Red faces and angry glances. Shouting and bulging veins all around. Stares that would bore a hole in most any wall. Condescending attacks on individual people rather than concrete responses to opposing arguments. Conspiracy theorists’ cries against any who contradict them. Sounds more like oppression and stifling of discovery than an open-university campus. So much for the “free marketplace of ideas,” eh?

The events take place throughout campus, from lectures to roundtable discussions to a very controversial guest. The table is set for those who promote a specific worldview and a specific faith to make themselves known. The perceived “scientific” community rejoices, belittling and mocking any who oppose them. However, within these high “academic” communities grow whispers of dissension. The mathematicians crunch their numbers, churning out probabilities of origins. The biochemists continue to unlock and reveal an entire other mini-universe within the cell, with highly specified machinery and complexity beyond belief. Even biologists note the gaping hole the fossil record shows – and yet we still cling to the man who many think made possible the “intellectually-fulfilled atheist”? We venerate and value Charles Darwin more highly than most any other scientist, ignoring the discoveries and theories of countless theists throughout history.

The Darwin Day events and invitation of rabid evolutionary anti-theist Richard Dawkins only serve to demonstrate the extent to which one view predominates in science. Ironically, this week marks the controversial defeat of an Oklahoma Senate bill that would legislate the validity of teaching both strengths and weaknesses of evolutionary theory. The bill was narrowly defeated in a committee, but reflects an increasingly recognized opposition to modern evolutionary theory. The work of Ben Stein in his investigative documentary “Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed” adds popularity and momentum as well as evidence for opposition to naturalistic evolution in the battle which rages among scientists. No professor without tenure (and some even with) is above the Darwinist police, no matter the value of their contributions or the quality of their research.

Blindly, but faithfully, following an uncertain theory just because it has been widely accepted makes us no better than those who asserted throughout the Middle Ages that the earth was the center of the universe. But therein lies the problem. Because the definition of the term “science” has been commandeered and changed by the so-called intellectual establishment, it no longer is viable to question or doubt natural selection and random mutation as the only “true” explanation for origins. When you redefine science as Darwinism, of course you’ll reject any evidence which comes in opposition to it.

The welcoming of Dawkins to OU on March 6 is approaching with great fanfare, as the former Oxford biologist will herald the semester’s Darwin celebration events. But what has made Dawkins popular is his foray into the philosophical realm in books such as “The God Delusion”, in which he purports the seeming impossibility of the supernatural realm. His public disdain for religious belief, particularly expressed in attacks on Christianity, has made Dawkins a polemic figure.

However, intellectual thought has not been without question for his philosophical motives. Noted philosopher and historian of science Michael Ruse, known for his respected work in the history and philosophy of science, will be another guest speaker for the OU Darwin 2009 Project. Ruse, who will give a public lecture on Feb. 26 at the Sam Noble Oklahoma Museum of Natural History, comments in his review of “The God Delusion” that “Dawkins is brazen in his ignorance of philosophy and theology (not to mention the history of science)…So long as his understanding of Christianity remains at a sophomoric level, Dawkins does not deserve full attention.”

Angry language and condescension will bring no clarity or resolution to the problem. Bringing Dawkins in does nothing but increase the level of tension between naturalism advocates and those who purport other theories of origins.

So what is to be done about this? First, I would strongly suggest, even if you fully agree with Dawkins about evolutionary biology, that you acquire knowledge of the opposing arguments to evolutionary theory.

The first opportunity for such knowledge is tonight in the way of two academics from the Discovery Institute, a think tank in Seattle that publishes and funds intelligent design research. Researcher Dr. John West and lawyer Casey Luskin will present on the troubling topic raised by Ben Stein – academic freedom. Second, Ruse will debate design theorist William Dembski on Feb. 27 in the Paul F. Sharp Concert Hall in the Catlett School of Music. Dembski controversially spoke at OU in the fall of 2007. Come hear rational conversation and discussion rather than personal attacks and scare tactics. Let’s talk about what science is and means, in a historical and a present sense. The soft-spoken naturalist and biologist Charles Darwin might have even calmly discussed it himself.

-Jon Malone is an English education graduate student.