Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

Just shut up and pay, losers … Part 3058


Here’s a good one:

NCSE’s Eugenie Scott Serves as Chief of Darwinian Thought Police for University of Kentucky Faculty

Casey Luskin February 11, 2011 9:29 AM

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 died-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 evolution. Certainly he is an old-earther, and seems to be a bit of a fan of Hugh Ross, the best known OEC. This is a little troubling, as Ross though fine on astronomy, radioisotope dating and etc., still chokes on biological evolution, and requires the hand of God to specially create the “kinds” at intervals through time. No indication that this is Gaskell’s position, however.

(E-mail from Eugenie Scott to Thomas Troland, 10/21/2007)

At this stage, it’s clear that Eugenie Scott views Martin Gaskell as “accepting of evolution” with “no indication” that he agrees with Hugh Ross. Gaskell passes her litmus test.
It’s later apparent that Eugenie Scott changed her mind about Gaskell, coming to the view that he was a Darwin-skeptic–or as she later calls him an “ID Creationist.” This led her to flip-flop about whether UK was right in denying Gaskell the job.

So, if you are alumni at the University of Kentucky, your university consults a shrill Darwin lobbyist about whether to hire an astronomer.

Do you also encourage your children to listen to big corporate-sponsored gangsta rap?

No, seriously, I  mean no insult, I am simply saying that these things are not thrust on people. They choose them.

It’s just as bad where I am, though we are fighting. Keep watching this space.

Because not all beliefs are equal, a critical thinker must try to form beliefs that are increasingly accurate and justified. Interestingly, the book Thinking Critically, Eighth Edition, by Dr. John Chaffee, reads, "Most people in our culture are socialized to believe that knowledge and truth are absolute and unchanging. One major goal of social institutions including family, the school system, and religion is to transfer the knowledge that has been developed over the ages. Under this model, the role of learners is to absorb this information passively, like sponges." It's not wrong to listen to authorities when they speak, but to assume that they know everything and are never wrong is the old logical fallacy of argument from authority. As we can see from the debates on evolution between evolutionists themselves, the authorities often disagree. It's up to the critical thinker to determine which viewpoints are better, not because the authorities say so, but because there are compelling reasons to support those viewpoints. Barb
There should be a litmus test at universities, to test for the presence of Eugenie Scott and her bandwagon of naive, patsy Christians and hi-fiving atheists over at NCSE. Any university's senior administrator worth her/his mettle should know that part of the academic history of science has always been the questioning of prevailing paradigms, not indoctrination of philosophically biased views. Scott's rigid, dogmatic evolutionism does not encourage critical thinking, questioning and rational inquiry...which is part of what scientists do. Rather, it encourages a good-ol-boy club consisting of anyone she and her organization can get to oppose creationism, in whatever way the NCSE conveniently defines it. Also, keep in mind that Eugenie Scott needs evolution to be taught the NCSE way, not the genuine scientific way. As long as the NCSE continues to ram its agenda down the throat of anyone who is gullible enough to swallow it (about 4000 people judging from the number of alleged NCSE members), then Darwinism would presumably remain safely outside of public critique. The NCSE has a problem though, a real problem. People have an innate desire to think independently. And we want to question Darwinism, not because many of us believe in God, but because Darwinism requires us to make a bigger faith commitment than a theist's faith in God. I believe this makes Eugenie Scott & Co. very uncomfortable. One can reasonably wonder if the NCSE doesn't just have a motive for protecting Darwinism, but rather seeks a more ominous social agenda, at the expense of intellectual freedom. America...watch out! The Thought Police from the NCSE are coming to a higher learning institution near you! Women and children first! Save the books! Free your mind! Make the change! Bantay

Leave a Reply