With respect, you seem to have missed the point. Gonzalez WAS doing research that furthered ID. His research on galactic hzabitable zones - an area in which he is considered expert - was turning up inconvenient facts about the favourable position of Earth and its moon for life and exploration.
LMAO!!! Galactic habitable zones, indeed!
We may reach the point in my own lifetime when one really must turn to religion ("religion?") in order to get a correct account of basic facts about our planet and to science ("science"?) for propaganda and witch hunts.
We may reach a point in my lifetime when even insipid fools know how to use reason. It won't be in your lifetime, however.
So an incorrect account of Earth's position is science and a correct account is religion?
Where TF do you get that idea? Do you even know what you are talking about, or do you just make whimsical interpretations and claims, and then use them as factual premises to base your even more absurd conclusions on?
For instance, what incorrect account of earth's position??? Your quote from sagan does not have anything to do with Earth's position, least of all in relation to our galaxy. Whether the earth is habitable or not has ZERO, get it ZERO to do with where we are in the galaxy. It has to do with our position in THE SOLAR SYSTEM!!!
- - -
Now you, Denyse. It is such a non-issue. There are multiple reasons he was denied tenure, and it certainly wasn't some kind of a conspiracy.
His grants were 1/10th of average, that including a majority from DI for $50,000!!
His published work was unscientific and not at all up to standard for a legitimate school.
Speaking of which, you must absolutely hate Steven Harper, and GWBush. I mean, they are dozens of times more evasive and dishonest than this University's admin you claim credibilitys is in shreds.
Your accounting of facts. That is credibility in shreds, as if it ever was established in the first place.
Another comment that won't show, I am sure.