quote:

ORIGINAL: Bettawrekonize
and they dishonestly discriminate against those that disagree with them.

quote:

In this thread.

quote:

They wouldn't allow it to be published for peer review.

quote:

That's not what I said. I said that they shouldn't discriminate against those that may question naturalism and that's just what they do.

quote:

I have substantiated my claims.

quote:

www.halos.com

quote:

Honorable Robert S. Walker
House of Representatives
Washington, D.C. 20515

Dear Mr. Walker:

Thank you for your memo to Mr. Raymond Bye, Jr. of May 12 and the enclosed letter from Mr. Leroy Anderson of Denver, Pennsylvania. Both of these are enclosed with this reply.

Mr. Anderson is correct when he states in his letter that Dr. Robert Gentry is the world's leading authority on the observation and measurement of anomolous radio-active haloes. Because of his recognized capabilities, Dr. Gentry's research was funded by the Foundation during the early 1970's. In 1977, however, a proposal presented by Dr. Gentry was declined. A copy of the pertinent correspondence is enclosed. That action was based upon the recommendations of six of his peer scientists, who found that the proposal did not measure up to either Dr. Gentry's earlier standards, as evidenced by his previously successful proposals, or to the standards of the Foundation.

Following the declination, Dr. Gentry requested a formal reconsideration of his proposal. The procedures to be followed in such a situation are set forth in the enclosed NSF Circular No. 127 (revised August 1980). The outcome of the reconsideration was that the decision to decline was sustained. A copy of the letter informing Dr. Gentry of that decision is enclosed. The proposal to which your constituent, Mr. Anderson, refers was submitted in 1979. It was reviewed by mail by six of Dr. Gentry's peer scientists and by a panel of six additional scientists. Based upon the recommendations of these twelve knowledgeable persons, the proposed research was declined in April 1980. A copy of the correspondence is enclosed.

Please note that in each letter to Dr. Gentry he has been invited to resubmit his proposed research ideas. The funding process within the NSF is competitive for each submission of a proposal. The fact that a proposer has a grant in force does not bear upon whether he will be awarded a new grant. Each offering must stand on its own merit. We will be pleased to review and evaluate a proposal from Dr. Gentry at any time. I assure you that any submission will be given a fair, honest and open appraisal by his peers and that if they judge his ideas as worthy of support, he will be funded.

We appreciate your interest in the Foundation's programs and will be pleased to supply you with further information if you wish.

Enclosures Sincerely yours,

Francis S. Johnson

quote:

I have already given you an example of a creationist grant denied only after it was known that the research may support YEC. Keep ignoring.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Method
Then show it.

quote:


Where in this thread? Post #?

quote:


What does that mean? The editor sent it to a reviewer. The reviewer panned it. The editor agreed with the review. End of story. The letter failed peer review.

If you think the review is unfair then show me where the review was unfair.

quote:


This page is a court transcript which has Gentry on record admitting that his research was flawed, and this was one of the reasons that his grant was rejected:

quote:


It was denied for known criteria that did not involve his creationist leanings. All Gentry does is whine. He gives zero evidence that the grant rejection was based on his creationist leanings.

quote:


They fear that the tenants of intelligent design and the creationists (people I hate as much as they do) will rejoice and quote them as being on their side.

quote:


Professors should be able to fail any student, no matter what the grade records indicate, if the professor discovers the student is a creationist. Furthermore, the student's department should have the right of retracting grades, and possibly even degrees, if the student becomes a creationist later. (Kendrick Frazier Skeptical Inquirer Fall, 1983)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bettawrekonize
In the case of Gentry and Behe.

quote:

You've already read them.

quote:


It's already been done.

quote:

Where? He admit that some of his previous conclusions regarding previous research wasn't completely accurate but what does that have to do with this case? No one is perfect.

quote:

The evidence has already been given. They had no problems giving him grants before it was known his research may support YEC. Only after they discover his research supports YEC, they make up a bunch of bogus irrelevant reasons to deny him grants. I see no reason to believe this is a coincidence. Feel free to keep ignoring the evidence.

quote:

quote:


They fear that the tenants of intelligent design and the creationists (people I hate as much as they do) will rejoice and quote them as being on their side.

...

quote:


Professors should be able to fail any student, no matter what the grade records indicate, if the professor discovers the student is a creationist. Furthermore, the student's department should have the right of retracting grades, and possibly even degrees, if the student becomes a creationist later. (Kendrick Frazier Skeptical Inquirer Fall, 1983)

http://creationwiki.org/Anticreationist_debate_tactics

quote:

The fact is, Behe and Gentry used to get grants before their positions were known.

quote:

Same is true with Gonzalez. He got the early achievement award for research and yet as soon as it was known that he was an ID advocate, they make up all these bogus reasons to discriminate against him.

quote:

When the secular community stops dishonestly discriminating against those that question naturalism then we can talk.

quote:


What I'm really eager to do is write grant proposals to do research on some of the ideas I have as a result of intelligent design theory. So we'll see what the future holds.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bettawrekonize

Behe

quote:


What I'm really eager to do is write grant proposals to do research on some of the ideas I have as a result of intelligent design theory. So we'll see what the future holds.

http://www.leaderu.com/real/ri9602/behe.html

Of course the secular community would not fund this with tax dollars. UCD and other naturalistic philosophies can't afford to have criticisms and opposing views funded with tax dollars and they can't afford not to have themselves funded with tax dollars.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Method
Where is the discrimination
...
Where? Post #?

quote:


It is his faulty research which the review board for his grant criticized, not his creationist leanings.

quote:


They aren't bogus, irrelevant reasons. They have everything to do with his science which is what they were judging.

quote:


Were any of these tactics used against anyone?

quote:


Behe no longer submits grants in the field he used to work in.

quote:


Gentry's grant was denied because of the quality of his work, not his creationist leanings.

quote:


His lack of research grants is not bogus. His total drop off in pulications is not bogus. His inability to graduate students is not bogus. His refusal to collaborate with colleagues is not bogus. None of this has to do with his ID leanings. All of these are legitimate reasons for a denial of tenure at any research university. The dean of the college reviewed the case and left out anything mentioning ID. He found that the tenure board ruled correctly. Strike three.

quote:


They haven't started Betta.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bettawrekonize
Keep ignoring

quote:

There is no reason to believe this.

quote:

Again, ID is falsifiable and UCD is not.

quote:

Already given.

quote:

Yes, because they would not fund him now that they know he is an ID advocate.

quote:

Again, there is no reason to believe this. They only denied him after it was known he was a creationist.

quote:

These alleged arguments have been dealt with in the thread I linked to. Keep ignoring. For instance, they never specified how much grant money is required beforehand. If anything, someone who does more research with less money should be congratulated.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Method
was not graduating students

quote:


Other than the reviewers stating that this is exactly what happened? Give me a break.

quote:


Where? Post #?

quote:


Tell you what. Give me one paper that Gonzalez wrote that was based on research he did while a professor at ISU. Can you name any?

quote:


and his only publications were left over work from his post-doc years.

quote:


Prove it.

quote:


In 1977, however, a proposal presented by Dr. Gentry was declined. A copy of the pertinent correspondence is enclosed. That action was based upon the recommendations of six of his peer scientists, who found that the proposal did not measure up to either Dr. Gentry's earlier standards, as evidenced by his previously successful proposals, or to the standards of the Foundation.

quote:


Eeks. He was able to pull in just a tiny percentage of what his peers were able to pull in.

quote:


"Dr. Gonzalez is eminently qualified for the promotion according to your guidelines of excellence in scholarship and exhibiting a potential for national distinction. In light of your criteria I would certainly recommend the promotion."

Indeed, 2/3 of the external reviewers who gave an opinion about whether Dr. Gonzalez deserves tenure agreed that he should receive tenure.
...
# ISU Physicist John Hauptman explicitly admitted in an op-ed that he voted against Gonzalez’s tenure because of ID: "I participated in the initial vote and voted no, based on this fundamental question: What is science? … It is purely a question of what is science and what is not, and a physics department is not obligated to support notions that do not even begin to meet scientific standards."
# During tenure deliberations in November 2006, Dr. Gonzalez’s department chair Eli Rosenberg devoted a full third of his chair’s statement in Gonzalez’s tenure file to discussing intelligent design, instructing voting members of ISU’s Department of Physics and Astronomy to make ID a litmus test where Gonzalez’s support for ID as science "disqualifies him from serving as a science educator."

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bettawrekonize

quote:

ORIGINAL: Method
was not graduating students

Jhud and I addressed this in post 43, 45, 112 at

http://forums.christianity.com/m_2392215/mpage_5/key_/tm.htm

quote:

I don't expect them to admit that the reason they denied grants to Gentry is because his views may question naturalism. However, all the evidence seems to suggest this to be the case.

quote:

http://www.evolutionnews.org/2007/12/in_further_attempts_to_try.html

quote:

quote:


and his only publications were left over work from his post-doc years.

that's been refuted so now you're just making up any excuse to justify the misbehavior of ISU.

quote:

I can't prove it with absolute certainty, but there is substantial evidence suggesting dishonest discrimination against scientists who may criticize naturalism.

quote:

They decided that the proposals did not measure up to his earlier standards only after it was known his research may support YEC.

quote:

Again, he did more research than his peers at ISU

quote:

and he received the early achievement award for research at ISU. Why should they give him that award if they weren't happy with his research at ISU?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Method
His publications were dwindling to nothing. He was not doing any research that was known of

quote:


work has been cited in Science, Nature and many other scientific journals. All told, there were nearly 1,500 citations to his articles and research in science journals by the end of 2005.

quote:


Correlation is not causation. Gentry is a martyr only in his own world.

All you have to go on is some dreamt up paranoid fantasy.

quote:


Papers are often written years after the data is collected, and this was the case with Gonzalez.
...

quote:


Again, he did more research than his peers at ISU

Not while at ISU.

quote:


Rossi's implication is that Professor Gonzalez was denied tenure because he didn’t receive enough grant money. Ironically, this is refuted by an op-ed the Des Moines Register printed by ISU physicist John Hauptman, who admitted that his vote against Gonzalez's tenure was based solely on Gonzalez's support for intelligent design. Moreover, Gonzalez actually received more grant money than many of those given tenure at ISU this year, and he has more peer-reviewed publications than nearly all of those approved for tenure. Clearly, it is incredible to believe that Gonzalez was objectively less qualified than the 91% of ISU faculty applying for tenure in 2007 who were approved.

quote:


Correlation does not evidence causation.

quote:

The same day Geoffroy denied Gonzalez's tenure appeal, the Des Moines Register published a story stating Gonzalez had only attracted $22,661 in external research grants since arriving at ISU.

During an interview with The Tribune this summer, Gonzalez countered that claim, saying he has brought in more. He said shortly before he left the University of Washington to come to ISU, he received, and brought much with him, a three-year, $58,000 grant he used to write his book "The Privileged Planet" and a five-year, $64,000 NASA grant, which he used to pay a doctoral student at the University of Washington. Then, as his tenure documents were at the provost level for review, he received promise of a five-year, $50,000 grant from the Discovery Institute.

Although it is more than the Des Moines Register originally reported, it was still far below that of the average $1.3 million in research funding the newspaper found tenured faculty in the physics and astronomy department had generated during their first six years before receiving tenure.

There was no mention of research funding during the press conference or in the packets provided by the institute. When asked following the press conference about the disparity, Luskin said research funding was not specifically stated in the guidelines required for tenure and therefore he believed it should not have been a factor in his tenure denial.

"Astronomers do not need the kind of grant funding to do research that, say, a physicist does," he said. "All you really need is travel time to go to the observatory, permission to go to the observatory and a PC computer to crunch some numbers."

But Gonzalez said during his interview with The Tribune last summer that he was told, beginning with his three-year tenure review in 2004, that he needed to bring in more research funding. He added he heard the same message in reviews every year since, as well.

He has made the effort, he said, submitting two grant applications per year, but to no avail.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bettawrekonize
Keep repeating this lie or delusion. He received the early achievement award for research at ISU for a reason, because he surpassed his peers in research at ISU.

quote:

…a closer look at Mr. Gonzalez’s case raises some questions about his recent scholarship and whether he has lived up to his early promise. …

Under normal circumstances, Mr. Gonzalez’s publication record would be stellar and would warrant his earning tenure at most universities, according to Mr. Hirsch [a scholar who analyzed the publication record]. But Mr. Gonzalez completed the best scholarship, as judged by his peers, while doing postdoctoral work at the University of Texas at Austin and at the University of Washington, where he received his Ph.D. His record has trailed off since then.

“It looks like it slowed down considerably,” said Mr. Hirsch…. “It’s not clear that he started new things, or anything on his own, in the period he was an assistant professor at Iowa State.”

That pattern may have hurt his case. “Tenure review only deals with his work since he came to Iowa State,” said John McCarroll, a spokesman for the university.

When considering a tenure case, faculty committees try to anticipate what kind of work a professor will accomplish in the future. “The only reason the previous record is relevant is the extent to which it can predict future performance,” said Mr. Hirsch. “Generally, it’s a good indication, but in some cases it’s not.”

David L. Lambert, director of the McDonald Observatory at Texas, supervised Mr. Gonzalez during his postdoctoral fellowship there in the early to mid-1990s. … [H]e is not aware of any important new work by Mr. Gonzalez since he arrived at Iowa State, such as branching off into different directions of research. “I don’t know what else he has done,” Mr. Lambert said. …

Mr. Gonzalez said he does not have any grants through NASA or the National Science Foundation, the two agencies that would normally support his research…. He arrived at Iowa State in 2001, but none of his graduate students there have thus far completed their doctoral work

quote:

ORIGINAL: Method
So Gonzalez knew beforehand that his lack of funding was a problem, and he was told that by more than one person.

quote:


Gonzalez didn't do any research at ISU.

quote:


In any event, Gonzalez received more grant funding than 35 percent of faculty members who were granted tenure at ISU in 2007 and who listed their research grants on their curriculum vitae.

quote:


One reviewer observed that ISU’s Department of Physics and Astronomy does not consider grants as a criterion for gaining tenure, and stated that “Dr. Gonzalez is eminently qualified for the promotion according to your guidelines of excellence in scholarship and exhibiting a potential for national distinction. In light of your criteria I would certainly recommend the promotion.”

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bettawrekonize
I edited my previous post. As it states, "Moreover, Gonzalez actually received more grant money than many of those given tenure at ISU this year, and he has more peer-reviewed publications than nearly all of those approved for tenure."

http://www.evolutionnews.org/2007/07/misinformation_left_unchecked.html

quote:

Not true

quote:


In any event, Gonzalez received more grant funding than 35 percent of faculty members who were granted tenure at ISU in 2007 and who listed their research grants on their curriculum vitae.

quote:

Uncommondescent

quote:

I will take the secular community seriously when they stop dishonestly discriminating against those who question naturalism (from a scientific perspective).

quote:

ORIGINAL: Method
I will take you seriously when you stop confusing grant money in the humanities and grant money in the sciences. You really have no clue how science is done, do you?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bettawrekonize

quote:

ORIGINAL: Method
I will take you seriously when you stop confusing grant money in the humanities and grant money in the sciences. You really have no clue how science is done, do you?

Discriminating against Gonzalez and others . .

quote:

ORIGINAL: Method
No one is discriminating against them as I have shown. Gonzalez did not gain tenure for very legitimate reasons. You can't show that Gentry was discriminated against. Behe's letter was peer reviewed, and it failed for the reasons given in the review.

quote:


Professors should be able to fail any student, no matter what the grade records indicate, if the professor discovers the student is a creationist. Furthermore, the student's department should have the right of retracting grades, and possibly even degrees, if the student becomes a creationist later. (Kendrick Frazier Skeptical Inquirer Fall, 1983)

quote:


They fear that the tenants of intelligent design and the creationists (people I hate as much as they do) will rejoice and quote them as being on their side.

quote:


In 2005, three ISU faculty members drafted a statement and petition against intelligent design in the science curriculum that collected 120 signatures.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bettawrekonize
They are dishonestly discriminating against them, as I have shown.

quote:

E-mails at ISU strongly imply that ID had a huge influence.

quote:

There is substantial evidence that Gentry was discriminated against only because his research may have supported YEC.

quote:

Behe had no problems publishing before it was known he was an ID advocate. Afterwards, they discriminated against him too.

quote:


Professors should be able to fail any student, no matter what the grade records indicate, if the professor discovers the student is a creationist. Furthermore, the student's department should have the right of retracting grades, and possibly even degrees, if the student becomes a creationist later. (Kendrick Frazier Skeptical Inquirer Fall, 1983)

quote:

Even science admits they don't publish creationist research.

quote:


In 2005, three ISU faculty members drafted a statement and petition against intelligent design in the science curriculum that collected 120 signatures.

quote:

Science doesn't progress by method of blacklisting and proclamations through petitions.

quote:

To say that unfair discrimination does not exist is either a lie or a delusion.

quote:


...the U.S. Senate adopted a "sense of the Senate" amendment to the Elementary and Secondary Education Act authorization bill... Although the text of the amendment appeared to promote the development of students' critical thinking skills, it also contained the following sentence: "Where topics are taught that may generate controversy (such as biological evolution), the curriculum should help students to understand the full range of scientific views that exist." ... nearly 100 science organizations mobilized in opposition to the amendment.[**] The amendment never made it into the final bill...

quote:

ORIGINAL: Method
A second committe came to the same conclusion as the first.

quote:


You have admitted that no one, of the 12 reviewers and the granting committee, has ever stated that his YEC views were a factor. All we have is your paranoia.

quote:


You have to do research to publish. Behe stopped doing research.

quote:


Was Frazier on any committee, review board, or tenure committee in any of the incidents listed? No.

quote:


They also admit that they don't publish bad science.

quote:


Gonzalez's ID leanings were ignored in the appeal. He was still denied tenure.

quote:


Last I checked Gonzalez is still a professor at ISU. He is still able to apply for grants, do research, take on graduate students, and do everything that a tenured professor is able to do. He is still allowed to reapply for tenure. If he is able to start a research project, get funding, and graduate students then the tenure committee will have no excuse to deny him tenure.

quote:


He is not blacklisted at all.