Constitutional Law, Politics, Religion, Science, Society

Texas Federal Court Upholds Denial of Certificate to Institute for Creation Research Graduate School

Creationists have lost a major battle after a federal court in Texas upheld a decision by the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board to deny the Institute for Creation Research Graduate School a certificate of authority to offer master’s degrees in science. We have previously discussed this new “science” degree.

A panel of science education experts found little evidence of science in the degree or its underlying curriculum. The panel concluded “much of the course content was outside the realm of science and lacked potential to help students understand the nature of science and the history and nature of the natural world.”

The school claimed violations of free speech, free exercise, equal protection and due process. However, under the rational basis test (which sets an extremely low standard for the government), the court granted summary judgment.
Under subchapter G of the state regulation, no “person” (defined as an individual, firm, partnership, association, or other private entity or association thereof,” may grant or award a degree on behalf of a “private postsecondary educational institution” unless the institution has been issued a “certificate of authority” to grant the degree by the Board.

It is a solid victory for science and education in the United States.

Source: Science Blogs

54 thoughts on “Texas Federal Court Upholds Denial of Certificate to Institute for Creation Research Graduate School”

  1. Elaine,

    I saw the author on the Colbert Report and thought that the book sounded interesting, but I haven’t read it. I certainly believe that we should spend more time thinking about the costs (and risks) of civilization – the cost was only unforeseen because most people weren’t paying any attention.

  2. Slartibartfast,

    I should have asked you if you had read the book I recommended in my previous comment. “Pandora’s Seed: The Unforeseen Cost of Civilzation” by Spencer Wells sounds like your cup o’ tea.

  3. Elaine,

    I haven’t been around much lately, either so I didn’t notice that you haven’t been posting as much as usual. And certainly I would never doubt your punning or poetic ability. 😉

  4. Buddha,

    If my grandchildren take after their mother–my daughter–they are sure to have a serious funny streak! Was I being oxymoronic? I wonder if the wiseass gene can only be passed on to the next generation through the “X” chromosome???

    BTW, since we’re on the top of real versus faux science in this thread, I’d like to recommend a terrific nonfiction book that I’m reading at the moment: “Pandora’s Seed: The Unforeseen Cost of Civilzation” by Spencer Wells. Wells is an Explorer-in-Residence at National Geographic, a professor at Cornell, and is the leader of the Genographic Project. I doubt Tootie would enjoy reading the book.

    **********

    Slartibartfast,

    I haven’t been around commenting at the Turley blog much lately. I couldn’t resist the gratuitous pun. I didn’t want the other blawg regulars to think I’d lost my knack for eliciting virtual groans from the rest of you.

  5. Elaine,

    I sincerely hope any and all grandchildren in your lineage are as p(h)unny as their grandmother.

  6. Still a cat, Woosty is:

    I’m sure you’re only related to the nicest chimpanzees – although you do have some skeletons in your genetic closet since you are no more than a 50th cousin of mine… And 1 is halfway between zero and infinity.

    Elaine said:

    “Psalm of the students earn a degree called a Bachelor of Pseudoscience.”

    Getting in your gratuitous pun for the day, I see. And is it merely a coincidence that such a degree would be called a ‘BP’? And don’t pick on Dredd – his being off by a thousand years pales beside me being off by more than 4 billion years…

  7. OMG!!!!!!

    evolution IS creation!!!!!

    ALL is 1 and 1 is ALL and I AM related to a chimpanzee!!!!!
    😮

  8. Slartibartfast–

    Ditto what FF Leo said.

    The Institute for Creation Research requires its students to read just one textbook: The Bible. Psalm of the students earn a degree called a Bachelor of Pseudoscience.

    **********
    Dredd,

    You’re off by a millenium–the Earth is just 6,000 years old…doncha know!

  9. FFLEO,

    Anytime. I just wish that Tootie had the guts to try to defend the ignorant misinformation she posts, although I doubt that she has the ability to back up any of her blatant untruths in any case…

  10. Slartibartfast,

    Thank you for that rebuttal of tootie’s nonsensically incorrect assumptions.

  11. Tootie posted:

    What are they afraid of?

    Giving people science degrees that they didn’t earn because they were studying a myth-based pseudo-science.

    Everything, apparently.

    No, just ignorance trying to masquerade as authority.

    Anti-creationists are afraid their mythical conclusions will be exposed as being unscientific.

    We’re called scientists not anti-creationists because we believe in the scientific method – we don’t BELIEVE in evolution, we know that the scientific method says that it is essentially accurate. You are perfectly free to show that any conclusion is not scientific – you just have to come up with a repeatable experiment which falsifies the hypothesis that you think is unscientific and it will die, so let’s see you show us a chimera fossil (a fossil that shares traits from 2 distinct lines of descent) or explain why one of your chromosome pairs appears to be the fusion of two great ape chromosome pairs (and just why are you carrying around evidence of your common descent with apes?). The thing about science is that the conclusions aren’t mythical – they arise from using the scientific method. You should read about it someday…

    This is the only reason why they persecute creationists and deny them a seat at the table.

    If creationists want to come up with falsifiable hypotheses and put them to the test experimentally then they are welcome to call themselves scientists, but until then they will be called out as unscientific charlatans when they try to cloak their myths in the trappings of science.

    Creations do NOT disagree with evolutionists on matters of science.

    So you’re saying that creationists know evolution to be a substantially correct theory which agrees with over 150 years of experimental observation? That hasn’t been my impression.

    That is a lie and myth perpetuated by corrupt leftist scientists.

    Your statement is an uninformed, unsubstantiated smear which only an ignorant zealot would believe.

    Creationists only disagree about the interpretation and conclusions drawn from the mutually agreed upon evidence.

    And how do creationists explain the fact that chromosome #2 in humans has two centromeres and a telomere in the middle? And that it is nearly identical to the fusion of 2 chimpanzee chromosomes? What about the myriad of transitional fossils that have been discovered or the genetic basis for inheritance and evolution? If creationists stipulate to the evidence, they’ve already lost…

    Apparently only certain scientists (schools and accreditation groups) are allowed to interpret the data in the way the gate-keepers insist it must be interpreted.

    Sorry, but data gets interpreted according to the scientific method. A hypothesis doesn’t become a theory until it has been verified countless times by many independent groups of scientists – like evolution has.

    How convenient. How unscientific.

    The truth is that you could falsify evolution tomorrow if you had an experiment that gave a counter-example and was repeatable. But you don’t, do you? Nor does any creationist. If you want to be a scientist, you’ve got to follow the rules of science, i.e. the scientific method.

    How scientific is it to disallow contrary opinions about mutually agreed upon evidence?

    Please cite an example or admit that this is another baseless slur.

    Not very.

    If you think that people who do research into evolution aren’t acting appropriately as scientists while creationists are exemplars of the proper paradigm of scientific behavior, please give us some examples… Until then I would appreciate it if you shut up about things you know nothing about.

  12. What are they afraid of?

    Everything, apparently.

    Anti-creationists are afraid their mythical conclusions will be exposed as being unscientific. This is the only reason why they persecute creationists and deny them a seat at the table.

    Creations do NOT disagree with evolutionists on matters of science. That is a lie and myth perpetuated by corrupt leftist scientists. Creationists only disagree about the interpretation and conclusions drawn from the mutually agreed upon evidence.

    Apparently only certain scientists (schools and accreditation groups) are allowed to interpret the data in the way the gate-keepers insist it must be interpreted.

    How convenient. How unscientific.

    How scientific is it to disallow contrary opinions about mutually agreed upon evidence?

    Not very.

  13. All yall is going to Hell. When all yall is burning then yool have yer proof and yall have to mit Jebus is science.

  14. Really? A group of people in Texas both 1) knew enough about science to point out that this malarkey isn’t science and 2) stuck their necks out by denying this certificate?

    It’s good to know that Texas isn’t as whacked out as South Carolina.

    About Thomas Jefferson and the history of the US….

  15. It would take only a single word to defeat these creationist maggot-flies anywhere on earth….

    FOSSIL…

  16. ” … Institute for Creation Research Graduate School a certificate of authority to offer master’s degrees in science …”

    Oxymorons

  17. “Keeping church and state separate is a wise endeavour.”

    can we start that experiment now? please?

  19. Well, they are creative, especially in explaining a “7,000 year old universe” by the doctrine of “apparent age”.

    Keeping church and state separate is a wise endeavour.

  20. Can you really blame the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board when the applicant draws a pastor riding a dinosaur in crayon in the blank that ask for a description of the curriculum?

Comments are closed.