the universe (cosmology) and what should be taught in schools (THAT was the topic of the thread, not biological evolution per se – and I bet you don’t grasp the meaning of per se). BTW: I provided supporting evidence for this position many times but that does not stop you from repeating your disproved statement like a parrot. BTW: that was ANOTHER thread but that did not stop your from reintroducing your disproved statement IS THIS THREAD. CLUE: I was not the one that brought up cosmology in this thread.
that you would shut up with your inane "evolution as cosmology" patter.
Are you one of the close-minded know-it-all clowns that is still trying to claim evolution has nothing to do with cosmology. You can lead a know-it-all to data, but you can’t make them think.
And ALS, you've been asked dozens of times on this thread to present to us your groundbreaking ideas that will cut the legs from current evolutionary theory.
The problem is you know-it-all Orthodox Darwinists apply rules to other people’s statements/theories that your own positions/theories can not meet – that is intellectual dishonesty
Anybody ever seen LVD and you know who together in the same room?
Funny that did not stop you from endlessly trying to argue with me. That says a lot about your intellectual integrity.
Actually, I can't even say I disagree with you
Yet you endlessly argue, snipe, and insult me – that says a lot about your intellectual integrity.
(other than on the point about "evolution" meaning the origin of stars or the universe or the big bang or abiogenesis or whatever else your own definition applies it to mean.)
It does. Are you really this THICK?
Let’s try it again – clearly you don’t understand the meaning of the word evolution
Evolution: A gradual process in which something changes into a different and usually more complex or better form. (The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language)
Does the origin of stars, the universe, abiogenesis fall into the category? If no, please provide a detailed explanation why you think it does not.
NOTE: I never claimed the Big Bang was related to evolution (actually that is a big problem with most theories – the Big Bang is evidence of a singular creation event which is quite the opposite of evolution).
You follow the MO of a know-it-all. You never question your beliefs (because you think you know it all) you assume the word evolution can only mean biological evolution and you are so closed minded you refused to even let in the evidence that disproves your position.
Putting a personal insult in your tag line pretty much proves you are here as a disrupter and you are not really interested in the exchange of ideas.
Nope! Per your request, more!
Have you ever seen me and Elvis in the same room - Stultis, boy genius?
"You're so square - baby I don't care"
Speaking of saying nothing - what the HECK are you talking about? Are you claiming I have not made any affirmative statements? NOTE: whatajoke (such an applicable moniker) was taking about an exchange on another thread - are you just jumping on the sniping bandwagon without really understanding the situation?
Since you claim "I say knowing" is a "fact" - please provide supporting evidence (don't "facts" required supporting evidence?)
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.