Rex Kickass Posted March 23, 2005 Share Posted March 23, 2005 http://www.alligator.org/pt2/050323freedom.php Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrimsonWeltall Posted March 23, 2005 Share Posted March 23, 2005 “Some professors say, ‘Evolution is a fact. I don’t want to hear about Intelligent Design (a creationist theory), and if you don’t like it, there’s the door,’” Baxley said, citing one example when he thought a student should sue. Rep. Dan Gelber, D-Miami Beach, warned of lawsuits from students enrolled in Holocaust history courses who believe the Holocaust never happened. Similar suits could be filed by students who don’t believe astronauts landed on the moon, who believe teaching birth control is a sin or even by Shands medical students who refuse to perform blood transfusions and believe prayer is the only way to heal the body, Gelber added. The Academic Freedom Bill of Rights? More like the Professors Must Teach Stupid s*** to Avoid Conflict With Stupid Students Bill. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlaSoxxJim Posted March 23, 2005 Share Posted March 23, 2005 Unreal. Looks like I'll be getting sued by my students before too long. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yossarian Posted March 23, 2005 Share Posted March 23, 2005 (edited) I don't spend a lot of time on this part of the board, but after reading the above I was primed to make a very long post. Then I figured who the hell's gonna care? So I'll keep it reasonably short and sweet. Academia does tilt far to the left, at least as far as most disciplines that would fall under the heading "liberal arts" are concerned. If you try to crack their little monopoly while attempting a past 40 career change then good luck unless you are in lock step. I found that out the hard way. Concerning evolution, just let me say I love science. That's why I reject this theory as it's taught. I'm not particularly religious and I don't think the world is 6 or 7 thousand years old either. I've seen California law school professor Phillip Johnson make mince meat out of evolutionary scientists in public forums. Johnson is not a member of the religious right. When Galileo first positied his theory centuries ago politics in the form of church authorities moved to censor him. The politicization of science continues to this day. In the 70's and 80's we were told that a New Ice Age was imminent. Today the same authorities preach that we're all going to get roasted in the coming hot house caused by "global warming." I guess I have too much time on my hands. I actually check these things out. In time, real science will win out and I suspect it will lead to much hand wringing and lamenting among the scientific and political elites. They're joined at the hip. Edited March 23, 2005 by Yossarian Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Kickass Posted March 23, 2005 Author Share Posted March 23, 2005 The political elite are conservatives last time I checked. Or are you still living in 1993? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlaSoxxJim Posted March 23, 2005 Share Posted March 23, 2005 QUOTE(Yossarian @ Mar 23, 2005 -> 03:01 PM) I've seen California law school professor Phillip Johnson make mince meat out of evolutionary scientists in public forums. You've seen him in the wrong setting then. I've seen him twice on two different campuses and on both occassions he had his ass summarily handed to him by the scientists in attendance. Not that this is unexpected. Darwin on Trial was amusing enough when it was first published, although the revised edition with his so-called responses to critical comments we not particulartly insightful. I have not read any of his more recent works. What Johnson does do successfully is attack evolution as a philosophy, which it is not. But it is science – testable, rife with knowledge gaps, but a sound and vigorous science. And the key problem with Johnson is that he is NOT a scientist, nor does he show any understanding of how science actually works. Hence, his approach to evolution as a faulty philosophy (something he can attack with a lawyer's logic) and not an, er..., evolving scientific discipline. As such, he spends a lot of his time doing what the creationists have done before him, attacking classical Darwinian theories as if they were the sum total of evolutionary knowledge today rather than a brilliant if incomplete book published in 1859. Darwin didn't even understand the mechanisms of inheritance in 1859, chromosomes having not yet identified as the mechanism of particulate inhertitance at the time. If Johnson were to actually try to critically examine modern Neo-Darwinism without doing the creationsist sleight of hand, he would not be very effective. As it is, he is a smart many who understands the art of argument, even if he cannot understand the discipline he is arguing against. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LowerCaseRepublican Posted March 23, 2005 Share Posted March 23, 2005 Suing because you're insulted as to what is talked about in a class? BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. Talk about the PC Police on patrol. Holy Hell. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.