Caroline Crocker: Victim of the Darwinist Establishment?

Or dishonest creationist hack?

Crocker is featured in the upcoming anti-evolution movie Expelled which purports to demonstrate the callous disregard for scientific truth by the 'Darwinian establishment' and how terrbily those who dare to tell the truth get treated. Crocker was an adjunct biology lecturer at George Mason University and her contract was not renewed. She blamed Darwinism. Her reviews* say something else.

She is also writing a book (aren't they all?) about intellectual honesty in science.

Which is very ironic, considering that she has a hisory of engaging in patently intellectually DIShonest hackery in her 'attacks' against 'Darwinism.'

'Tiny Frog' has a very nice write up in which the depths to which 'intellectually honest' Crocker will go to prop up her fantasies. Seems Crocker gives these 'anti-Darwin' lectures, and her slide show was unwittingly made available on the web (now unavailable, I suspect). She makes some, shall we say, interesting claims in her intellectually honest pursuits. Some gems follow...

Darwin was a "rich kid" who enjoyed "partying","gambling", and "drinking."

Not sure what the evidence - or relevance - of that is. But the IDcreationist crowd does seem to favor the cult of personality, and so attacking Darwin to them is the same as attacking evolution which is the same as propagandizing for Jesus, so it is all good.

'Birds' were found in the same 'layer' as the Archaeopteryx fossil was, and that there was only one such fossil. (there are at least eight, and no, modern birds are not found in contemporaneous strata)

Eohippus (fossil primitive horse) is the same as the modern day Hyrax. Not sure where that bizarre nonsense came from. I suspect it came from Eohippus' former name, Hyracotherium, which means 'hyrax-like beast.' Here is a picture of a reconstruction of Eohippus fossil bones:

And here, a hyrax skeleton:

I report, you decide - shouldn't a biologist (even a molecular biologist) be able to tell the difference? Or does Crocker just rely on the fact that her target audience will not and even if they did, they would not care?

On just two slides of her presentation, one can find innuendo, nonsense, incompetence/dishonesty - and she and her followers want America to believe that the reason that she can't seem to keep a job at a college is because The (Darwinian) Man is keeping her down?

AND she is writing a book pontificating on "intellectual honesty"?

Should Crocker have been 'expelled'? You bet. But not because she 'went against orthodoxy' in teaching the garbage she did, but instead, for incompetence and spreading disinformation.

*Reviews from her next teaching gig show much more of the same...