Posted on 02/09/2009 10:37:36 AM PST by GodGunsGuts
No Tolerance Allowed: Stein declines university speech after 'hundreds' of angry emails
by Christine Dao*
Comedian/economist/lawyer Ben Stein backed out of delivering a spring 2009 commencement speech because of complaints to the university about his views on evolution.
The University of Vermont’s president, Daniel Mark Fogel, was bombarded with angry messages, including one from British atheist and Darwin fanatic Richard Dawkins, after inviting Stein to deliver the university’s commencement speech. Stein had given a sold-out economics lecture at UVM on April 25, 2008, and it was for his economics expertise, not his views on evolution, that Fogel invited Stein back.
After Fogel shared “profound concerns” with him over the protest, Stein voluntarily withdrew from the May 17 appearance and declined the 7,500 (USD) honorarium that came with the invitation.
“I did not ask him to withdraw,” Fogel said at a news conference. “I wrote to Ben and, because his talk last spring was about the economy, I had always assumed that that would be the subject of his talk.”
“[L]et me be clear, I did not ask Ben Stein not to come,” he reiterated. “I had invited him and I was not going to retract the invitation. But I was not going to let him be blind-sided by the controversy…. I asked him to confirm that he would speak about the economy and it was at that point that he withdrew.”1
In a university press release, Fogel wrote:
Mr. Stein has also expressed opinions on subjects unrelated to economics, most notably with respect to evolutionary theory, intelligent design, and the role of science in the Holocaust. Those views are highly controversial, to say the least. Following the announcement of Mr. Stein as Commencement speaker, profound concerns have been expressed to me by persons both internal and external to the University about his selection. Once I apprised Mr. Stein of these communications, he immediately and most graciously declined our Commencement invitation.2
Stein, who has spoken at Columbia, Yale, Stanford, and many other universities, told The Burlington Free Press that he initially didn’t want the UVM engagement but agreed to it, as well as an approximate 80 percent cut in his usual fee, because of mutual friends he and Fogel share. Stein called the whole episode “pathetic” and the university’s response “chicken sh**, and you can quote me on that.”
“I am far more pro-science than the Darwinists,” Stein told Free Press. “I want all scientific inquiry to happen—not just what the ruling clique calls science.”3
The Holocaust reference in the press release, Stein said, probably came from the 2008 documentary Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed when he interviewed the curator of a former Nazi “hospital” called Hadamar, who had cited “Darwinism” as the reason behind the horrific killings that happened there.
“I like Dr. Fogel and feel sorry that he is caught in the meat grinder of political correctness. My heart goes out to him. He’s a great guy trying to do his best in difficult circumstances.”3
Fogel said he received hundreds of emails, but only a few came from people at UVM, a signature implication of evolutionists and their intolerance bullying their way into arenas where they are not concerned, invited, or involved.
References
UVM’s president responds to questions about commencement speaker Ben Stein. Straight from the Source. Posted on straightfromthesource.wordpress.com on February 2, 2009, accessed February 4, 2009.
Office of the President, Campus Communication. The University of Vermont press release, February 2, 2009. Available on straightfromthesource.wordpress.com
Johnson, T. Ben Stein responds to UVM flap. The Burlington Free Press. Posted on burlingtonfreepress.com on February 4, 2009, accessed February 4, 2009.
* Ms. Dao is Assistant Editor.
You can pretend all you want that they are detecting HIV. The fact is, all they are detecting is transcriptional activity that is setting off LacZ. If they are detecting HIV, then they should be able to isolate it and take electron micrographs. But they can’t. Because HIV is nowhere to be found. The fact that they have to rely on all these indirect methods (that could be reacting to God knows what) should tell you something about the “strength” of the HIV-AIDS hypothesis.
Here is where they describe how they can identify viral particals; which is a goal post far removed from your 'they find anti HIV antibodies and zero zip nada of anything else' garbage. Detection of HIV-related genes in virus-infected cells by electron microscopical in situ hybridization. http://gateway.nlm.nih.gov/MeetingAbstracts/ma?f=102211312.html
And in evolutionists imaginations they have a just-so story to tell how it formed. Who needs research or evidence when we have a materialist hypothesis as our rock hard proof against the anti-evolutionists.
That doesn’t demonstrate much. As it turns out, the non-translated regions, which comprise about 97% of the genome, and were previously thought by the Evos to be “junk”, are quite functional. It is in these regions that scientists are starting to find explanations for the obvious body plan and functional differences between humans and chimps. I predict that as we go forward, the genomic differences between chimps and humans will grow much wider, and that chimps will once again be considered closer to apes than to humans (as their obvious differences suggest).
Your link only talks about detecting what they think are HIV-related RNA. Once again, the CAN’T FIND INTACT HIV! Moreover, just throwing up an electron micrograph of God knows what isn’t going to cut it. I want a link, and I want a paper describing precisely how it was isolated.
Let me be a little more specific. For starters, I want a paper in which they have obtained HIV virion via cell free fluids from an AIDS patient. From this fluid, the paper should demonstrate that they isolated HIV virion via density purified samples, and this should be documented via an electron micrograph in which every HIV virion looks identical with no other contaminants. The paper should then demonstrate that these virus isolates actually behave like viruses by adding them to cell culture, in which case they should multiply in far greater numbers than the original isolate, be re-isolated, form at the same density as the original (purified) isolate, but should form a much thicker band. The paper should then demonstrate that they have broken the virus down into its constituent parts (dna, rna, protein), and then separated via electrophoresis. Find me a paper that demonstrates this, along with the electron micrographs showing identical virion, and we will take it from there.
The map was over the entirety of chromosome 1 and 2, if it is “junk” or not is irrelevant to the fact that whatever its functionality or non-functionality, humans and chimps are closer to each other then either is to a gorilla.
I still maintain it’s a logical impossibility. And I’m pretty sure my prediction will be substantiated in fairly short order.
LOOK AT POST #140. Can you not see that it is red?
Counting differences it is quite easy to see that there is much more places where humans and chimps were the same and gorillas were different (RED), and a lot less of where chimps and gorillas were the same and humans were different (GREEN).
CAN YOU NOT SEE RED AND GREEN?
Logical Impossibility!!! LOL!!!!
Like I said, it’s a logical impossibility, and I fully expect to be vindicated by the non-translated regions in fairly short order. Hopefully you will still be around for me to rub it in. d:op
Looks awful RED there GGG. As red as your cheeks should be in shame.
First, as always, I would like a link to the paper that contains an analysis of chromosome 1 and 2. Second, if you knew anything about the untranslated regions, function has much less to do with nucleotide/gene placement than the overlapping regulatory functions that can be accomplished from surprisingly diverse areas of the genome.
PS Those regulatory functions come from the 97% of the genome that the Evos predicted would be “junk.”
It is the same paper you cited your phylogenetic tree from, are you not following the argument, do I need to slow it down for you?
Again I repeat because you didn’t get it the first time, this is, as labeled, chromosome one and two which includes both translated and untranslated regions.
==Again I repeat because you didn’t get it the first time, this is, as labeled, chromosome one and two which includes both translated and untranslated regions.
As I stated before, the regulatory activities of the untranslated regions are not linear arrangements. As the ENCODE project has clearly demonstrated, the untranslated regions have an “interleaved structure of overlapping segments” with “five, seven or more transcripts coming from just one segment of code.” I predict this is where they will find the explanation for the obvious differences between humans and chimpanzees, while at the same time explaining why chimpanzees so resemble their ape cousins both in terms of body plans and functional needs.
So much for you “logical impossibility”, now you just want to quibble about an unrelated matter rather than admit your error.
What inpenetrable ignorance.
Well obviously chromosome 1 and 2 don’t explain why chimpanzees are closer to their ape cousins than to humans in body plan and functional needs. Therefore, the explanation must lie elsewhere. I predict that chimps will be found to be closer to their ape cousins in the 97% of the genome that the Evos predicted would be “junk.” Namely, the untranslated regions—the 97% of the genome where we now know five, seven or more transcripts can orgininate from a single segment of code. This leaves plenty of room to explain why the chimpanzee is more like an ape than a human.
Ever notice in pro wrestling that the "heels" never feud with each other?
Chromosome 1 and 2 cover a large percentage of the entire genome and include both translated (3%) and untranslated regions (97%).
There is no “room” for the similarities between chimps and GORILLAS (gorillas and apes are synonyms only to a simpleton) to be “hidden”. The ENTIRETY of chromosome one and two sequences were compared and as anyone with eyes to see and a brain to understand can comprehend, HUMANS AND CHIMPS ARE MORE SIMILAR IN DNA than either is to a GORILLA.
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.