Professor Rigid on Evolution (must "believe" to get med school rec)

The Lubbock Avalanche Journal ^ | 10/6/02 | Sebastian Kitchen

[hispanarepublicana]

I'll bet if Dini's rigid position was in defense of Creationism, this wouldn't just be a local story.

[joesnuffy]

How is believing the "lie" of evolution going to help one practice sound medicine?..perhaps it trains young doctor on how to kill the unborn or defraud medi-caid and not lose any sleep over it?...

[tjg]

"a large amount of literature exists against the theory."

None of it science though. Which is sort of the point.

This anti-evolution thing is like the Clintons. There is an overwealming body of evidence that they are twisted meglomaniacs that care about nothing except power, yet millions of people all over the world think they are decent, caring people.

They don't see the facts because they won't look at them.

[rdb3]

They don't see the facts because they won't look at them.

Whether you adhere to this theory or not is your business. What I want to know from you is do you agree with this professor. Not his evolution stance, but his making the "belief" in evolution a requirement.

[Kevin Curry]

The policy seems unusual, May said, but Dini should not be "gang-tackled and punished for his policy."

Was Dini subjected to acts of physical abuse? Was he fined or imprisoned? I guess I missed that report.

[hispanarepublicana]

I think Dini's website has been disabled this morning. Here's what I found in the campus directory, though:

MICHAEL LAWRENCE DINI
ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR

BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES

MS3131
Texas Tech University
Lubbock, TX 79409

Phone:	(806) 742-2729
Fax:
Email:	MICHAEL.DINI@TTU.EDU
Web:

[bert]

To be a competant Pyysician one must first be a scientist. The consideration of Biblical creation myths over scientific evolutionary theories will result in ineffective medical education.

[DJtex]

"One can deny this evidence only at the risk of calling into question one's understanding of science and of the method of science,"

It's stated a bit baldly, but true. I wouldn't want to be treated by an MD who had tried to get thru med school by resisting the overwhelming evidence of the intimate evolutionary relationship of homo sapiens to other species.

There are some extraordinary advances being made on our "theory" of evolution at this time, such as our understanding that evolution may take place in dischordant leaps rather than imperceptible slow-flow. But unfortunately, none of this scientific progress is coming from the "creationist" school, or sect.

Creationism is a religious freedom, and I support that. But it is, at it's heart, anti-scientific. I really can't understand why it is such a preoccupation with FreeRepublic.

[Alouette]

Do Muslims believe in evolution? He he refused to qualify a Muslim, do you think he could get away with it?

[Kevin Curry]

None of it science though.

There is much science, especially statistical/mathematic, against it. That the universe had a beginning--and a mere 12-18 billion years ago--is profoundly powerful evidence in support of Genesis and against Darwin's "just so--something from nothing" stories.

Honest evolutionists far better informed and more intelligent than you privately admit the gross inadequacies of their so-called theory to explain how life got started so quickly in such a young universe. "Negative entropy" (not thermodynamic, but Shannon-informational) is a physical miracle beyond their skills to even begin to explain in any way, shape, or fashion.

You are insufficiently intelligent to know the grave flaws of your own materialist absolutist faith. Or, you lack sufficient understanding. Or both.

You choose.

[balrog666]

Dini's site also states: "So much physical evidence supports" evolution that it can be referred to as fact even if all the details are not known.

"One can deny this evidence only at the risk of calling into question one's understanding of science and of the method of science," Dini states on the Web site.

Sounds reasonable to me.

[hispanarepublicana]

I believe my greatest issue is with his requirement in the "belief" in order to to get the med school rec. For instance, let's look at the government and property rights. If a student took a property rights class(perhaps as part of a pre-law program), should he be REQUIRED to believe a certain theory about property rights in order to get that professor's recommendation to law school?

[Kevin Curry]

To be a competant Pyysician one must first be a scientist

Can a crucified man who has been dead three days rise and take up his life again?

The physician Luke believed one man could--and did.

[Kevin Curry]

Sounds reasonable to me . . .

But then, you deliberately chose a name like "balrog666."

I would expect nothing less of you.

[VadeRetro]

Would you want your history professor to be a holocaust denier? Being a harmless kook is a right, but it may preclude your ever attaining full competence in certain areas where your kookiness impinges.

[G Larry]

Here's the note I just sent the professor:

Professor Dini,
Given that Biology is a science class, it is interesting that you've placed yourself in a position that makes it unnecessary to address the missing scientific evidence supporting evolution.
The several texts that I've reviewed that purport to provide scientific evidence, instead engage in a mutual admiration society, citing the impressive work of others, none of whom present ANY scientific evidence for their position.
The literature cites adaptation within a species and extrapolates that to indicate evolution from one species to another.
But there is NO evidence to illustrate transition from one species to another.
Recently to meet that challenge, people who call themselves "scientists" have taken to redefine the term "species".
That is ludicrous and self-serving, but it is not science!
Professor, GROW UP and defend your position on the debate using your "scientific" training!

[chance33_98]

So know we have edicts coming not from churches but from professors, who whined that the church squashed free thinking in the old days. Hypocrites.

[DallasMike]

None of it science though. Which is sort of the point.

Oh, puh-leeze. Evidently you define "science" as something that supports your narrow world-views.

[VadeRetro]

Do Muslims believe in evolution?

You can probably find a few random evolution-deniers of every faith, and even the very rare genuine secular anti-E. That said, they seem to be over 90 percent protestant evangelicals.

[templar]

Creationism is a religious freedom, and I support that. But it is, at it's heart, anti-scientific.

You're absolutely correct about that. And, in all fairness, many very famous doctors have believed in evolution and it enhanced their practice trememdously. Not being held back by false creationist beliefs is a plus factor in medicine and medical practice. Dr. Joseph Mengele, a true pioneer in genetic research and experimentation, comes to mind.