[Ol' Dan Tucker]

What this decision brings to light is that the notion of intelligent design and the notion that God is responsible for it is not only reasonable, but has basis in reality i the same reality science is enjoined to explore. The more science looks at the details of matter, the more evident it becomes that intelligent design is involved. Because this reality is in accord with the teaching that God exists, it is discordant with those who espouse wholly atheistic science, a definition and practice of science that is deficient at best, malicious at worst.

No, what this decision brings to light is that creationists will use any lie or resort to any subterfuge to get creationism, and by extension, God back into the public school classrooms.

Basis in reality? Then where is the physical evidence? Please point me to the physical evidence that supports your claims.

So, yes. This case shows that the mere notion of intelligent design irks evolutionists enough to cause them to make a federal case of it. Ultimately it is a case that will be lost, not only because it is not in accord with the fundamental reality that matter is organized and behaves according to predictable laws, but also because the constitution does not espouse or guarantee separation of church and state.

Please. Let's call this what it really is: Creationism. Intelligent design is simply a codeword, as was shown with the post-Edwards edition of "Pandas".

The plantiffs filed suit because the creationists pulled a fast one. They won for the same reason.

[Fester Chugabrew]

Please point me to the physical evidence that supports your claims.

Open your eyes. If the matter around you is retaining its integrity, you have physical evidence of intelligent design.