Re: Viewpoint discrimination or careless reading.

From: Pim van Meurs <>
Date: Fri Oct 07 2005 - 14:06:00 EDT

Ted Davis wrote:

>IMO, there are prima facie reasons to think that the Univ of Idaho issued
>this statement at this point in time precisely b/c they want to discredit
>Minnich before he testifies in Harrisburg. The combination of the content
>of the statement--which appears to be a clear violation of Minnich's
>academic freedom--and the timing, suggest this as the obvious
>interpretation. Releasing such a statement precisely now, however,
>certainly appears to be politically motivated. Do you not agree?
The thought had occurred to me. But why could it not have been
scientifically motivated? And why does this statement violate Minnich's
academic freedom? What is this 'academic freedom'?

>The facts behind this are not clear yet. At this point, however, I'd say
>that this appears to be part of a smear campaign. If it happened to me, I'd
>sue the university.
Smear campaign for asking science to be taught in science classes?

>Saying that it's ok for faculty in many other disciplines to talk about ID,
>but not for faculty in the sciences to do so, is simply outrageous and
>unjustifiable. Do you not agree?

Is that what the statement said? My version seems different from yours
Received on Fri Oct 7 14:07:08 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Fri Oct 07 2005 - 14:07:08 EDT