Sigh. West never said that it wasn't.
He said that it (cut-past w/ errors) seriously undercuts the credibility of Jones' examination of the scientific validity of the intelligent-design argument and it does. If Jones couldn't recognize scientific error, how does that support his ability to make a judgement in that area?
I really wish you'd stop projecting your own personality onto others when posting.
He said that it (cut-past w/ errors) seriously undercuts the credibility of Jones' examination of the scientific validity of the intelligent-design argument and it does.
No, it doesn't.
You obviously haven't read the transcripts - the defense's star witness, under oath, admitted that ID is as scientific as astrology.
The only side to put forward a valid scientific analysis was the plaintiff. The only side to lie in court was the defense. That the judge recognized those two facts in no way weakens his argument.