[Vision2020] Creation vs. Evolution

Nick Gier ngier at uidaho.edu
Sat Dec 22 18:05:57 PST 2007

Hi Jeff:

Here are the "selected publications" that Scott 
Minnich lists on his department website.  I would 
be willing to lay a huge bet that in none of his 
publications does Prof. Minnich challenge the 
theory of evolution, let alone prove intelligent design.

That fact that Prof. Minnich testified in the PA 
trial was an emabarrassment to the UI and 
President White was the first known university 
president to publicly declare that creationism 
was not science.  It was one of UI's finest hours.

Would you now care to cite a peer reviewed 
publication that disproves evolution?  Your first 
ball bounced off the net right back at you.

By the way, philosophers stopped counting angels 
on any surface about 700 years ago.  This 
particular philosopher is now more concerned 
about neo-Confederate influences on our fair city.


Selected Publications by Scott Minnich:

V. Kapatral , J. W. Campbell, S. A. Minnich, N. 
R. Thomson, P. Matsumura and B. M. Pruess. 2004. 
Gene array analysis of Yersinia enterocolitica 
FlhD and FlhC: regulation of enzymes affecting 
synthesis and degradation of carbamoylphosphate. 
Microbiology 150: p. 2289-2300.

Monday S.R., Minnich S.A., Feng PC. 2004. A 
12-base-pair deletion in the flagellar master 
control gene flhC causes nonmotility of the 
pathogenic German sorbitol-fermenting Escherichia 
coli O157:H-strains. J Bacteriol. 186:2319-2327.

Yoon J.W., Minnich S.A., Ahn J.S., Park Y.H., 
Paszczynski A., Hovde C.J. 2004. Thermoregulation 
of the Escherichia coli O157:H7 pO157 ecf operon 
and lipid A myristoyl transferase activity 
involves intrinsically curved DNA. Mol. Microbiol. 51:419-435.

Ely B., Ely T.W, Crymes W.B. Jr, Minnich S.A. 
2000. A family of six flagellin genes contributes 
to the Caulobacter crescentus flagellar filament. J. Bacteriol. 182:5001-5004.

Rohde J.R., Luan X.S., Rohde H., Fox J.M., 
Minnich S.A. 1999. The Yersinia enterocolitica 
pYV virulence plasmid contains multiple intrinsic 
DNA bends which melt at 37 degrees C. J Bacteriol 181:4198-4204.

At 02:43 PM 12/22/2007, you wrote:
>Joe Campbell,
>You are becoming most predicable in your tactics.
>Gary made two statements (or perhaps only one statement), if Paul is correct:
>Statement 1: As if good scientists made up their own data in the laboratory.
>Pure sarcasm.  I have confidence that if Gary 
>wished to assert that Some or All scientists 
>made up their own data, that he would have said that.
>You are asserting that he meant something altogether different.
>Statement 2: Why the very notion that data might 
>be faked by Scientists must be preposterous.
>Again, pure sarcasm and the same conclusion.
>You are, of course, free to attribute any 
>meaning you wish to either or both of the 
>statements and to restate the statements to 
>whatever you wish, but you are not free to 
>credit him with those altered statements.  That 
>would be a breach of academic ethics.
>It does appear that you have decided to pursue 
>misrepresentations of my previous postings to 
>you.  I am calling you out on this again.  I did 
>not, ever, state that philosophy or logic was 
>not a science, nor did I state that economics 
>was more of a science than logic or philosophy. 
>Just as you did with Gary, you fabricated the 
>issue and attributed it to me.  That is academic dishonesty.
>The reference to my family and how I spend my 
>time on Friday evenings was petty and out of 
>line. Most readers of this post will recognize 
>the hypocrisy of your post.  For what it is 
>worth, the family had a good chuckle over the matter.
>For those interested in the 
>evolution/intelligent design thread, here is an interesting piece:
>Another interesting piece:
>As I understand the matter of the protocol of 
>betting,  Andreas called the bet first - so Mr. 
>Campbell loses again.  Andreas appears to have 
>conceded the five biologists - that is fine with 
>me.  I did a quick search through Google Scholar 
>and found several hundred thousands hits on 
>evolution theory, challenges to evolution theory 
>and intelligent design.  Since one local 
>biologist, Prof Scot Minnich has argued on 
>intelligent design and the Gould piece above 
>outlines some challenges to Darwin theory, I am 
>reasonably confident that there are three or 
>four more advocates of intelligent design out 
>there publishing in "peer review" 
>journals.  Someone with more time feel free to 
>continue the investigation.  As to winner or 
>loser of the bet, I offer two outcomes for 
>Andreas - we could call it a draw and move 
>on.  Or we could just say that I only offered up 
>two or three examples and hence Andreas 
>wins.  Whatever you choose Andreas is fine with me.
>Now, everyone is wished a happy holiday from 
>yours truly - yes, even you Mr. Campbell.
>If any of you get a caning rod or a hickory 
>switch, it is probably because you deserved 
>it.  But you will also get something nice, 
>because most (or is it all) of you all of the 
>time (or is it most of the time) have done 
>something that should be rewarded.  So, enjoy the good with the bad.
>Three holiday days ahead - I plan to count 
>angels dancing on the heads of pins, like most 
>academicians this holiday season.
>At 09:20 PM 12/21/2007, you wrote:
>>Your post was a bit incoherent. For instance, you wrote:
>>Gary Crabtree made two simple statements:
>>1. "As if good scientists made up their own data in the laboratory!"
>>2. "Why the very notion that data might be 
>>faked  by Scientists must be preposterous."
>>Both are instances of sarcasm, so it is not 
>>explicit what statements Crabtree made. Maybe
>>I’m wrong but (1) suggests:
>>(1*) Good scientists make up their own data in the laboratory,
>>which is incomplete. SOME good scientists or ALL? Similarly, (2) suggests:
>>(2*) Data might be faked by scientists.
>>Again, SOME data or ALL? SOME scientists or 
>>ALL? You should be interested in the
>>claims since you’ve stated that economics is 
>>a science. Did Crabtree say that you make
>>up data? Are you making up the very claims in 
>>your last post, for instance? Did he say
>>that data is faked ­ ALWAYS ­ by you? Luckily 
>>you don’t think that either logic or
>>philosophy is a science, so I remain unscathed in your eyes and in his!
>>If Crabtree thinks that SOME scientists fudge 
>>data, then I agree! But who cares. Some
>>economists beat their wives but not much 
>>follows from this unfortunate fact, nothing that
>>I could pin on you or economists in general.
>>Thus, your claim that “Neither statement 
>>could be reasonably argued that Crabtree was
>>asserting that all science was fudged” is 
>>false, for Crabtree’s claims ­ as you quote them
>>­ are ambiguous and at least one interpretation 
>>suggests that ALL science is fudged. The
>>other interpretation is a sad but obvious and 
>>meaningless truth. Maybe that is what
>>Crabtree meant. Maybe your comments here are in 
>>support of the sad, meaningless,
>>unfortunate truth that some scientists fudge. 
>>What is even sadder is that this Friday
>>night ­ which you could have spent with your 
>>family ­ was wasted on such an endeavor.
>>Andreas beat me to the bunch but, yes, I’m 
>>willing to bet that no more than 5 biologist
>>reject evolution theory. The bet is on. Name 
>>them or pay up. (And I hope that you have
>>enough integrity to abide by Andreas’s criteria ­ but honestly I doubt it!)
>>Best, Joe
>>  List services made available by First Step Internet,
>>  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>>                http://www.fsr.net
>>           mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>  List services made available by First Step Internet,
>  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>                http://www.fsr.net
>           mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com

"Truth is the summit of being; justice is the 
application of it to human affairs."
--Ralph Waldo Emerson

"Abstract truth has no value unless it incarnates 
in human beings who represent it, by proving their readiness to die for it."
  --Mohandas Gandhi

"Modern physics has taught us that the nature of 
any system cannot be discovered by dividing it 
into its component parts and studying each part 
by itself. . . .We must keep our attention fixed 
on the whole and on the interconnection between 
the parts. The same is true of our intellectual 
life. It is impossible to make a clear cut 
between science, religion, and art. The whole is 
never equal simply to the sum of its various parts." --Max Planck

Nicholas F. Gier
Professor Emeritus, Department of Philosophy, University of Idaho
1037 Colt Rd., Moscow, ID 83843
208-882-9212/FAX 885-8950
President, Idaho Federation of Teachers, AFL-CIO

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20071222/88ab2b87/attachment-0001.html 

More information about the Vision2020 mailing list