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.

[RightWhale]

What does the Darwinian THEORY explain!

Darwinism explains a lot. But, its main accomplishment was the rout of teleology.

[CharlesWayneCT]

That is why I called it an inaccurate example.

[Dimensio]

Conventional definition of theory is not applicable to ToE since evolution is not science

We've been through this before. You were asked to support your claim that evolution is not science and you responded by lying about what evolution is. You are a liar and a fraud.

[ml1954]

FYI anyone ... from the decision (P. 49 - 50; legal references deleted)

In summary, the disclaimer singles out the theory of evolution for special treatment, misrepresents its status in the scientific community, causes students to doubt its validity without scientific justification, presents students with a religious alternative masquerading as a scientific theory, directs them to consult a creationist text as though it were a science resource, and instructs students to forego scientific inquiry in the public school classroom and instead to seek out religious instruction elsewhere. Furthermore, as Drs. Alters and Miller testified, introducing ID necessarily invites religion into the science classroom as it sets up what will be perceived by students as a “God-friendly” science, the one that explicitly mentions an intelligent designer, and that the “other science,” evolution, takes no position on religion. Dr. Miller testified that a false duality is produced: It “tells students . . . quite explicitly, choose God on the side of intelligent design or choose atheism on the side of science.” Introducing such a religious conflict into the classroom is “very dangerous” because it forces students to “choose between God and science,” not a choice that schools should be forcing on them.

[AntiGuv]

And might I add that the schools I attended formally taught religion and assembled for prayers daily. See how great I turned out!! :)

[benjibrowder]

The evolution from an aquatic species, to an amphibian species, to a land/reptilian species? Am I missing something here?

[Ichneumon]

Never really have found in all my reading where evolution is scientifically proven.

You never found where the existence of atoms is scientifically proven, either. That's because science doesn't deal in "proof", it deals with the theories that best fit all the available evidence.

The evolution crowd still can't get around creating something from nothing though.

Neither can the ID crowd, so if you thought you had a point, you're mistaken.

[CharlesWayneCT]

It wasn't, but the judge said it was. I was simply noting that while Christians get upset when a judge rules that a nativity is a "religious symbol", I'd be more upset if I was a Jew who gets to keep his Menorah on the same grounds because the judge says it is merely "cultural".

I would note that a nativity scene is NOT a religious symbol. Nowhere in the bible does it mention a nativity scene. It is a model of a place in history where some believe a baby was born, whose birth we are celebrating with a national holiday.

[Baraonda]

"I apologize for the suggestion that Anti-Gov was vested in, or had any reason to want to, destroy religion.

"I was merely using his post as an illustration of how evolution was used by those who DID want to do so."

Excellent distinction.

[andysandmikesmom]

Thanks for that summary...very informative

[Canard]

"evolution is not science. Evolution is NOT a fact - it's all cooked up stuff."

Saying that evolution is not a fact does not make it 'not science', it just displays your ignorance for everyone. Do you consider gravity a fact?

[Thatcherite]

Conventional definition of theory is not applicable to ToE since evolution is not science. Evolution is NOT a fact - it's all cooked up stuff.

Good luck in an attempt to find even one scientist who agrees with you. Even Dr Behe, foremost scientific witness for the *defence* in the Dover trial, and the world's foremost scientific proponent of ID admitted under oath that (a) evolution theory is scientific (b) he believes evolution to be true (c) ID theory is not scientific unless science is broadened to include such fields as astrology. The trial might as well have ended at that point.

[RogueIsland]

ID has mode none to date, and the supporters of ID haven't even proposed any.

Actually, I think Behe has suggested that someone (not him, being too busy I suppose) should consider at some point giving thought to perhaps doing some manner of experiment vis-a-vis ID. See, now isn't that scientific?

[jennyp]

Pinging connectthedots... pinging connectthedots... Only you can tell us what this ruling REALLY means...

[aNYCguy]

Yes, intelligent design is the mainstream belief among most Christians...so therefore we should keep it from being taught in public schools? There is absolutely no logic in that stance.

You've obviously misunderstood the situation entirely. The ruling does not hold that ID cannot be taught simply because it's a "mainstream belief" among any particular religious group. The ruling holds that ID cannot be taught because it is inherently religious. This should not be difficult to understand.

[narby]

First you say science is by nature atheistic

Yeah. I did. It is, because it cannot detect the supernatural.

then you suggest a scenario at some point down the road when a scientist might detect, or describe a method to determine the nature of God.

Might. But I doubt it. Actually I can't imagine it, but I tend to not rule out anything in the future.

Is this a problem for you?

[benjibrowder]

This was found in rock dating back 100,000,000 years, so the fossil is 100,000,000 million years!!! Is that not also circular reasoning?

[js1138]

We have FReepers here who have essentially misrepresented the ruling of a federal judge. How unsurprising.

They aren't lying. They're just testifying inconsistently.

[Thatcherite]

Pinging connectthedots... pinging connectthedots... Only you can tell us what this ruling REALLY means...

BUWAHAHAHA!!! That was my first thought when I heard the news on the BBC this evening. (yep, the Dover ruling made the BBC radio news)

[RogueIsland]

The theory of evolution says that any organism from one class or species will evolve into an organism from another class or species, which is not true. No such evolution as ever been seen taking place.

Do we really need to post the observed speciation links again? The constant reposts of the same refutations of the same tired and discredited Creationist cavils must be hogging up half of Jim's server farm by now.