Recognition Denied Great Scientist Who Did Not Bow to Darwin

Creation Magazine ^ | Sept 2004 | Carl Wiland

[found_one]

Creation Archive > Volume 26 Issue 4 > The not-so-Nobel decision

The not-so-Nobel decision Recognition denied for achievement of great scientist—who is also a creationist by Carl Wieland

Anticreationists often try to pretend that there is no prejudice against biblical creation in ‘the world of science’. But creationists have long known that things are not like that in the real world. We even have to publish our own peer-reviewed journals; any paper which does not bow to materialistic axioms on origins has a snowball’s chance in a blast furnace of getting published in a secular journal.

In fact, some editors have made it very clear that they will go to great lengths to keep their respective journals free of such ‘corrupting influences’. Then there was the well-publicized case of Forrest Mims, the highly-skilled science writer. His employment by Scientific American was openly denied on the grounds of his creationist views—even though the subjects he was paid to write on were not remotely related to origins.

In June 1994, Creation magazine ran a feature article1 on Dr Raymond Damadian, the inventor of the MRI (magnetic resonance imaging) scanner. This medical breakthrough has saved many lives. We wrote how Dr Damadian had been awarded the United States’ National Medal of Technology. He has also been inducted into the National Inventors Hall of Fame, alongside Thomas Edison, Alexander Graham Bell and the Wright brothers, where he was awarded the Lincoln-Edison medal.

In 2003, the Nobel Prize for Medicine went to the breakthrough field of diagnostic MRI scanning. It was shared by two scientists. But, to the stunned disbelief of virtually all who worked in that field, these did not include Raymond Damadian, even though the terms allow for up to three people to share the award.

[found_one]

Even conservatives sometimes get confused about the issues involved in intelligent design and the evolution vs creationism controversy. Thus many otherwise conservative observers side with those who wish to muzzle intelligent design proponents, particularly those in academe, comparing the recent Kitzmiller trial in Dover, PA, with the Scopes monkey trial, which it certainly was not, and hailing the outcome as a triumph of science over ignorance, which it also is not. At issue here is whether science can tolerate open debate and let the chips fall where they may or whether it must silence dissent. It is mainly for those who have missed the point, namely, academic intolerance, that I submit this article.

[jess35]

This isn't about scientific debate and it's exceptionally disingenuous to claim it is. ID/Creationism is and always has been about inserting religion into science.

As for Dr Raymond Damadian, he should have gotten the nod as one of the earliers pioneers but the evidence that he was the sole creator of MR technology just isn't solid. Furthermore, it's exceptionally bad form to tell the committee they MUST nominate/award you for the work you've done. It's even poorer form to send you minions out to claim you were snubbed because of religious persecution.

[Oztrich Boy]

"look at me Kimmie" placemarker