Last fall, Laura Connor, an adjunct professor at Nashville State Technical Institute, wrote another chapter in Tennessee’s long and celebrated antagonism between evolution and religion, teaching creationism as legitimate scientific theory. And she presented it—not in a class about the Bible—but in a biology course.

“She definitely made it harder to learn about evolution,” says Melody Stern, who took Connor’s class. “She basically tried to tear the theory to shreds while trying to validate creationism.”

Connor, a Vanderbilt Medical School graduate who doesn’t practice medicine, says she was instead presenting a balance. “What I was doing was covering the stuff in the textbook, which is evolution, plus I was giving them the other side of the story that many believe,” she says. “At the very least, I told them that we can’t prove either one of these because they are both based on belief.”

In fact, the textbook for Connor’s course—which she is not teaching at the present time, but has taught several times in the past—contained only a few sentences about creationism, referring to it as a “biblical myth.” In contrast, the text spent more than 100 pages explaining the theory of evolution, which the grand majority of the scientific community believes explains how species originated and changed over time. To balance this gap, Connor showed her students videos that purported to debunk evolution and passed out lecture notes that labeled Charles Darwin, the British naturalist who developed theories of evolution and natural selection, as a racist and misogynist.

“My personal opinion is that evolution and creationism should both be taught, and students should make up their own minds,” says Connor, who has also worked as a substitute teacher at Christ Presbyterian Academy.

Few other professors would defend her. In fact, the academic community typically views those who espouse creationism as a science in much the same fashion as it looks upon those who insist that the Holocaust, despite reams of physical and historical evidence, never happened. Basically, they are seen as loony. In fact, Nashville Tech administrators have defended her behavior as simply offering students another point of view, but they’ve also told Connor there will no longer be a teaching spot for her at the school. Connor says she was let go for teaching creationism; school officials say they simply don’t need as many adjunct professors this semester.

“Creationism is not a science,” says professor Leonard Alberstadt, who heads Vanderbilt University’s geology department. “They start from a premise that science can’t start from.” Alberstadt says that creationists believe the Bible is the ultimate source of scientific truth, whereas true scientists typically use observable fact—an apple always falls down (and not up) from a tree, for example—as a foundation.

Told of Connor’s presentation of creationism as a legitimate branch of scientific thought, the Tennessee chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) also strongly objects.

“Among all scientists of various religious persuasions it is understood that creationism is not, in fact, a science,” says Hedy Weinberg, the executive director of the ACLU of Tennessee. “Rather, creationism is based on a religious doctrine. And while there is certainly a place to teach it, it’s not in a biology 101 class at a public university.”

Connor insists, however, that creationism has legitimate scientific underpinnings, and points to various Web sites as evidence. But the tagline for one of the sites she mentions, answersingenesis.org, reads: “Upholding the authority of the Bible from the very first verse.” That’s not a slogan most scientific outfits would adopt. Posted on answersingenesis.org is an essay in which writer Russell Grigg claims that Darwin suffered from painful flatulence, vomiting and insomnia and broke out in boils—all because he worried about the long-term effects of his theory of evolution. The writer’s scientific credentials are not included in the body of the essay.

In yet another essay, writer Carl Weilan contends that the earth is between 6,000 and 10,000 years old, which nearly all geologists view as impossibly young. “Many people find it difficult to accept that scientific investigation should start with the Bible,” Weilan explains. “They think we can answer the question about the age of the earth by coming to evidence with an 'open mind.’ In fact no one has an open mind.... By contrast, when we start from the Word of God, we can be sure that what it says is true.”

The administration at Nashville Tech has refrained from criticizing Connor’s controversial blend of religion and science. “We don’t tell our teachers how to teach,” says Pam Munz, the dean of arts and sciences, who says that Connor is very popular among most of her students. “We give them a certain amount of latitude.”

Bob Palinchak, the vice president for academic affairs at Nashville Tech, says that creationism is “not a science, but it is a point of view. We have no problem with it being mentioned as a philosophy.”

Neither does former student April Sadler West. She says that while Connor taught creationism alongside evolution, the teacher kept her personal beliefs to herself. “She did a fabulous job in that class,” West says. “Personally, I believe in creationism, and I had no problem learning about evolution. I learned what the theory consisted of. I even did my research paper on Charles Darwin so that I could broaden my view in this area. I studied it and learned it, but I still don’t buy into it.”

But the teaching of creationism doesn’t sit well with Marshall Stern, the father of Connor’s former student Melody Stern. “It’s not a science and has no place being taught as a science,” says Stern, who teaches a class in improvisational comedy at Nashville Tech. “If you are really interested in being fair, then teach the Buddhist creationism and Hindu creationism. The fact of the matter is that what she is teaching is mythology. There is no reputable scientist who buys creationism as a viable scientific theory.”

Melody Stern says that Connor also regarded the Bible as a legitimate scientific text. “Some students asked her if they could use the Bible as their source for a paper, and she responded that they should probably use another source in addition to that.”

Stern says that he and his daughter complained to the administration at Nashville Tech about Connor, but didn’t take the issue any further. They did, however, allow Melody to have another teacher grade her final class paper. Stern’s topic: that creationism is not supported by science. “I found overwhelming scholarly evidence that supported evolution,” she says. The outside teacher gave Stern an “A” for her paper.