On 7/13/07, Janice Matchett <janmatch@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> If any of you would like to present what you think is "the other side of
> the story", as requested by this poster (#8), I'll be glad to copy and
It did not take me long to find the true story and I am surprised that
Janice did not do her homework. I hope that Janice will report the
correction to her group.
> The day after ISU's president announced his rejection of Gonzalez's first
> appeal, a member of ISU's department of physics and astronomy published an
> article in the Des Moines Register openly admitting that Gonzalez's support
> for intelligent design was the only reason he voted against tenure for
> Gonzalez.
http://desmoinesregister.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070602/OPINION01/706020313/1035/OPINION
no1.
<quote>
His tenure denial violates neither of those principles. I participated
in the initial vote and voted no, based on this fundamental question:
What is science?
and
Intelligent design is not even a theory. It has not made its first
prediction, nor suffered its first test by measurement. Its proponents
can call it anything they like, but it is not science.
</quote>
No. 2
<quote>SU astronomy professor Curtis 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</quote>
Seems the DI is not telling the full story. Anyone surprised?
Again, I show how some trivial research can save oneself from much embarassment.
The real question of course is: Will Janice correct her position and claims?
Time shall tell.
To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Sat Jul 14 00:38:22 2007
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sat Jul 14 2007 - 00:38:22 EDT