Is 'science' really 'all that'?

I remember reading about this when it happened. I find it interesting and somewhat revealing. It comes from The Spiritual Brain: A Neurosientist's Case for the Existence of the Soul,(Beauregard & O'Leary, HarperOne: NY, NY 2007). Yes, I am reading it. And yeah, my nerdism is raging. FYI, 'materialism' is another name for atheism.

IS SCIENCE A SEARCH FOR TRUTH OR SUPPORT FOR MATERIALISM?

Sometimes academic scientists are so convinced that providing support for materialism is the purpose of science that they end up violating conventional civil rights. This happened to Richard von Sternberg, a paleontologist who permitted a peer-reviewed article to be published in his journal, the Smithsonian's Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington, an article suggesting that the explosion of complex life forms that occurred quite suddenly about 225 million years ago might best be explained by intelligent design. Almost all the existing large classifications of animals (phyla) emerged quite suddenly during a few million years, a mere sneeze of geological time. Sternberg was not himself a supporter of the intelligent design hypothesis, but he believed strongly in putting all the options on the table.

The mere suggestion of an origin that included intelligent causation set off a huge uproar, directed not at the author, geologist and intelligent design theorist Stephen Meyer, but mainly at editor Sternberg. He was cross-examined about his political and religious beliefs by his employers, removed from his position, and denied access to collections of fossils he needed for his work as a paleontologist. Also, he recounted to the Washington Post, then the biological society made a statement disowning Meyer's article, he was counseled not to attend because, in his words, "I was told that feelings were running so high they could not guarantee me that they could keep order." He appealed to the Office of Special Counsel, a federal body that protects the civil rights of government employees, who found that he had had been subjected to retaliation and a disinformation campaign. A December 2006 Congressional report again vindicated Sternberg against many false allegations, accusing senior Smithsonian officials of having "harassed, discriminated against, and retaliated against him.

It became apparent that Sternberg had violated not a written law but an unwritten one: Intelligent causation could not be considered, irrespective of either the state of the evidence or of whether or not scientists who were in any way associated with it had followed correct procedures in gathering and publishing evidence. Sternberg was supposed to have known better than to publish such a paper even though it had passed peer review.

Some argue that such unwritten rules actually hinder the very science they are supposed to protect. Mathematician and ID theorist William Dembski, for example, says, "Materialist ideology has subverted the study of biological and cosmological origins so that the actual content of these sciences has become corrupted. The problem, therefore, is not merely that science is being used illegitimately to promote a materialistic worldview, but that this worldview is actively undermining scientific inquiry, leading to incorrect and unsupported conclusions about biological and cosmological origins."