Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

Regents asked to consider e-mails: Des Moines Register


Regents asked to consider e-mails


“Advocates for Iowa State University professor Guillermo Gonzalez, who was turned down for tenure, called on the Iowa Board of Regents Monday to consider the e-mails that show faculty members at ISU were uncomfortable with promoting someone who advocated the idea of intelligent design.

Gonzalez, an assistant professor in physics and astronomy, learned this spring he did not achieve tenure at ISU, essentially a lifetime appointment. His position expires at ISU in May of 2008.

Members of the Discovery Institute, a Seattle-based organization that supports the discussion of intelligent design in classrooms, said the Board of Regents refused to allow certain e-mails between physics and astronomy professors into the official review of the tenure denial.

The e-mails the Discovery Institute refers to are several among physics and astronomy faculty members who said Gonzalez’s support of the theory of intelligent design damaged his prospects for tenure long before his peers voted on the job promotion. . . .” See full article HTML or See full article PDF

I agree with tyke. They probably will figure it is better to be inconsistent than suffer such a political setback. I have no doubt they would lend full support to Naziism before they considered supporting ID. Lord Timothy
Your link, russ, to the ACLU position statement on ID certainly lays bare their 'belief'. It would be *honorable* if they were to act on this case solely on the perceived basis that GG was denied tenure outside the prescripted reasons, and damned because of his belief system. But, and this is the big BUT, would they really seek to redress the issues of someone, from academia and trying to resurrect an academic career, who they consider believes (from their "Frequently Asked Questions About "Intelligent Design"" website): * pseudoscientific set of beliefs; * (a theory that) makes no predictions and cannot be scrutinized using the scientific method; * (believes in) ideology and not science; * (who may possibly) teach astrology in an astronomy course? That certainly would be a BIG ASK of a group who disingenuously uses wild assertions on their ID FAQ to douse ID, then tries to help someone who is an anathema to them. A very interesting dilemma. AussieID
Collin: Go to the ACLU's FAQ page about ID here for their take on ID: http://www.aclu.org/religion/schools/16371res20050916.html russ
bornagain77: As far as I know, the "stability" of a virus particle refers to its ability to stay infective, regardless of the actual mechanisms that may cause its loss. Hu
The ACLU getting involved with this case reminds me of that joke… If buttered toast always lands buttered-side down, and cats always land on their feet, what would happen if you strapped the buttered toast (buttered-side up) to the back of a cat? Clearly, the ACLU would be deeply conflicted in this case. Their advocacy for Gonzalez, if it ever materialized, and Gonzalez' eventual victory, would represent a step toward teaching Intelligent Design in public institutions. Notice I said "a step toward." I realize that TEACHING Intelligent Design in public institutions is not the issue here specifically. TRoutMac
Let me be devil's advocate here for a moment. The ACLU, while I often disagree with its policies, is true to its principles of free speech and freedom of religion. It therefore has protected conservatives, evangelicals etc in court. It has also protected white supremacists in their right to free speech. Collin
Off Topic: For flu virus, cold weather proves ideal http://www.star-telegram.com/national_news/story/342394.html of special note: "The answer, they say, has to do with the virus itself. It is more stable and stays in the air longer when air is cold and dry, the exact conditions for much of the flu season." I was wondering if they meant more stable on the molecular level...i.e. Is molecular entropy of the virus a factor? If so, it is yet another piece of the puzzle falling in place for the ID camp. bornagain77
I tend to agree with the Dog_of_War here. Being "very interested observers" does not necessarily mean they are observing and promoting the one whose liberties has been cut asunder, but maybe just 'interested' to see how anti-ID under-the-microscope pans out . I hope to speak for all when I say that the *process* used to deny tenure to GG should be evaluated on its transparency. If not, then an open, fair and legally accurate line of inquiry should proceed. Allowed tenure or fairly denied, the *process* that was followed is, indeed, of most interest, and more consumingly so everyday. Casey Luskin's writings have been an essential read. I'm also still amazed at how much was written by ISU profs and their cohorts on email and not once, in all their academic brilliance, did they consider that when you commit something to 'paper' it can be read by others. Amazed! AussieID
Actually, I doubt the DI would consider engaging the ACLU if it goes to court. The most the ACLU would do is submit their own amicus curiae brief in support of the action. But in any case, I would be surprised if the ACLU finds cause to help in this instance. tyke
I'm not sure if thats such a good idea. I know that the GG case is something that has presented itself as a poster case for how ID researchers are being repressed, but is it worth getting tied up with an organization as deplorable as the ACLU. Perhaps this is something we shouldn't wish for, but instead if there is anyone in the ID community who has a legal background, they could take the GG v. ISU case. Dog_of_War
R. Ben Stone, executive director of the American Civil Liberties of Iowa, said the organization will be "very interested observers" in the Gonzalez tenure case.
Now that would have a lot of people dancing for joy around here -- the ACLU teaming up with the DI on behalf of Gonzalez.. :) tyke

Leave a Reply