Intelligent Design case decided - Dover, Pennsylvania, School Board loses [Fox News Alert]

Fox News | 12/20/05

[snarks_when_bored]

Fox News alert a few minutes ago says the Dover School Board lost their bid to have Intelligent Design introduced into high school biology classes. The federal judge ruled that their case was based on the premise that Darwin's Theory of Evolution was incompatible with religion, and that this premise is false.

[andysandmikesmom]

Boy you guys are quick...before I could log off, I already got some answers..I guess, tomorrow, I will Google this, and find out some information pertaining to this story...thanks for at least presenting the alternative side to 'conservative blondes' story...

[CarolinaGuitarman]

http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/ladyhope.html is a good summary.

[conservative blonde]

This is just something I have always known. If you go to www.discovery.org, I am sure you can write to someone there who can give you a source.

[xzins]

Are you suggesting that red-haired Irishmen are a different species than black-haired Italians?

Good thing -- Otherwise, if we could mix them we'd have hot heads who want to conquer the world. :>)

[Canard]

"Yes, this will reverse the decline in our government schools seen since about the time judges decided kids can't prey in schools."

Haha, funniest typo ever!

[newzjunkey]

No surprise.

The Intelligent Design movement is a ridiculous attempt to fit Creationism in science courses.

The recent "evolution" case that bothered me is the court ruling a label in biology text books declaring evolution is a theory is somehow unconstitutional. That court went TOO FAR since the decal contained no false or religious statements, only simple fact that, as a theory, evolution should be studied, tested, investigated, challenged like all other scientific theories.

[benjibrowder]

It isn't. Even the Sixth Court realized that when the judge said that the ACLU's claim of Separation of Church and State had grown tiresome and that no such wall exists.

[NapkinUser]

I'm surprised that there are so many atheists on this board.

[Ceewrighter]

"I respect your beliefs. But faith is not fact."

If we are basing the appropriateness of teaching a curriculum on its being a fact, then it is incorrect to teach Darwin's Theory. It has always been a theory. There is no correlation between us and a supposed cosmic soup. There are large gaps in Darwin's fossil record, and I can't fathom why people are so reluctant to realize that.

[CarolinaGuitarman]

"Are you suggesting that red-haired Irishmen are a different species than black-haired Italians?

Good thing -- Otherwise, if we could mix them we'd have hot heads who want to conquer the world. :>)"

<< not a hothead who wants to conquer the world.

Just part of it. :)

(in case you didn't guess, I AM Irish/Italian)

[ThinkPlease]

That court went TOO FAR since the decal contained no false or religious statements, only simple fact that, as a theory, evolution should be studied, tested, investigated, challenged like all other scientific theories.

So then why doesn't the school district put stickers on all of the other textbooks mentioning that? The judge ruled that because they didn't do THAT, it was invalid. Did you read the ruling?

[Canard]

"I'm surprised that there are so many atheists on this board"

How can you tell who the atheists are?

[Ol' Dan Tucker]

It is not as though intelligent design has no basis in reality. A good many examples can be set forth by virtue of human invention.

IOW, no proof.

I do not consider proof to be the be-all and end-all of science. It is only one among many tools science can use to arrive at knowledge. If proof is all you expect of science, then you expect too much.

I do.

I expect that someone who makes absolute claims should provide the evidence that proves what they're saying is true.

Intelligent Design is all about faith, which by definition, is about believing in the absence of proof.

[jwalsh07]

It had nothing to do with teaching Intel. Design in the curriculum.

Which is one reason the judge may be overturned. Appeals courts are notoriously picky about the facts. If the judge stated that ID was being taught in his opinion, he will be overturned just like the guy in the Cobb County case will be overturned.

[Canard]

"If we are basing the appropriateness of teaching a curriculum on its being a fact, then it is incorrect to teach Darwin's Theory science."

Fixed.

[VadeRetro]

A superb if utterly wasted effort. What the Dover trial shows superbly is how poorly the creationist "dummy dance" trick works in a court of law as opposed to an FR thread.

On an FR thread, creationists are never caught "misspeaking." For that matter, on an FR thread, creationists are never wrong on anything above the typo level. These seemingly amazing feats are accomplished by a simple, dishonest, bland denial accompanied by endless restatement, distraction, and evasion.

If I were a creationist with the accustomed habits of argument of those on the typical FR crevo threads, I would tremble to enter a court of law.

[Fester Chugabrew]

They're the cream of the crop atheists: reasonable, intelligent, dedicated, mostly polite, erudite, and occasionally helpful in promoting conservative ideals.

[NapkinUser]

Dangit.

I knew I screwed that word up, but didn't bother to change it because I was second-guessing myself.

[jwalsh07]

The judge ruled that because they didn't do THAT, it was invalid.

More reason for being overturned. It is not the business of a federal judge to decide which texts get stickers and which don't.

[VadeRetro]

You are merciless. (But that one had it coming in spades.)