Well, show them. I have posted a newspaper excerpt which indicates what I stated. The wedge document has been explained by the CSC and is no plan for a "test" case, especially in relation to Dover, which, as I demonstrated, was rejected by the Discovery Institute. So show your "conspiratorial" facts. The link I provided to the University of Missouri is fairly clear on the conspiracy in the Scopes case.
Let me guess, you bought the spin. An internal DI document labeled "Top Secret" and "Not For Distribution" was leaked detailing their plans. Obviously they didn't want anybody to know of their plans, yet now we do. Meyer had to finally admit its authenticity. After that the DI went on a massive spin campaign to downplay it. That's what organizations usually do when they get caught.
especially in relation to Dover, which, as I demonstrated, was rejected by the Discovery Institute.
Read again: Started by the Discovery Institute as part of their "teach the controversy" program. They only withdrew after they saw they had a losing case.
So show your "conspiratorial" facts.
Wedge Document, Phase III, second sentence: "We will also pursue possible legal assistance in response to resistance to the integration of design theory into public school science curricula."
In response to criticisms the DI said in their "So What" refutation, "others have invented and then hyped a supposed secrecy" about the strategy. Supposed secrecy? The document was marked "Top Secret" so the DI obviously intended secrecy.