The first dispatch from the Eastern Front.
This is an incredible waste of time and money...trying to prove the unprovable.
bttt
It seems pretty clear to me that the ID folks will not prevail in this case. The attempts to separate ID from creationism are doomed to failure, and that will be an end to this debate.
If a "higher being" did the design work, then those making that argument are going to be asked to identify what sort of being that might have been. They'll hem and haw and finally have to admit that it's a deity. Which deity? Well, any would do, since every religion has a creation myth of some kind. Are all deities equal? Did they form a committee to design the universe?
Are they all the same deity with different names, then?
Then the big question comes: How would science investigate a deity? Well, that would be impossible, of course, since a deity is obviously supernatural and out of the realm of scientific investigation.
So, no evidence for this "higher being" exists? Nope. Case over.
For crying out loud, public schools can't even teach children to read!!! How are they supposed to teach intelligent design, creationism, evolution, or anything?
Proof that even a stopped clock is right twice a day.
As opposed to dumb design? :)
Read part of the complaint. Can't wait for the plaintiffs to provide proof that the evolutionary process leads to the appearance of new species. I suspect they will not be able to do so.
Also, is there a witness list?
Hoping science/common sense prevails (yes, I'm talking about evolution, not "intelligent design" dogma).
Heh. If they televise Saddam's trial, I might buy that headline. If they ever file a case against the guys who whacked Natalee Holloway, and they televise that trial, I might buy that headline. As it is, I suggest that there are few trials (if any) that the entire world is less likely to be following with bated breath than this one.
We're behind enough in science education as it is without these ID moonbats dumbing down the system even further.
Portion of today's article regarding testimony on Monday. miller seems to have admitted that evolution is not a 'fact'. Anyone who tries to suggest that gravity and friction are not 'facts' in the same way evolution is not a 'fact' is going to have problems later on in his cross examination. I don't think Miller is going to hold up very well.
http://www.yorkdispatch.com/local/ci_3066513
"Cross examination starts: The ACLU's Walczak ended his line of questioning with Miller with about an hour and a half left in the day.
Robert Muise, attorney with the Thomas More Law Center, began his cross examination by suggesting that maybe there was evidence, "observable, empirical facts" to a greater hand's help in the Red Sox victory.
His next line of questions seemed to focus on the language used in the board's policy, which says there are "gaps" in Darwin's theory.
But Miller countered that no scientific theory is a fact: Even the theories of friction and gravity are not "fact" because in science, everything is subject to testing.
Bonsell said he thought the first day of the trial was successful for the school board. In his opinion, he said, Miller had not said that the language in the school board's policy was incorrect."