Professor Emeritus Peter Irons (Political Science, UC San Diego):
"It seems to me the height of hypocrisy for the Discovery Institute to accuse Judge Jones of copying 90 percent of one section of his opinion (just 16 percent of its total length) from the proposed findings of fact by the plaintiff's lawyers, when the DI itself tried to palm off as 'original' work a law review article [submitted to Montana Law Review] that was copied 95 percent from the authors' own book {Traipsing Into Evolution]. Concealing this fact from the law review editors, until
I discovered and documented this effort, seriously undercuts the credibility of the DI on this or any other issue."
- Log in to post comments
More like this
The Discovery Institute has challenged SMU profs
to debate at the "Darwin vs Design" event in Dallas. No takers so far; I'm not surprised, any scientist who participated would be increasing the DI's reputation immensely simply by sharing a meeting room with one of those clowns.
But the DI is in the…
Time for another installment of, “How bad have things gotten for the ID folks?”
It is now almost a year since the big ruling in the Dover case. As I'm sure you recall, that's the one where the ID folks put their most formidable legal and scientific talent in front of a Court, and the Court…
Everyone knows the first rule of holes: When you're in a hole, stop digging.
Apparently no one told Discovery Institute lackey Casey Luskin. He's still trying to pretend that their inane charges against the Judge in the Kitzmiller decision have any merit. Recall that their latest brainstorm is…
What a year it has been for the Discovery Institute and the Intelligent Design movement! Below the fold, I detail the advances that ID has made in the short time since Judge Jones delivered his ruling in Kitzmiller v. Dover.
January
Dembski:
Just as a tree that has been "rimmed" (i.e., had its bark…