Oct 082005

Telic Thoughts had a link to this article Drawing a Line in the Academic Sand. I like to comment on this quote from the President of University of Idaho.

“Because of the recent national media attention on the issue,” reads President Timothy P. White’s letter, “I write to articulate the University of Idaho’s position with respect to evolution: this is the only curriculum that is appropriate to be taught in our bio-physical sciences.” The short letter goes on to allow for the teaching of “views that differ from evolution” in other courses, like religion and philosophy, but not as a scientific principle, which is “testable and anchored in evidence.”

The president’s letter noted that this view is consistent with the views of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the National Academy of Sciences, and dozens of scientific societies.

This letter convinced me that Darwinists are smarter than Creationists. I mean imagine if back in 1925 instead of forbidding John Scopes from teaching evolution. The Creationists should have allowed Scopes to teach evolution in other courses, like mythology and philosophy, but not as a scientific principle. Design is the only appropriate bio-physical science, which is testable and anchored in evidence.

This view is consistent with the views of the majority of scientists, since the time of Aristotle, Kepler, Newton, Mendel and Agassiz.

The Darwinian mantra is that evolution is testable and anchored in evidence, which is preposterous. Part of the premise of ID is that Darwinism is not testable and is not supported by evidence. ID challenges the very interpretation by Darwinian mechanisms for the diversity of life. In other words, this tyrant President White would only allow the teaching of science that does not challenge his religious beliefs.

  4 Responses to “Academic Freedom at the University of Idaho”

  1. In his Blog, Dr. William Dembski posted the next title,

    Iowa State did it to Gonzalez, Now U of Idaho is doing it to Minnich.

    Next, you can see two of Dr. Minnich’s Videos. I admire the microbiological research of Dr. Scott Minnich!

    Bacterial Flagella: A Paradigm for Design.

    Paradigm of Design: The Bacterial Flagellum.

  2. Dembski tried to do it in Texas, and it didn’t work. When it was pointed out to him that science is not a democratic exercise, and adding up signatures on a letter is not the way to do science, he scoffed.

    Now, in more fair forums, with greater public scrutiny, it turns out that real scientists are voicing their real views, and you and Dembski don’t like it.

    Tell you what: You condemn the Discovery Institute’s dishonest campaign of saying ‘an increasing number of scientists are skeptical of Darwin,’ we can begin to talk. But first, let’s have a demonstration that somebody on the ID side can count, and will adhere to standards of academic honesty.

    What did Dembski expect scientists to do, remain silent in the face of silliness? Dembski can’t stand the heat of the kitchen, but he still wants to be able to tell the sou chef the sou chef’s job.

  3. Dear reader,

    Of course, if you prefer to listen, next is the first file of Scott Minnich in mp3 Audio:

    Scott MinnichBacterial Flagella: A Paradigm for Design

  4. Is Minnich ever going to testify in Dover, or is he going to turn tail rather than face cross examination, too?

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.