|
|
Darwinian thought police strike againID-advocate astronomer denied tenure at Iowa State UniversityDr Guillermo Gonzalez is an astrophysicist and assistant professor of physics and astronomy at Iowa State University [ISU], as well as a senior fellow of the Discovery Institute’s Centre for Science and Culture, considered the hub of the Intelligent Design [ID] movement. Earlier this year, ISU President Gregory Geoffroy notified Gonzalez that he would not be granted tenure and promotion to associate professor. Such a storm of controversy erupted over this blatant case of discrimination against an academic because of his pro-ID beliefs that the ISU took the unusual step of issuing a news release on the subject, dated May 14, 2007. Written by ISU PR person John McCarroll, this stated: ‘Tenure is recognition of significant accomplishment in scholarship and in faculty responsibilties in research, teaching and service. … It means a lifetime appointment for the individual being considered.’ Then under the heading ‘Why was tenure not granted to Guillermo Gonzalez?’ it says: ‘Dr. Gonzalez was evaluated for tenure and promotion to associate professor by the tenured faculty in the Department of Physics and Astronomy. That evaluation was based on an assessment of the excellence of his teaching, service, scholarly research publications and research funding in astronomy, using standards and expectations set by the department faculty. The consensus of the tenured department faculty, the department chair, the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, the dean of Liberal Arts and Sciences, and the executive vice president and provost was that tenure should not be granted. Based on recommendations against granting tenure and promotion at every prior level of review, and his own review of the record, President Gregory Geoffroy notified Gonzalez in March that he would not be granted tenure and promotion to associate professor.’1 Qualified or not qualified?Notice that the above statement does not give the reason the faculty came to its decision to deny Dr Gonzalez tenure. His academic qualifications for the position would appear to far exceed the requirements.
Copyright © Scott Hammonds 2004
M31, the andromeda galaxy, 2.5 million light years from earth. Gonzalez’s personal beliefsThe Nature article referred to above describes Dr Gonzalez as ‘a deeply religious evangelical Christian’, and it says ‘his faith has shaped his views on science. He considers himself a “sceptic” of Darwin, and says that his Christianity helps him to understand Earth’s position in the Universe. “Our location in the Galaxy, which is optimized for habitability, is also the best place for doing cosmology and stellar astrophysics in the Galaxy,” he says. In other words: “The Universe is designed for scientific discovery.”’2 Dr Gonzalez has refrained from mentioning his religious beliefs in his teaching and peer-reviewed works, but his 2004 book The Privileged Planet: How Our Place in the Cosmos is Designed for Discovery, co-authored with Jay Richards of the Discovery Institute, includes many of his pro-design arguments. What then is the reason for denial of tenure to Dr Gonzalez?An interesting clue is that it appears that ISU, at the same time as it denied tenure to Dr Gonzalez, decided to promote to full professor outspoken atheist and secular humanist Hector Avalos, professor of religious studies, faculty adviser to the ISU Atheist and Agnostic Society, and editor of the Journal for the Critical Study of Religion. For those unaware, Hector Avalos is an embittered apostate ‘Christian’ who now describes himself as ‘a secular humanist’, and believes that ‘the Bible has no intrinsic value or merit’.8 He achieved some infamy by being quoted in the journal Nature as advocating cutting out parts of the Bible which deal with ‘theologically inspired violence’.9 In answer to Bill Muehlenberg’s question as to just what should be cut, Avalos said, ‘In the first phase what I hope will be deleted is any endorsement of violence that cannot be proven by scientific means to be coming from God. In the final phase, we hope to persuade humanity that the entire Bible should be removed as an authority in the modern world. According to John West of Discovery Institute, ‘Avalos has led the charge against Gonzalez and intelligent design on ISU’s campus, helping to draft a 2005 petition denouncing intelligent design that ultimately was signed by more than 120 ISU faculty.’11 Concerning this Avalos says, ‘We were starting to see Iowa State mentioned as a place where intelligent-design research was happening. We wanted to make sure that people knew the university does not support intelligent design.’2 ‘Two of the five active tenured astronomy professors in the department that denied tenure to Dr Gonzalez are connected to the statement that denounces intelligent design as “creationist pseudoscience”. Professor Steven Kawaler, the Program Coordinator for astronomy in the Department of Physics and Astronomy at ISU, actually signed the statement. University Professor Lee Anne Willson is married to ISU mathematics professor Stephen J. Willson, who also signed the statement.’12 ‘According to a story to be published in the May 26 edition of World Magazine, two faculty members of the department that denied tenure to Guillermo Gonzales at Iowa State University have admitted that his work on ID played a role in the denial. While Prof. Eli Rosenberg, Chair of the Department of Physics and Astronomy, insisted to the magazine that intelligent design “was not an overriding factor” (emphasis added), he then conceded according to the magazine that Gonzalez’s pro-ID book The Privileged Planet "played into the decision-making process.”’ The other department member who admitted that intelligent design played a role in the tenure decision was ISU astronomy professor Curtis Struck. According to Discovery Institute, ‘Struck told World that he was not surprised at the denial of tenure to Gonzales because “[h]e includes some things in his astronomy resumé that other people regard as taking a coincidence too far.” Struck was obviously referring to Gonzalez’s arguments for intelligent design.’ Appeal rejectedOn June 1, 2007, Gregory Geoffroy, President of Iowa State University, informed Gonzalez that he had rejected Gonzalez’s appeal and that he upheld the denial of tenure. In a prepared statement published in the The Ames Tribune concerning this, he said: ‘I specifically considered refereed publications, his level of success in attracting research funding and grants, the amount of telescope observing time he had been granted, the number of graduate students he had supervised, and most importantly, the overall evidence of future career promise in the field of astronomy.’13 An article in the Des Moines Register provided the following additional information: ‘Iowa State has sponsored $22,661 in outside grant money for Gonzalez since July 2001, records show. In that same time period, Gonzalez’s peers in physics and astronomy secured an average of $1.3 million by the time they were granted tenure.’14 The Discovery Institute in anticipation and response posted a web article by John West on June 1, 2007, entitled ‘The Truth about Research Grants, Gonzalez and ISU’ as follows:
It is worth pointing out again that 91% of ISU faculty considered for tenure this year received it. Did they all receive more than a million dollars in grants [in] order to get tenure? Did they all exceed by 350% their departmental standards for publications? We are trying to find out, but ISU apparently doesn’t want people to know the answers to these questions.15 CommentMichael Behe, biochemist, prominent advocate of intelligent design at Lehigh University in Bethlehem, Pennsylvania, and author of the ‘irreducible complexity’ book Darwin’s Black Box, says, ‘Academia seems to be in a rage about anything that points to any purpose. They are penalizing an associate professor who’s doing his job because he has views they disagree with.’2 Professor of Astronomy David Lambert (who oversaw Gonzalez’s postdoc work at the University of Texas) says, ‘Nothing I have seen in his refereed papers leads me to believe his beliefs are impinging on his science. I would have said he was a serious tenure candidate.’2 Such an assault on academic freedom does not bode well for the advancement of true science. United States Senator and Republican presidential candidate Sam Brownback has issued a forceful statement expressing alarm over this situation. According to Sen. Brownback, ‘such an assault on academic freedom does not bode well for the advancement of true science.’ Brownback continues, ‘Observation, testing, and the development of reasonable hypotheses have long been integral to good science. Scholars, such as Professor Guillermo Gonzalez, ought not to be intimidated nor silenced by those in the academic community who would rather dismiss a well-reasoned hypothesis than debate it on its merits. Such an assault on academic freedom does not bode well for the advancement of true science.’16 ConclusionIt should be noted that many in the ID movement do not hold to the biblical history of the universe as laid out in Genesis—we are unaware what Dr Gonzalez believes about creation. However, even the mere suggestion that someone believes that the universe shows signs of design appears to be enough to cause this sort of persecution. Those who control academia are at war with God and will not allow the concept of design to be discussed. It seems that no matter how much evidence for design is presented by ID advocates, both the evidence and the person(s) advocating it will be booted out. The common argument raised by anticreationists, that ‘if your ideas were sound, they would be accepted by the scientific establishment, so why don’t you get them published there’, is seen to be laughable. The fond notion that science is some sort of self-correcting, ideologically neutral pursuit of the truth, wherever it might lead, is seriously undermined by these happenings. This should alarm not only Christians, but advocates of academic freedom in general. References
Published: 12 June 2007 (GMT+10) |

