Guillermo Gonzalez tenure review goes to the Board of Regents today


It’s not certain there will be a decision immediately, though:

From the Iowa State Daily:

The Iowa Board of Regents will meet Thursday to discuss the tenure denial appeal of Guillermo Gonzalez, assistant professor of physics and astronomy at Iowa State, at its regional meeting on the ISU campus.

The meeting is at 8:30 a.m., with a one-hour closed session dedicated to discussing the appeal beginning at 8:35 a.m. The regents will emerge with either a decision on the case or a decision to postpone it.

“The board does not have to decide within the hour time slot given for the meeting, and discussion may take place over the following days,” said Iowa Board of Regents President David Miles.

Stay tuned…


I just saw a news article from the “Gazette online” which says that the board voted 7-1 to reaffirm the decision:[…]08/1006/news

How long until the DI and Gonzalez take this to court? Let’s hope soon! I’d love to see them lose in court again.

Maybe they could improve their odds in court by finding a Bush appointed judge who’s also a Christian and Republican. Of course a judge like that would rule ID is science!

“Gonzalez said he was disappointed in the decision, and also with the regents’ refusal to let him present his case during the closed session.”

He had the chance to present his case during his initial tenure review and that failed. What, did he have a surprise witness this time around? ID doesn’t get expelled – ID fails.

Bill Dillon at the Ames Tribune has more here as well. I’ll update the post as soon as I can log in; darn computer I’m at now doesn’t have my password automatically entered and I’ll be damned if I can remember it.…

Casey Luskin is throwing a hissy fit at Discovery Pravda

“The Board of Regents would not allow into the record extensive e-mail documentation showing that Dr. Gonzalez was denied tenure not due to his academic record, but because he supports intelligent design,” said Casey Luskin, Program Officer in Public Policy and Legal Affairs at Discovery Institute, where Gonzalez is a senior fellow. “Then the Board refused to grant Dr. Gonzalez the right to be heard through oral arguments. Does it come as any surprise that now they denied his appeal?”

“They’ve denied his due process rights throughout this entire appeal,” Luskin continued. “This kangaroo court decided its verdict long before today’s deliberations even began.”

“The most disheartening part of this appeal is that they refused Dr. Gonzalez the opportunity to present his case fully to the Board and to have face-to-face contact with the Board through oral arguments,” said Chuck Hurley.

“The Board of Regents had an opportunity to give justice to an outstanding scientist who is a leader in his field,” Luskin concluded. “Instead, they caved in to political pressure and threw academic freedom to the wind.”

Luskin seems to be under the misapprehension that tenure is an automatic right and that the review board is a court of law. How many tenure applicants bring their lawyers along? Reminiscent of the Dover trial where DI chickened out of appearing and defending ID because they (as witnesses) demanded their own lawyers.

LUKE 11:46 Woe unto you also, ye lawyers! For ye lade men with burdens grievous to be borne, and ye yourselves touch not the burdens with one of your fingers.

LUKE 11:52 Woe unto you, lawyers! For ye have taken away the key of knowledge: ye entered not in yourselves, and them that were entering in ye hindered.

Luskin has argued before the Supreme Court before, hasn’t he? It’s a slam dunk case, right? How hard could it be?

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by Tara Smith published on February 7, 2008 12:15 PM.

Some good news from Florida was the previous entry in this blog.

Well that didn’t take long is the next entry in this blog.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.



Author Archives

Powered by Movable Type 4.381

Site Meter