Quote
But we know Gonzales to be a scientist, so if he says ID is science that carries more weight than you saying it isn't. Ain't that how the game is played?

I have said twice that the US legal system has also ruled that ID is religion not science. This occurred in Dover, Delaware in 2005; and in Arkansas and Louisiana in the 1980s. (Your claim that an individual such as Gonzalez should know more about science than the judges who evaluated reams of evidence from myriad witnesses in three different cases is highly questionable.) Indeed, Bex has been posting examples of creationist "science" for months which have proved to be poorly researched and scientifically inaccurate, the most recent one being the claims about the horse fossils. Any serious scientific paper which was riddled with these kinds of mistakes would never be published. ID/creationism will have to do better than this if they want mainstream science to take them seriously.

Quote
What's silly is, even if what you say was true, you're claiming that he should be discriminated against on grounds of his religion. It doesn't matter if he practiced it at work. Should people be fired for praying at work? Refusing to eat pork? No.

You are ignoring the fact that I told you that creationism figured into the work he was doing for the university. I told you that the very evidence he submitted for tenure contained it. I've also shown that creationist "science" is questionable at best, and that the US legal system has ruled that it is not science and has no place in a science classroom. If you cannot now accept that these grounds are good enough for denying tenure then I think we've got cognitive dissonance happening again. And I'm not going to continue to flog a dead hyracotherium with you.

Quote
They're discriminating against him because he doesn't share their religion. Plain as day.

He's a Christian. As are many other scientists. There are Christians who are leaders in their scientific fields, and Christians who get fired because they cannot fulfill their job descriptions. The DI themselves are claiming religious discrimination because he is an IDer. The undeniable logic here is that ID is religion.

Quote
Either his astronomy is a threat to evolutionism or it isn't. Which is it? Is the mantra meaningless, or should evolutionists let this astronomer go about his life in peace?

His work, as I stated earlier and will not state again, is of concern to the department for which he works. If he is publishing papers that include creationist ideas that fly in the face of science, then no doubt they will fear for their reputation. It is an embarrassment factor and nothing more. I think we should refrain from further comment unless someone can get access to one of his papers which incorporates his creationist beliefs, in which case the competency of his science can be better evaluated.