Former NASA specialist claims he was fired over intelligent design

LOS ANGELES – NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory has landed robotic explorers on the surface of Mars, sent probes to outer planets and operates a worldwide network of antennas that communicates with interplanetary spacecraft.

Its latest mission is defending itself in a workplace lawsuit filed by a former computer specialist who claims he was demoted -- and then let go -- for promoting his views on intelligent design, the belief that a higher power must have had a hand in creation because life is too complex to have developed through evolution alone.

David Coppedge, who worked as a "team lead" on the Cassini mission exploring Saturn and its many moons, alleges that he was discriminated against because he engaged his co-workers in conversations about intelligent design and handed out DVDs on the idea while at work. Coppedge lost his "team lead" title in 2009 and was let go last year after 15 years on the mission.

Opening statements are expected to begin Monday in Los Angeles Superior Court after two years of legal wrangling in a case that has generated interest among supporters of intelligent design. The Alliance Defense Fund, a Christian civil rights group, and the Discovery Institute, a proponent of intelligent design, are both supporting Coppedge's case.

"It's part of a pattern. There is basically a war on anyone who dissents from Darwin and we've seen that for several years," said John West, associate director of the Center for Science and Culture at the Seattle-based Discovery Institute. "This is free speech, freedom of conscience 101."

The National Center for Science Education, which rejects intelligent design as thinly veiled creationism, is also watching the case and has posted all the legal filings on its website.

"It would be unfortunate if the court took what seems to be a fairly straightforward employment law case and allowed it to become this tangled mess of trying to adjudicate scientific matters," said Josh Rosenau, NCSE's programs and policy director. "It looks like a pretty straightforward case. The mission that he was working on was winding down and he was laid off."

Coppedge's attorney, William Becker, says his client was singled out by his bosses because they perceived his belief in intelligent design to be religious. Coppedge had a reputation around JPL as an evangelical Christian and other interactions with co-workers led some to label him as a Christian conservative, Becker said.

In the lawsuit, Coppedge says he believes other things also led to his demotion, including his support for a state ballot measure that sought to define marriage as limited to heterosexual couples and his request to rename the annual holiday party a "Christmas party."

"David had this reputation for being a Christian, for being a practicing one. He did not go around evangelizing or proselytizing. But if he found out that someone was a Christian he would say, `Oh that's interesting, what denomination are you?"' Becker said.

"He's not apologizing for who he is. He's an evangelical Christian."

In an emailed statement, JPL dismissed Coppedge's claims. In court papers, lawyers for the California Institute of Technology, which manages JPL for NASA, said Coppedge received a written warning because his co-workers complained of harassment. They also said Coppedge lost his "team lead" status because of ongoing conflicts with others.

Caltech lawyers contend Coppedge was one of two Cassini technicians and among 246 JPL employees let go last year due to planned budget cuts.

While the case has attracted interest because of the controversial nature of intelligent design, it is at its heart a straightforward discrimination case, said Eugene Volokh, a professor of First Amendment law at the University of California, Los Angeles School of Law. The First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution guarantees such basic rights as freedom of speech and religion.

"The question is whether the plaintiff was fired simply because he was wasting people's time and bothering them in ways that would have led him to being fired regardless of whether it was about religion or whether he was treated worse based on the religiosity of his beliefs," said Volokh. "If he can show that, then he's got a good case."

Coppedge, who began working for JPL as a contractor in 1996 and was hired in 2003, is active in the intelligent design sphere and runs a website that interprets scientific discoveries through the lens of intelligent design. His father authored an anti-evolution book and founded a Christian outreach group.

He is also a board member for Illustra Media, a company that produces video documentaries examining the scientific evidence for intelligent design. The company produces the videos that Coppedge was handing out to co-workers, said Becker, his attorney.

His main duties at JPL were to maintain computer networks and troubleshoot technical problems for the mission. In 2000, he was named "team lead," serving as a liaison between technicians and managers for nearly a decade before being demoted in 2009.

He sued in April 2010 alleging religious discrimination, retaliation and harassment and amended his suit to include wrongful termination after losing his job last year.

Coppedge is seeking attorney's fees and costs, damages for wrongful termination and a statement from the judge that his rights were violated, said Becker.

CLICK THE TITLE HEADLINE FOR ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Lou Buren of TWAU BLOG: For years now, people have been fired from jobs when they have talked about God creating the universe etc. There is a very extreme bias against anyone who is Christian in the mainstream science field. Of course the theory of evolution is completely false, a made up lie. But mainstream secular scientists claim it to be 100% fact. And when a fellow scientist starts talking about God creating, that person is quickly fired to silence them. There is a documentary on DVD that documents the vast list of scientists fired over the years for exactly that reason. The DVD is called: Expelled, no intelligence allowed. Click here to purchase the DVD. I highly recommend it.

Above is the trailer for Expelled, however it's now on DVD. It's very sad that the mainstream science community is so bias against God, they deny him as creator. They need to understand that God created them, the earth, and the universe in six literal days, around 6,000 years ago.

The idea that anything is millions of years old is completely made up, and totally absurd. It's all part of the atheist agenda.

For more info on the evolution lie, and creation by God visit: Answers In Genesis.

OBAMA IMPEACHMENT BILL NOW IN CONGRESS

Let the president be duly warned.

Rep. Walter B. Jones Jr., R-N.C., has introduced a resolution declaring that should the president use offensive military force without authorization of an act of Congress, “it is the sense of Congress” that such an act would be “an impeachable high crime and misdemeanor.”

Specifically, Article I, Section 8, of the Constitution reserves for Congress alone the power to declare war, a restriction that has been sorely tested in recent years, including Obama’s authorization of military force in Libya.

In an exclusive WND column, former U.S. Rep. Tom Tancredo claims that Jones introduced his House Concurrent Resolution 107 in response to startling recent comments from Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta.

“This week it was Secretary of Defense Panetta’s declaration before the Senate Armed Services Committee that he and President Obama look not to the Congress for authorization to bomb Syria but to NATO and the United Nations,” Tancredo writes. “This led to Rep. Walter Jones, R-N.C., introducing an official resolution calling for impeachment should Obama take offensive action based on Panetta’s policy statement, because it would violate the Constitution.”

In response to questions from Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., over who determines the proper and legal use of the U.S. military, Panetta said, “Our goal would be to seek international permission and we would … come to the Congress and inform you and determine how best to approach this, whether or not we would want to get permission from the Congress – I think those are issues we would have to discuss as we decide what to do here.”

“Well, I’m almost breathless about that,” Sessions responded, “because what I heard you say is, ‘We’re going to seek international approval, and then we’ll come and tell the Congress what we might do, and we might seek congressional approval.’ And I just want to say to you that’s a big [deal].”

Asked again what was the legal basis for U.S. military force, Panetta suggested a NATO coalition or U.N. resolution.

Sessions was dumbfounded by the answer.

“Well, I’m all for having international support, but I’m really baffled by the idea that somehow an international assembly provides a legal basis for the United States military to be deployed in combat,” Sessions said. “They can provide no legal authority. The only legal authority that’s required to deploy the United States military is of the Congress and the president and the law and the Constitution.”

The exchange itself can be seen below:


The full wording of H. Con. Res. 107, which is currently referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary, is as follows:

Expressing the sense of Congress that the use of offensive military force by a president without prior and clear authorization of an act of Congress constitutes an impeachable high crime and misdemeanor under Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution.

Whereas the cornerstone of the Republic is honoring Congress’s exclusive power to declare war under article I, section 8, clause 11 of the Constitution: Now, therefore, be it

Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), That it is the sense of Congress that, except in response to an actual or imminent attack against the territory of the United States, the use of offensive military force by a president without prior and clear authorization of an act of Congress violates Congress’s exclusive power to declare war under Article I, Section 8, clause 11 of the Constitution and therefore constitutes an impeachable high crime and misdemeanor under Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution.

CLICK THE TITLE HEADLINE FOR ARTICLE

Obama is acting like we live in a one world government, seeking permission from NATO instead of congress. This usurper is a flat out criminal of so many crimes. Please join us in prayer, that Obama is removed from office one way or another.

It's sickening how he tramples the constitution.

Kony 2012

Our prayers go out to the people of Uganda. This evil killer needs to be arrested and put to death for his crimes. Please join us in praying that he is captured. Our heart goes out to the children he has abducted and killed.

It is our Christian and American duty to do all we can to stop this evil.

The right to protest

Harold Hodge believes in the power of protest.

“It’s important,” he said as he walked on First Street in front of the steps of the U.S. Supreme Court. "I believe people should have the right to protest and picket against the government.”

But, he says, it’s a right that is disappearing.

“They,” he said, as he pointed up at the white columns, “are taking it away from us.”

In January 2011, Hodge was standing on the public plaza above the steps of the court wearing a sign around his neck. It read “The U.S. Gov. allows police to illegally murder and brutalize African-Americans and Hispanic people."

CLICK ON THE TITLE HEADLINE FOR THE FULL ARTICLE

Lou Buren of TWAU BLOG: I believe people should have the right to PEACEFULLY protest. But with what's been happening with the occupy rioters I can see why they have to designate certain area's that people are allowed to protest in. Let me explain what peacefully protesting means; You don't break anything, you follow orders given to you by police. You hold up your sign or whatever and you stay out of people's way. Do not block progress of every day people living their lives.

I have never been a fan of protesters myself, I believe it to be a total waste of time. Because, nothing has ever changed because of any protest. And all it really does, is show us how much of an unemployed population we have.

Unedited Obama race video unveiled

This will most likely be the deal breaker for Obama. I'm sure this will cost him the election.
Obama has ties with very radical people. Obama is the main reason why we have the occupy riots happening. He is trying to divide the American people, and it seems to be working. Obama's main tactic for this election is class warfare. Turning people against one another, so they don't focus on how wicked he is.

Sheriff Joe's investigation on Obama qualifications.

You'll notice the media that was there at the News conference wasn't interested in the facts found out about Obama, but where there to attack Sheriff Joe. They are apparently paid off by the FEDS.

This was an actual investigation by a real law enforcement agency. And they found that Obama is a fraud. However, mainstream media is either too afraid to report the truth, or have been paid off by the FEDS to not cover it.

But bookmark our web site, we'll keep you up to date on all news relevant to Obama. And current events around the world. Let us be your one spot stop.

THREATS SILENCE MEDIA ON OBAMA PROBE

NOTE: In case you missed the news conference of Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s “Cold Case Posse,” you can view it here.

CLICK THE TITLE HEADLINE FOR ARTICLE

The lead investigator in Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s review of the authenticity of Barack Obama’s birth certificate today unloaded a bombshell about the case: that he was told by sources members of the media were threatened with federal investigations should they continue to report on the birth certificate issue.

Lead investigator Mike Zullo told WND that as he was preparing information to be presented to the public “it was clear that the mainstream media was not going to be in attendance” at the sheriff’s scheduled new conference, where he revealed facts suggesting both fraud and forgery in the image of a Hawaiian birth certificate that the White House released as “proof positive” of Obama’s eligibility for office last year.

“During our investigation, we actually were told [that media] had been threatened with FTC investigations. Commentators [had been] threatened with their jobs,” Zullo said. The threats were so intimidating that some individuals quit their positions over safety concerns for their families, he said.

So the problem became to get the information to the American public in spite of an intentional media blackout, since citizens still must make critical leadership decisions about their government through the election process.

And the result was an ebook that includes the details from the investigation, the evidence that was accumulated, and the questions that remain for Arpaio and his investigators to continue pursuing.

Zullo has been blasted in recent days for coordinating that book project with longtime political writer Dr. Jerome Corsi. Much of the online criticism stems from a single AP article that links Zullo to “well-known political conspiracy writer” Jerome Corsi and includes a statement that Corsi “denied using Sheriff Joe Arpaio … as a promotional tool to sell his books and theories.”

It cites Zullo’s being listed “as the co-author” of the ebook. But it fails to mention the evidence cited by the investigation suggesting those alleged fraud and forgery crimes.

Zullo told WND that he had no interest in working on an ebook, but was faced with the question about how to get the information to the American people absent national media coverage. There were interests outside of Arizona, he was convinced, making obvious efforts to have the information closed down and never allowed to move beyond the borders of the state of Arizona.

Zullo told WND that as an investigator he sought transparency in the information released to the media and the people and he just wanted the information made available to everyone who wished a closer look. Zullo said it was not an easy decision. He knew he would be ridiculed by the media if the information was released, but the alternative of allowing the information to be squelched and people kept in the dark was just too much of an injustice. He decided to allow the ebook project in order to disseminate the facts of the case: that there is probable cause to believe Obama’s birth certificate document is a forgery – and the implications that has for the American system of government.

Corsi confirmed that Zullo was very reluctant to be in a position where he found himself. The prospect of being reimbursed financially from his investigation never was Zullo’s intention. But Corsi pointed out that Zullo contributed six months of his time to the investigation. Corsi also said he was acutely aware of the financial sacrifice Zullo made over the last six months, having to devote much of his time to the investigation. The posse investigate was not, in fact, subsidized by taxpayers.

The bigger question, Zullo said, is just exactly how would an investigator or a law enforcement officer ignore findings that suggest a deception at the highest levels of politics in the nation. And how does the national media willfully ignore it. Zullo said this is a very serious and alarming concern. It brings into question the transparent objective vetting of presidential candidates.

“If the evidence took us the other way, and the sheriff proclaimed this thing to be authentic, the news would have traveled from Arizona to New Jersey to Hawaii in milliseconds,” he said. “If I wrote a book about it I would have been hailed a hero.

“All we’re trying to do here is get this information out there and keep it out there. Had the mainstream media done their job, we wouldn’t have done [this book].”

He said now media members have started calling him a “kook” and an “old geezer” for reporting on the facts that resulted from the investigation.

“The media just wants to come destroy people’s credibility,” he said. “They’re trying to vet [investigators] when they should be vetting the next presidential candidate of the United States.”

He said that many people didn’t come forward with their knowledge about Obama “out of fear.”

“The information that we got, which these people refused to step forward with out of fear, but shared afterward, came independently – they don’t even know each other – from distance parts of the country, that investigations of major media outlets [were planned] if they continued reporting,” he said.

“Our system is broken because the vetting process used to rely on the free press. We don’t have a free press any more,” he said.

Although the numbers may have been small, there was support for Zullo’s perspective, even in the media.

In a column at American Thinker, Cindy Simpson quoted Ronald Reagan in support of Zullo’s work.

“Ronald Reagan was fond of saying, ‘Trust, but verify,’” she wrote. “President Obama told us he released his official long-form birth certificate on April 27, 2011. Can we trust him, and should we verify?

“Most of the reporters’ questions at the end of [Arpaio's] press conference were statements in defense of Obama, and the subsequent coverage by major news outlets asserted that rumors about the president’s birth certificate were ‘debunked’ and ‘discredited,’ but gave no details of the debunking or discrediting,” she marveled.

“As the sheriff also noted at the conference, no specific or official investigation has ever been reported, unless we can count Savannah Guthrie, apparently the only reporter allowed to touch and photograph the original long-form certificate after it was released, or the two representatives of Factcheck (neither noted as having an relevant professional experience in document examination) who photographed the short-form certification posted in 2008,” she wrote.

“To paraphrase another favorite Reagan quotation, ‘It isn’t so much that the mainstream media are ignorant. It’s just that they know so many things that aren’t so,’” she added.

She noted that after they attacked the message, then the reporters at the news conference “questioned the motives of the sheriff and even the political affiliation of the posse’s lead detective, Mike Zullo.”

She said the focal point for a true reporter would be the issue at hand – the validity of Obama’s documents.

“Was the document posted by the White House a scan of an original certified document? Based on the analysis of the posse’s experts, it was not. In fact, the posse has traced the image to a specific computer where it resided a mere 20 minutes before it was uploaded, and has identified a ‘person of interest.’”

She suggest three possible answers: purely innocent anomalies to “touch up” an image and someone purposely tinkering to create the appearance of suspicion.

“Third, if the certificate is indeed an intentional forgery, we have witnessed the greatest fraud of the century,” she said.

“In my local paper, there was not even a single line devoted to the posse’s stunning assertions. What happened to ‘Extra! Extra! Read all about it! The posted birth certificate of a sitting president a possible forgery!’”

Nick Martin at TPM editorialized that the book sale “gives Zullo a financial motive to continue stoking the flames of a conspiracy theory that has been debunked numerous times by an array of independent investigations.”

But the details of those investigations were absent.

The sheriff himself also noted the single side of the issue that was being reported.

In a commentary in the Arizona Republican, he wrote of reporters, “They were practically salivating at the opportunity to embarrass me, my highly capable group of volunteer investigators and literally anyone else who would dare show in interest in the possibility that this investigation would lead to any real credible evidence into what they claim has already been ‘looked into’ or ‘widely debunked.’”

Arpaio also has defended the book.

“We needed a book precisely because we knew in advance the mainstream media would impose a blackout on any serious law enforcement investigation into Obama’s identification documents and his eligibility to be president,” Arpaio told WND.

He explained that the book is intended to bypass the filter the establishment media tries to impose on news. WND provided a live-stream Internet broadcast of the Arpaio press conference last Thursday for the same reason.

Martin wrote that the sheriff also failed to mention that much of the evidence concerned questions about the digital scan “that was already investigated and proven to be false” by another investigative agency, “National Review Online.”

There were signs, however, that the national media’s silence was creating concerns.

Wrote Jeff Crouere at the St. Tammany Slidell Sentry: “Despite a mountain of evidence and new allegations of fraud, the national news media refuses to cover the Obama birth certificate scandal.”

He cited the discoveries from the Arpaio investigation.

“Such a bombshell should have led the national news coverage throughout the country. Instead, it was completely ignored by a corrupt network of media elites who are decidedly liberal and wholeheartedly support Obama’s re-election,” he wrote. “The vast majority of the American people have been denied the truth by a media who want to shield Obama.”

He called reporters nationally “liberal sycophants” and said, “If these allegations had been made about a Republican president there would have been a media firestorm greater than Watergate and Iran/Contra combined.

“Not surprisingly, the media acted like partisan Democrats in the news conference after Arpaio’s team announced their findings. Instead of asking questions about the Obama documents, the reporters were more interested in asking Sheriff Arpaio about his political affiliation, his relationship with the tea party and his motives for the investigation.

“What the media conveniently overlooked was the expert testimony and the evidence presented by Arpaio’s group of investigators. Potentially, a major crime has been committed at the highest levels of our government, and the media attacked the messengers.”

CLICK THE TITLE HEADLINE FOR ARTICLE


Lou Buren of TWAU BLOG: So to answer the question that so many of my followers have been asking. "Why isn't the national media covering this"? The answer is, the FEDS are threatening them with job loss, and possibly worse things. But info sources like WND and ourselves (TWAU BLOG) will not be intimidated. We will continue to put the truth out there. And no matter what the mainstream media wants to think, people want to know about Obama being a farse.