THIS. This, a thousand, a million times over.
It is tedious to listen to “poor discriminated ID me because of MN” stories. Heck, it’s tedious for me, and I’m a notorious ID me. But we can all use a bit more tedium before moving on to the important stuff, so…
Due to the ongoing careers in question, I can only describe these true cases in general terms. They are representative, however, of a much larger pool of experience.
– a close colleague and friend submitted a design-motivated hypothesis on cell function to a major journal, high impact-factor (you would recognize its name if I said it). The MS went through full peer review, and was about to be set in galley proofs, when the editor-in-chief asked the author if he was a well-known ID advocate. My friend said yes, and the submission was yanked.
– another friend, much younger than me, landed a postdoc in a lab at a top-3 Ivy League school. During his undergraduate and graduate training, he had been active at ID meetings, published ID articles, etc. The lab director knew this, and told him, No more of that. You got the postdoc, but I don’t want to see your name on any ID papers or in any news stories mentioning ID. So he quit, and it seems now (in 2020), as he is competing for biology faculty tenure in his first university post, that he has quit permanently.
– another friend is junior science faculty at a really good university, famous for its science acumen. This person was recently told by a faculty performance review committee that he was doing exceptionally well, except for his ID publications. No more of that, they told him.
And so on. Were these episodes motivated by MN? Who knows? Who cares? The point it, those of you on the majority side (i.e., science as applied naturalism, look for the physical / material / non-intelligent cause) need to know that we on the other side can feel your boots on our neck. Every summer, when students from all over the world come to the Discovery Institute summer seminar, they do so with some anxiety. Every year, we schedule a session for them about how to survive in science with an interest in exploring design.
The most competitive, unsentimental, ruthless people I’ve ever met are high-performing scientists. This is true even within ID circles. In 2004, at an ID research meeting in North Carolina, an Ivy League trained ID advocate (cell biologist) cut me into small pieces after my presentation, laughing as he did, and I still feel the pain today. Why do journals proudly feature their impact factors? Because having others pay serious attention to your ideas and data, versus ignore you, matters. Getting funding matters, and the process is deadly competitive.
SO…science is not a game for whiners. Listening to ID sob stories is like being stuck next to some guy (this is a pre-COVD analogy, bear with me) in the stands at a major league baseball game who tells you that he could have been a major league hitter, except the pitchers insist on throwing breaking balls. He says, I hit everything in Little League. .450 batter. Could have been a contender. Blah blah blah.
No, what we’re looking for is a fair competition. Don’t rig the rules so we lose no matter what.
Last point, and then I really am done with MN whining. Who suffers, really? Not us. Y’all do. If design is true, then MN is slowing YOU down. Want to know my idea of science hell? Trying to solve problems that don’t have answers. Think about the difference between these two questions:
– How did life start?
– By what natural, physical pathway did life start?
Those aren’t the same question.