The Discovery Institute is currently making hay (again) over Iowa State's decision to deny tenure to Discovery Institute Fellow Guillermo Gonzalez. They've held a press conference and issued a [press release](http://www.evolutionnews.org/2007/12/intelligent_design_was_the_iss.html) claiming to have proof that Intelligent Design was "the" issue that resulted in Gonzalez not receiving tenure. I've read the release, and I'm unconvinced.
For starters, their release relies heavily on fragmentary quotes taken from emails that they obtained through an open records inquiry. Given the [notorious track record](http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/quotes/mine/project.html) of the entire anti-evolution movement when it comes to quoting scientists, I'm somewhat reluctant to accept the quotes provided at face value, particularly since the DI has not made the full text of the sources available for examination. Even if all of the quotes the DI uses do accurately capture the spirit of the full emails they are taken from (and does anyone want to offer me odds on that), I still don't think they've made their point. At most, they've demonstrated that Intelligent Design was _a_ factor in the decision. Since people who were involved in making the decision have already said as much publicly, that's not exactly a shocking revelation.
But let's assume, for the sake of argument, that Intelligent Design was the overriding factor in the tenure decision. Heck, let's assume that it was the _only_ factor that came into play in the tenure process. Let's pretend, in short, that the Discovery Institute has actually provided overwhelming evidence to support their argument. Let's set aside the facts and evidence that the Discovery Institute's using to support their claims, and look instead at the truly strange nature of the claims themselves.
[Read more at The Questionable Authority, where comments may be left:](http://scienceblogs.com/authority/2007/12/the_discovery_institute_and_th.php)