Category: Culture
Does The Panda’s Black Box “mov[e] beyond mere name-calling and finger-pointing” or continue the Darwinian trend?
Does Panda’s Black Box really contribute something new or is it just more Darwinist “name-calling and fingerpointing”? A book has come out about intelligent design, published by Johns Hopkins University Press and titled The Panda’s Black Box, that promises on its dust-jacket that it “moves beyond mere name-calling and fingerpointing.” Does it live up to its promise? Let’s look at some of the statements in the book to find out. We’ll start with my favorite quote, by bioethicist Jane Maienschein: “There is no doubt, there is no evidence against evolution, and there is no controversy about the science of evolution.” Just keep repeating that to yourself over and over again until you believe it. Other examples include Scott F. Gilbert’s Read More ›
New Law Review Articles Discuss Teaching Evolution: Textbook Disclaimers and the “Singling Out” Argument
Two new law review articles were recently published in Rutgers Journal of Law and Religion discussing the teaching of evolution. Asma T. Uddin authored an article entitled, “Evolution Disclaimers, Establishment Jurisprudence Confusions, and a Proposal of Untainted Fruits of a Poisonous Tree,” which aimed to “determine the constitutionality of disclaimers” regarding the teaching of evolution. The second article, “Evolution and the Holy Ghost of Scopes: Can Science Lose the Next Round,” by New York Law School professor Stephen A. Newman, provides a shimmering example of how mainstream academics support blatant censorship of the pro-intelligent design viewpoint. A series of two posts will discuss these articles. Disclaiming Disclaimers I’ve discussed recently why think textbook disclaimers are not an effective way to Read More ›
ISU Physicist Misrepresents Guillermo Gonzalez’s Arguments for Testing Intelligent Design
The Privileged Planet argues for design based upon a testable prediction of a convergence of the requirements for both habitability and scientific discovery. Rob Crowther recently discussed the intolerance of ISU physicist John Hauptman’s Des Moines Register op-ed that supported ousting ID-proponents from the academy. Hauptman is a member of Guillermo Gonzalez’s department at ISU who voted against Dr. Gonzalez because Gonzalez believes ID is science. Hauptman justifies his intolerance by claiming that “Intelligent design is not even a theory. It has not made its first prediction, nor suffered its first test by measurement.” (In fact, Hauptman holds scientific theories to a very high standard, writing, “Any single wrong prediction, and you must junk the theory.” If that’s the case, Read More ›
ISU President Geoffroy and the Elephant in the Living Room
The President of Iowa State University, Gregory Geoffroy, has issued a statement defending his denial of the tenure appeal of Dr. Guillermo Gonzalez. In the statement, Geoffroy claims that he concluded that Gonzalez “simply did not show the trajectory of excellence that we expect in a candidate seeking tenure in physics and astronomy.” Ah, yes, President Geoffroy has such high standards of excellence that only the most outstanding professors are allowed to achieve tenure at ISU.Geoffroy’s high standards must be why he approved 91% of the tenure applicants at ISU in 2007 (and why the tenure approval rate has gone up each year at ISU for the past five years). Geoffroy’s high standards are presumably also why he promoted to Read More ›
Statement of Guillermo Gonzalez on Tenure Appeal Denial
Guillermo Gonzalez has issued a statement about the rejection of his tenure appeal by ISU President Gregory Geoffroy: I learned on the morning of June 1, 2007 that President Geoffroy has denied my tenure appeal. I understand that this was a very difficult decision for him to make given its far-reaching implications. It is now clear to me that this decision, in effect, had been predetermined by August 2005, when Hector Avalos and other ISU professors began circulating a petition statement condemning Intelligent Design. At the same time several of the same ISU faculty spread misinformation about me and the nature of my Intelligent Design research in the local press. These events poisoned the atmosphere among the faculty and administration Read More ›