Re: [asa] Secret Emails Reveal How ISU Faculty Plotted to Deny Distinguished Astronomer Tenure

Proof by vacuous assertion.

Fiber relies on a known entity: Carpet and similarities. There is no
such evidence for the anthropic principle. In fact a simpler
explanation exists.

Fine if you want to conclude design but I fail to see how your faith
is somehow scientific to others?

But this is not about ID as much as a about Gonzalez, and his tenure
denial which by all reports were based on his dismal funding and
significant drops in publications. Did his work in what most saw
rightly as a scientifically vacuous concept contribute to the tenure
denial. Of course and if he presented his book on ID as relevant to
tenure then the faculty did have to consider it.

Given the rhetoric from the DI, they have little to argue, unless they
are willing to admit ID is a religious concept.

On Dec 7, 2007 7:51 AM, John Walley <john_walley@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Pim,
>
> You have to keep up. I am not going to spell it all out for you again.
>
> Bottom line, neither ID nor forensic carpet fiber evidence is 100%
> conclusive in the scientific sense because both us and the carpet fiber
> could have been planted by aliens, but we deduce Wayne Williams guilt from
> one but deny GG his tenure for making the same rational deductions from the
> other.
>
> The obvious implications of the anthropic principle is that all these
> coincidences proves that there is a Designer. There is no getting around
> that. That is not unscientific. It is just rational.
>
> John
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On
> Behalf Of PvM
>
> Sent: Friday, December 07, 2007 12:25 AM
> To: John Walley
> Cc: _American Sci Affil
> Subject: Re: [asa] Secret Emails Reveal How ISU Faculty Plotted to Deny
> Distinguished Astronomer Tenure
>
> Why? What is the equivalent of carpet fiber evidence which is matched
> to a known carpet?
>
> Analogies have limited value indeed.
>
> What is the obvious implication of the anthropic principle?
>
> On Dec 6, 2007 9:03 PM, John Walley <john_walley@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> > For GG to conclude a designer from all the just right characteristics of
> the
> > universe is just as "scientific" as a jury finding Wayne Williams guilty
> of
> > capital murder based on carpet fiber evidence.
> >
> > This is the hypocrisy of academia and those that deny the overwhelmingly
> > obvious implications of the anthropic principle (aka, design inference)
> in
> > nature.
> >
> > John
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On
> > Behalf Of PvM
> > Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2007 11:07 PM
> > To: John Walley
> > Cc: _American Sci Affil
> > Subject: Re: [asa] Secret Emails Reveal How ISU Faculty Plotted to Deny
> > Distinguished Astronomer Tenure
> >
> >
> > What I find so fascinating is how the media has mostly refused to
> > accept the claims by the Discovery Institute and I have looked at some
> > of this supposed evidence and found that the arguments are pretty weak
> > at best.
> >
> > Sure, Gonzalez's involvement with Intelligent Design were a concern to
> > the faculty but the Discovery Institute is making some assertions
> > which I find poorly supported by the evidence. Some people have looked
> > at the publication record of Gonzalez (and Behe) and found a
> > remarkable trend.
> >
> > Also interesting is how Rosenberg was quoted and what the full quote
> > revealed
> >
> > <quote>
> > "Contrary to his public statements, and those of ISU President
> > Gregory Geoffroy, the chairman of ISU's Department of Physics and
> > Astronomy, Dr. Eli Rosenberg, stated in Dr. Gonzalez's tenure dossier
> > that Dr. Gonzalez's support for intelligent design 'disqualifies him
> > from serving as a science educator.'"
> >
> > <quote>
> > The full context of that quotation is:
> >
> > <quote> "on numerous occasions, Dr. Gonzalez has stated that
> > Intelligent Design is a scientific theory and someday would be taught
> > in science classrooms. This is confirmed by his numerous postings on
> > the Discovery Institute Web site. The problem here is that Intelligent
> > Design is not a scientific theory. Its premise is beyond the realm of
> > science. . But it is incumbent on a science educator to clearly
> > understand and be able to articulate what science is and what it is
> > not. The fact that Dr. Gonzalez does not understand what constitutes
> > both science and a scientific theory disqualifies him from serving as
> > a science educator."
> > </quote>
> >
> > Now the DI may be able to help Gonzalez by arguing that this was
> > religious discrimination but that would involve accepting that ID is
> > religious. Not a very palatable choice. Instead, the DI seems to have
> > moved from tenure to viewpoint discrimination and hostile workplace.
> > Again, not a very plausible argument either.
> >
> > The DI attempted to generate media interest in the Gonzalez case and
> > failed, outside Iowa few noticed and within Iowa the reception was
> > mixed.
> > They lost in the scientific arena, they are losing in the media arena,
> > and they are losing amongst conservatives.
> >
> >
> >
> > To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
> > "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
> >
> >
>
> To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
> "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
>
>

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Fri Dec 7 11:41:48 2007