If they only eat PCBs, and PCBs have never been around before, we can draw the conclusion that, therefore, these bacteria have never been around before. Now, how significant people think that is, in the grand scheme of things, is another matter, but it doesn't seem that there's much room for argument here, regarding the basic conclusions...
Don't you think that the more relevent tests of whether a future physician would be good, as it relates to biology as a science (this is the important part) on an undergraduate level would be aspects their abilities like: the ability to be thorough in labs, the ability to describe the structures in flora and fauna, ability to assimilitate seemingly random data and form good judgements based on possibly limited information.
I think those are all relevant tests, absolutely! It's harder to objectively judge one to be more relevant than another, but I think he addresses all of these issues in some form in his requirements:
http://www2.tltc.ttu.edu/dini/Personal/letters.htm
If we give him the benefit of the doubt, with respect to him teaching biology properly, than earning an "A" in his class (Criterion #1) is likely relevant to a lot of those criteria you've mentioned, as are things like being in his Honor's section, meeting with him regularly to discuss biology, or serving as a TA, or on the Biology Advisory Committee (Criterion #2). In addition, what you wrote at the end is very significant: ...ability to assimilitate seemingly random data and form good judgements based on possibly limited information.
This is exactly what Criterion #3 is about! We have seemingly random and limited information on the origin of the species, and he is asking for the best scientific judgement the student can offer (not to be confused with "The Truth"). I'm glad you agree that this is a relevant criterion!
If the recommendation is for grad school in biology we are in a different academic world.
Sure, but holding different students to different standards based on their eventual career goals (which can readily change, I should add) would be discrimination. He has to have a uniform standard, and it has to be relevant to what he is teaching, not what jobs his students may or may not get in the future.
There is an incredible amount of acrimony in any thread that says either the evil evo... or crea... words.
Absolutely right - And you and I clearly agree that it has no place in the debate, because it helps no one.
I've been told that my creationist beliefs are...and I've never made the claim nor even put up the arguments. But if I even say one thing that a creationist has talked about, the label comes up. I've been told that they did not want to convince me, just discredit me. Hardly the scientific method.
That's true, this would absolutely not constitute a proper application of the scientific method. All I can say is that I'm sorry you've had bad experiences in the past - And that I don't want to see them repeated, for you or anyone else here :) No one deserves to be personally attacked, and it should never be a matter of malice, or labeling as a means of dismissing someone's reasoning, or distracting people from the issues at hand. I hope I have not done that, but if I have, I apologize, and I assure you it was not intentional. I'd much rather have us agree than disagree, and attacking people only ensures that we will never reach common ground.
Does an undergraduate have to have faith in evolution, to have a true understanding of it?
Absolutely not! In fact, they should not have "faith" in it, or any other scientific theory. Rather, they should accept or reject a theory, as you said, based on their "ability to assimilitate seemingly random data and form good judgements based on possibly limited information," and in accordance with the scientific method. Again, I don't believe Dr. Dini is asking for faith, since faith in scientific matters prevents you from being skeptical (faith implying an absolute belief appropriate to spritual, not scientific matters), and skepticism is necessary for good science. Rather, he is asking for the best scientific answer, based on the ability you rightly described as being a relevant criterion.
There are 34 other profs in biology that can give the required recommendation. I kind of wonder if they have any similar requirements, or if this is common in the biology field.
Maybe, maybe not - And you're absolutely right, he could be alone in this, and it could screw up his reputation, and make him many enemies.
Would this really change the nature of the debate? If it really is a good criterion, should he drop it anyway, for fear of the consequences? That would make him a very poor scientist indeed...
You are the gold standard. When you put up an example, you not only gave it, but also it's shortcomings.
IMHO it's the only proper way to do things, if we're trying to be fair, so we gotta try - We may not always succeed, but that's life as an imperfect being... In my experience it seems that people are a lot more likely to reach an understanding when they are shown that people are willing to give their views due consideration, even if an agreement is not reached... At any rate, I really do appreciate that!! Thanks :)
Don't you think that kind of levels the intellectual playing field from poker to chess?
:) I hope so. Thanks for reading,
DFS