How does a non-accredited institution like Bob Jones University get students? Do they not realize that their degrees will mean nothing? Do they actually get jobs based on their degrees? How does BJU get faculty? They endorse creationism, so they obviously don’t have any competent biology professors, so how do they teach biology, geology, astronomy, physics or any of the other sciences that prove creationism false? Where do BJU’s professors get their degrees?
Well, why do people get undergraduate philosophy degrees? Basically, I think that people place higher values on what they perceive to be the advantages of going to BJ-University than the economic disadvantages of earning such a degree. Although still, why the hell would anyone go to Bob Jones University.
Seeking opinions.
My opinion is that this should be in IMHO
[ /Moderator Mode ]
A degree from a non-accredited isn’t necessarily worth nothing. It can’t get you into grad school, law school, or med school, or into a job in a profession such as banking that has strict standards. But there are plenty of businesses out there that would hire such people. For instance, I’ve worked at a couple hotels where they want the department managers to have more than just a high school education, but would probably be okay with someone whose degree came from a non-accredited place. But what you have to remember is that for folks who think that mainstream American society is so corrupt that all participants in it are doomed to hell, attending a place like Bob Jones is worth it regardless of the disadvantages on the educational side.
As for where they get their profs, I haven’t a clue. Maybe they all have PhDs from non-accredited universities.
I went to a Southern Baptist high school in Florida (1979-1982) and most of the teachers and administration had degrees from BJU. These fundies didn’t care if it was accreditied or not; they thought BJU was the greatest thing since sliced bread. We were taught the whole creationist agenda in biology class – 6000 year old earth, dinosaurs on Noah’s Ark, etc. The principal especially made it a point to push the (mostly Baptist) kids into attending BJU.
First of all, I believe you have a few incorrect beliefs yourself:
“They endorse creationism, so they obviously don’t have any competent biology professors…”
Since when does being a competent biology person REQUIRE the belief of no intelligent design? What if I said the foremost expert on cellular respiration believed in intelligent design? I am not saying that that person does, I am pointing out that just because you believe God created life does not make you bad at biology.
“so how do they teach biology, geology, astronomy, physics or any of the other sciences that prove creationism false?”
No science can PROVE anything about creationism or intelligent design. Joe Professor can believe God created the earth just as it is, dinosaur skeletons and all. Harry Professor could believe that God created the universe and let it have a big bang and evolution. Either way, science can’t PROVE God didn’t create the universe.
I am not making this a debate, I am just pointing out some of your faulty assumptions that have an affect on the question.
Now to actually get at your question, I have known several people that have graduated from BJU in Computer Science and Physics. None of them were the next Nobel Prize winners, but none of them were bad in their field. Don’t judge someone by where they graduated.
My step-siblings and their spouses all went to BJU. One’s a nurse, one got criminal justice and theology degrees and now works at a law office, one got a really well-paying job in the sales dept. at Adidas but now sells commercial real estate, and the other makes a damn good living in copier sales. The other two are in cosmetology.
You can get good jobs coming out of BJ, notably if you stay in the area after graduation. A BJU degree is just as good as any other college degree-- in some cases it might be considered better-- in many places in and around Greenville.
The job prospects are definitately not as bad as one might think. I sure wouldn’t want to go there, but you can get a job-- and a good one at that-- with a BJU diploma.
Happy
I’m surprised that BJU degrees are worth so much since the school isn’t accredited. Are their biology degrees worth anything? Do their professors actually accomplish any valid research in their fields? A few of them (especially in biology) are clearly incompetent. How can someone who cannot understand basic thermodynamics teach biology?
Believing in God does not make one incompetent, but not accepting the theory of evolution does. Evolution is a very fundamental concept to biology, and it is just as thoroughly proven as atomic theory or the theory of relativity. Just as a competent chemist accepts atomic theory or a competent physicist accepts relativity, a competent biologist must accept evolution.
It can, however, prove that YEC as advocated by BJU is as thoroughly false as the belief that the moon is made of cheese. I really don’t want to start a debate here.
Another question: I noticed that the BJU application does not require scores or grades, only recommendations (from any adult, not just teachers). How do they make admissions decisions with so little information? What proportion of applicants are accepted?
I’m sure that my Grandfather, a deeply religious professor at the University of Pittsburgh who took the first image on their electron microscope and did some of the groundwork for the polio vaccine with his doctoral research, appreciates your approbation.
What he personally believed, I don’t know, but right beside the Bible on his bookshelf was Origin of the Species and the Koran, among others. I do know that he was one of the smartest human beings I have ever met, but I guess that was in spite of his Catholicism, right?
Don’t you people ever get tired of beating that drum and showing how intolerant and ignorant you really are?
I have not much to add except that I hear more about Bob Jones on the SDMB than I do anywhere else. (see location)
Bzuh? Where do you find intolerance and ignorance in “acceptance of the evolution theory is necessary for competent biology”?
The “acceptance” part.
Just because you think it’s true does not mean that it is universally accepted, and for you to presume that people that do not accept it are incompetent is arrogant to the extreme.
Airman, what exactly are you arguing against? Catholicism is NOT the brand of Christianity they teach at BoJo-in fact, BoJo is extremely ANTI-CATHOLIC. They’re all a bunch of Biblical literalists who have some seriously wacko ideas. Racial integration, for example, is a sin according to them.
And your grandfather was a devout Catholic, who studied evolution, at least for the purposes of his career, so what’s the problem?
He’s saying that people who do NOT read Darwin, or even learn about evolution, should probably not study biology-at least not these days.
(And quick hijack-did he actually work with Salk? Wow!)
quelquechose, you say:
“Believing in God does not make one incompetent, but not accepting the theory of evolution does.”
Since this is now in IMHO, I will argue with this statement.
I am not arguing for or against evolution, I am arguing that not believing in evolution does not make some incompetent. What do you say to these people?
German physicist Max Born, who pioneered quantum mechanics, said, “Those who say that the study of science makes a man an atheist, must be rather silly people.”
German-British researcher Ernst Boris Chain was awarded a Nobel Prize in medicine for his work with penicillin. Chain says, “The principle of [divine] purpose … stares the biologist in the face wherever he looks … . The probability for such an event as the origin of DNA molecules to have occurred by sheer chance is just too small to be seriously considered … .”
Chain also said, “The assumption of directive forces in the origin and development of vital processes becomes a necessity in any kind of interpretation.”
American physicist Arthur Compton discovered what we call the Compton Effect, relating to X-rays. He said, “For me, faith begins with the realization that a supreme intelligence brought the universe into being and created man. It is not difficult for me to have this faith, for an orderly, intelligent universe testifies to the greatest statement ever uttered: ‘In the beginning, God … .’”
From Wired magazine:
In recent years, Allan Sandage, one of the world’s leading astronomers, has declared that the big bang can be understood only as a “miracle.” Charles Townes, a Nobel-winning physicist and coinventor of the laser, has said that discoveries of physics “seem to reflect intelligence at work in natural law.” Biologist Christian de Duve, also a Nobel winner, points out that science argues neither for nor against the existence of a deity: “There is no sense in which atheism is enforced or established by science.” And biologist Francis Collins, director of the National Human Genome Research Institute, insists that “a lot of scientists really don’t know what they are missing by not exploring their spiritual feelings”.
“Although a biologist, I must confess I do not understand how life came about… I consider that life only starts at the level of a functional cell. The most primitive cells may require at least several hundred different specific biological macro-molecules. How such already quite complex structures may have come together, remains a mystery to me. The possibility of the existence of a Creator, of God, represents to me a satisfactory solution to this problem.” Werner Arber (Nobel for Medicine in 1978) a quote from Henry Margenau & Ray Abraham Varghese, eds., “Cosmos, Bios, Theos: Scientists Reflect on Science, God and the Origin of the Universe, Life and Homo Sapiens” /LaSalle, IL, USA: Open Court, 1992, p. 142.
Sir Fred Hoyle, founder of the Cambridge Institute of Theoretical Astronomy and the originator of the Steady State theory of the origin of the universe commented, “The chance that higher life forms might have emerged in this way is comparable with the chance that ‘a tornado sweeping through a junk-yard might assemble a Boeing 747 from the material therein.’”
Are these people incompetent? I think you need to give up this idea.
It gets even weirder; racial integration is a Bad Thing, according to them, but look at how they handle accepted attire (don’t bring any pants if you’re a woman) or, Og forfend, should you wish to go on a date or seek out-of-school employment.
So why would someone go there? Because they want to, or their parents want them to, or something like that. Same generic reasons anyone might go to any other place.
Further cite from a later date: Lauffer, M.A., Ansevin, A.T., Cartwright, T.E., and Brinton, C.C. (1958) Polymerization—depolymerization of tobacco mo-saic virus protein. Nature 181:1338-1339
Salk took my grandfather’s work and built on it. Yes, they knew each other, and my grandfather was always a bit bitter (although not terribly so) that he didn’t get some props. Oh, well. He wasn’t the only one working on it, but he was the one closest to Salk (being at Pittsburgh) and so his research was influential.
Anyway, that’s a fun tangent, but I’m uptight because it seems that the default here is Religion=Ignorance, and that just isn’t the truth.
Anyway, before I get busted and since this is IMHO where you register your opinion and leave, I’m going to do just that. My objections are on the record.
Your assumption that Bob Jones can’t get anybody even marginally acceptable to teach science there is wrong. See this page:
http://www.bju.edu/academics/cas/undergrad/divns/faculty/
The faculty there and their training is as follows:
Ph.D. in analytic chemistry, Clemson, teaches chemistry and physics
Ph.D. in chemistry, UT Knoxville, teaches chemistry
Ph.D. in physics, Oklahoma State, teaches physics
M.A. in English, Bob Jones, with some study at Oxford, worked as a computer programmer, teaches electronics
Ph.D. in zoology, Clemson, teaches biology
B.A. in chemistry, Bob Jones, teaches chemistry
Ph.D. in microbiology, Clemson, teaches biology
Ph.D. in chemistry, Clemson, teaches astronomy, geology, chemistry, and biology
Ph.D. in entomology, Kansas State, teaches biology
Ph.D. in zoology, Clemson, teaches high school science (for education majors?)
Ph.D. in computer science, Clemson, teaches computer science
Ph.D. in genetics, University of Florida, teaches biology
Ph.D. in electrical engineering, Syracuse, teaches physics and engineering
Ph.D. in physics, Clemson, teaches physics and astronomy
Ph.D. in pharmaceutical sciences, University of Florida, teaches chemistry
B.S. in broadcast engineering, teaches electronics
Ph.D. in dental science, Indiana University, teaches chemistry
These are certainly not top people in their field. A few aren’t really qualified for what they are teaching. Most of them are certainly acceptable though. It’s probably about the level of competence of the faculty at an average junior college.
Nobody in this thread has said any such thing. In particular, quelquechose, who you seem to have this beef with, said precisely the opposite thing. There’s a pretty huge difference between religion and intelligent design on the one hand and young-eath creationism on the other. The difference is that the latter is complete fucking nonsense and provably so, while the former is a simple issue of faith and has nothing to do with scientific knowledge. God and some form of IC are accepted by many in the scientific community. YEC is accepted by none. I think that point has been made quite clear.
Exactly which one of the scientists that you named does not subscribe to the theory of evolution?