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

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

[hispanarepublicana]

Professor rigid on evolution </MCC HEAD>

By SEBASTIAN KITCHEN </MCC BYLINE1>

AVALANCHE-JOURNAL </MCC BYLINE2>

On the Net

• Criteria for letters of recommendation: http://www2.tltc.ttu.edu/dini/Personal/ letters.htm

• Michael Dini's Web page:

http://www2.tltc.ttu. edu/dini/

Micah Spradling was OK with learning about evolution in college, but his family drew the line when his belief in the theory became a prerequisite for continuing his education.

Tim Spradling said his son left Texas Tech this semester and enrolled in Lubbock Christian University after en countering the policy of one associate professor in biological sciences.

Professor Michael Dini's Web site states that a student must "truthfully and forthrightly" believe in human evolution to receive a letter of recommendation from him.

"How can someone who does not accept the most important theory in biology expect to properly practice in a field that is so heavily based on biology?" Dini's site reads.

Dini says on the site that it is easy to imagine how physicians who ignore or neglect the "evolutionary origin of humans can make bad clinical decisions."

He declined to speak with The Avalanche-Journal. His response to an e-mail from The A-J said: "This semester, I have 500 students to contend with, and my schedule in no way permits me to participate in such a debate."

A Tech spokeswoman said Chancellor David Smith and other Tech officials also did not want to comment on the story.

At least two Lubbock doctors and a medical ethicist said they have a problem with the criterion, and the ethicist said Dini "could be a real ingrate."

Tim Spradling, who owns The Brace Place, said his son wanted to follow in his footsteps and needed a letter from a biology professor to apply for a program at Southwestern University's medical school.

Spradling is not the only medical professional in Lub bock shocked by Dini's policy. Doctors Patrick Edwards and Gaylon Seay said they learned evolution in college but were never forced to believe it.

"I learned what they taught," Edwards said. "I had to. I wanted to make good grades, but it didn't change my basic beliefs."

Seay said his primary problem is Dini "trying to force someone to pledge allegiance to his way of thinking."

Seay, a Tech graduate who has practiced medicine since 1977, said a large amount of literature exists against the theory.

"He is asking people to compromise their religious be liefs," Seay said. "It is a shame for a professor to use that as a criteria."

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.

Edwards said Dini admits in the statement that the details are not all known.

Dini is in a position of authority and "can injure someone's career," and the criteria is the "most prejudice thing I have ever read," Seay said.

"It is appalling," he said.

Both doctors said their beliefs in creationism have never negatively affected their practices, and Seay said he is a more compassionate doctor because of his beliefs.

"I do not believe evolution has anything to do with the ability to make clinical decisions — pro or con," Seay said.

Academic freedom should be extended to students, Edwards said.

"A student may learn about a subject, but that does not mean that everything must be accepted as fact, just because the professor or an incomplete body of evidence says so," Edwards said.

"Skepticism is also a very basic part of scientific study," he said.

The letter of recommendation should not be contingent on Dini's beliefs, Edwards said.

"That would be like Texas Tech telling him he had to be a Christian to teach biology," Edwards said.

Harold Vanderpool, professor in history and philosophy of medicine at the University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston, said he has a problem with Dini's policy.

"I think this professor could be a real ingrate," Vanderpool said. "I have a problem with a colleague who has enjoyed all the academic freedoms we have, which are extensive, and yet denies that to our students."

Vanderpool, who has served on, advised or chaired committees for the National Institute of Health, the Food and Drug Administration and the Department of Health and Human Services, said the situation would be like a government professor requiring a student to be "sufficiently patriotic" to receive a letter.

"It seems to me that this professor is walking a pretty thin line between the protection of his right to do what he wants to do, his own academic freedom, and a level of discrimination toward a student," he said.

"It is reaching into an area of discrimination. That could be a legal problem. If not, it is a moral problem," Vanderpool said.

Instead of a recommendation resting on character and academic performance, "you've got this ideological litmus test you are using," he said. "To me, that is problematic, if not outright wrong."

William F. May, a medical ethicist who was appointed to President Bush's Council on Bioethics, said he cannot remember establishing a criterion on the question of belief with a student on exams or with letters of recommendation.

"I taught at five institutions and have always felt you should grade papers and offer judgments on the quality of arguments rather than a position on which they arrived."

Professors "enjoy the protection of academic freedom" and Dini "seems to be profoundly ungrateful" for the freedom, Vanderpool said.

He said a teacher cannot be forced to write a letter of recommendation for a student, which he believes is good because the letters are personal and have "to do with the professor's assessment of students' work habits, character, grades, persistence and so on."

A policy such as Dini's needs to be in the written materials and should be stated in front of the class so the student is not surprised by the policy and can drop the class, Vanderpool said.

Dini's site states that an individual who denies the evidence commits malpractice in the method of science because "good scientists would never throw out data that do not conform to their expectations or beliefs."

People throw out information be cause "it seems to contradict his/her cherished beliefs," Dini's site reads. A physician who ignores data cannot remain a physician for long, it states.

Dini's site lists him as an exceptional faculty member at Texas Tech in 1995 and says he was named "Teacher of the Year" in 1998-99 by the Honors College at Texas Tech.

Edwards said he does not see any evidence on Dini's vita that he attended medical school or treated patients.

"Dr. Dini is a nonmedical person trying to impose his ideas on medicine," Edwards said. "There is little in common between teaching biology classes and treating sick people. ... How dare someone who has never treated a sick person purport to impose his feelings about evolution on someone who aspires to treat such people?"

On his Web site, Dini questions how someone who does not believe in the theory of evolution can ask to be recommended into a scientific profession by a professional scientist.

May, who taught at multiple prestigious universities, including Yale, during his 50 years in academia, said he did not want to judge Dini and qualified his statements because he did not know all of the specifics.

He said the doctors may be viewing Dini's policy as a roadblock, but the professor may be warning them in advance of his policy so students are not dismayed later.

"I have never seen it done and am surprised to hear it, but he may find creationist aggressive in the class and does not want to have to cope with that," May said. "He is at least giving people the courtesy of warning them in advance."

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

The criterion may have been viewed as a roadblock for Micah Spradling at Tech, but it opened a door for him at LCU.

Classes at LCU were full, Tim Spradling said, but school officials made room for his son after he showed them Dini's policy.

skitchen@lubbockonline.com 766-8753

[AndrewC]

Because the random function with a seed constant of 1 gives results from 0 to .99999999 the statement [X = INT (26 * RND (1)) + 1] can only generate a number from 1 to 26 from which the results are cherry picked in order (by alphabet position and in sequence) as you say!

Well, actually, that statement is producing a "random" pointer into the alphabet. It then uses that random number and compares it to the pointer in the alphabet for the letter it is seeking. For instance "T" is the 20th letter, "O" is the 15th letter, so on. If it matches it prints the letter and goes on to the next letter. If it does not match it loops and gets another number. The consequence is that each letter is preselected and only a "random" period is generated until the letter is printed.

[VadeRetro]

It means there's a conflict with the tree in 715. Different molecular studies draw different trees all the time. So do different cladistic analyses. Different trees happen. This does not mean there's no underlying real phylogenetic tree, only that data are incomplete and reconstructions will vary.

The cool thing about paleontology is that, for all its shortcoming, it works with real historical data points. When the scenario plays out that evolution predicts something should be out there, and creation "science" scoffs that gaps are forever, and the something is found, that's the march of science.

It isn't as if the fossil whales are the only such case.

"We're finding more and more dramatic evidence by the day that major changes have occurred in both appearance and adaptation," said Domning. "It's no longer a matter of theory. We have actual bones in hand representing all phases of the evolution, from land animal to sea animal, in different groups of animals."

Legged Sea Cow Found in Jamaica.

Every answer brings new questions. The Luddites and AndrewC ignore the new knowledge and trumpet the new questions. Well, Luddites will be Luddites ...

[f.Christian]

Creation/God...REFORMATION(Judeo-Christianity)---secular-govt.-humanism/SCIENCE---CIVILIZATION!

Originally the word liberal meant social conservatives(no govt religion--none) who advocated growth and progress---mostly technological(knowledge being absolute/unchanging)based on law--reality... UNDER GOD---the nature of GOD/man/govt. does not change. These were the Classical liberals...founding fathers-PRINCIPLES---stable/SANE scientific reality/society---industrial progress...moral/social character-values(private/personal) GROWTH(limited NON-intrusive PC Govt/religion---schools)!

Evolution...Atheism-dehumanism---TYRANNY(pc-religion/rhetoric)...

Then came the SPLIT SCHIZOPHRENIA/ZOMBIE/BRAVE-NWO1984 LIBERAL NEO-America...

the post-modern age---political satanic religion---EVOLUTION!

Maybe murderers and robbers should get a free pass because they are exempt from reality...don't believe in morality---righy vs. wrong!

Just call their debauchery EVOLUTION---"exempt from the constitution---1st amendment"!

[Alamo-Girl]

Exactly! We are making the same observation, just using different jargon.

The only variable on each run of the program is the number of attempts required to get the desired pointer (or index number) for the character in a sequential, predetermined, position.

And the odds are merely 1 in 26 for each attempt!

[lasereye]

If someone didn't believe in evolution, then there would be no reason for them to expect, say, lemur sequences to be closer to humans than bacterial sequences.

Of course you could. You could think God made them that way. How is it that creationists like Duane Gish have been accomplished biochemists? Understanding how the sequences work is distinct from a theory of where they came from anyway, isn't it?

[f.Christian]

Originally the word liberal meant social conservatives(no govt religion--none) who advocated growth and progress---mostly technological(knowledge being absolute/unchanging)based on law--reality... UNDER GOD--

knowledge being absolute/unchanging--personal as opposed to public...forced/repressed---POLITICAL!

Religous/faith liberty is gone...thanks to evolution/liberals(stealth religion/science)!

-------------------------------------------------

The MO/magic of the ATHEIST--EVO taliban...

missing--Butchered dove(TRUTH/SCIENCE/CONSTITUTION)---

appearing rabbit(RATS)/... 'experts'' !

Then came the...

SPLIT SCHIZOPHRENIA/PSYCHO-EVO/NWO Soviet-LIBERAL-Socialist GULAG America---

the post-modern age of switch-flip-spin-DEFORMITY-cancer...

Atheist secular materialists through ATHEISM/evolution CHANGED-REMOVED the foundations...demolished the wall(separation of state/religion)--trampled the TRUTH-GOD...built a satanic temple/SWAMP-MALARIA/RELIGION(cult of darwin-marx-satan) over them---made these absolutes subordinate--relative...

REDACTING them

and calling/CHANGING---

all the... residuals(technology/science) === TO evolution via schlock/sMUCK IDEOLOGY/lies/bias...

to substantiate/justify/validate their efforts--claims...social engineering--PC--atheism...

anti-God/Truth RELIGION(USSC monopoly)---

and declared a crusade/WAR--JIHAD--INTOLERANCE/TYRANNY(breaking the establishment clause)...

against God--man--society/SCIENCE(religious oath-TEST for office/employment)!!

------------------------------------------------------

My definition of schizophrenia is...

opposite ideas/personalities that aren't functioning/communicating very well together---

evolution &/vs science except in crazy people's head/beliefs!

Combining God and Evolution...anti-thesises---is a major psycho-logical blunder/INSANITY----'disorder'!

[lasereye]

Yep, absolutely, outside of his specialty, he is as unqualified as anyone else.

This is pretty meaningless, since I guess everyone is unqualified outside their specialty. Remember, this thread was about someone who couldn't get a letter of recommendation to go to Med school because he didn't believe in evolution. Evolution has no application in medicine that I know of. The evolutionists all seem to think this makes sense, since it indicates he lacks a "scientific mind". PatrickHenry compared it to someone who wants to study math who doesn't believe 2+2=4. So if this is true, no one who doesn't believe in evolution is qualified to be a scientist in any specialty. Therefore, I assume you wouldn't hire Raymond Jones in his specialty.

if he was an activist or someone who proselytized on the job, he would fired in a New York minute.

This has nothing to do with prosletyzing. It's about whether someone can be as competent a doctor or scientist if they don't believe in evolution as those who do.

[f.Christian]

I like creative---synergistic answers---explanation...

but when it comes to God/Truth vs. LIES...

PICK one...no 3rd choices!

[Nebullis]

The evolutionists all seem to think this makes sense, since it indicates he lacks a "scientific mind".

All evolutionists don't agree. A quick perusal of this thread will show you that. We have stated that a belief in creationism can be a negative indication for a career in science for which evolution is relevant. Medicine does not fall into this category.

[Nebullis]

The evolutionists all seem to think this makes sense, since it indicates he lacks a "scientific mind". PatrickHenry compared it to someone who wants to study math who doesn't believe 2+2=4...

Who cares what lawyers think about who should be an MD? You might take note that three Ph.D. scientists have weighed in against Professor Dini.

[f.Christian]

To: f.Christian

Now I follow, thank you. Actually, I don't disagree with this at all since I see the left as abandoning the uncertianty of democracy and majority rule for the assurance technocracy and expert rule.

152 posted on 9/10/02 12:17 PM Pacific by Liberal Classic

[MEGoody]

"Conversely, if someone aces all his exams in divinity school, yet he steadfastly refuses to believe that Jesus Christ is the son of God who died for our sins, would he be qualified to be a preacher? I think not."

Are you comparing evolution to the spiritual realm?

[MEGoody]

"Science is not subject to the first amendment. We dismiss damnfool ideas out of hand every day. Evolution, in the minds of 99+% of working biologists, occupies so central a position in biology that anything questioning its fundamental truth (as opposed to the details of its mechanism) qualifies as a damnfool idea."

But specifically, what problems could be caused by a doctor who successfully completed the required coursework, et al, but who did not believe in evolution?

[f.Christian]

The PH crowd..."the assurance technocracy and expert rule"---

overblown egos---philosophically/intellectualy DEAD!

[AndrewC]

Every answer brings new questions. The Luddites and AndrewC ignore the new knowledge and trumpet the new questions.

Your Ad Hominem is noted and is justification to declare your argument brain-dead. In any case, questions are what torpedoed the

[Agamemnon]

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.

To be a competent poster, one must first be a competent linguist to some degree.

The next question would be: Are you either a competent scientist or a competent physician yourself (or Pyysician, as some of you may spell it down there in Tennessee)?

[VadeRetro]

Still no explanation from you. Your Luddite screeches against what you believe are still in my reply queue. Why don't you go find a quiet corner in some bar, get crocked, and have a nice debate with yourself?

[AndrewC]

Exactly! We are making the same observation, just using different jargon.

Noted.

[Junior]

You know, getting crocked sounds like a great idea right now.

[PatrickHenry]

Are you comparing evolution to the spiritual realm?

No.