Christian Post
05-25-07
Academia's Assault on Intelligent Design
By
Ken Connor
Christian Post Guest Columnist
"There is evidence for intelligent design in the universe." This does not seem like
an especially radical statement; many people believe that God has revealed
himself through creation. Such beliefs, however, do not conform to politically
correct notions in academia, as Professor Guillermo Gonzalez is learning the
hard way. An astronomer at Iowa State University, Professor Gonzalez was
recently denied tenure—despite his stellar academic record—and it is
increasingly clear he was rejected for one reason: He wrote a book entitled The
Privileged Planet which showed that there is evidence for design in the universe.
Dr. Gonzalez's case has truly distressing implications for academic freedom in
colleges and universities across the country, especially in science departments.
Enlarge this Image
Ken Connor
Dr. Gonzalez, who fled from Cuba to America as a child, earned his PhD in
astronomy from the University of Washington. By academic standards, Dr.
Gonzalez has had a remarkable career. Though still a young man, he has
already authored sixty-eight peer-reviewed scientific papers. These papers have
been featured in some of the world's most respected scientific journals, including
Science and Nature. Dr. Gonzalez has also co-authored a college-level text book
entitled Observational Astronomy, which was published by Cambridge Press.
According to the written requirements for tenure at the Iowa State University, a
prospective candidate is required to have published at least fifteen peer-reviewed
scientific papers. With sixty-eight papers to his name, Dr. Gonzalez has already
exceeded that requirement by 350%. Ninety-one percent of professors who
applied for tenure at Iowa State University this year were successful, implying
that there has to be something seriously wrong with a candidate before they are
rejected.
What's wrong with Dr. Gonzalez? So far as anyone can tell, this rejection had
little to do with his scientific research, and everything to do with the fact that Dr.
Gonzalez believes the scientific evidence points to the idea of an intelligent
designer. In fact, as World Magazine has reported, at least two scientists in the
Physics and Astronomy Department at the Iowa State University have admitted
that intelligent design played a role in their decision. This despite the fact that Dr.
Gonzalez does not teach intelligent design in any of his classes, and that none of
his peer-reviewed papers deal with the subject. Nevertheless, simply because
Gonzalez holds the view that there is intelligence behind the universe, and has
written a book presenting scientific evidence for this fact, he is considered
unsuitable at Iowa State.
What is the state of academic freedom when well qualified candidates are
rejected simply because they see God's fingerprints on the cosmos? Isn't the
Academy supposed to be a venue for diverse views? Aren't universities
supposed to foster an atmosphere that allows for robust discussion and freedom
of thought? Dr. Gonzalez's fate suggests that anyone who deigns to challenge
conventional orthodoxy is not welcome in the club.
In the future, will scientists who are up for tenure be forced to deny that God
could have played any role in the creation or design of the universe? Will Biblebelieving astronomers be forced to repudiate Psalm 19, which begins, "The
heavens declare the glory of God; the skies proclaim the work of his hands"? Will
faithful Catholics be required to reject the teaching of Vatican I, which said that
God "can be known with certainty from the consideration of created things, by the
natural power of human reason..." Just where will this witch hunt lead?
The amazing fact is that, even as many science departments are working
overtime to forbid professors from positing that there is evidence for intelligent
design in the universe, more and more scientists are coming to this conclusion.
The Discovery Institute has compiled a list of over seven-hundred scientists who
signed the following statement: "We are skeptical of claims for the ability of
random mutation and natural selection to account for the complexity of life.
Careful examination of the evidence for Darwinian theory should be encouraged."
The list of scientists who find good reason to doubt the strictly materialistic
Darwinism that is currently scientific orthodoxy is growing every day.
It seems that many scientists and academicians who hold views contrary to Dr.
Gonzalez have concluded that the best way to avoid debate about the evidence
for intelligent design is to simply deny jobs to those who will not affirm their
atheistic worldview. The fact that these scientists, who are supposedly open to
following the evidence wherever it leads, have resorted to blatant discrimination
to avoid having this conversation speaks volumes about the weakness of their
position. They realize their arguments are not sufficient to defeat the intelligent
design movement and they must, therefore, shut their opponents out of the
conversation. All the evidence suggests that it is unjust that Dr. Gonzalez was
denied tenure and that this ruling should be overturned on appeal. Nevertheless,
what happened to Dr. Gonzalez is a reflection of the growing strength of the
intelligent design movement, not its weakness.