Scientist “expelled” for giving speech about evolution … on Darwin Day?

I’m not sure why it took this long to see news on the subject. Maybe I just happened to miss it when it happened, or the folks responsible were good at keeping it under wraps. But, apparently, back in February a scientist was set to give a speech about evolution, a subject she is an expert in. The event was Darwin Day. Rather fitting to have a speech about evolution on that day, don’t you think? Pinellas County officials didn’t think so.

And since [University of South Florida professor Lorena] Madrigal’s [link] doctorate is in anthropology, in which she has developed an academic expertise in genetics and human evolution, what better speaker could the Friends of the Brooker Creek Preserve [link] hope for to deliver remarks on Darwin Day?

However, a week before she was to speak, Madrigal was given the bum’s rush by Pinellas County officials, who canceled her appearance.

“They told me very clearly they felt their budget was in danger if the lecture took place,” Madrigal said.

“Her topic was about evolution,” [William Davis, the Pinellas County director of environmental services] said. … “I flinched on that.”

“I canceled her out after discussing it with my supervisors,” he said. “We are not the platform for debate on creationism versus evolution.”

Even on Darwin Day?!?!?! Apparently not.

“We don’t believe it’s our role to engage in that debate,” Davis said.

It’s a Preserve. It’s a place devoted to nature and science and education. There is no debate, Mr. Davis.

About Brandon Haught

Communications Director for Florida Citizens for Science.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

21 Responses to Scientist “expelled” for giving speech about evolution … on Darwin Day?

  1. zygosporangia says:

    Well, the fundies should work hard to surpress this story. It might ruin their image as being the target of persecution instead of the source of it.

  2. S.Scott says:

    Oooh! I know someone who is keeping track of these things – thanks Brandon!

  3. Josh Krupnick says:

    When will they ever realize that the debate over evolution and creationism is a political debate, not a scientific one?

  4. wright says:

    When will they ever realize that the debate over evolution and creationism is a political debate, not a scientific one?

    Josh, it looks to me that Mr. Davis made a purely political decision, so it could be argued he realizes that perfectly. Which is too bad, considering that some one directing “environmental services” should be swayed more by actual, you know, science.

  5. James F says:

    Alas, there’s much more.

    http://www.sunclipse.org/?p=626

  6. Karl says:

    While this situation remains political for now, it can all change if some religious speaker gets a free pass to make a speech about how this wonderful nature preserve is an example of God’s creation or something. Then we’ll see if politics really has anything to do with this…

  7. S.Scott says:

    James F. – You need to send that to Raven. (If he hasn’t seen it already). I didn’t notice him comment there.

  8. S.Scott says:

    @PT oops! 🙂

  9. Lowell says:

    nobody wants to attract the attention of the bush people. they are vindictive and punitive to causes that do not serve them. the broad strategy they employ is sophisticated; the methods are cruel and primitive.

  10. Dan Alderman says:

    It was stupid of them to cancel her speech, but it was within their right to do so. If they know their audience and are a fundraising organization then it’s actually in their best interest to do so.
    The headline says “Scientist ‘expelled’ for giving speech about evolution” That is simply, by your own reckoning, not the case. Your headline makes it seem as though she were in some way removed AFTER the speech were given, when in reality she never even gave the speech.
    We can sink to their tactics of using misleading language to fight against them. We can only continue to point out their flawed logic, and that’s really easy because it’s all flawed, isn’t it.

  11. Dan Alderman says:

    We “CAN’T” sink to their tactics…damnit. (I hate when an error changes the meaning of what is being said!)

  12. Nick Murray says:

    Why are you people justifying this dark ages thinking?
    You’re saying it’s ok to write text books about the world being flat because right now it’s popular thinking among the masses.
    You’re saying that funding is more important than the truth.

    It seems like the majority of evolutionists seem to view the creationist side as this cutesy group of children who need to be protected, like telling your kids Santa does exist, and I really don’t think you realize the damage this is causing, particularly to the American school system.

    The way Dawkins puts it is that, creationism is a blatant falsehood based on myth, you can’t believe in radio waves, or fabric softener, or even chemistry and physics in general and then dismiss a huge portion of the same science in favor of stories.

    I’m not an atheist, but this creationist wave isn’t religion or science, it’s control and it has no place in institutions of education. Period.

  13. zygosporangia says:

    I’m not an atheist, but this creationist wave isn’t religion or science, it’s control and it has no place in institutions of education. Period.

    Yes, it is about control. The religious extremists want to bring this country under biblical law, they want a theocracy. That’s why it is so important to thwart them at every step along the way.

  14. S.Scott says:

    Hey Brandon! You scooped Prof. Myers with this post! 🙂

  15. Karl says:

    It’s sad that this whole manufactured controversy has created an atmosphere of fear over a simple scientific theory. Our goal is to get people to embrace science and the benefits it can bring to mankind, not to make people afraid of it. The fact that people are afraid, even to just taking a side on this whole sham of a controversy, shows that the efforts and influence of the Discovery Institute and other religious fundamentalists groups are wide-reaching.

    *Incidentally, labeling these people as fundamentalists is starting to get tiresome, and some of them even wear this label with deluded pride. I propose calling them Dark-Agists/Agers from now on. It’s got more of a witch-burning/heretic executing feel to it…

  16. Mike O'Risal says:

    Karl,

    I agree, but I think they would wear your alternate label with almost as much pride. How about “Baby-eating Gestapo-lovers?”

  17. Mike O'Risal says:

    Oh, sorry… I meant to say that there’s a fun sort of acronym in there if you take just the first letter of each word. It’s the name of an old boat the Neocreos find particularly troublesome.

  18. zygosporangia says:

    Dark-agers. I like it. 🙂

  19. scott says:

    If you think the universe is just a few thousand years old you are an complete idiot -and there’s not another word that needs to be said on this subject.

  20. Jason says:

    Yes, evolution has really been surpressed hasn’t it. Poor things. All those complaining about this would do the exact same thing to someone else that had a differing opinion than theirs. Everybody is a victim nowadays. Good grief.

  21. zygosporangia says:

    Ah. Apparently saying “IDiot” and “dark-ager” is enough to attract one to post.

    Everybody is a victim nowadays. Good grief.

    So, then you agree that the whole premise of Expelled is completely asinine?

Comments are closed.