Re: When Geoscientists Attack

This is a great article identifying some of the err...difficulties surrounding the evolutionist-creationist (or in some cirles, scientist-creationist) political scheme found at many major universities as shown in an insightful NYT piece (Mollie deftly mentions reminds us of the uni- in university).

One of my favorite quotations from the article was

Meanwhile three faculty members had written the university administration, arguing that Mr. Leonard’s project violated the university’s research standards in that the students involved were being subjected to something harmful (the idea that there were scientific alternatives to the theory of evolution) without receiving any benefit.

I'm sorry, but all I could hear was some sort of deep drum, beating the way towards an academic whoopcry in the dark, with a much darker modernistic inquisition on the way. What is harmful? The chance that students might disagree with their professors? The idea that any idea other than evolution just might be useful? How about that religion has nothing valuable to say, period? I'm actually not sorry, but simply glad to know the side on which I'm rooted.

Update: This blog post by Alister McGrath presents this lack of interest in seeking truth with even more clarity and insight by describing his own experiences with God, science, and Richard Dawkins.