No succor for creationists: Ball State University appoints a scientist as president

June 2, 2014 • 8:32 am

Ball State University (BSU) in Muncie, Indiana, was the site of “Hedingate,” the controversy about whether Eric Hedin, a professor of Physics and Astronomy, could proselytize his students for Intelligent Design (ID) and Abrahamic religion in his Honors science class. After a complaint to the President by the Freedom from Religion Foundation, BSU’s president, Jo Ann Gora, convened a panel of academics to study the matter. She wound up making a strong and no-nonsense statement that ID would not be taught in BSU’s science classes.

The Discovery Institute kvetched mightily, and leaned on four Republican Indiana legislators to threaten BSU with loss of funding for their “censorship” of ID.  Those legislators met with Gora a few months ago and, as far as I know, there was no conclusive outcome, as I expected. There was simply no way that the President would make her university the laughingstock of scientists by allowing people like Hedin to teach goddy stuff in science classes.

All this has been documented in detail on this site, for it was a nice victory for real science against the superstitions of ID and their whining flaks.

Last fall, Gora announced that she would resign her presidency at the end of June, which is in one month.  And her replacement has just been announced, a person who will give no succor, I think, to the creationist IDers. For the replacement is a scientist—BSU’s very first president with a background in hard science.

The local paper, the Muncie Star-Press, gives details:

Paul W. Ferguson, who will take over as Ball State’s 15th president this summer, early in his career worked as a pregnancy research specialist at the Los Angeles County-University of Southern California Medical Center; as a research biologist for agricultural chemicals producer Pennwalt Corp., and as a senior toxicologist in the medical and legal departments for Union Oil Company of California, creator of the Union 76 brand.

His research projects have included the effects of pesticides and other chemicals on mice, rats, monkeys and crayfish. . .

Technically, Ferguson will become the second scientist to lead Ball State, Geelhoed noted.

In the month between President Jo Ann Gora’s departure on June 30 and Ferguson’s arrival on Aug. 1, Provost Terry King will serve as interim president. A chemical engineer who once worked as a researcher for ExxonMobil Chemical, King came to Ball State after serving nine years as dean of the College of Engineering at Kansas State University.

. . . Ferguson, a former professor, is currently president of the University of Maine and formerly spent five years as provost at Southern Illinois University, Edwardsville.

Well, some people will object that working for Big Oil and Big Agro tarnishes one’s credentials as a scientist, but I’ll take what I can get. And such a background makes it less likely that he’ll cater to or cower before the Discovery Institute or other creationists.

Cue the kvetching over at Evolution News and Views.

h/t: Amy

I’ve named my squirrel

June 2, 2014 • 6:50 am

I didn’t imagine I’d get nearly 100 comments when I asked readers to name my baby squirrel.  There were many good suggestions, and I’ve picked a name.

Or rather, I’ve given him two names. Reader Craig Gallagher suggested “Tufty”, after the squirrel in the videos below, while the linguistically inclined Diana MacPherson suggested “Jerry Eichcoynechen” (in Germany, the word for “squirrel” is “Eichhörnchen”).  After due consideration, I’ve decided to give him both names: Tufty Eichcoynechen, or “Tufty E.” for short.

Tufty was not a gray squirrel, but a British red squirrel who featured in television lessons on traffic safety in the 1970s. All five Tufty episodes are on YouTube, and you can see the entire series by clicking on the screenshot below.

Don’t miss episode 2, in which Willie the Weasel doesn’t take his Mummy with him to the ice cream van, and suffers the dire consequences of his disobedience.

God bless the Brits!

Screen shot 2014-06-02 at 8.47.12 AM

Sudanese Christian still under death sentence for apostasy, more on the Lahore stoning case

June 2, 2014 • 6:37 am

Yesterday I posted a piece which, based on a report by the Israeli outlet Arutz Sheva 7, suggesting that Meriam Yahia Ibrahim, a Sudanese Christian doctor whose father was Muslim, had been exculpated from the crime of apostasy. She had been imprisoned with her new baby (and apparently still is), was sentenced to 100 lashes after the baby had aged a bit, and then was to be hanged when her child became two years old.  This sentence was imposed by applying sharia law.

My elation about her release was premature. As both Arutz Sheva and the South China Morning Post report, the rumors were just that—rumors and not news. Yet there was a firm basis for this rumor, a statement by a Sudanese official. From the SCMP:

Abdullah al-Azraq, a foreign ministry undersecretary, said earlier on Saturday that Ishag “will be freed within days in line with legal procedure that will be taken by the judiciary and the ministry of justice”.

Now he’s backed off:

But the foreign ministry said the release of the 27-year-old, who gave birth to a baby girl in prison on Tuesday, depended on whether a court accepted her defence team’s appeal request.

A ministry statement said Azraq actually told media on Saturday “that the defence team of the concerned citizen has appealed the verdict … and if the appeals court rules in her favour, she will be released”.

“Some media took what the undersecretary said out of context, changing the meaning of what he said,” Azraq said.

After Azraq’s comment on Saturday, Ishag’s husband, Daniel Wani, said he did not believe she would be freed.

Aretz Sheva adds:

Ishag’s husband, US citizen Daniel Wani, also denied that her release was imminent.

“No Sudanese or foreign mediator contacted me. Maybe there are contacts between the Sudanese government and foreign sides that I’m not aware of,” Wani told BBC. “As far as I’m concerned I will wait for the appeal which my lawyer submitted and I hope that my wife will be released.”

Manar Idriss, Sudan researcher for Amnesty International, reiterated that reports of a release remain unconfirmed.

“We’ve received no confirmation that Meriam is going to be released and the appeal court has yet to issue any such ruling confirming a release,” she said.

I’m hoping that this has already been worked out in advance, and the appeals court will set her free.  Until then, the lashing and hanging are still in the offing.

As for those misguided readers who claimed that we, or I, cared about this woman only because she was married to a U.S. citizen, or had a high-profile profession, you’re simply wrong. We singled her out simply because she came to our attention, and, in fact, this site has been consistently opposed to the marginalization and brutalization of Muslim women in the Middle East—all oppressed women, including the one stoned to death in front of Lahore’s High Court building last week.

***

And on the latter issue, a new report from CNN notes that when Farzana Parveen, 25, was stoned in an honour killing for marrying a man out of love rather than to satisfy her parents’ demands, the Pakistani police stood by and did nothing:

Pakistani police officers will be investigated because they didn’t intervene when a woman was publicly beaten to death with bricks, a court official said Friday.

. . . “I have also ordered that a case be filed against the police officers present at the crime scene,” Jillani said, because it appears the “cops helped the criminals by watching the crime as silent spectator.”

Her husband (more on him below) described the killing:

“We went to the court to seek justice [Parveen’s family filed kidnapping charges and also demanded money] to tell them what had happened. We were sitting there when all of a sudden they appeared,” he told GEO TV. “Someone fired shots in the air. My wife and I were sitting and then bricks were thrown, then a lady came and took Farzana away. …”

Police stood and watched and didn’t come to their aid, Iqbal said. He said the crowd killed his wife and her unborn child.

The “excuse” for inaction doesn’t wash:

Aamir Jalil Siddique, vice president of the Lahore High Court Bar Association, told CNN, “We believe that this was an oversight on the part of the police — they were stationed there and did not do anything. We have security, Punjab police officers, at the high court 24 hours a day. The advocate general’s office, which is next door to the gate, has additional security.”

The issue is not black and white because Parveen’s husband, Mohammad Iqbal, admitted strangling his first wife six years ago so he could marry for love. New reports say that he served a mere year in jail for that.  He gets a year for wife murder, but his new wife is battered to death with bricks for merely falling in love. How fair is that?

Parveen is one of nearly 900 Pakistani woman killed for “honour” last year, while the UN estimates about 5,000 women are killed worldwide yearly for the same stupid code of honour. One rarely hears of a male killed in this way. 

Police have arrested four more people in the case. Perhaps, if convincted, they’ll get more than a year in jail.  

I still maintain that the U.S. government, fearful of Muslim wrath, has been cowardly in its failure to denounce Islamic oppression and mistreatment of women. According to CNN, the British Foreigh Secretary spoke out about this stoning:

Britsh Foreign Secretary William Hague said, “There is absolutely no honor in honor killings, and I urge the government of Pakistan to do all in its power to eradicate this barbaric practice.”

Wouldn’t it be nice to hear something like that from the lips of John Kerry?

 

 

Hili dialogue: Monday

June 2, 2014 • 4:44 am

Oy vey, another week—but my last week of teaching, as classes end for the year. Meanwhile, back at the cherry ranch, the standoff continues. . .

A: Hili, are you asleep?
Hili: No, I’m pretending that I’m not afraid of him.

10376198_10203493434123815_8763499611342003855_n

In Polish:
Ja: Hili, śpisz?
Hili: Nie, udaję, że się go nie boję.
That  d*g’s gonna nom her, I swear . . . .

 

My rodential offspring: name him

June 1, 2014 • 2:11 pm

I’ve seen only one young squirrel in this year’s crop, but I’m sure this one’s mine—that is, I am sure that, by feeding his mom copiously, I helped bring him into being. What pride!

And, today I verified that it’s a male, for he stood up while eating a peanut, and, sure enough, he had a penis.  So, I’m asking readers what I should call him. I’m sure he’ll be around for a while, for, as you can see, he’s in very good shape.  Here he is drinking water and nomming his seeds (he went for the birdseed, too):

A reader tells us why cats pwn dogs

June 1, 2014 • 1:49 pm

A while back I asked readers to give me their opinion of why cats are better than dogs, some crowdsourcing for an exciting event coming up this fall.  There were lots of answers, and lots of ammunition for the “event.”

But one reader went further. Over at his own website, Further Thoughts for the Day, David compiled his thoughts into a very nice post, “Why cats are better than dogs.” Go over and have a look: it’s not long but has some good information and, of  course, some subjectivity. Among David’s points are these (bullet points are direct quotes).

  • I find cats more aesthetically pleasing. Sure, dogs can be cute, or handsome, or beautiful etc, but cats are more so. They look more graceful when they move, they look more elegant when they sleep, and basically are much more pleasing to my eyes. Whilst I’m not sure it’s true that “The dog may be wonderful prose, but only the cat is poetry” is a French proverb (my only source is a fridge magnet I saw), the sentiment certainly is.

I agree. I like to think of cats as “living sculptures.”

  • Also, cats are just the right size, and feel more comfortable curled up on my lap than dogs have done. Dogs can be a bit too big, or a bit too small. Cats are just right.

Indeed! Do you want a German Shepherd cuddling on your lap, for crying out loud? And the real lapdogs, like chihuahuas and papillons, are repugnant.

I know some reader is going to mention bird deaths. A word to the wise: don’t. We’ve done that to death.

Of course you’ll have to divide all the figures for dogs by seven, for as we know, a human dollar is the equivalent of seven dog dollars. However, the cat figures get divided by five, so cats still come out cheaper at the high end. And they live longer, too, reducing their annual financial burden.

This doesn’t even include the lagniappe of the purr, which David extols as well. I won’t mention how wet dogs smell, since David does that, too.

And, to celebrate the wonder that is the felid, I’ll append this cartoon, sent by reader Steve:

10341609_10152492510806255_7412701041821099068_n

 

Now the “butt” thing is really novel!

Lebanon, Missouri school board member responds to my First-Amendment concerns with snark and defiance

June 1, 2014 • 8:45 am

Yesterday I posted a video of Kevin Lowery, the principal of Lebanon High School in Lebanon, Missouri, offering a prayer and a defense of our country’s religious foundations at his school’s graduation. That was clearly open defiance of our government’s ban on public schools endorsing religion. I also posted a list of publicly available email addresses for principal Lowery, the school board members for Lebanon, and the school superintendent, as well as an email I wrote all of them protesting the intrusion of religious beliefs into the public-school ceremony.

One of these members, Mr. Kim Light, has responded, and with an unusual level of defiance and snark.  I reproduce his email here along with his email address, since that was also listed on the Lebanon  page of school-board members cited in my earlier post. Notice that Light’s response was copied to the other members of the school board, the school superintendent, and the principal—the same people who received my email. I’ve put the text of his email in bold below:

From: Kim Light klight@heritagebankozarks.com

CC: “dwidhalm@lebanon.k12.mo.us” dwidhalm@lebanon.k12.mo.us, “john@carmeco.com” john@carmeco.com, “keldridge@central-bank.net” keldridge@central-bank.net, “sheadley@midmobank.com” sheadley@midmobank.com, “jeremiah.hough@independentstavecompany.com” jeremiah.hough@independentstavecompany.com, “bob@oneiloneil.com” bob@oneiloneil.com, “jsriggs@webound.com” jsriggs@webound.com, “klowery@lebanon.k12.mo.us” klowery@lebanon.k12.mo.us

My question is whether or not this is funded and/or supported by the University of Chicago and is this YouTube viewing conducted using university resources and conducted during time that could be used for instructional or research time.

Sent from my iPhone

I have emailed a response to Mr. Light, copying it to all concerned:

Dear Mr. Light:

Thank you for your response—or rather, your non-response—to my complaint and inquiry about Principal Lowery’s remarks at the Lebanon High School graduation.

I see that you are not only avoiding the issue, but being sarcastic: raising the possibility that I am using the resources of the University of Chicago (which is, by the way, a private school, unlike Lebanon High), as well as the time I am supposed to devote to my job, to complain about the intrusion of religion into the Lebanon School District. Let me assure you that my website post, the YouTube video, and the posting on my website about the school’s behavior, were all done on my private time and on my private website on Saturday morning. None of my university’s resources, nor the time I devote to my job here, were diverted to what I wrote, nor, of course, does anything I said reflect the official positions of the University of Chicago.

Now that I’ve answered your question, perhaps you can answer mine: was the principal’s speech vetted and approved by the Lebanon School Board? And what is being done to prevent further Constitutional violations in the future?

I have posted my complaint, as well as the YouTube video, on my website, which gets between 20,000 and 30,000 views per day. My original post is here: http://whyevolutionistrue.com/2014/05/31/public-high-school-principal-prays-at-graduation/. I will also post your email response so readers can see the kind of insouciance and disdain you bring to this serious issue.

Please note that I am not the only one upset at Principal Lowery’s decision to drag religion into the graduation ceremony. If you look at the comments on my post, you’ll see that Mr. Lowery’s oration also offended a graduating senior of your school as well as her parent, who has complained to both the American Civil Liberties Union and the Freedom from Religion Foundation about Lowery’s remarks. As a person with legal standing, the parent of course can be party to a legal complaint against the principal, the superintendent, and your school board. Here is what the parent wrote on my site:

“I was an audience member at this event, and my graduating daughter was very offended and upset by this. I’ve already contacted the ACLU about this. Thank you for your blog post.

. . . I was pretty enraged about the whole event. The strong audience cheers are only going to further ostracize the students who don’t share his belief. It is inappropriate and rude to shame students at their own graduation ceremony for being different–intentional or not.”

I don’t think you’re aware of the serious issues involved here. Instead of writing a snarky email in response to my complaint, you should be pondering how to prevent future violations of the Constitution in your school district. You should also be aware that, given the complaints to the FFRF and ACLU, it is likely that legal proceedings are in the offing, and that your dismissive behavior will not help matters.

I sincerely hope that other members of the school board, the Superintendent of Schools, and Principal Lowery do not see my email in the same dismissive light that you did. Such recalcitrant behavior will, in the long run, only harm your school district.

I am sending your response (and this response from me) to the other members of the Board, and to the superintendent and principal; and will post them both on my website. It is instructive to see this kind of behavior from a member of a public school board, someone supposedly responsible for making sure that students are properly educated for the responsibilities of citizenship.

Sincerely,
Jerry Coyne

*****

I wondered who Mr. Light was, and found that he is President and Senior Credit Officer of Heritage Bank of the Ozarks. Here is his photo from that page (I always like to see what opponents look like):

staffKL

The announcement of his appointment at the bank , and a bit about his background, can be seen in the August, 25, 2011 issue of the Lebanon Daily Record.

 

Sudan will free Christian doctor sentenced to death for apostasy

June 1, 2014 • 5:49 am

There is some good news on this lovely summer morning (well, it feel like summer, with temperatures in the 80s in Chicago).

On May 16 I reported the sentencing to death for apostasy of Meriam Yehya Ibrahim, a doctor living in a Muslim country. She had married a Christian man and was raised as a Christian by a Christian mother, but, as her father was Muslim, that apparently constitutes apostasy under Sudanese (sharia) law. She was also eight months pregnant. The sentence included 100 lashes “after she had recovered from giving birth,” and then hanging when her child was two years old.  This, of course, is barbarism, an offense to every rational person.

Thus I’m delighted to report that, according to Arutz Sheva 7 from Israel, Ibrahim is to be freed:

Meriam Yahia Ibrahim Ishag was condemned to death on May 15 under the Islamic Sharia law that has been in place in Sudan since 1983 and which outlaws conversions under pain of death.

“The lady will be freed within days in line with legal procedure that will be taken by the judiciary and the ministry of justice,” Abdullah al-Azraq, a foreign ministry undersecretary, told AFP.

Azraq, who spoke via telephone from London, did not elaborate.

The 27-year-old gave birth to a baby girl on Tuesday in a women’s prison in Khartoum’s twin city of Omdurman.

Her husband, U.S. citizen Daniel Wani, visited Ishag and the baby on Thursday, after being denied access earlier in the week, and told AFPboth were in “good health.”

There’s little doubt that this reversal of barbarism was due to international pressure:

Her case sparked international condemnation, with British Prime Minister David Cameron saying Saturday he was “appalled” by the “barbaric” sentence given to Ishag.

Britain and Canada had summoned the Sudanese envoys to their countries last week and told them the sentence violated Sudan’s international human rights obligations.

United Nations experts have called the conviction “outrageous” and said it must be overturned.

Sudan, while defending the verdict, had earlier hinted that Ishag might be freed, saying on May 18 the verdict was “preliminary”.

Fox News added this on May 23:

International pressure is mounting on Sudan to release Ibrahim, including an online petition by Amnesty International that has over 600,000 signatures.

The U.S. response appears to have been tepid, and I don’t recall President Obama saying anything about the case, although it’s reported that Ibrahim’s husband is an American citizen. Fox adds:

State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki told reporters Thursday that the administration is doing what it can on the case.

“Through our U.S. Embassy in Khartoum, the White House and the State Department have communicated our strong concern to the highest levels of the Government of Sudan over this case,” said State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki. “We’ve also joined with other embassies in Khartoum to express our concern in a widely distributed public statement. U.S. Embassy officials have been engaged in the case from the earliest days.”

Ibrahim’s husband, Daniel Wani is confined to a wheelchair and “totally depends on her for all details of his life,” her lawyer said. Wani said when he called the U.S. Embassy in Khartoum in April prior to his wife’s death sentence, there was no interest in the case. He said he emphasized that his son was a U.S. citizen, by virtue of his own citizenship, embassy officials demanded DNA evidence. Wani said he agreed and even provided official wedding documents and birth certificates, but that the embassy still offered no help.

If this is true, Obama’s lack of a statement can be construed as fear of offending Muslims. At any rate, it’s shameful that the U.S. didn’t join Canada and Britain in the very strong gesture of summoning the Sudanese ambassador for a dressing-down.

h/t: Malgorzata