First, the title of PhD, although archaic, does not imply that there is a rigid system of “approved thought” excepting that it (most of the time) rigidly follows the scientific method (in most cases, anyway). That’s a feature, not a bug. As long as you can prove your thesis, it’s all good. Of course, every school is different, but your rant about that sounds like something Ben Stein would say.

Second, you mention online courses. Again, I am a fan as I’ve seen the online course material my wife is taking for some IT courses she’s going through. There’s some good stuff out there from reputible institutions. However, if you get an online degree from Phoenix University, you can’t expect to get into a PhD program at Harvard, if you catch my drift. Yes. The kids that sweated it out at the brick and mortars deserve it more, because it is harder and they have accomplished a larger task and (most importantly) proven themselves on the topic better.

Anyway, good luck, but I don’t think your argument is a very good indictment of the post-graduate educational system in the United States, as flawed as parts of it may be.

I find more value in technical certificates these days, as there is so much junk science going on that it’s getting really hard to sort through the chaff.

In applying at grad schools I came upon a system of privileges that is unstated but painfully obvious. Not only are schools seeking CASH students, they actively discriminate against single parents and financial aid graduate applicants. I was told point blank a few times, pretty much the same words each time, that they “don’t want people like me” in their program.

Apparently, higher education is reserved for those who are ‘deserving’ and have ‘earned it’. Whatever that means.

I’d always thought, if you pass the tests, and carry the grades, there you go.

Not so. I’m still taking online classes for an MSE because I can’t get into a bricks and mortar school. Honestly, I’d rather go for an IEEE/ASE certification of graduate level software engineering, or some other trade-certificate than a Doctorate. I actually have zero interest in continuing on to obtain a Doctorate in any field now.

I’m going to search out and obtain specialty licenses instead.

It’s part of their wedge strategy, and it’s beginning to get out of hand. It needs to be stopped now.

Although I agree we need to stop this, as I said before. I wonder how we can pull this off? You can’t just ask somebody if they are religious as that is actual persecution and will backfire. Somehow there needs to be a way to see if they actually believe their research for the PhD they are applying. How do we do that? Serious question here.

Either way, they just discredited themselves.

Yeah. I think that either they didn’t perform due diligence (which is inexcusable), or they’re trying to play both sides of the fence.

As far as the Geological Society is concerned – I don’t necessarily sympathize with them for being caught in a difficult position. Why did they invite him to lead the trip in the first place?

That’s my point, too. Did they not know who he is? If so, they aren’t doing sufficient background checks. Do they let anybody claiming to be a geologist run a trip? No legitimate organization hires somebody without verifying his credentials.

If they knew who he was and hired him anyway, they aren’t standing behind their own published standards and therefore have no legitimacy as an academic organization either.

Either way, they just discredited themselves.

My recollection is that several people there had legit degrees. I’m hoping it’s a rare phenomenon that a young-Earth creationist manages to steal a degree from a reputable school.

This is what’s troubling me. It appears to be a growing phenomenon. After I attended that creationist lecture in August, given by the young man who went to Harvard then went to work for ICR, I learned that they have another employee with a Harvard degree. One of the speakers at the Darwin Was Wrong debacle was Marcus Ross, who two years ago received a PhD in Earth Science from URI – not Ivy League, but a real university with reputable scientists. It’s part of their wedge strategy, and it’s beginning to get out of hand. It needs to be stopped now. Yes, it will fuel their collective persecution complex, but who cares? As PL said, “That’s better than helping legitimize their claims by building up credentials.”

As far as the Geological Society is concerned – I don’t necessarily sympathize with them for being caught in a difficult position. Why did they invite him to lead the trip in the first place? It isn’t as though there aren’t any legitimate geologists they could have asked.

Yes, I did see Sanford’s presentation. I haven’t written that article yet. I’ll have to look at my notes to refresh my memory.

My recollection is that several people there had legit degrees. I’m hoping it’s a rare phenomenon that a young-Earth creationist manages to steal a degree from a reputable school.

“Looky at me! I did all the schoolin’, I joined geological socities, and led trips. I’m an authority!”

But, what could the society do? I’m not sure. But if it requires changing rules to kick him out, so be it. Yes, he will have a knee-jerk persecution complex. But how is that different than now? We already had Expelled! Do we want to open them into science circles because we fear them complaining? That’s better than helping legitimize their claims by building up credentials.

Thomas – I, too, have wondered when they are going to begin addressing modern forms of evolutionary theory. Poor Darwin.

I agree on wanting to get the facts from a reputable geologist – that’s why I didn’t go on the field trip myself, even though I really wanted to visit St. Helens.

Jeff – Ron’s got it right; I think GSA was stuck with not being able to not approve the trip. I’m sure they didn’t really want Austin in there, knowing who he was, but there wasn’t a whole lot they could do about it (aside from banning him after the fact if he went on a creationist rant of some kind). They just couldn’t exclude him based on something he hadn’t done yet. (Check out the field trip description, too – it’s pretty carefully worded to keep GSA from gathering any ammunition.)

If you read the summary that Cookie links to, you’ll see that most people on the trip didn’t seem to know about Austin’s stealth YEC views. I don’t know if the Geological Society approved the trip without knowing who he is, or if they couldn’t find a way to not approve it, based on the trip description that Austin submitted.