University fires scientist, July 2014

Here are the 'court documents', which is commonly called 'the complaint'. His story is that after telling students that the fossil's soft tissue had implications regarding its age, his supervisor yelled at him about religion and his 'creationist projects'. 8 months later (two weeks after publication) his employment was terminated. He believes he can make a case that this correlation is sufficient to prove causation in a civil case.We haven't heard the opposing position at this time as far as I know. I'm going to guess two possible avenues: Funding cuts {boring}, and there were complaints that Armitage had crossed the line from expressing an opinion to proselytizing.Either way, I think headlines such as University Fires Christian Scientist for Discovery Proving Creationism are grotesquely misleading as it presents it as a done deal, rather than just an allegation. And also: the discovery doesn't prove creationism or even a young earth. At best it proves recent dinosaurs, and it doesn't even do that.

This does not prohibit him from being a scientist. Those credentials serve their own purpose. Credentials don't make someone a scientist.Armitage, M. 1996. Heterophyid trematodes in the Light of Scanning Electron Microscopy. Microscopy and Analysis. July: 54: 43-44. 1 Gable Cottage Post House Lane, Surrey KT23 3EA ENGLANDArmitage, M. 1997. The Euryhaline cottid fish, Leptocottus armatus (Girard), second intermediate host of the trematode Ascocotyle (P.) diminuta. Bulletin of the Southern Calif. Academy of Sciences 96(3) :112-116Armitage, M. 1999. The euryhaline gobiid fish, Gillichthys mirabilis Cooper 1874, second intermediate host of the trematode, Pygidiopsoides spindalis Martin, 1951. Bulletin of the Southern California Academy of Sciences 98(2):75-79 . Cover photo, in addition to article.Armitage, M. 2001. Cercarial emergence from rediae in California snail tissues. Bulletin of the Southern California Academy of Sciences 100(1) 50-58. Cover photo in addition to article.Armitage, M. 2004. The spray nozzle of the Bombardier Beetle, Brachinus favicollis, Erwin. Bulletin of the Southern California Academy of Sciences 103(1): 24-33.Armitage, M. 2004. Artifacts from rapid microwave processing of trematode tissues (Ascocotyle pachycystis and leighi). Microscopy Today 12(5):32-35Doing science? That qualifies, I think, even if it isn't all that exciting. Interesting angle. Although I think him engaging in a 'Socratic dialogue' about the age of the horn while training someone else's students how to use a microscope may have been contributory to his dismissal.

Unless they claim it. Proposing explanations that are consistent with how the universe works is acceptable, yes. That's not a theistic offering. A theistic offering would be 'a divine being is responsible for the information in organisms', but, to date, without providing evidence that this is the case. Hardly acceptable in the same way as the alternative above. Given his personality, I'd assume he'd be field scientist studying barnacles or worms and we'd never hear about him. Either that or he'd crop up as having discovered some new African or American species every now and then. Well as a general rule we don't find soft tissue, and the only reasoning proposed that it is young is 'I don't know how it could have survived for as long as you say'. There is no law that means this material must be young. Edited by Modulous, : No reason given.