Ed Brayton is a freelance writer and speaker. He is the co-founder and president of 
In an interview with Newsweek:
There are a number of scientists and academics who've been fired, denied tenure, lost tenure or lost grants because they even suggested the possibility of intelligent design. The most egregious is Richard Sternberg at the Smithsonian, the editor of a magazine that published a peer-reviewed paper about ID. He lost his job.
Except that Sternberg did not lose his job. He didn't even lose his unpaid courtesy position at the Smithsonian. In fact, even after everything that happened, the Smithsonian still extended an invitation after his Research Associate position had expired to remain as a Research Collaborator.
The Smithsonian respond in a letter to Newsweek:
Sternberg has never been employed by the Smithsonian Institution. Since January 2004, he has been an unpaid research associate in the departments of invertebrate and vertebrate zoology at the Smithsonian's National Museum of Natural History. Dr. Sternberg continues to enjoy full access to research facilities at the museum. Moreover, Stein's assertion that Sternberg was removed from a Smithsonian publication is not true. The Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington is an independent journal and is not affiliated with the Smithsonian.
He should also have noted that Sternberg had resigned as editor of PBSW 6 months before the controversial Meyer article was published. His leaving as editor had nothing to do with the article. It's rather telling that their "most egregious" example of persecution requires flat out lying, don't you think?
Comments
Ed, why let reality get in the way of a good argument?
If these people were interested in reality, they wouldn't have mentioned ID in the first place.
Posted by: Malcolm | April 24, 2008 9:52 AM
One slight problem is this:
"Moreover, Stein's assertion that Sternberg was removed from a Smithsonian publication is not true."
I don't read Stein as saying this. Stein seems to say that Sternberg was at the Smithsonian and was the editor of a "magazine". Not that he was at the Smithsonian and editor of a Smithsonian magazine.
Posted by: SteveF | April 24, 2008 10:06 AM
SteveF,
I disagree... it seems like Stein was making an effort to associate the Smithsonian with the journal. Otherwise, there's not much of a story to tell.
Posted by: Chris | April 24, 2008 10:14 AM
Glad to see Smithsonian responded to that. Newsweek, please do a story about the real story. Thanks!
Posted by: 386sx | April 24, 2008 10:16 AM
Chris,
I see it as Stein suggesting that the Smithsonian sacked him for being sympathetic to ID by publishing an ID article. Not necessarily that the article itself was in a Smithsonian publication.
Posted by: SteveF | April 24, 2008 10:19 AM
Well, they have the good fortune to possess an audience who they know won't check out the claims and uncritically accepts whatever its told, so truth isn't something they need to care about.
I mean hell, they claim that Darwin was responsible for the Holocaust. That's like saying Socrates was responsible for the Opium War. They're the ultimate post-modernists; to them, reality doesn't exist.
Posted by: Julian | April 24, 2008 10:39 AM
It's only a lie if you have an athiest Worldview. Isn't it obvious that the Smithsonian is covering its tracks with its own lies?
*sarcasm alert*
Posted by: Ericb | April 24, 2008 10:45 AM
Five outright lies and at least six misleading statements in three sentences. That's damn fine speech writing.
Posted by: Thoracantha | April 24, 2008 10:51 AM
Thoracantha--would you expect anything less from Nixon's former speechwriter?
Posted by: gary l. day | April 24, 2008 11:48 AM
Ben Stein specifically says that he did not write the line: "I am not a crook." but then on what basis should we take Ben Stein at his word?
Posted by: rpenner | April 24, 2008 1:03 PM
"Reality has a well-known liberal bias."
- Stephen Colbert
Apparently, Stein didn't get the joke.
Posted by: PBW | April 24, 2008 3:00 PM
SteveF:
In both the actual film and in this trailer, Stein says that Sternberg "edited a small scientific journal affiliated with the Smithsonian Institution in Washington." (starts at 3:00 in the trailer).
Posted by: BCtheEra | April 24, 2008 3:15 PM
He should also have noted that Sternberg had resigned as editor of PBSW 6 months before the controversial Meyer article was published.
Maybe the BSW should write their own letter.
Actually, at this point I can't help but think Stein has made these specific statements about Sternberg "losing his job" so many times that the BSW maybe should look into whether they are within their rights to investigate libel/slander charges.
Posted by: Coin | April 24, 2008 3:34 PM
Thanks for clarifying this. I'm going to point people to this article over and over and over.
Posted by: TheFallibleFiend | April 25, 2008 4:05 PM
Excuse the cross-posting but I found one particular passage from SI official Sheila Burke's letter to Sternberg (page 11 of the report's appendix) to be very illuminating. Burke is responding to issues raised in a meeting Sternberg had with the head of Humans Resources at the Smithsonian:
"Fourth, you stated that, while you are not asking for any money personally or for a permanent position at the Institution, you felt that you had lost a year or more in your research because of your "inability" to work as a Research Associate at the NMNH. As a result you stated you would like to have a "grant" or some other funding in the amount of $300,000 over a three year period. You said this money would not be construed as salary, but would be used strictly for your research. When Mr. Douglas noted that the Smithsonian does not give grants, you indicated that any funding vehicle would be acceptable. You also said you do not trust NMNH staff and that you needed "intellectual and research freedom." You stated the money would allow you to be support staff to assist you in getting you research back up to speed. You said you were not requesting residency at the museum, but would like to come in and use the collections as necessary."
Sound like a shakedown to anyone else?
Posted by: mfbjr | May 10, 2008 11:20 PM