[Gladwin]

ping

[VadeRetro]

Intelligent-design proponents -- such as Phillip E. Johnson, a University of California at Berkeley law professor whose 1991 book "Darwin on Trial" lifted the fledgling intelligent-design movement from obscurity -- hope to bring the concept to other state curricula.

Johnson demolished here. Oh, wait! You have to settle for a sad little paraphrase of some of it, here. EsotericLucidity was too good and too new.

[AndrewC]

"If you are going to teach the Darwinist view that organisms may look like they were designed but weren't, then you have to allow for the possibility that they look like they were designed because they were designed," said Johnson

That is totally unreasonable! It is certain, which means no possibility of the opposite view, that the Darwininian theory of evolution is fact, requiring no proof only evidence. The Darwininian theory states that random is what works, therefore something non-random is unnecessary. Finally, from the logical proof named Occam non-random does not exist do to its superfluous nature making all things non-designed and fully explicable by the Darwininian theory Law.