Earth Times.Org
05-18-07
PR News Wire-US Newswire
Two Iowa State University (ISU) faculty members of the department that rejected
astronomer Guillermo Gonzalez's tenure application have admitted that his work
on intelligent design played a role in the department's denial of tenure.
"What possible academic reason was there to deny tenure to a candidate who
met or exceeded every requirement?" asked Dr. John West, associate director of
Discovery Institute's Center for Science & Culture, the nation's leading think-tank
supporting research into the scientific theory of intelligent design. "This is clearly
a case of viewpoint discrimination and an attack on Dr. Gonzalez's academic
freedom and free speech rights."
In a World magazine article released today, physicist Eli Rosenberg, Chair of
the Department of Physics and Astronomy, is described by the magazine as
having admitted that Gonzalez's pro-ID book The Privileged Planet "played into
the decision-making process." Rosenberg went on to explain that the reputation
of a professor in his field is a significant factor.
"Normally a scientist's reputation is based on publishing scientific articles, which
Gonzalez excelled at," said West. "Of course, if instead are putation' is used as a
code word for whether one's views are popular among fellow scientists, then this
is another way anti-ID bias entered into the decision."
ISU Astronomy Professor Curtis Struck, meanwhile, told World that he was not
surprised at the tenure denial given Gonzalez's intelligent design research that
"people regard as taking a coincidence too far."
The comments from Struck mean that at least three of the five tenured
astronomers in Gonzalez's department have now been tied to anti-ID bias. As
discovered earlier this week, another tenured astronomer in the department
signed a statement circulated by the Darwinist lobby organization National
Center for Science Education denouncing intelligent design as "creationist
pseudoscience," while the husband of a third astronomy professor at ISU signed
the same statement.
Dr. Rosenberg tried to do damage control by claiming that there was something
deficient about Dr. Gonzalez's sterling research record: "You take a look at
somebody's research record over the six-year probationary period and you get a
sense whether this is a strong case. Clearly, this was a case that looked like it
might be in trouble."
"Really? Was Gonzalez somehow remiss in publishing 350% more peer-
reviewed publications than his own department's stated standard for research
excellence?" asked West. "Or in co-authoring a college astronomy textbook with
Cambridge University Press? Or in having his research recognized in Science,
Nature, Scientific American, and other top science publications?"