One argument familiar to both evolutionary and anti-evolutionary apologists is that there is over whether or not there is pressure on scientists not to openly explore intelligent design (henceforth, ID), even going as far as firing or dismissing professors and scientists. Evolutionists like to mock the notion by sneering that Evilutionary conspiracies don’t fly.
Now, there are many, many examples. Today I read news of one that has been in the making for some time on Worldnetdaily.com: Gonzalez Loses Tenure. Here we have a person exploring ID who was denied tenure and was not even allowed to defend himself in person, orally. Now, evolutionary apologists can say “Oh, hey, but there is no evidence that it was on account of ID.” That’s a bit of a silly thing to say since no evidence was allowed to be presented. However, we are aware of emails that would have served as evidence to the board, but even if not recognized by the board, we ourselves can judge for ourselves.
Here is a Discovery Institute page devoted to the affair. Evilutionists can produce their own, if they like. On that page is a document called “Intelligent Design Was the Issue After All” which contains email documentation, obtained by an open records request, showing just how clearly ID was a factor. I say ‘clearly’ knowing full well that clear or not, evolutionists will find it justified even if it was a factor, because, well, ID is not science. Who says? They say? On the evidence? … Or, is it perhaps because they control the educational establishment.
I can’t be accused of conspiracy-mongering because here is at least one well documented case of exactly that. Now we must wonder how many other cases exist where the documentation wasn’t quite as clear. Furthermore, even evilutionists learn from their mistakes. You mean next time they’ll be open minded or at the very least allow a man to defend himself in person? Nah. I mean next time they won’t communicate by email on government accounts.
Evilutionist apologists often insist that in the march of science it is actually the golden quest to try to produce the evidence that overturns a long cherished theory. That is where the fame and glory is! Certainly, there is a bit of that, but even evilutionists understand how rare that is. It is much better from a financial security perspective to plug away on issues where grant money exists. That is not necessarily a slam to them, although it does diminish the argument. What really destroys the argument is the realization that there is a deliberate program not merely to withhold grant funding, but to actually end the professional career of scientists who question the orthodox evolutionary line.
In other words, even the likes of Francis Collins in his book “The Language of God” cites the above argument, but he fails to note that the alleged incentive to bring down a well established theory- if it can be done- is offset by the real pattern of pressure and intimidation that exists when a scientist does attack evolution. Other ‘well established theories’ are open for questioning, but not evolution.
Many people note that most scientists accept evolutionary theory and who are you to question the scientists? Here we see that it is in the scientist’s best interest to accept the theory and also to repudiate challenges to the theory… or even his designation of ‘scientist’ will be stripped from him.
So of course scientists accept evolutionary theory. It is increasingly clear that in the minds of the ones controlling the purse strings, ones views on evolution is a litmus test… part of the very definition of a scientists. Not an evolutionist? Very well, not a scientists either. Look! All scientists accept evolution! Feel persuaded? If so, remember Gonzalez.