Tag: Eugenie Scott
The Closing of Charles Darwin’s Formerly Christian Mind
Bad news for “those trying to refashion Darwin into a religious believer whose evolutionary theory is no threat to religion, especially to traditional forms of Christianity.”
Eugenie Scott Misrepresents the Law on Evolution Education
Eugenie Scott conveniently claims that the courts have insulated evolution from any form of critique in public schools — but the law proves her wrong.
AP Lets Martin Gaskell Speak
You don’t need to be an ID proponent or a Darwin-doubter to be troubled by dogmatic teaching of evolution in the classroom: just ask Martin Gaskell.
NCSE’s Eugenie Scott Serves as Chief of Darwinian Thought Police for University of Kentucky Faculty
As reported on ID the Future interview, Martin Gaskell’s attorney Frank Manion stated that during the course of Gaskell’s lawsuit, it became clear that Eugenie Scott, executive director of the National Center for Science Education (NCSE), consulted University of Kentucky (UK) faculty about whether UK should hire Gaskell. She gave Gaskell a clean bill of health–not because she endorsed hiring Darwin-skeptics, but because at the time she believed Gaskell was a dyed-in-the-wool evolutionist–“accepting of evolution.” According to her e-mail, Eugenie Scott wrote: Gaskell hasn’t popped onto our radar as an antievolution activist. Checking his web site and affiliations (and also with a friend in Nebraska) it seems as if, as you already know, he is very religious, but accepting of Read More ›
Eugenie Scott Endorses Discrimination Against Darwin-Doubting Scientists
We’ve previously reported on the case of Martin Gaskell (here, here, here), an astronomer who was denied a job at the University of Kentucky (UK) due to perceived sympathy for “creationism.” In reality. Gaskell is no creationist, and calls himself an “old earth theistic evolutionist” who has “no trouble with the natural selection process.” Gaskell alarmed the Darwinian thought police at UK because in online notes from a talk, he favorably cites the works of proponents of intelligent design like Michael Behe and Phillip Johnson, and states, “there are significant scientific problems in evolutionary theory,” and “these problems are bigger than is usually made out in introductory geology/biology courses.” In his deposition testimony he further stated that “when it comes Read More ›