Because that's what scientists do. When the French government was set to cut off Pasteur's funding, Darwin rose to Pasteur's defense, despite Pasteur's stark criticism of Darwin's work.

The analogy is faulty. You are arguing for a general increase in funding, not preventing a cut off for a specific project. There is a common misconception that progress is directly related to funding. Truthfully it is more complex than that. If IDists are to seek funding they are better advised to seek it for projects related to the views of a Guillermo Gonzalez or OOL research like the type cited by Salvador. Anti-IDists wield the real power anyway and are not in any way dependent on IDists for support.

Why would IDists urge Congress to spend more money for the research efforts of others?

Because that's what scientists do. When the French government was set to cut off Pasteur's funding, Darwin rose to Pasteur's defense, despite Pasteur's stark criticism of Darwin's work.

It's how Christians do science. Maybe you've let on more than you intended.

I doubt I'm in the minority position. It's only that the majority is uninformed and unorganized. This needs to change. I'm doing my part.

The teleological perspective is extremely well organized and informed through churches and organizations such as the DI. They got their heads handed to them in elections over the last couple of years anyway. That would indicate a minority position. Of course, as a non-religious IDist, maybe you can help get the new-agers organized and allied to the christian fundamentalists who are the backbone of the ID movement. Politics does make strange bedfellows!

aagcobb: I would suggest passing a law requiring each public university to have a department of pseudoscience, so that the cranks would have somewhere to play with sullying the reputation of the science department.

me: I'm curious have you read anything that Gonzales has written?

Either he(or she?) didn't notice my question or chose not to answer. That being the case let me make my point and open it up for wider discussion. What if anything in Gozales' 68 refereed papers and articles could be described as pseudo science? Shouldn't he be judged on the basis of his scholarly work rather than his personal beliefs?

I remember about five years ago that ID critics (at least the more objective ones) were arguing that ID was a philosophical and/or theological position, not a scientific one. (BTW, that is the position I more or less agree with) Now suddenly it has become a pseudo science. When and how did that happen? And, what exactly is a pseudo science?

It was just a lighthearted response to mcromers suggestion that the yahoos decide what constitutes science in public university science departments. We already know Behe would include astrology (just kidding!).

Assuming that Gonzalez's appeal is rejected, what is likely to happen to him at ISU?

Most likely he will be given a final one-year contract. That is, he can stay another year while looking for a job. If he doesn't have a job offer lined up, then of course it will be in his interest to stay.

Under such a system the central committee would account for things like number of publications and quality of spelling / grammar, and then assign them to the geographically most convenient research faculty.

And if the faculty objected to that appointment because they believed that their new colleague was somehow "anti-science", then tough luck.

I would suggest passing a law requiring each public university to have a department of pseudoscience, so that the cranks would have somewhere to play with sullying the reputation of the science department.

You make it sound like scientists, and their departments, are delicate little flowies. Are we really still back in high-school here?

eddarrell: When do the ID advocates go to Congress to urge more funding, generally, across the board, for all research? When do ID advocates begin to show the collegiality to other ideas that wins tenure

Why would IDists urge Congress to spend more money for the research efforts of others? Let the beneficiaries do their own urging. "Collegiality to other ideas?" Ask that of Professor Avalos. He's a textbook example of it's all about religion.