Now on ScienceBlogs: Attack of the pregnant cannibal fathers
Evolution, development, and random biological ejaculations from a godless liberal
PZ Myers is a biologist and associate professor at the University of Minnesota, Morris.
…and this is a pharyngula stage embryo.
• a longer profile of yours truly
• my calendar
• Nature Network
• RichardDawkins Network
• facebook
• MySpace
• Twitter
• Atheist Nexus
• the Pharyngula chat room
(#pharyngula on irc.synirc.net)
• Quick link to the latest endless thread
The effort to understand the universe is one of the very few things that lifts human life a little above the level of farce, and gives it some of the grace of tragedy.
Steven Weinberg (1933 - )
« Ben Stein sinking ever lower | Main | Rehabilitating Mr. Wiggles »
Category: Politics
Posted on: July 16, 2009 7:51 PM, by PZ Myers
Francis Collins will be stepping down from his role at the BioLogos Foundation, as part of the process of becoming the head of the NIH.
This is only a minimal step, however, and it really doesn't address any of my objections to the guy. The foundation and its web site will still be going on, and you know that once he finishes his tenure at NIH, he'll just step back into it. I'm more concerned about whether he'll be injecting religion into his politics on the job.
Find more posts in: 
Politics
Share this: Facebook Twitter Stumbleupon Reddit Email + More
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://scienceblogs.com/mt/pings/115058
Sign in or register with TypePad. Sign up with Movable Type.
Greg Laden's Blog 11.24.2009
The World's Fair 11.24.2009
Effect Measure 11.24.2009
Starts With a Bang 11.23.2009
ERV 11.23.2009
Comments
Posted by: Bill | July 16, 2009 8:03 PM
Why PZ! Isn't that what you are doing? Injecting your religion, Atheism, into your job?
Posted by: Summitwulf | July 16, 2009 8:08 PM
Spelling 'atheism' with a capital 'a' doesn't magically turn it into a religion. I suggest you look up the definitions of both 'atheism' and 'religion' before making even more of an idiot of yourself.
Posted by: Holbach
|
July 16, 2009 8:13 PM
Of course Collins will be bringing his imaginary god to his new post. Isn't it already there, in a sense?
Posted by: Shaun | July 16, 2009 8:14 PM
Definitely a step in the right direction, and could even be looked at as a sign of good faith (pun entirely intended. Oh yeah).
Posted by: Holbach
|
July 16, 2009 8:19 PM
Bill @ 1
Here we go again, stygmatizing rational atheism with irrational religion under the umbrella of anything opposed to religion is really a religion. Will this equation never cease?
Posted by: NewEnglandBob
|
July 16, 2009 8:20 PM
No, writing Pharyngula is not his job, its his (second) love.
(I gave trophy wife first billing, of course)
Posted by: Zeno | July 16, 2009 8:20 PM
I think his track record matters. How much religion did Collins inject into the human genome project?
Posted by: JT | July 16, 2009 8:27 PM
Why PZ! Isn't that what you are doing? Injecting your religion, Atheism, into your job?
His complaint is over placing a man with a history of not being able to separate his work and his religious beliefs into a government position in which he is likely to use those beliefs to provide government support for a singe specific religion. Your complaint is that PZ uses his own in-no-way-tied-to-the-government time to spread his beliefs (or lack thereof).
Unless of course you were suggesting that PZ lectures his students on atheism during class time. In which case I would caution you of the legal dangers (not to mention the flat-out immorality) of making such claims without evidence.
Posted by: Holbach
|
July 16, 2009 8:27 PM
Zeno @ 7
Whether he did or did not, would the results differ? Of course not, but why proffer a belief aside from his work that makes no difference whatever? There is no god to influence his work at hand, so to embrace an uninfluential nothing is ridiculous.
Posted by: foxfire | July 16, 2009 9:04 PM
@ Holbach # 9
Holbach, please excuse me for not understanding: Are you saying that Collins is not qualified for the NIH position because he mentions his religious beliefs, even if those beliefs do not influence his work whatsoever?
I think Zeno (#7) makes a good point and I'm reading your response to mean Collin's opinion on religion would matter even if that religion has no impact on how Collins would perform his job functions. I think I'm misunderstanding your statement and am asking for clarification. Thanks!
Posted by: Holbach
|
July 16, 2009 9:46 PM
foxfire @ 10
No, his opinion on religion would not matter, as that same religion would have no impact on how Collins performs his job since there is no god in the matter at all, but just in his established belief. He is most certainly qualified for his new position, but he is being disingenuous to think that a belief in an imaginary god may somehow guide his thoughts and hand for it's glorification, whether he expresses it personally or assumes that it has an influence. As I said previously, the work will be performed whether he is religious or not, but why interject an absolutely unnecessary medium that will have no bearing on the work performed? Science should be the supreme matter at hand, not an imaginary thing that does and should not matter. I feel strongly about keeping science free from all irrational taints, including religion.
Posted by: James F | July 16, 2009 10:22 PM
As far as guiding scientific funding, I'm not concerned. He's pro-embryonic stem cell research and pro-evolution, what funding would he discourage related to his religious beliefs? Neuroscience? He's already being watched cautiously by critics, there'd be a serious uproar. I'm a little concerned about his support for "high-throughput" vs. small-scale hypothesis-driven research, but he's got a solid record in both. If he uses the directorship as a bully pulpit to help some evangelicals overcome their phobia of evolution, more power to him.
Posted by: kamaka | July 16, 2009 10:52 PM
He does good work, there is no doubt.
But if he professes to be a theist*, his ability to reason is definitely in doubt.
*How do they do it, reconcile the irrational with reason?
Posted by: CalGeorge | July 16, 2009 10:59 PM
You can take the Collins out of the BioLogos but you can't take the BioLogos out of the Collins, unfortunately.
Posted by: raven | July 16, 2009 11:04 PM
Relax folks. It is just bill the drive by troll. He doesn't have enough brain power to write a long, intelligent post or reply. His one line non sequitor will take his brain at least a week to recover.
Hey Bill. Last time you piddled on the blog, I asked you if you felt odd belonging to a weird cult full of crazy, stupid, hateful, morons. Unfortunately, you are too stupid to read it much less think about it. I guess to a troll, other trolls appear normal.
Posted by: Scott Hatfield, OM | July 17, 2009 1:43 AM
Holbach@11:
"...he is being disingenuous to think that a belief in an imaginary god may somehow guide his thoughts and hand for it's glorification, whether he expresses it personally or assumes that it has an influence..."
Did you mean some word other than 'disingenuous' ? I'm pretty sure that Collins actually believes a lot of that stuff. His beliefs might be confused, incoherent, compartmentalized, etc. But I don't think he's trying to deceive himself or others. Maybe you have, you know, some evidence otherwise?
Posted by: articulett | July 17, 2009 2:32 AM
What exactly does PZ think he is right about and that everyone else is wrong about?
And why are theotards so confused about what atheism is. It's not a faith... it's a lack of faith--the same lack of faith that you guys have towards other religions an the myriad of invisible undetectable entities you don't believe in (Xenu, for example).
I think Collins and some of the posters on this forum are showing signs of dementia.
Collins believes the invisible creator of the universe gave him a personal sign in the form of a waterfall indicating that Christianity is The Truth (tm). He also asserts that people are "right to reject materialism". These are scientifically unsupportable claims.
Does religion cause mental illness or are the mentally ill particularly vulnerable to woo memes?
Posted by: artifishal | July 17, 2009 2:39 AM
articulett -
When we remember that we are all mad, the mysteries disappear and life stands explained. -Mark Twain
The problem is not religion or atheism, but self-righteousness.
Posted by: Andyo
|
July 17, 2009 3:00 AM
Ok, so Mabus at #17 will go poof in the morning. Be prepared to adjust your quote numbers.
Posted by: foolfodder | July 17, 2009 3:33 AM
Doesn't stepping down from Biologos show that he gets the need to be religion-neutral in his new appointment?
Posted by: Lotharloo | July 17, 2009 5:09 AM
Sometimes I feel you are judging him too harshly. Collins' step down was a good move. So what exactly is the problem here? Should he shut up about his beliefs?
Posted by: John Morales | July 17, 2009 8:05 AM
Foolfodder @21,
All it shows is he's aware that he should appear to be neutral.
But, unlike PZ, I think it's certainly worth a little credit, either as a PR or as a good-will gesture.
Posted by: James Sweet | July 17, 2009 10:53 AM
I also think this is a good sign. Even if it's just the appearance of neutrality, that's a good thing in and of itself (because he can't actively promote an evangelical stance while simultaneously appearing neutral)
Posted by: ms physics | July 17, 2009 11:02 AM
I realize people like myself are a minority, but there are those of us religious folk who feel very strongly about keeping our religion out our science and our government. In this, we share a lot of goals with not only atheists, but all who want to see the end of the ridiculous twisting of science and gratuitous insertion of religion into various institutions of the American government. Perhaps we could give Collins here the benefit of the doubt?
Sorry- perhaps this comment is out of place, but being constantly maligned by both sides of the fence can become exhausting at times.
Posted by: foxfire | July 17, 2009 7:43 PM
Holback @ 11
Thanks for clarifying your position as to Collins being qualified for the NIH position. I agree with Scott Hatfield (#16) in that I don't think Collins is being "disingenuous" (for the reason Scott stated) and I do think it would be inappropriate for Collins to comment on the supernatural while issuing statements about scientific matters (as ms physics so eloquently stated in #24 above).
Posted by: NBeale | July 23, 2009 1:23 AM
If Obama is allowed to be explicitly religious and talk about religion and his beliefs while doing his job, I don't see why Collins shouldn't either.