[<1/1,000,000th%]

The writers argue that Jones' decision was the work of "an activist judge" and that he ignored the science behind intelligent design.

DI was given the opprotunity to present their "science behind intelligent design".

Why didn't they?

[longshadow]

DI was given the opprotunity to present their "science behind intelligent design".

Why didn't they?

BEHOLD: the "Science" behind "Intelligent Design":

Behe Cross-X Day 12
source: http://www.aclupa.org/downloads/Day12AM.pdf

p22 line 25 Q. [plaintiffs' attorney] And in fact 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, is that correct?

A. [Prof. Behe; defendants' expert witness] That is correct, yes.

[emphasis added]

There you are, folks. One of the leading academic advocates for "Intelligent Design" took the stand as a defense expert witness and under oath told the court that Intelligent Design advocates have not produced a SINGLE peer reviewed article with supporting scientific evidence describing how Intelligent Design of ANY biological system ever took place.

NOT ONE.

EVER.

Dover was ID's Waterloo.