Here is the action taken where the best candidate for an academic research position was denied the job because he had questioned evolution in his writings as I published it in The Livestock Weekly:
WRITTEN FOR THE JANUARY 27 EDITION OF THE COMPUTER AND THE COWBOY
I haven't seen the documentary film Expelled produced by Ben Stein, but have read about it. It documents the persecution of teachers who dare to question evolution in the classroom. In one of my latest engineering newsletters I got this:
UK Settles With Astronomy Professor Alleging Religious Discrimination.
The AP (1/19, Lovan) reports, An astronomy professor who sued the University of Kentucky after claiming he lost out on a top job because of his Christian beliefs reached a settlement Tuesday with the school. The university agreed to pay $125,000 to Martin Gaskell in exchange for dropping a federal religious discrimination suit he filed in Lexington in 2009. According to Gaskell's suit, he was passed over to be director of UK's MacAdam Student Observatory because of his religion and statements that were perceived to be critical of evolution. The university did not admit any wrongdoing, and said its hiring processes were and are fundamentally sound and were followed in this case.
I went into teaching at a university when we didn't have a tenure policy. Later it was established and the one criteria was that a professor couldn't be fired for what he taught in the classroom in order to ensure freedom of research and teaching. Apparently that only applies if you toe the evolution thinking. I think scientists should only teach only the truth and question every assumption behind their conclusions.
A Kentucky newspaper stated that "no one denies that astronomer Martin Gaskell was the leading candidate for the founding director of a new observatory at the University of Kentucky in 2007--until his writings on evolution came to light." In his lawsuit Gaskell claims that "UK officials repeatedly referred to his religion in their discussions and e-mails" as the real reason he was denied the post. One astronomy professor, for instance, "feared embarrassing headlines about Kentucky's flagship university hiring a 'creationist' in a state already home to the controversial Creation Museum. Three biology professors and a geology professor also hammered that theme, that hiring Gaskell would be a "disaster" and an embarrassment to the university, even though Gaskell disagrees with the young-earth position of the Creation Museum. Some of his views, which resemble those of old-earth astronomer Hugh Ross, are published on his personal webpage. "UK biologists said in their e-mails that evidence for evolution was so overwhelming that Gaskell had no scientific basis to raise questions about it."
I have been quoting from a story in Creation Matters, a publication of the Creation Research Society that anyone can subscribe to. I want to quote their last two paragraphs:
" Even the "potential" exposure was enough to expel this man, without any evidence he had actually tried to influence anyone a the university of observatory about his views. This can only mean one thing: the Darwin Party, whose hardcore stance on secular evolution represents a small fraction of American opinion, is running scared. They cannot afford to give a platform to anyone who potentially might expose to the public the existence of alternative views. They will destroy careers to keep ideological purity in their ranks.
This tactic cannot work forever, because it is self-refuting; it violates academia's own ostensible commitment to the Enlightenment ideals of reason and tolerance. If Darwinists' beliefs are so fragile that they worry exposure to alternative viewpoints is intolerable, then their beliefs are not worth believing. And if they think that the public must be protected from such exposure, they disparage the intelligence of their fellow Homo Sapiens. No scientist should fear openness about the evidence. Bring it on."
You can reach me by E-mail at email@example.com.
Copyright C. A. Rodenberger 2011 602 words