Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

Don’t fire him . . . Just make his work-situation a living hell

Share
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Flipboard
Print
Email

The Scientist reports today on the unfolding Congressional probe into the Sternberg case. The following paragraph caught my attention:

NCSE spokesman Nicholas Matzke said his group was not part of an effort to dismiss Sternberg. “A lot of people at the Smithsonian were mad because their journal was dragged into a political issue. We wanted them to focus on the science and not persecute or discriminate against Sternberg on religious grounds,” Matzke told The Scientist. “We advised them not to fire Sternberg,” he said, “and they eventually followed our advice.”

My understanding is that the NCSE did everything just short of asking the Smithsonian to fire Sternberg (does the “S” in “NCSE” stand for sleazy?). But hey, let’s not beat our gums. The Office of Special Counsel (OSC) has all the emails that the NCSE sent to Sternberg’s employers. Let’s see them.

Unfortunately, the wheels of the Freedom of Information Act turn slowly. I’ve offered a $500 reward at UD (see here) to the person that makes them all public — I’ll even pay that money to Nick Matzke if he sends them my way. What do you say? Let’s see those emails (the complete stack). Funny how the anti-ID side is always working back channels to shaft our side. Anybody on the anti-ID side ever have their employment threatened for being anti-ID?

PREDICTION: If Nick posts on this at the Panda’s Thumb, the one thing you can be sure of is that he won’t divulge the complete correspondence in this case.

Comments
Maybe they should just put dog food in his spaghetti (like happened recently to a firefighter in a Los Angeles fire station).Larry Fafarman
December 22, 2006
December
12
Dec
22
22
2006
03:36 PM
3
03
36
PM
PDT
“A lot of people at the Smithsonian were mad because their journal was dragged into a political issue."
Dragged by the darwinian lobbysts, NOT by Sternberg or Meyer. Drs Sternberg and Meyer focused on the science, while Darwinian totalists focused on the suposed "religious motivations", and/or "political" motivations of Dr Sternberg. If anyone is to be blamed for this turning into politics, that anyone is on the Darwinian camp.
The Office of Special Counsel (OSC) has all the emails that the NCSE sent to Sternberg’s employers. Let’s see them.
Are you sure you want to see that? You might not look at the NCSE folks the same way thereafter, BTW, NCSE lobbysts have a history in making false claims against Darwinian skeptics. After a debate with Dr Jason Lisle, where Dr Eugenie Scott made false claims, Dr Russ Humpreys sent her the following letter/mail:
Dr. Humphrey’s letter to Dr. Scott Hi NCSE folks: Please relay this to Dr. Scott. Having watched her talk about my theory of planetary magnetic fields on the Paula Zahn show tonight, I’m mildly curious as to which “physical constants” she is alleging that my theory changed in making the predictions Jason Lisle mentioned. Would she please specify them? Has she even read the Creation Research Society Quarterly article in which I made those predictions?23 By the way, I thought Dr. Lisle won the debate. He looked sharp and well-informed, which he is. Hoping to get Genie up to speed, D. Russell Humphreys, Ph. D. Institute for Creation Research
To date, I don't know if Dr Scott answered Dr Humpreys
PREDICTION: If Nick posts on this at the Panda’s Thumb, the one thing you can be sure of is that he won’t divulge the complete correspondence in this case.
Oh, finaly an ID prediction! Let's see if Nick can reveal to the world what things did the National Center say to the Smithsonian. By the way, Dr Dembski, this is the 2nd challange you issue against Darwinists in one day. Is this the Christmas spirit? ;-) Is there any other Darwinists you want to go after? I propose Daniel Dennet. God blessMats
December 22, 2006
December
12
Dec
22
22
2006
02:58 PM
2
02
58
PM
PDT

Leave a Reply