Skip to comments.When is it acceptable to discriminate against evolution sceptics?
Posted on 02/18/2011 8:40:28 AM PST by SeekAndFind
Dr Martin Gaskell is a respected expert on supermassive black holes and a long-serving research fellow at the University of Texas.
In 2007, Dr Martin Gaskell applied for the position of director at the new MacAdam student observatory at the University of Kentucky. He stood "breathtakingly above the other applicants in background and experience" according to the chairman of the selection panel, but he did not get the job. Unsurprisingly, he sued.
It is not controversial to state that English-born Gaskell is a devout Christian. He has also said that he is sceptical about certain aspects of evolutionary theory and that he respects creationists for being true to the Bible. However, his own views have more nuance and he probably belongs somewhere in the broad church usually labelled "theistic evolution". But the mere fact he was sympathetic towards creationists and kept an open mind about evolution appears to have disqualified him from being director of the observatory. As the chairman of the selection committee emailed afterwards, "no objective observer could possibly believe that we excluded Martin on any basis other than religion ... "
The case was about to go to trial. But, last month, the university caved in and settled out of court. Gaskell was given a payoff of $125,000, although the university refused to admit any wrong-doing. Nonetheless, this appears to be an unambiguous example of religious discrimination within the American academy. It is hard to imagine the university would have settled if they were sure of their ground.
The case has given rise to a certain amount of hand-wringing in anti-creationist circles.
(Excerpt) Read more at guardian.co.uk ...
Martin Gaskell now teaches at the Astronomy Program of the University of Texas at Austin.
See here :
Sad, too. The real yahoos are the people totally sold out on evolution, despite the obvious fraud in so much of what purports to be “support” for it.
People who are hard-core evolutionists are nuts and whackjobs in much the same way as are the hard-core “global warming/climate change” fanatics.
This documentary presents some challenging facts but falls short of proving trans-species development.
If the third human on this planet did not come from the first two!... THeN..
A very ambitious Yarn MUST be created..
How do you figure?
no, no anti christian bias here...of course not......and he obviously isnt a real scientist, and he just doesnt ‘understand how science works’...
did i miss anything...
Are you familiar with the concept of “begging the question”?
Evolution is a faith for fanatics. Convincing them of the obvious, that the theory of evolution contributes nothing to real science, is nearly impossible.
Are you familiar with the concept of changing the subject?..
I’ll state it another way: Since creation science types are generally laughed at in scientific circles, would it be appropriate for a scientific organization to refuse to employ one of them in order to spare the organization the shame of having such a person on the staff?
Really? Are you aware of who prevailed in that case?
In other words, you prefer not to answer the question. I understand.
You have the sides backwards, it's the Creationist and Global Warming Alarmist are the same.
To hide their true intent Creationist changed their name to Intelligent Design, while Global Warmist did the same and changed the name to Climate Change.
Creationist claim Atheist to their religion are denying their God because they want to live a life of sin (Sex!), while Global Warmist also claim Atheist to their religion are just deniers who want to live a life of sin (Capitalism).
Indulgences/Carbon Credits, Garden of Eden / Noble Savage, etc, etc
Of course I am, but Scope’s conviction was overturned on a technicality, and he was never retried. And the floodgates opened to get creationism out of the schools after that.
Out of the schools where it never belonged in the first place.
It is the easiest thing in the world to simply say, “...and this animal evolved....”
Detailing each and every ‘RANDOM” mutation leading to that is a bit harder. Shall we say,...impossible? We shall!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.