Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Dover Intelligent Design Decision Criticized as a Futile Attempt to Censor Science Education
Evolution News.org ^

Posted on 12/20/2005 12:12:16 PM PST by truthfinder9

SEATTLE — "The Dover decision is an attempt by an activist federal judge to stop the spread of a scientific idea and even to prevent criticism of Darwinian evolution through government-imposed censorship rather than open debate, and it won't work," said Dr. John West, Associate Director of the Center for Science and Culture at Discovery Institute, the nation's leading think tank researching the scientific theory known as intelligent design. “He has conflated Discovery Institute’s position with that of the Dover school board, and he totally misrepresents intelligent design and the motivations of the scientists who research it.”

“A legal ruling can't change the fact that there is digital code in DNA, it can’t remove the molecular machines from the cell, nor change the fine tuning of the laws of physics,” added West. “The empirical evidence for design, the facts of biology and nature, can't be changed by legal decree."

In his decision, Judge John Jones ruled that the Dover, Pennsylvania school district violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment by requiring a statement to be read to students notifying them about intelligent design. Reaching well beyond the immediate legal questions before him, Judge Jones offered wide-ranging and sometimes angry comments denouncing intelligent design and praising Darwinian evolution.

"Judge Jones found that the Dover board violated the Establishment Clause because it acted from religious motives. That should have been the end to the case," said West. "Instead, Judge Jones got on his soapbox to offer his own views of science, religion, and evolution. He makes it clear that he wants his place in history as the judge who issued a definitive decision about intelligent design. This is an activist judge who has delusions of grandeur."

"Anyone who thinks a court ruling is going to kill off interest in intelligent design is living in another world," continued West. "Americans don't like to be told there is some idea that they aren't permitted to learn about.. It used to be said that banning a book in Boston guaranteed it would be a bestseller. Banning intelligent design in Dover will likely only fan interest in the theory."

"In the larger debate over intelligent design, this decision will be of minor significance," added Discovery Institute attorney Casey Luskin. "As we've repeatedly stressed, the ultimate validity of intelligent design will be determined not by the courts but by the scientific evidence pointing to design.”

Luskin pointed out that the ruling only applies to the federal district in which it was handed down. It has no legal effect anywhere else. The decision is also unlikely to be appealed, since the recently elected Dover school board members campaigned on their opposition to the policy. "The plans of the lawyers on both sides of this case to turn this into a landmark ruling have been preempted by the voters," he said.

"Discovery Institute continues to oppose efforts to mandate teaching about the theory of intelligent design in public schools," emphasized West. "But the Institute strongly supports the freedom of teachers to discuss intelligent design in an objective manner on a voluntary basis. We also think students should learn about both the scientific strengths and weaknesses of Darwin's theory of evolution."

Drawing on recent discoveries in physics, biochemistry and related disciplines, the scientific theory of intelligent design proposes that some features of the natural world are best explained as the product of an intelligent cause rather than an undirected process such as natural selection. Proponents include scientists at numerous universities and science organizations around the world.


TOPICS: Editorial; US: Pennsylvania
KEYWORDS: creation; crevolist; darwinianfundies; design; dover; evolutiontheory; faithinscientists; god; id; intelligentdesign; science; scienceeducation
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 181-198 next last
To: truthfinder9

You are a member of the superfamily Hominoidea. As are all great apes.

http://www.chimpanzoo.org/hominoid.html


81 posted on 12/20/2005 1:04:21 PM PST by Sols
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: truthfinder9
For those of you who don't actually follow science, gentics in recent years has been showing that man and "apes" aren't related.
Look it up.

Why don't you tell me where this fantastic science item can be located?

82 posted on 12/20/2005 1:04:27 PM PST by Oztrich Boy (so natural to mankind is intolerance in whatever they really care about - J S Mill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: dmz

Lawsuits can be dismissed.
susie


83 posted on 12/20/2005 1:04:53 PM PST by brytlea (I'm not a conspiracy theorist....really.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: Oztrich Boy

If you were as brilliant has you claim, why don't you already know? It's been the biggest shift in thinking in human origins. I thought you Darwin Fundies were all super intellects?


84 posted on 12/20/2005 1:05:44 PM PST by truthfinder9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: WinOne4TheGipper

I've actually never heard anyone say that they "believe" in evolution. "Belief" implies an adoption of an idea even though there is no rational proof (such as ID), whereas evolution is backed up with actual scientific evidence.


85 posted on 12/20/2005 1:08:12 PM PST by RonF
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: Salgak
Remember: Science answers the question "how ?"

Religion (and philosohpy) concern themselves with the question "why ?"


So, the Genesis account answers the question of why? Seems to me that it's screaming "This is how it happened." I could understand if Genesis merely said "God created the earth", but it goes into detail. Therefore, any other attempt to explain how that doesn't agree with it by necessity contradicts it. Don't get me wrong, I don't think sciencve and religion contradict at all. I see evolution as being in the same vein as radical environmentalism and the flat-earthers: laughable, ridiculous, and definitely not science.
86 posted on 12/20/2005 1:09:35 PM PST by WinOne4TheGipper (When in Rome, yell and complain until Romans do what you want them to do. If that fails, sue.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: truthfinder9
Actually, ID doesn't say anything about who the designer is. There are ID scientists from a variety of religions. Of course that probably wasn't in the talking points from Darwinian Fundie HQ.

Except for the fact that it was created specifically to try and sneak Creation Science past the Constitution. Nice try, but the history doesn't bear out your assertion.

87 posted on 12/20/2005 1:10:20 PM PST by highball ("I find that the harder I work, the more luck I seem to have." -- Thomas Jefferson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: truthfinder9

I am beginning to think you are a liar.

Apes are, by definition, members of the Hominoidea superfamily. Great apes are, by definition, members of the fmaily Hominidae.

Humans are members of Hominidae. Humans are great apes.


88 posted on 12/20/2005 1:12:58 PM PST by Sols
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: truthfinder9

Appeal to numbers. If "many" scientists think this, then it still doesn't matter. "Many" of them are wrong.


89 posted on 12/20/2005 1:12:59 PM PST by Siegfried The Red (Subgeniuses are the last TRUE Americans!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: truthfinder9
HaHaHa!!! The DI are charlatan losers. They ducked and ran when they had the chance to witness for the trial and now start spinning Orwellian doublespeak to rev up book sales to the terminally ignorant. What a bunch of sorry losers! ...and to think they want to sneak their charlatan pseudoscience into science class so they can force ignorance down peoples throats. It's a good thing we have a few conservative Bush appointed judges in Pennsylvania to stop this outrageous hoax in it's tracks!
90 posted on 12/20/2005 1:17:08 PM PST by shuckmaster (An oak tree is an acorns way of making more acorns)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: brytlea

Funny, I thought someone using my nick and writing in a manner resembling me just said that taxpayers should decide what gets taught in schools. I just have a problem with teaching ID as science, cause it's not. Would you have a unit on the Declaration of Indpendence in your calculus class?

Wait, I forgot the cardinal rule. Facts don't work on people who reached their conclusion without considering the facts. So I won't bother.


91 posted on 12/20/2005 1:17:33 PM PST by Siegfried The Red (Subgeniuses are the last TRUE Americans!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: highball
Creation Science past the Constitution

Why would one have to sneak creation science past the Constitution?

susie

92 posted on 12/20/2005 1:17:38 PM PST by brytlea (I'm not a conspiracy theorist....really.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: Salgak

Science involves theories. Theories aren't proven. Neither evolution or ID is proven or likely will be. I encourage evolution being taught in schools. It just doesn't make sense to completely ignore the gaps and problems with it and then completely ignore all the evidences of the theory of ID. How can it hurt the kids to teach them about controversy? If they know both sides they'll be able to look at it more objectively. Not just being taught one side and having no idea of the other side.


93 posted on 12/20/2005 1:18:30 PM PST by onja ("The government of England is a limited mockery." (France is a complete mockery.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: RonF

And yet anytime evolution is questioned, it's defenders leap readily to attack those who would dare question the faith (and not the ideas they set forth). Yep. Very "Scientific".


94 posted on 12/20/2005 1:19:30 PM PST by WinOne4TheGipper (When in Rome, yell and complain until Romans do what you want them to do. If that fails, sue.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: Siegfried The Red

Witty!
susie


95 posted on 12/20/2005 1:20:48 PM PST by brytlea (I'm not a conspiracy theorist....really.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: truthfinder9

Did you know that our understanding of genetics and the theory of evolution is used to develop flu shots each year? The flu virus mutates and we use our knowledge of genetic mutation and evolution to predict the proper vaccine.

If you get flu shots, you are placing your trust in our knowledge of evolution to keep you healthy. In case you want to read more:

http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evosite/relevance/IApathogens.shtml

It's sad how much people fight tooth and nail against such a basic fact of reality. Life evolved. It's really funny that you and others like you find it insulting that we evolved from earlier life forms (fact), yet have no problem with the idea that an invisible man in the sky created us out of mud (myth).


96 posted on 12/20/2005 1:21:51 PM PST by gdne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: jdsteel
I've seen quotes in the MSM that said the theory of evolution is as well established as the "theory of gravity". It's the LAW of gravity, not the theory. There is a big difference in science between theory and law.

Why can't science classes spend a little time on that?

I hear you. (The difference obviously missed you.)

"The attractive force between two bodies is proportional to their masses and inversly proportional to the square of the distance between them" - That's the LAW of gravity.

Why? - That's the THEORY of gravity. And there's a Nobel Prize in it for you if you can come up with a better explanation than the current one.

97 posted on 12/20/2005 1:22:04 PM PST by Oztrich Boy (so natural to mankind is intolerance in whatever they really care about - J S Mill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: Dave S
"To which taxpayers? Islamists have more kids than Anglos. In 50 years do you want a majority Muslim sets of parents ruling the holocaust was a hoax and that there is but one God and that is Allah."

Very good point. I strongly support this decision, and think it was the right one. However, the people who oppose it should be very careful about what they ask for. If this had been allowed, every religion would have asked that their theory on the origin of life be taught, from Hinduism to Flying Spaghetti Monster-ism.

I include the latter, because it would happen, and it would then put the courts in the untenable position of deciding which religious beliefs could be taught in the schools. It would be used to marginalize Christianity, and ultimately polarize Christians against non-Christians, and there are more on the non side in the US than most of us imagine.

Consider the scenario of muslims moving to a town of about 15,000 in numbers large enough to control the vote. Probably only take 5 or 6 thousand the first election, and they control the city government and school board. You wouldn't want them to schedule school holidays around Ramadan or the birth of Mohammad, or require the girls to wear veils to school would you? It's easy to say it doesn't matter and that a little won't hurt when Christianity is the dominant religion, but if that changes, we would see things from a much different perspective.

98 posted on 12/20/2005 1:23:30 PM PST by JustRight
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: truthfinder9

"gentics in recent years has been showing that man and "apes" aren't related. Look it up"

You haven't met my Uncle Earl


99 posted on 12/20/2005 1:24:34 PM PST by JNL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: truthfinder9

The title you created has been amended to the original published title. Please do not alter titles.


100 posted on 12/20/2005 1:25:57 PM PST by Admin Moderator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 181-198 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson