I’m starting to give up hope for Ball State University. I once thought that Professor Eric Hedin, with his Jesus-and-Intelligent-Design-pushing science course, complete with its “No Monkey Gods” brand of Christian apologetics, was an aberration, and that he’d be criticized by his colleagues. No dice. While BSU has convened a panel to investigate Hedin’s course, Ball State was busy hiring another creationist, Guillermo Gonzalez. And have we heard Ball State faculty and students standing up for good science education? Nope. What we get are a spate of BSU students and faculty writing semi-literate and pro-religion letters to the local newspapers, defending Hedin’s right to teach creationism to students in a public university. Along with that I’m accused of being a carpetbagging tyrant who wants to control science education and prevent “balanced” discussion (i.e., keep Jesus out of science).

I don’t in the least mind the invective, though its intensity has surprised me. What has surprised me is the antiintellectualism that’s rampant among Ball State faculty and students. It’s as if they want to be seen as a benighted group of academics unacquainted with science, with the meaning of academic freedom and, apparently, with the First Amendment.

Enter another BSU academic: Dr. George Wolfe, professor of saxophone. In today’s Muncie Star-Press, “Change needed for culture of the inquiring mind,” Wolfe pronounces that I’m not only “violating the integrity of academic culture” (how, exactly, did I do that?), but am also wasting my time going after creationists. What I should be doing, it seems, is going after Nazi eugenics, something that disappeared nearly seventy years ago!

Unfortunately, there has developed within secular humanist circles a small but vocal group of cynical atheists. These are people who are intolerant of those who question aspects of accepted science paradigms, or who belittle people who study the wisdom traditions of the great religions.

Wrong: we try to keep superstition out of science, for it has never added one iota to scientific wisdom or practice. And I don’t belittle people who study religious tradition, just those who believe in insupportable superstition and, above all, try to import it into the classroom.

Rather than dealing with the challenges presented by atypical researchers, cynical atheists respond with exaggerated accusations and generalized categorizations. They are quick to ridicule anyone who entertains the possibility that a power and a consciousness beyond the human mind’s comprehension may have initiated the unfolding expansion of the space-time continuum we call the universe.

No evidence for that celestial power and consciousness, Dr. Wolfe. I likewise ridicule those who entertain the possibility that a large Jurassic reptile lives in Loch Ness, or a primate-like creature roams the woods of Oregon.

Professor Jerry Coyne of the University of Chicago is a recent example of a professor who has violated the integrity of the academic culture. His assertion, for example, that Dr. Eric Hedin, who teaches a class on “The Boundaries of Science,” is a “nutty professor” who is “cramming Jesus” down students’ throats (see The Star Press, June 21 issue) is refuted by many students who have sat in Hedin’s class. One of my own students is appalled at the attack on Hedin, and insists that Dr. Hedin presented the science accurately and never once mentioned Jesus.

Other students disagree.

Rather than proselytize his atheism, professors such as Jerry Coyne should spend more time speaking out against the abuse of the theory of evolution, as occurred in the early 20th century when social Darwinism was used to justify European white supremacy, eugenics, and the extermination of Jews, gypsies and people with disabilities.

What the deuce is Wolfe banging on about here? Darwinism hasn’t been used in that way for decades—and the Nazis really relied not on Darwinism but simple artificial selection (which antedated Darwin by millennia) to justify the Holocaust. Creationism, on the other hand, is a going concern.

The overconfidence of scientists has come back to haunt researchers many times in the past. In the mid-20th century, behaviorism as promoted by Harvard professor B. F. Skinner — that conditioning comprised the “building blocks of behavior” and only observable behaviors were worth investigating — became the credo of psychological researchers. Yet today, many psychologists see Skinner’s views as extreme. . . . Theories are important because they help explain phenomena and predict possible outcomes, but challenging accepted scientific views is what moves science forward. As educators, we should create an educational environment where students feel safe to discuss issues that are important to themselves and the academic disciplines, as Carson Bennett and I did in August of 2009. Thank God Albert Einstein had the guts to question Isaac Newton.

Yes, but what has moved science forward is challenges from science—not from religion. Considering the supernatural has never moved science forward a millimeter, so why include creationism in the “educational environment”? As Laplace said, we simply don’t need that hypothesis. Here Wolfe embarrasses himself by mistaking challenges that science poses to itself with the non-challenges that the supernatural poses to science. He needs to get out of the studio more.

****

As if that weren’t enough, BSU student Garett Cates contributes another letter, “Jerry Coyne’s agenda:”

GARETT CATES After discovering from July 7’s article that Jerry Coyne from the University of Chicago is behind the investigation of Eric Hedin at Ball State, I researched Coyne to find out why he is so desperate to silence anyone who doesn’t bow down and kiss the sacred cow of evolution. I watched a video of him speaking at an Atheist Alliance International convention (2009), which anyone can watch on YouTube, where Coyne sticks his middle finger in the air, saying, “That’s for creationists.” Toward the end of the video, he says, “The real way to increase the teaching and acceptance of evolution is to get rid of religion by building a more harmonious society.” Hmm. Does Coyne have an agenda? What does he mean by “harmonious” society? Lack of resistance to evolution? If he wants to get rid of religion, then evolution (macro) has to go, too. I am a student at BSU, and I resent this academic tyrant suppressing academic freedom and free thought. I hope the administration will support academic freedom and its faculty. I encourage everyone to read 2 Peter 3 to understand what is happening in the world. “There shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts.” What is Coyne’s lust? To eliminate God. Coyne is not motivated by science but by sin. Even though Satan and those deceived by him may try, Jesus Christ cannot be removed from his own creation. It’s time for his followers to take a stand.

Ask yourself this: why would the Muncie Star-Press even consider publishing a letter that is but half a step removed from the delusional fulminations of snake-handlers? Is this letter of value to their readers?

Is this a typical product of BSU, one who thinks that academic freedom is furthered by bowing down before Jesus? If so, Ball State has its work cut out for it.

If you’re a Ball State student, faculty, or alum reading this, could you please clean up your house?