This is an old theme of the Discovery Institute, related to their endless complaints about “viewpoint discrimination.” At their creationist blog we find Tolerate Differences in Scientific, Not Just Political, Viewpoints. It was written by Sarah Chaffee, whom we call “Savvy Sarah.” Here are some excerpts, with bold font added by us.
In his New York Times column recently, Nicholas Kristof offered A Confession of Liberal Intolerance. A liberal himself, Kristof acknowledges that universities welcome many kinds of diversity — except the political and philosophical kind. We could add another: viewpoints on evolution and intelligent design.
Clever, huh? Everyone knows that universities are biased toward what is currently called “liberalism” — which in previous generations was known as left-wing political thinking. The Discoveroids hope to use that as a vehicle to complain about bias against their “scientific theory” of intelligent design. Flat-Earthers, astrologers, alchemists, faith healers, Moon landing deniers, and others should pay close attention to Savvy Sarah’s argument, because they can use it too.
She quotes from the Times article, which speaks of conservative scholars staying “in the closet” early in their careers and then “coming out” after receiving tenure. Then she says:
This hostile environment sounds uncannily like the one ID proponents face. Think of Richard Sternberg, who as editor of Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington faced retaliation after publishing a peer-reviewed article favorable to intelligent design.
BWAHAHAHAHAHA! She’s talking about the infamous Sternberg peer review controversy. A paper about intelligent design by Discoveroid Stephen Meyer was approved only by Richard von Sternberg, without submitting it to the usual process of peer-review. This is the statement issued by the journal when they withdrew Meyer’s paper: STATEMENT FROM THE COUNCIL OF THE BIOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF WASHINGTON. Savvy Sarah gives us the Discoveroids’ interpretation:
Scientific orthodoxy in academia poses a threat to anyone who may not have the “correct” Darwinian perspective. At Discovery Institute, we’re very cognizant of this.
Yes. That’s why they created their own, in-house journal, BIO-Complexity. She continues:
[E]ducation benefits from consideration of multiple viewpoints. Indeed, testing ideas against each other is vital. That absolutely requires intellectual diverstiy [sic]. Yet we’ve seen case after case of universities that have forgotten this.
Then she gives one of our favorite examples:
It’s interesting, for example, to reflect on how differently Baylor University would have treated advocates of intelligent design and evolution skepticism if scholars and administrators valued such diversity in science. Perhaps Baylor wouldn’t have removed William Dembski from his post leading the Michael Polanyi Research Center, which engaged in ID-related research … .
BWAHAHAHAHAHA! The Discoveroids never tire of reliving their old catastrophes. We wrote about that incident — see Intelligent Design’s Brief Shining Moment. Here’s how Savvy Sarah concludes her post:
Few have, like Kristof [the Times columnist], recognized the importance of political diversity in higher education. But thankfully that is changing, slowly. Fewer accept the value of diverse views on origins science. But one hopes that will change too.
The Discoveroids are dreaming of the day when the value of teaching their pseudo-science will at last be recognized. The only appropriate way to end this post is with a link to Cinderella singing Someday My Prince Will Come.
Copyright © 2016. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.