Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

Creationism conference: Either attend the event and write about it, or mind your own business.

Share
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Flipboard
Print
Email

Here (Michigan State U):

Emily Weigel, an MSU graduate student in evolution and a member of the BEACON center, says the event has made her feel like she’s under attack—in part because of her own religious faith. “As a religious BEACONite, I’ve never felt unwelcome” at MSU, she says. “But this conference on campus has made me uneasy about my identity on campus for the first time. It’s antiacademic in the way it is being carried out, and honestly, it is shaming for fellow Christians to target individuals in an attack such as this one.” MSU plant biologist David Lowry says that he and some colleagues also worry that the event could harm MSU’s reputation within the scientific community.

Shoutout to Emily: Get over yourself, will you?

If you can’t deal with people you disagree with, why are you even at a university?

No really, this is a serious question: Many of us have had just about enough of people who claim to want advanced degrees but cannot deal with the level of contention one might find in a hairdressing shop or checkout line in Canada. Such people spoil freedom for everybody else because they can’t handle it themselves.

Either attend the event and write about it, or mind your own business.

Fortunately, so far

University officials say they have no plans to interfere with the event. “Free speech is at the heart of academic freedom and is something we take very seriously,” said Kent Cassella, MSU’s associate vice president for communications, in a statement. “Any group, regardless of viewpoint, has the right to assemble in public areas of campus or petition for space to host an event so long as it does not engage in disorderly conduct or violate rules. While MSU is not a sponsor of the creation summit, MSU is a marketplace of free ideas.”

So you mean MSU is really a university and not just another tax-funded degree mill?

Let’s hope the idea catches on.

Note: I am tempted to start a new topic category: Whining

Follow UD News at Twitter!

Comments
ppolish @ 28. Thanks a lot. Your OT comment on 'earth as the center of the universe' sounded so absurd it sent me on a Google quest that took me through cosmic radiation, barycenters, universal ether, the theory of relativity and even to (why does it always seem to go here?) quantum physics -- which always makes me 'hair on fire' crazy. Just stop it! 'Earth as the center' may be crazy, but not nearly as crazy as insisting that the fine tuning of the universe, the earth and the functionally specified complex order - information - of living things are all the product of a mindless and random universe that exists and is structured for no reason or purpose. -- Or the (crazy or just evil?) notion that a *university* should not allow a conference on the theory that it's all intelligently designed. I thought the 'versity' part of the name refers to 'diversity' of ideas. Or maybe you only like the 'uni' part of it?leodp
August 14, 2015
August
08
Aug
14
14
2015
08:15 AM
8
08
15
AM
PDT
jstanley01 said: "The real issue is the incipient fascism in this alumnus’s whiny opposition to free speech at a taxpayer-funded state college." I can see Ms. Weigel's point. If I was an MD from Johns Hopkins I wouldn't want a witchoctor's convention, attacking medical practices and touting spells and chicken entrails as cures, at my school either. Why do you have a problem with Ms. Weigel's right of free speech to criticize what she sees as a insult to the academic integrity of her university? Makes you seem somewhat of a hypocrite.Enkidu
November 1, 2014
November
11
Nov
1
01
2014
02:16 PM
2
02
16
PM
PDT
tjguy @39
Well Thorton, it looks like you’ll have to figure out a different reason to criticize the conference. And you should take back all your false accusations as well since they are not using the university’s name. All that worry and posting for nothing!...
Oh no, Thorton accomplished his intention in stellar fashion. His intention being, quite transparently, to misdirect the conversation away from the real issue. The real issue is the incipient fascism in this alumnus's whiny opposition to free speech at a taxpayer-funded state college. And look. Thorton managed to start his shell game in the very first post too! Good job, jackass.jstanley01
November 1, 2014
November
11
Nov
1
01
2014
01:48 PM
1
01
48
PM
PDT
Sanford is the ID guy.Silver Asiatic
November 1, 2014
November
11
Nov
1
01
2014
10:08 AM
10
10
08
AM
PDT
I took a look at the board of this organization. The only PhD in biological sciences received his degree from California Pacific university, a known (now defunct) fraudulent diploma mill. Out of curiosity, does the UD community agree with their beliefs: 1) The big bang is a hoax? 2) Dinosaurs and humans lived together? 3) There was a global flood that carved the grand canyon? 4) Plate tectonics is false? 5) It is the role of 'scientists' to turn young minds to Jesus? Just trying to get a sense of what the excitement is about for intelligent design advocates.REC
November 1, 2014
November
11
Nov
1
01
2014
07:23 AM
7
07
23
AM
PDT
Did any of the people making all the fuss happen to notice that the first sentence of comment #1 was phrased as a question, not a definitive statement?Enkidu
October 31, 2014
October
10
Oct
31
31
2014
09:10 PM
9
09
10
PM
PDT
Thorton:
That’s the whole point. Some people will undoubtably come just because they falsely think the conference is somehow endorsed by a reputable school. That’s what makes using the MSU name so dishonest.
Anyone going to the conference can find out the physical location easily enough from the website or Google Maps. “No one could find it” is about as poor an excuse as they come. Well Thorton, it looks like you'll have to figure out a different reason to criticize the conference. And you should take back all your false accusations as well since they are not using the university's name. All that worry and posting for nothing! Perhaps the university should just make a rule that unless the event is specifically sponsored by the school, no group is able to use the school name on their literature. Would that make you happy? Of course, that would apply to any atheist group using the school as well, right? Their atheist seminar would then become the Atheism Seminar in East Lansing. Perhaps you could write to the school and make your suggestion!tjguy
October 31, 2014
October
10
Oct
31
31
2014
03:34 PM
3
03
34
PM
PDT
Good news! I contacted the group itself and found out they will be taping the event and hope to have it on line by maybe the middle of December! If I find out more, I'll post the information. I was wishing I could hear these lectures and it looks like that will be possible! Doug Sharp is the guy who will be taping it. If anyone wants to contact the group, here is their e-mail address: creationsummit@live.comtjguy
October 31, 2014
October
10
Oct
31
31
2014
03:21 PM
3
03
21
PM
PDT
MSU is a great place for a Creation conference as Lenski's long-running experiment supports baraminology.Joe
October 31, 2014
October
10
Oct
31
31
2014
03:45 AM
3
03
45
AM
PDT
Edward, Don't be silly as facts do not matter to our opponents. ;)Joe
October 30, 2014
October
10
Oct
30
30
2014
10:21 AM
10
10
21
AM
PDT
I'm confused. Here is a quote from the article: The 1 November event, called the Origin Summit, is sponsored by Creation Summit, I'm not sure where the group claimed their event was sanctioned by the university. Could anybody help me? TIA, EdEdward
October 30, 2014
October
10
Oct
30
30
2014
10:19 AM
10
10
19
AM
PDT
Educated people should be able to tell the difference between something being held at MSU and something being held by MSU. Evolutionists don't fit into that category.Joe
October 30, 2014
October
10
Oct
30
30
2014
10:04 AM
10
10
04
AM
PDT
There's an easy and honest way for the organizers of a Creationism conference or anyone else to advertise their events at schools. If the event organizers are just renting a room or building at a college and the event is not officially sanctioned by the college, the event organizers should make that obvious at the start of the event to everyone who attends and also make it obvious in all of their advertisements for the event. Such as: This event is being held in a rented room or building and is not officially sanctioned by MSU.Astroman
October 30, 2014
October
10
Oct
30
30
2014
10:02 AM
10
10
02
AM
PDT
OT: The Dog Delusion - October 30, 2014 Excerpt: In his latest book, geneticist Wolf-Ekkehard Lönnig of the Max Planck Institutes in Germany takes on the widespread view that dog breeds prove macroevolution.,,, He shows in great detail that the incredible variety of dog breeds, going back in origin several thousand years ago but especially to the last few centuries, represents no increase in information but rather a decrease or loss of function on the genetic and anatomical levels. Michael Behe writes: "Dr. Lönnig shows forcefully that one of the chief examples Darwinists rely on to convince the public of macroevolution -- the enormous variation in dogs -- actually shows the opposite. Extremes in size and anatomy come at the cost of broken genes and poor health. Even several gene duplications were found to interfere strongly with normal growth and development as is also often the case in humans. So where is the evidence for Darwinian evolution now? The science here is indeed solid. Intriguingly, Lönnig's prediction from 2013 on starch digestion in wolves has already been confirmed in a study published this year.,,," http://www.evolutionnews.org/2014/10/the_dog_delusio090751.htmlbornagain77
October 30, 2014
October
10
Oct
30
30
2014
06:05 AM
6
06
05
AM
PDT
@1
I wonder if the creationists will take to calling this the Michigan State University Creation Conference, dishonestly implying that MSU sponsored the event.
You needn't wonder, as the linked piece plainly states in the second paragraph that the event is to be called the "Origin Summit". --------- @10
That’s the whole point. Some people will undoubtably come just because they falsely think the conference is somehow endorsed by a reputable school. That’s what makes using the MSU name so dishonest. Anyone going to the conference can find out the physical location easily enough from the website or Google Maps. “No one could find it” is about as poor an excuse as they come.
Again, no cause for alarm, as the actual name of the conference doesn't include the school's name. Although, I see no dishonesty in using the name suggested by Silver Asiatic. If they were to call it Creation Conference at Michigan State University, there is no lie being promulgated by that name. The name uses the preposition "at" to indicate proximity or location. So long as they didn't substitute "by" or "of" for "at" in the hypothetical name, there is no indication of association beyond venue. --------- @15
Science isn’t determined by popular vote. Teaching pseudoscience horsecrap to impressionable children isn’t a democratic right. Falsely implying that there’s still a scientific debate over creationism by associating it with MSU isn’t protecting integrity, it’s pushing a lie.
What do you mean by "science" when you say "Science isn't determined by popular vote"? (i.e. a particular branch, all branches, a body of knowledge, system or method). I'm assuming that you mean a body of knowledge. If so, I do believe "popular vote" of a fashion is responsible for the creation and continued curation of a "body of knowledge". The "scientific community" (or group of scientists) must agree upon the opinions generated on a particular subject otherwise those opinions aren't included among the "body of knowledge" utilized by the constituents of the scientific community. There may not be a ballot to elect an article of knowledge into the larger "body of knowledge", however, the accumulated opinions of the constituency will generally perform the process of "election" for an article of knowledge. You develop an opinion upon some aspect of the strength of hydrogen bonding in chemical reactions, for instance, and are able to successfully persuade other members of the scientific community that your opinion has merit. Slowly (relative to ballot box exercises), the entirety of the scientific community comes to accept that an opinion is valuable to the group. Once that happens, the opinion has now gained entry into the "body of knowledge". The converse is true. I'm not certain what you mean by "democratic right", but largely what "rights" one is entitled to or guaranteed depends largely to which governing body(s) jurisdiction you find yourself subject. In the U.S.A. for example, there are several several jurisdictions (federal, state, local) that can claim governance over public education. They vary in terms of the degrees of freedom from regulation, from one jurisdiction to the next. It is possible that you live in a very restrictive regulatory environment and so must adhere to a strict, state-sponsored, curriculum. It is also true that you are free to select what ever curriculum you so choose, or even to make up your own. What defines "pseudoscience horsecrap[sp]" from presumably "non-pseudoscience horsecrap" is largely a matter of opinion, in the U.S.A., and therefore subject to the political process (regardless of the perceived absurdity of the subject).ciphertext
October 29, 2014
October
10
Oct
29
29
2014
12:21 PM
12
12
21
PM
PDT
Sirius at 28, I wouldn't be so hard on her EXCEPT that all too often today these kinds of women are flattered and catered to in these fits and moods - inadvertently creating the impression that women who are scholars normally behave this way, thus further inadvertently catering to stereotypes about women. Next thing, we'll hear the conference has been cancelled to protect her FEELINGS about her RELIGION. Hey, if they've got this kind of thing going on down there, who cares about a War on Women? I don't doubt she could behave more responsibly, given a chance. But is there any incentive to behave more responsibly? Well, we'll see.News
October 29, 2014
October
10
Oct
29
29
2014
11:31 AM
11
11
31
AM
PDT
News, glad you mentioned Emily Weigel by name. I wonder if she knows she has been in the news. She's obviously too dumb to be in grad school. But I guess grad students (especially gals!) just have to sign on to the conventional wisdom to get degrees.Sirius
October 29, 2014
October
10
Oct
29
29
2014
10:34 AM
10
10
34
AM
PDT
Film Shocker... Does the Universe Revolve Around Earth? Coming to a Theatre near you maybe. http://m.cbn.com/cbnnews/healthscience/2014/October/Film-Shocker-Does-the-Universe-Revolve-Around-Earth-/ppolish
October 29, 2014
October
10
Oct
29
29
2014
10:17 AM
10
10
17
AM
PDT
What frosted me about Emily Weigel's remarks is their self-referentiality. It's all about her feelings. As a grad student in evolution, she could just go to the conference and report on it, however critically. Lots of people are like that, to be sure. They are not suited to the life of the mind, and it is a huge mistake to cater to them. The demands for protection and comfort just keep increasing, until finally the U becomes a hotel that gives degrees.News
October 29, 2014
October
10
Oct
29
29
2014
09:28 AM
9
09
28
AM
PDT
From the website:
BEACON is a place where we study EVOLUTION IN ACTION, and we have fun doing it! We study evolution going on in the lab and the field, evolution of “digital organisms” in artificial computer environments, and application of evolutionary principles to solving of real-world problems in engineering and computer science.
So, I take it then, that in cas of e.g. computer malfunctioning, they solve matters by "evolutionary principles", IOW random processes. What will that look like? Sudden change in the environment of the computer - e.g. sudden flooding? Or take out the ol' hammer and have at it?Box
October 29, 2014
October
10
Oct
29
29
2014
09:09 AM
9
09
09
AM
PDT
Christianity didn't bring us geocentrism. That was the Greek philosophers. Galileo, Kepler and Copernicus were Christians. It's amazing how the Christian worldview is frequently blamed for the mistaken notions it ended, like geocentrism.bb
October 29, 2014
October
10
Oct
29
29
2014
09:09 AM
9
09
09
AM
PDT
The reason geocentrism and stork-involved reproduction are not currently on the table for discussion is that NOBODY seriously believes either one of those paradigms. Truth is, much as Denyse referenced in her article about Denialism, the fear held by evolutionists is that discussion, open and honest, without all the cards being held by them, will somehow crack apart their Darwinian edifice. THEIR denials are signs of their own lack of confidence in their doctrine.OldArmy94
October 29, 2014
October
10
Oct
29
29
2014
08:50 AM
8
08
50
AM
PDT
Don't assume the audience is naive. I am sure any one who attends can decide on their own whether to believe ID or not. What evolutionist are afraid of is that the audience will be convinced, due to the strength of ID argument, that ToE is not a concrete theory. (even if no ones becomes an IDist, they are sure to start doubting ToE). Darwinist are afraid they will lose all respect when the audience realizes how weak ToE is.the bystander
October 29, 2014
October
10
Oct
29
29
2014
08:49 AM
8
08
49
AM
PDT
Evolution, in contrast to Christianity which has given us physics, geology, zoology, microbiology, has given us such notable sciences like phrenology and eugenics. Big zeros like ool studies.bb
October 29, 2014
October
10
Oct
29
29
2014
08:41 AM
8
08
41
AM
PDT
As Dennis Prager writes:: WHY LIBERALS SO OFTEN FEEL “OFFENDED” The feelings-based nature of liberalism helps explain a liberal and Left phenomenon— how much more likely people on the Left are to say that they feel “offended” when confronted with views with which they differ. Where other people would say, “I disagree,” many on the Left will say, “I am offended.” This is a key to understanding Leftist thinking. After all, when are people offended ? When their feelings are hurt. A pro-choice woman is far more likely to say that she is “offended” when encountering a pro-life position than is an equally fervent pro-life woman when she encounters a pro-choice position. Why? Because the pro-choice position is nearly always feelings-based: A mother’s feelings, not the objective worth of a human fetus, determine whether a human fetus has any intrinsic worth. Prager, Dennis (2012-04-24). Still the Best Hope: Why the World Needs American Values to Triumph (pp. 83-84). Broadside Books. Kindle Edition.[email protected]
October 29, 2014
October
10
Oct
29
29
2014
08:35 AM
8
08
35
AM
PDT
Science isn’t determined by popular vote. Teaching pseudoscience horsecrap to impressionable children isn’t a democratic right.
The educational standards are established by the scientific establishment in education. So, perhaps they are the threat to the US's technological advantage? Either evolution is going to win the debate or not. It has to convince the school boards and and scientific educators. It has all the advantages. With that, how does ID become a threat? Are diverse opinions a danger in a democratic system led by scientific educators?
Falsely implying that there’s still a scientific debate over creationism by associating it with MSU isn’t protecting integrity, it’s pushing a lie.
Your opinions are welcome in the "marketplace of ideas". ID supporters find quite a large number of lies in the world of evolutionary science as well.
We don’t teach geocentrism in schools, we don’t teach the stork brings the babies and we don’t teach creationism.
Somehow scientific educators and school boards were able to figure out that there's no stork bringing babies. But apparently they can't figure out that ID is an equivalent mythological lie? If that was the case, I could see why any mention of ID would have to be banned. We couldn't trust anyone to actually understand the truth. The power of ID-promoters would be so great that it could deceive the entire US scientific-educational system. That's something even very accomplished politicians can't do.Silver Asiatic
October 29, 2014
October
10
Oct
29
29
2014
08:35 AM
8
08
35
AM
PDT
Science isn’t determined by popular vote.
And yet you think that it is.
Teaching pseudoscience horsecrap to impressionable children isn’t a democratic right.
And yet that is exactly what is happening today. Evolutionism is the bane of society and needs to be taken out of schools.Joe
October 29, 2014
October
10
Oct
29
29
2014
08:20 AM
8
08
20
AM
PDT
"Trekkies aren’t actively lobbying school boards to have their fiction taught to teenagers in public schools as scientific fact." So Trekkies are more honest than Darwinists?Edward
October 29, 2014
October
10
Oct
29
29
2014
08:19 AM
8
08
19
AM
PDT
roding
On an unrelated topic, this broke yesterday: http://www.independent.co.uk/n.....22514.html I don’t know if UD plans to report on it, but it seems a significant and relevant story. Would be interesting to hear Denyse’s perspective on it.
Darn activist Pope! :)Thorton
October 29, 2014
October
10
Oct
29
29
2014
08:17 AM
8
08
17
AM
PDT
That’s the whole point. Some people will undoubtably come just because they falsely think the conference is somehow endorsed by a reputable school. That’s what makes using the MSU name so dishonest. Anyone going to the conference can find out the physical location easily enough from the website or Google Maps. “No one could find it” is about as poor an excuse as they come.
Knowing where a conference is without having to check a map is called good marketing. Anyone is entitled to use good marketing to boost attendance. Creationism doesn't need MSU's reputation given many of its adherents were founders of the most rigorous branches of science. You only think that way because evolution needs such crutches.bb
October 29, 2014
October
10
Oct
29
29
2014
08:11 AM
8
08
11
AM
PDT
1 2

Leave a Reply