Some more new atheist bullying

[James Hannam]

Here's a reasonable enough article from an esteemed scientist who is also a Christian on engaging with creationism:

www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/jan/06/controversiesinscience-evolution

Well, fresh from hounding Michael Reiss from his job at the Royal Society, the bully-boys are at it again.

Here's Jonathan West, a CiF contributor in the comments:

"I'm shocked and extremely disappointed to find this kind of proposal coming from a scientist of one of our leading universities who really ought to know better. By writing this article, you have quite frankly brought the name of your university into disrepute."

Later, when someone calls for the Thomas Crowley, the author of the article, to be sacked, West replies:

"I don't know that dismissal is appropriate. Academic freedom is an important principle even if it sometimes encompasses the freedom of academics to make complete prats of themselves from time to time. But I do think it is appropriate for the matter to be brought to the attention of the University authorities so that they can decide whether some sort of action might be necessary. I have accordingly sent an email to the Principal expressing my concerns, providing a link back to this article so that he can see both the original article and the comments on it. You may wish to do the same. The Principal's email address is available on the university website.

Let me make it very clear, I have no objection at all to Prof Crowley or any other scientist holding religious beliefs. We have freedom of religion in this country, this is a thoroughly good thing, and this freedom applies to scientists just as much as it does to everybody else in the land.

My objection is solely to the way in which in this article he expresses thoroughly unscientific lines of reasoning while using his position and title to imply that what he is saying has anything to do with science, and that he does so in an article whose subject falls within the scope of his profession, specifically the teaching of science."

So West supports academic freedom but if a scientist says something he disagrees with, he'll report them to their boss with a view to them taking 'action'.

Something has gone very wrong here.

Best wishes

James

[turoldus]

Well, it's consistent with Adam Rutherford's call for creationist scientists to be sacked. Obviously ID's success in America makes some quarters afraid it spreads in secular Europe even though chances for that amount to nil, and they advocate radical measures to fight the "enemy". What annoys me most is that Crowley's admittedly awkward article will be used ad nauseam to disqualify any possibility of a peasible coexistence between science and religion.

[humphreyclarke]

Irrespective of your worldview, comments like this are extremely embarrassing.

"I'm appalled that a person with this obviously unscientific worldview has risen to his current position at a major European university. Others have clearly shown the lapses in his logic and scientific understanding so one can only conclude that this persons delusional religious beliefs have overcome his rational mind. I thought Dawkins was a little harsh in describing this situation as a national disgrace but I now think he didn't go far enough. It is a disgrace on a far wider basis. If this article represents the true views of the professor he should resign. If not, his employers should remove him quickly."

This is getting a bit ridiculous. People like Dawkins, Hitchens and Dennett can be fair minded and polite but their acolytes are fanatically intolerant and dangerously stupid.

[turoldus]

Jan 6, 2009 17:43:58 GMT humphreyclarke said:

This is getting a bit ridiculous. People like Dawkins, Hitchens and Dennett can be fair minded and polite but their acolytes are fanatically intolerant and dangerously stupid.

As far as academia is concerned, the only question is whether Mr. Crowley teaches geosciences competently. If he does, and refrain from proletytizing in the classroom, then there is no reason to sack him - which is the reason why Lehigh University has kept Behe among its staff despite disagreeing with his views. Obviously it's far too hard to understand for CiF's academic cleansers.

[bjorn]

The raging responses to Crowley show again how much Angry Atheists (which is a better term than "new") prefer propaganda to principled thinking.

Anyone not raging against God, not to mention keeping a firm stand against all and any "creationism", is an imbecile and immoral enemy who needs to be hunted down. Anyone commenting positive on God, or negative on the DHDH-team, is to be slammed in public. Preferably with a ruler.

[turoldus]

DHDH-team?

[rfmoo]

Dawkins Hitchens Dennett Harris?

Tentatively,

Richard

[bjorn]

Precisely, and they act like a syndrome.

[hawkinthesnow]

Am I alone in thinking that The Angry Atheist brigade are rapidly turning into a sect?

[sandwiches]

Ever read Bacon on atheism?.

www.authorama.com/essays-of-francis-bacon-17.html


Francis Bacon
Of Atheism
It appeareth in nothing more, that atheism is rather in the lip, than in the heart of man, than by this; that atheists will ever be talking of that their opinion, as if they fainted in it, within themselves, and would be glad to be strengthened, by the consent of others. Nay more, you shall have atheists strive to get disciples, as it fareth with other sects