...we find that ID is not science and cannot be adjudged a valid, accepted scientific theory as it has failed to publish in peer-reviewed journals...
The judge bought this lie hook, line, and sinker, and repeats it in his decision. Discovery org has a list of articles in scientific publications.
Cordially,
From page 88 of the judge's opinion, referring to Behe's own testimony:
On cross-examination, Professor Behe admitted that: “There are no peer reviewed articles by anyone advocating for intelligent design supported by pertinent experiments or calculations which provide detailed rigorous accounts of how intelligent design of any biological system occurred.” (22:22-23 (Behe)). Additionally, Professor Behe conceded that there are no peer-reviewed papers supporting his claims that complex molecular systems, like the bacterial flagellum, the blood-clotting cascade, and the immune system, were intelligently designed. (21:61-62 (complex molecular systems), 23:4-5 (immune system), and 22:124-25 (blood-clotting cascade) (Behe)). In that regard, there are no peer-reviewed articles supporting Professor Behe’s argument that certain complex molecular structures are “irreducibly complex.”17 (21:62, 22:124-25 (Behe)). In addition to failing to produce papers in peer-reviewed journals, ID also features no scientific research or testing. (28:114-15 (Fuller); 18:22-23, 105-06 (Behe)).Amiably,
But when you read them they support evolution. Which is why folks like Behe and Denton accept the fact of common descent.
It is interesting that on one hand we here accusations that ID advocates are discriminated against and fired for their beliefs, and on the other hand we have claims of hundreds of peer reviewed articles by ID advocates.
What is missing is the ID hypothesis, the clear statement of something to be expected that is different from what natural selection expects. In other words, a research program or plan supporting some hypothesis.
.... Discovery org has a list of articles in scientific publications.
Did DI file an amicus brief? did the defense make reference to the articles? If not, the judge is officially unaware of them, and can't use them in his ruling.