Stranger Fruit

Archives for December, 2005

Some quotes from Ricky Santorum: “Therefore, intelligent design is a legitimate scientific theory that should be taught in science classes.” – 2002 Washington Times op-ed article “I’m not comfortable with intelligent design being taught in the science classroom.” – Interview in August 2005 on National Public Radio “I do not believe it should be required…

The myth of activism

Over at Positive Liberty, Tim Sandefur has a good piece on “judicial activism” that takes on the claim that Jones’ decision was an example of same. As Tim – who also blogs with the Panda’s Thumb – notes: With this in mind, check out this post at Southern Appeal, which accuses Judge Jones of activism…

A victory for faith

Over at The Nation, Katrina Vanden Heuval says something that I’ve been saying for years. Regarding the Dover decision, she says This is obviously a victory for science. What is less obvious is that it is also a victory for faith. The most pernicious aspect of the ID movement is its commingling of science and…

Einstein … “it is a theory”

Next semester I will be teaching Einstein’s own account of relativity (amaz) in my HON 172 class. It will be interesting to see how that goes as it’s not the easiest text in the world. Given that, the following caught my eye: In a fitting cap to the World Year of Physics 2005, MIT physicists…

The cat is out of the bag and running

Things must really be unraveling for the ID supporters. First, as Dave Thomas notes, Jonathan Witt admits that the identity of the designer is a matter of religion (look mom! no space aliens!): [I]n fact ID appeals to positive evidence for design and merely detects design, leaving the question of the designer’s identity to religion.…

Spin, Part II

Over at Dembski’s blog, the poor saps are trying desperately to get some joy out of the Dover decision. Witness “DaveScott”: The next trial needs be carefully crafted by OUR side so that … 2) The expert witnesses on our side should be industrial design engineers not biologists. What are biologists doing testifying about design?…

Dembski spins Dover … Film at Eleven

Dembski chimes in with: [T]he actual ruling is not a Waterloo for the intelligent design side. Certainly it will put a damper on school boards interested in promoting intelligent design. But this is not a Supreme Court decision. Nor is it likely this decision will be appealed since the Dover school board that caused all…

More Robertsonian Wisdom

Pat Robertson on the Cobb County sticker case (700 Club, December 15th): ROBERTSON: You know, what we have got to recognize just there in this case is that the evolutionists worship atheism. I mean, that’s their religion. And evolution becomes their religion. It is a matter of religion. So this is an establishment of religion…

Better dates for Human/Chimp split

With all the posting about the Dover decision, it is always good to remember that scientific problems are solved by scientists and aired in scientific journals, not in the legal arena. Investigators at Arizona State and Penn State Universities have placed the time of the human/chimp split between 5 and 7 million years ago —…

A win in Kitzmiller v Dover

Quick post as I have to head out for the day but will post again later… Judge Jones has found for the plaintiffs in Kitzmiller v Dover, holding that ID is not science and that the ID policy violates both the purpose and effect prongs of the Lemon test. See here, here, and here. Legal…