Michael Egnor has posted a number of quotations from me about how I would deal with people who don't understand the basic principles of science [Dr. Larry Moran and Censorship of Intelligent Design].
He get it mostly right. If they are undergraduates who don't understand that evolution is a scientific fact, the Earth is 4.5 billion years old, and humans share a common ancestor with chimpanzees, then they flunk the course. If they are graduate students in a science department, then they don't get a Ph.D. If they are untenured faculty members in a science department, then they don't get tenure.
Readers might be amused at Michael Egnor's comments regarding Kirk Durston. It's further proof that IDiots are irony deficient. (Note that Kirk has not accepted my invitation to give a seminar here in the Biochemistry Department. I guess his "courage" has limits.)
Why should Mr. Durston’s willingness to present his scientific evidence for intelligent design to other scientists require courage? Isn't the presentation of evidence a routine part of science? Why should presenting evidence for intelligent design put Mr. Durston’s "scientific reputation on the line"?Are you listening Kirk? Michael Egnor M.D. wonders why you don't come here and defend your evidence that protein folding demonstrates the existence of God.
I gave you two dates last November: you can give a seminar on Tuesday April 22nd or Tuesday April 29th.