Intelligent Design

United States Congress uncovers evidence Darwinists violated civil and constitutional rights of Richard Sternberg

Spread the love

The staff investigation has uncovered compelling evidence that Dr. Sternberg’s civil and constitutional rights were violated by Smithsonian officials.

See Rob Crowther’s links: here

11 Replies to “United States Congress uncovers evidence Darwinists violated civil and constitutional rights of Richard Sternberg

  1. 1
    Michaels7 says:

    For some reason I am unable to access the PDF file containing the emails. I hope we see all of this come to light.

  2. 2
    scordova says:

    Michaels,

    That file is huge. That might be the reason.

    I just caught a glimpse of the file you mentioned and there was reference in this congressional inquiry to threads at PandasThumb!!! That cesspool of drek is going to be cited as evidence in a congressional inquiry. This is too funny.

  3. 3
    Lurker says:

    From the Recommendations, on page 28

    Since the treatment of Dr. Sternberg came to light in early 2005, evidence has accumulated of widespread invidious discrimination against other qualified scientists who dissent from Darwinian theory and/or who are supportive of intelligent design. In November, 2005, for example, National Public Radio reported that it had “talked with 18 university professors and scientists who subscribe to intelligent design. Most would not speak on the record for fear of losing their jobs. One untenured professor at Kennesaw State University in Georgia wrote that talking to NPR would be, quote ‘the kiss of death.’ Another said, ‘There is no way I would reveal myself prior to obtaining tenure.’”77 In another case, the President of the University of Idaho issued a letter forbidding faculty from teaching alternatives to Darwin’s theory in science classes there.78 The widespread hostility of many scientists to criticisms of Darwinian theory makes further violations in this area by federally-funded institutions likely.

    One can imagine how this might skew the research grants and the peer review process.

  4. 4
    scordova says:

    In November, 2005, for example, National Public Radio reported that it had “talked with 18 university professors and scientists who subscribe to intelligent design. Most would not speak on the record for fear of losing their jobs

    I’m pleased to say, the IDEA club at GMU was part of that NPR story. I’m going to let the officers who participated in the story know that the story they were in was mentioned in a congressional report.

  5. 5
    thechristiancynic says:

    I think this is a fabulous decision and the only possible one to be made given the situation. The language in the recommendations is particularly fascinating to me, especially the recommendation to “consider statutory language that would protect the free speech rights regarding evolution of scientists in the Smithsonian and other federally-funded institutions”. I’d love to see this happen and would find it very interesting if we saw organizations like NCSE lobbying Congress against language that would prevent dissent.

  6. 6
    shaner74 says:

    Wow…you mean it actually was NOT a vast right-wing attack on “science”? I’m just stunned. ID people were telling the truth? How can that be? Bad week for Darwinism hah? I’d love to see one of those “explosion” pictures with a title like : “The sound of the Sternberg cover-up exploding”

  7. 7
    Rowan says:

    Off topic sorry..
    “Russia teen sues over evolution teaching” http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/200.....in_lawsuit

    Article includes the usual amusing “definition” of ID..
    “an idea known as ‘intelligent design’ which holds that living organisms are so complex they must have been created by some kind of higher force.”

  8. 8
    GilDodgen says:

    Does Sternberg have any further legal recourse? Can he collect damages (for libel/slander/defamation/personal torment)? If memory serves me correctly I believe his marriage dissolved over all the turmoil.

    Perhaps attorney and UD contributor Barry could comment on this.

  9. 9
    Jehu says:

    Sternberg has a web site up discussing the controversey.
    http://www.rsternberg.net/index.htm

  10. 10
    DaveScot says:

    Our only problem is that we aren’t martial enough, or vigorous enough, or loud enough, or angry enough. The only appropriate responses should involve some form of righteous fury, much butt-kicking, and the public firing and humiliation of some Smithsonian administrators, many NMNH scholars, and vast numbers of sleazy far-left academicians.

    http://www.uncommondescent.com/archives/502

  11. 11
    Mats says:

    ah oh, this is not good for PR. IT sure would be interesting to know what Judge Judge has to say about this.

Leave a Reply