February 9, 2004 | David F. Coppedge

Was the Nobel Denied to a Creationist?

Rick Weiss, writing in Smithsonian Magazine (Dec. 2003), analyzes Raymond Damadian’s “prize fight” over the 2003 Nobel for Physiology and Medicine (see 11/10/2003 and 10/10/2003 entries).  He suggests the possibility that one of the main reasons was Damadian’s views on creation.  A Nobel spokesman denies it, but Weiss wonders:

But it is difficult not to at least consider another explanation: that scientists on the assembly or in other positions of influence could not abide Damadian�s staunch support for “creationist science.”  Damadian is a firm believer in a literal translation of the Bible: he has no doubt that the earth was created by God during a six-day stretch about 6,000 years ago.  Damadian has also served as a technical adviser to the Institute for Creation Research, which rejects the standard model of evolution. …     …. It is tempting to speculate that some assembly members might have weighed the additional legitimacy a Nobel imprimatur would have conferred upon groups whose views are so diametrically opposed to so much of modern science.

The views of creationists are not diametrically opposed to so much of modern science, for crying out loud.  They are diametrically opposed to the totalitarian elitism of the Darwin Party.  Like so many great creation scientists before him, Damadian performed exemplary scientific research that has had phenomenal, world-wide impact for good.  That is what a prize should go for, not for allegiance to any “standard” mythology.
    We cannot know exactly how much this factor weighed in on the Nobel committee’s secret deliberations, but it would not be surprising, given the Darwin Party’s history of smear tactics going back to Huxley.  Rather than have open debate about the evidence, they present themselves as the noble couriers of science and everyone who disagrees with them as crackpots.  The Smithsonian, whose museum houses Damadian’s first working MRI scanner, could have done a better job defending his case, but at least this article is one of the few that have dared to suggest the creation factor.  Notice how Weiss talked about the “Nobel imprimatur,” and portrays the committee as if it were a council of bishops declaring the official interpretation of their scripture, The Origin of Species.  What’s next, the secular inquisition?

(Visited 14 times, 1 visits today)

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.