We’ve been searching, and there really isn’t any of our kind of news out there. This is traditionally a slow time for blogs, but it’s been especially slow in providing the stories we like to write about.
But fear not. We’re just a couple of days away from Kitzmas. This will be the sixth anniversary of the decision on 20 December 2005 by Judge John E. Jones III in the case of Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District.
If you’ve never seen our series of old posts about that landmark case, they’re Kitzmiller v. Dover: Is ID Science?, and Who is the Intelligent Designer?, and What’s the Wedge Document?, and The Role of The Discovery Institute, and Michael Behe’s Testimony, and lastly John Haught: Witness in the Dover Case.
To increase our merriment, every year around this time the Discoveroids post an exceedingly bitter diatribe blasting the Kitzmiller decision, Judge Jones, and the witnesses on the winning side. Such posts are usually written by either Casey or Westie, and we always look forward to them.
Please don’t feel restricted to discussing the Kitzmiller case — although it is a humdinger and no school board has officially endorsed creationism or intelligent design since the opinion came out. You can discuss pretty much anything — science, politics, economics, whatever — as long as it’s tasteful and interesting. This is a free-fire zone, so banter, babble, bicker, bluster, blaspheme; say what you will. But beware of the profanity filters.
We now throw open the comments to you, dear reader. Have at it. Ooops — we almost forgot. Merry Kitzmas to one and all!
Copyright © 2011. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
(edited from my Talk.Origins post)
Merry Kitzmas, evolution deniers!
It’s hard to believe but will be 6 years since an “activist judge” banned creationism, ID, and all other assorted anti-evolution arguments from every outlet that you counted on – the Internet, books, films, private school non-science classes, etc.
You may not believe me, but I feel your pain. So I’m actually going to break the law and give you a Kitzmas present that will have you jumping for joy. I wanted to find as many anti-evolution arguments in one place as possible for you to enjoy all year round. As a bonus, since you advocate “critical analysis,” your present includes a critical analysis of all those arguments.
Wait, there’s more! I pulled some strings so that if you want to use this as “supplemental material” in private school non-science classes, you will be granted the “academic freedom” to do so.
Those were heady times back in 2005. Those of us who have followed the creationist battles for many years were “glued to the TV,” so to speak, reading every transcript as soon as it was published and hanging on every word from reporters at the trial.
Then came Behe’s testimony and we were, like, “Game over, Man!” It was laughable and we were giddy with delight. Behe handed the decision to the plaintiffs lock, stock, double-barrel, hook line and sinker. All nine yards. The enchilada and the farm. It was beautiful to behold.
“ID is like astrology…” Thank you, Dr. Behe, expert witness for the defense. We couldn’t have scripted it better.
However, all comedy aside, the star of the trial was Barbara Forrest. She’s forgotten more than all the creationists in all the creationist rat’s nests together have ever learned collectively. The defense tried mightily to have her dismissed as an “expert” witness realizing, of course, that Dr. Forrest is a True Expert Witness of the highest caliber.
Barbara’s testimony was totally devastating. She parried cross-examination with one hand tied behind her back, cited references from memory and laid out bare for all to see the entire creationist strategy of lies and deceit. It was all there, documented and historically accurate. Without Behe even having to open his stupid yap, Forrest demolished the entire ID house of cards and took them all down.
Well, wait a second, you say, where was Dembski who wanted to put evolutionists on the stand and squeeze the truth out of them in what he called his vice (sic) strategy? Ah, poor Dr. Dr. Willie chickened out the day after he sat in on Forrest’s deposition. As Barbara tells the story, Dembski visibly blanched as the deposition wore on and he pulled out of the case the next day. Even Dumbski knew the jig was up and that his flim-flammery would be cut to ribbons by Forrest’s methodical expertise and insight.
In the end, all of the DI con artists pulled out of the case, except for Behe whose ego was too big, although his brain was too small. Par for the course, I’d say.
I’ve heard Genie Scott speak (she looks and sounds just like the video below!) and I have met her; a name I don’t mind dropping.
The video is 40 minutes well spent on why it’s important to keep tabs on creationism and why websites like Our Fearless Leader, Curmie, are so important. They shine a light on the sneaky stuff creationists do to water down education for ideological reasons in this country.
Hey, so they teach a little creationism in science, what’s the harm, you say? Well, dig through the Kitzmiller files and you’ll find that at a retreat attended by the Dover Board prior to enacting the disastrous ID policy, a board member asked the same question. He basically said, sure, let’s vote this in and get it over with. Then he was told that ID was only the first step and was given a book by the creepy pseudo-historian David Barton. Social studies was next. Then English and language arts and, somehow, mathematics. Nothing less than the total overthrow of “liberal” primary and secondary education to promote a Christian worldview.
So, it’s not just evolution that’s at stake.
Merry Kitzmas!
@Frank J:
Of course, you are being facetious, but the truth is not that anti-evolution arguments have been banned.
The ban is on pro-design arguments, descriptions of alternatives to common descent, “what happened and when, where, how”, etc.
Doc Bill says: “Those were heady times back in 2005.”
Indeed. Thanks for the memories.
@Anonymous: No, the ban is on anything that is not science. Since ID / creationism is not science (and so far as I’ve seen, never will be), it does not get the privilege of being taught in science class.
P.S. Frank J was actually being more sarcastic than facetious.
@Gary
Judge Jones pleasantly surprised me more than anyone in that trial. Not only was he a Christian and GWB-appointed Republican, he made sure to include not only ID but the next strategy that the scam artists were working on. Yet I must admit that my sarcam reflects more my disappointment with our side, than with the scam artists. The latter do just what I expect. But it’s tiring being usually the only one on our side who reminds everyone that the “ban” only affects ~0.1% of a student’s waking hours during high school years, and that’s not good enough for the spoiled rotten scam artists. They want their propaganda taught, unanswered in the one place that it would not have earned the right to be taught even if it were constitutional to teach it there. And they have the unmitigated gall to accuse us of censorship!
Speaking of Bill Dembski, not much heard out of him lately. What with having to recant his non-literalist interpretation of the Genesis Flood in order to keep his job and all. He can expect to have that brought up in response to any statement on ID or evolution which he is foolish enough to make in the future, before any non-religious audience anyway.
The cluelessness, in retrospect, is mind-bottling (as Chaz Michael Michael would say). Why would they think that the things they had told religious audiences for years would not come out at trial?
Gabriel Hanna says:
They’re used to addressing audiences of ignorant people and being regarded as knowledgeable. They didn’t realize that stepping into a federal courtroom with well-prepared opposition would be somewhat different.
Gabriel Hanna: “What with having to recant his non-literalist interpretation of the Genesis Flood in order to keep his job and all.”
I have to re-read it to be sure, but one thing I know is that Dembski chooses his words very carefully so that, as one critic said, trying to pin him down on anything is like trying to nail Jello to a wall (not sure if it was the same critic who said that his NFL argument is “written in Jello”).
Anyway, how I read it was that Dembski reiterated his clear old-Earth and old life position (no disagreement with any “whens” of mainstream science), but encouraged people to believe the Flood story despte there not (yet?) being evidence to support it. IOW it sounded more like Omphalos than any “scientific” creationism, flood “geology” and all.
If you couple the “to keep his job” part with his being “unsure” of common descent, while encouraging Behe to accept it, I would say that, short of reading minds, it’s safe to conclude that Dembski privately knows that the flood is a fairy tale and evolution is not.
I may be giving the Discoveroids to much credit even as scam artists, but my impression is that, after Dover they just act like they have nothing to lose. They know that the average conservative and Christian (as opposed to “conservative Christian” which usually means “radical authoritarian Fundamentalist”) judge will dismiss their propaganda as “breathtaking inanity.” So they are counting on the “masses” – who mostly don’t care if their ideas are religious or not – will vote in politicians who will appoint radical authoritarian judges.
That’s another reason why I think that we must speak more to the “swing vote”, and less to both the “creationists” (hopeless evolution deniers) and the “choir” (those already convinced that ID/creationism is a scam).