Christian evangelical university in Rocklin to offer biology degree

[cbayer]

http://www.sacbee.com/2013/03/13/5257951/christian-evangelical-university.html


William Jessup University, which relocated from San Jose to Rocklin in 2004, is a four-year university offering a liberal-arts education with 13 degree programs. The 125-acre campus has 175,000 square feet of classrooms, a library, administrative offices, a bookstore and residence halls.

By Ed Fletcher
[e-mail]
Published: Wednesday, Mar. 13, 2013 - 12:00 am | Page 1B

Continuing its push to add secular degrees to its theological offerings, Rocklin's William Jessup University will make its first foray into the sciences by offering a biology degree this spring.

Campus officials say students enrolling in their program will learn the prevailing scientific thought, while being exposed to alternate theories.

"Some people would say you can't teach the Bible and teach science. We would respectfully disagree," said campus President John Jackson.

He said sciences fit nicely into a "Christ-centered" education, and the two aren't mutually exclusive.

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/2013/03/13/5257951/christian-evangelical-university.html#storylink=cpy

[lastlib]

1. Is this real biology, or creationist wannabe biology??

[cbayer]

2. According to the article, very real science.

I think it's a good thing and a way for american evangelicals to move forward.

[mike_c]

3. there are no credible "alternative theories" to descent with modification, i.e. evolution....

This is just more xtian BS. I'll believe it when they say it: the Earth is 4.5 billion years old, life began here some 3 billion plus years ago and has continued in an unbroken chain of descent since then, making the whole question of whether or not "life begins at conception" irrelevant, modern taxonomic diversity is the result of biological evolution, including natural selection, and no special creator is needed to explain the workings of living systems. THAT is prevailing scientific thought, at least in the life sciences. There are NO credible "alternative theories" to the broad concepts I've outlined.

[trotsky]

4. Here's the money quote:

One class, a feature at many institutions, will focus on the origins of life. In that course students will be exposed to alternate theories, including intelligent design.

"Intelligent" "design" isn't a theory. This is more of the same dishonest Christian nonsense trying to combat and resist science.

[cbayer]

5. It sounds like they are going to teach evolution

To run the science program, the campus hired Ted Tollner, who has a doctorate in molecular, cellular and integrated physiology from the University of California, Davis. Tollner described himself as a scientist and man of faith.

"The learning objectives are the same. The science doesn't change," Tollner said. "You don't teach biology without teaching the big-picture view, and evolution is one of them."

But they are also going to include alternatives like intelligent design, but seem to be going out of their way to distinguish it from "prevailing scientific view".

Could be a good thing, as I would really like to see the numbers change in terms of the number of americans that have yet to embrace evolution.

[mike_c]

6. Tollner's work appears to focus on a mechanistic approach to male fertility/infertility....

His personal history-- what I've been able to find online, which isn't much-- seems overshadowed by evangelical Christianity.

When I was in grad school, one of my fellow doctoral students in one of the labs I did a rotation through was a devout evangelical Christian. He clearly preferred not talk about certain things, including evolution. There was a story among the grad cadre that when he interviewed for the program, his parents accompanied him to be on guard against ways he might be tempted into sin (I doubt that they had ANY idea, LOL), and at the end of the (multiday) interview, his only question for his potential adviser was "Is there a dress code?" The odd thing was that he was doing molecular phylogenetics, developing ways to better classify organisms based on patterns of evolutionary relatedness. On the few occasions when I could get him to discuss it, he vehemently denied any acceptance of evolution, and provided elaborate fantasies for alternative explanations, even for data that unambiguously demonstrated microevolution. And yet his research focused upon phylogenetics, for which there is NO credible framework other than evolution-- it's a discipline that pretty much cannot even exist without evolution as an organizing framework. This apparently was not a conflict for him-- he simply churned out the work, but rejected the central ideas that formed its foundation.

[cbayer]

7. His list of publications seems completely free of religious beliefs.

He also got this award (though I have been unable to find out what exactly for)
Discover Magazine’s Top 100 Science Stories - 2011

FWIW, I can't get your mormon.org link to work.

[mike_c]

8. oddly, I can't either....

It works when I find the link via a Google search (it's the first result) but the direct link goes to that portal sort of page. Bummer. I edited it out because while I don't mind linking to the guy's own page, I don't want to post his name outside that context. Oh well. It was one of those "I'm so-and-so, and I'm a Mormon" pages. I did find out that he's teaching biology at what he describes as a "small Louisiana college," and makes a point to profess his faith to his students. Knowing how that sort of thing would go over at most public institutions, I presume it's likely that he's teaching at a religiously affiliated school.

[okasha]

9. Having sat on a number of academic hiring committiees,

I can't imagine one that would permit a candidate to bring a parent or parents to the interview. We did have a candidate once who arrived accompanied by his father. Papa was parked at the library while Sonny did his teach, which was so bad he was instantly scratched off the list.