My understanding of the suit is that since the ID guys had no "peer reviewed" articles that had been properly published in a proper scientific journal, nothing they had to say carried any weight and was summarily thrown out.
Since the Theory of Evolution has been extensively "peer reviewed" it carries so much weight that nothing stated to be covered by the accepted theory is to be questioned.
Is that about what the ruling said?
Well along that line, I asked for a link to a "peer reviewed" article or study explaining the proper scientific explation concerning eyes. I use eyes because they are a quite complex organ. Further, eyes in all vertibrates are essentially the same design (if I may use the word.) and there are massive differences in the species that have eyes.
My request is for a "peer reviewed" and "acceptable, published" article or study, or series of studies that show how they originated, and how they were inherited by all these species that apperantly have no evolutionary connection.
Show by the "accepted scientific" showing all the links from the first species that had eyes of the design that has been inhereted by all these various species.
If your answer is that everyone already knows this and no showing is necessary, I will understand that "science" contains the necessary statements of belief to satisfy all the true believers. Any skeptics may be freely insulted.
"My understanding of the suit is that since the ID guys had no "peer reviewed" articles that had been properly published in a proper scientific journal, nothing they had to say carried any weight and was summarily thrown out."
"Since the Theory of Evolution has been extensively "peer reviewed" it carries so much weight that nothing stated to be covered by the accepted theory is to be questioned."
"Is that about what the ruling said?"
______________________________________________________
No. Perhaps you should read it.
______________________________________________________
"My request is for a "peer reviewed" and "acceptable, published" article or study, or series of studies that show how they originated, and how they were inherited by all these species that apperantly have no evolutionary connection."
__________________________________________________
There are literally hundreds, if not thousands, of articles on eye evolution. You can start with the simpler web pages available, and graduate to web-based library sources for peer reviewed articles (for many of which, not unexpectedly, you will have to pay a nominal fee -- peer reviewed journal articles and the journals that publish them are rarely free).
General web sites:
http://www.karger.com/gazette/64/fernald/art_1_0.htm
http://www.gnxp.com/MT2/archives/003603.html
http://www.origins.tv/darwin/eyes.htm
http://www.stanford.edu/group/fernaldlab/pubs/2004%20Fernald%20EvEyeBBE.pdf
http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/full/99/3/1426
Web-based library sources include the following (the links are to pages within the sources listing search responses for "eye evolution"):
http://www.ingentaconnect.com/search;jsessionid=em4t18letl05.henrietta?title=eye+evolution&database=1
http://www.springerlink.com/(neztbjbu1tj0n245ou3r3m55)/app/home/search-articles-results.asp?referrer=main
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?CMD=search&DB=PubMed
http://arjournals.annualreviews.org/doi/abs/10.1146/annurev.ne.15.030192.000245
Sorry. My links to Springerlink and PubMed (ncbi) were to the home pages. You will need to type "eye evoution" in the search box to pull up lists of responsive articles (and you can, of course, type in whatever else regarding evolution you wish to research).
My last link, to arjournals, has a PDF shortcut to a reasonably good article.