Posted on 05/13/2007 11:07:52 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
Proponent of intelligent design denied tenure by ISU
By: William Dillon
05/12/2007
Guillermo Gonzalez, an assistant professor of astronomy and physics who argues for the theory of intelligent design, was denied tenure this semester by Iowa State University.
"I was surprised to hear that my tenure was denied at any level, but I was disappointed that the president at the end denied me," Gonzalez said during a telephone interview with The Tribune Friday.
Gonzalez filed an appeal with ISU President Greg Geoffroy on Tuesday, May 8. Geoffroy has 20 days to respond.
While his work is heralded as "path-breaking" by supporters of intelligent design as a way of offering a new theory supporting design in the universe, Gonzalez has come under criticism by the mainstream science community for incorporating the theory of intelligent design into his work.
Opponents maintain that proving intelligent causes or agents is not science but rather the study of theology and philosophy. Some also have accused Gonzalez, an openly non-denominational Protestant, of thrusting religion into science.
In the summer of 2005, three faculty members at ISU drafted a statement against the use of intelligent design in science. One of those authors, Hector Avalos, told The Tribune at the time he was concerned the growing prominence of Gonzalez's work was beginning to market ISU as an "intelligent design school."
The statement collected signatures of support from more than 120 ISU faculty members before similar statements surfaced at the University of Iowa and the University of Northern Iowa.
According to ISU's policy on promotion and tenure, evaluation is based "primarily on evidence of scholarship in the faculty member's teaching, research/creative activities, and/or extension/professional practice."
In addition to that criteria, Gonzalez's department of astronomy and physics sets a benchmark for tenure candidates to author at least 15 peer-reviewed journal articles of quality. Gonzalez said he submitted 68, of which 25 have been written since he arrived at ISU in 2001.
"I believe that I fully met the requirements for tenure at ISU," he said.
Gonzalez said he would rather not comment on why he believes he was denied tenure.
On Friday, Geoffroy declined comment on why Gonzalez was denied tenure.
"Since an appeal is on my desk that I will have to pass judgment on, it is not appropriate for me to offer any comment," he wrote in an e-mail to The Tribune.
In addition to his research and teaching at ISU, Gonzalez is a senior fellow at the Discovery Institute, a conservative Seattle think tank leading the intelligent design movement.
John G. West, associate director of the Center for Science and Culture at the institute, said he sees this as a clear case of "ideological discrimination" by ISU against Gonzalez. He said he thinks the statement against intelligent design drafted at ISU played a large part in the eventual denial of Gonzalez's tenure.
"What happens to the lone faculty member who doesn't agree and happens to be untenured," he asked. "That is practically, with a wink and a nod, a call to deny him tenure."
Faculty members typically leave a university if they are denied tenure.
ISU considered 66 faculty cases for promotion and tenure during the past academic year. Only three, including Gonzalez, were denied tenure.
William Dillon can be reached at 232-2161, Ext. 361, or William.Dillon@amestrib.com.
The “Dark Ages” were actually the incubator of modern science, not least because it spread Christianity, which furthered the belief that nature operated according to a rational order and that therefore it patterns were in theory discernible to reason-— read “Human Achievement” by Charles Murray on this score.
Are you accusing Charles Murray of Creationism? I assume not, yet Gonzalez’s research either outrightly denies or has nothing to do with every accusation you make on your list.
This isn’t Darwin vs. the Bible, it’s the Rare Earth Hypothesis vs. the Mediocrity Principle-— that’s it, just another round in what I’m sure you know has been a longstanding debate in cosmology. Said debate has NOTHING to do with Darwin at all-— in fact, the co-discoverer of natural selection, Alfred Wallace, also annunciated one of the first fine tuning arguments, and the distinguished biologist and fervent ID critic Ken Miller has more recently echoed it.
Discovery Institute on the “Wedge” document:
http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/filesDB-download.php?id=349
==Once again, apologetics is defense of religion, and has nothing to do with scientific research.
You are wrong. Christian apologetics, or Jewish apologetics, or Buddhist apologetics would be the defense of religion. Apologetics by itself means the systematic defense of a position—any position. In this case, the position in question would be Intelligent Design.
I didn’t know that it happened more than usual at ISU. I do know it’s quite rare although, as you say, not unprecedented, at other universities.
I agree with you, the fact that Gonzalez made it out of committee shows what I think is admirable integrity on the part of his department. Given the emotions that tend to run wild on these subjects even on normally mild-mannered forums, like FR, I’m shocked they would do so on a campus:)
The guy’s career would have been better off, I think, had he just used his Templeton Grant to do research and not called what he was doing “Intelligent Design”.
See post #83
If you don’t want to be patronized, then don’t ask deliberately sarcastic/demeaning questions about issues in which your understanding is admittedly limited.
The procedure at ISU is that there is a department vote. If the candidate makes it that far, a dean’s committee has to approve, then it goes to the provost and the president and then the rubber stamp by the trustees (I forget if that’s what they’re called).
There are serious funding reprocussions against a department that gets a tenure case denied. It is not unusual for the provost to deny tenure, however. Usually it happens to people who don’t get as much funding as the administration thinks the person should get.
There are several recent cases at ISU where the person was denied tenure and ended up with a better job. But these were all mundane publishing/funding cases.
Avalos is a religious studies professor who has a problem with Gonzales' personal beliefs. Gonzales does not bring ID into the classroom but the the campus advisor to the Atheist and Agnostic club Avalos, started his little jackboot action a couple of years ago when Gonzales' book rose to prominence. It would be interesting to compare the scholarship of Gonzales and this little jack booted weasel Avalos.
Next up, the AGW skeptics.
What on earth is dishonest about it? Their premise is built right into the name. Were you somehow duped into thinking that ID is the search for unintelligent causes? If anything, Darwinian evolution has metamorphosed into a dishonest attempt to preach materialist religion under the guise of science, while at the same time using the power of government to stifle scientific inquiry into evidence for Intelligent Design. If you truly believe in a separation of religion and state, then the state (to include state and federally funded science) has no business promoting Darwinism. If, on the other hand, you believe Darwinism should be taught in our public schools, then ID should be taught right along side it.
Albert Einstein quotes:
God reveals Himself in the Harmony of all that exists.
God did not play dice in creating the Universe.
All things are determined by the necessity of a Divine nature.
He believed that a Divine Design was reflected in the elegant laws that governed the way the universe worked.
In trying to penetrate the secrets of nature, you will find that, behind all the discernable laws and connections, there remains something subtle,intangible and inexplicable.
Lots of scientists have believed in God - the debate is about whether to teach things based on faith in science class.
False, on several points.
If you truly believe in a separation of religion and state, then the state (to include state and federally funded science) has no business promoting Darwinism. If, on the other hand, you believe Darwinism should be taught in our public schools, then ID should be taught right along side it.
The fact that a small minority of religious believers disagree with the results of the theory of evolution does not discredit it as a science. It follows the scientific method.
On the other hand, ID is not science--it does not follow the scientific method--and it has no business in science classes.
But I am sure you disagree. So, a couple of questions:
What is the single most powerful argument you have for ID?
How many intelligent designers were there? Please explain the basis for your answer.
Does discovering new ways to fleece suckers with charlatan pseudo science count?
Yeah, so where's the evidence that Gonzales is teaching faith in a science class? The evidence is that he has been widely published. There's also evidence that a religious studies Professor with an axe to grind has Gonzales in his sights. Can a science Professor practice his beliefs outsided the classroom and be denied tenure by an institution that is a state actor?
>>Lots of scientists have believed in God - the debate is about whether to teach things based on faith in science class.
I feel pretty sure its his membership and speaking and writing for the Discovery institute that is the problem since they have the express purpose of teaching of getting things into the science curriculum that are not based on science.
And for tenure, a professor’s professional reputation is a factor. I mentioned a friend with a PhD from MIT recently denied tenure because he supports a different research direction than the department.
There is recourse. The scientist can either start a company based on their theory or demonstrate its truth with experiments or predictions.
The fact that these routes are not taken shows the Discovery Institute folks lack confidence in any kind of verifiability.
Without reading all the relies on this thread to learn if anyone answered you, allow me to answer your question. Apparently you assume that all creationists and intelligent design proponents believe in a 6,000-year-old universe. You are mistaken.
Actually, there are many, many "old-earth" (and old-universe) creationists who agree with scientific consensus that the universe is nearly 14 billion years old. Dr. Gonzales is one of them.
You may not be aware that the best literal reading of the Bible is consistent with such a scientific view. For more information, see reasons.org.
Biography of Dr. Guillermo Gonzalez
Dr. Guillermo Gonzalez is an Assistant Professor of Astronomy at Iowa State University (ISU).
Born in Havana, he and his family fled from Cuba to the United States in 1967, where he earned a Ph.D. in Astronomy from the University of Washington in 1993. Author of nearly 70 peer-reviewed scientific papers and co-author of a major college-level astronomy textbook, Dr. Gonzalez’s work led to the discovery of two new planets, and he has had his research featured in Science, Nature, and on the cover of Scientific American.
Dr. Gonzalez’s Scientific Research
In late 1995, Dr. Gonzalez began working on a series of projects examining stars with planets to see what sorts of properties they exhibited. This has been a major part of Dr. Gonzalez’s scientific research, and he has published twelve articles in peer-reviewed science journals on the subject and continues to research new planets and systems. Dr. Gonzalez’s research in this area led to he and his associate researchers discovering what is known as the Galactic Habitable Zone (GHZ), a term Dr. Gonzalez coined. Our star, the Sun, is one of the few stars in the Galaxy capable of supporting complex life. The sun is composed of the right amount of “metals,” and its orbit about the galactic center is just right. Our solar system is also far enough away from the galactic center to not have to worry about disruptive gravitational forces or too much radiation. When all of these factors occur together, they create a region of space now known as a Galactic Habitable Zone. Dr. Gonzalez believes every form of life on our planet—from the simplest bacteria to the most complex animal—owes its existence to the balance of these unique conditions. Dr. Gonzalez has also made novel contributions by developing the idea of the moon as “Earth’s lunar attic,” where the moon may serve as a repository for meteorites that came originally from earth or other nearby planets. Dr. Gonzalez views the moon as a museum for the history of our solar system, and further exploration could yield great insight into our planet’s own history. His work has lead to feature stories in Science and Nature, two of the world’s premiere scientific publications. And he and his associates wrote a cover story about GHZ in Scientific American.
Dr. Gonzalez’s Book on Intelligent Design
In 2004, Dr.Gonzalez co-authored the book The Privileged Planet: How Our Place in the Cosmos is Designed for Discovery, which presents empirical evidence for the hypothesis that the universe is the product of intelligent design. Supported by a research grant from the Templeton Foundation, the book has earned praised from such eminent scientists as David Hughes, a Vice-President of the Royal Astronomical Society, Harvard astrophysicist Owen Gingerich, and Cambridge paleobiologist Simon Conway Morris. The Privileged Planet was developed into a documentary and shown on PBS stations around the country.
Attacks on Dr. Gonzalez’s Academic Freedom
After the release of Privileged Planet, ISU religious studies professor Hector Avalos—faculty advisor to the campus Atheist and Agnostic Society—began publicly campaigning against Dr. Gonzalez and his work. Although Dr. Gonzalez had never introduced intelligent design into his classes, Avalos helped spearhead a faculty petition urging “all faculty” at ISU to “uphold the integrity of our university” by “reject[ing] efforts to portray Intelligent Design as science.” Avalos later conceded to a local newspaper that Gonzalez was the key motive for the petition. The logical conclusion of this campaign against Dr. Gonzalez came in the spring of 2007 when ISU President Gregory Geoffroy denied Dr. Gonzalez’s application for tenure.
Yup, sounds like a real drag on Iowa States Astropysicists. I’ve got news for you. They can deny him tenure for any number of reasons but if it is shown that he has been denied tenure for his religious beliefs Iowa State is in deep kimshi.
What?
The most powerfull argument that I have seen for Intelligent Design is the complexity of the information that is coded in the DNA. To create a single protein long strings of amino acids must be placed in the correct order. The information about the order in which to arrange Amino acids is coded in the DNA which can have one of four bases at any location - this is similar to binary computer code which an can have either a 1 or a 0 at any location.
Natural selection would not favor the gradual evolution of a new and beneficial protein, because, the intermediate stages would not provide a benefit to the organism. So, the new proteins (or at least any chunk of protein large enough to provide a benefit) would have to develop by chance before it could be protected by natural selection. The odds against randomly generating such a beneficial protein are astronomical due to the large number of DNA bases that would have to be arranged in the proper order. This is why I believe that intelligent design was required.
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.