killer paragraph from judge's decision in Dover intelligent design case:

The judge's opinion in this case was a MAJOR slap-down for the ID movement. My biologist hubby and I read the entire written opinion yesterday. It takes quite a lot of time, but is a good read. This paragraph (in the conclusion of the opinion) is a favorite:

"Those who disagree with our holding will likely mark it as the product of an
activist judge. If so, they will have erred as this is manifestly not an activist Court.
Rather, this case came to us as the result of the activism of an ill-informed faction
on a school board, aided by a national public interest law firm eager to find a
constitutional test case on ID, who in combination drove the Board to adopt an
imprudent and ultimately unconstitutional policy. The breathtaking inanity of the
Board's decision is evident when considered against the factual backdrop which
has now been fully revealed through this trial. The students, parents, and teachers
of the Dover Area School District deserved better than to be dragged into this legal
maelstrom, with its resulting utter waste of monetary and personal resources".

The judge was VERY pissed with school board members who repetitively LIED under oath. He squashed Michael Behe like a bug on a windshield. The decision was very well argued and thorough - the judge seemed to dot every "i" and cross every "t". He constructed a VERY tight box which the ID folks will have a hard time wriggling out of.

I'll bet they're shittin' bricks over at the Discovery Institute.

The entire opinion is here:
http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/msnbc/sections/news/051220_kitzmiller_342.pdf

Here come da judge!

:7

:applause:

Judge Jones should be immediately appointed to the Supreme Court. He's a national treasure.

He wouldn't put up with nonsense! The next democratic president should nominate him if he gets the chance.

appointed in 2002 by Chimpy?

"Judge John E. Jones on the other hand is a good old boy brought up through the conservative ranks. He was state attorney for D.A.R.E, an Assistant Scout Master with extensively involved with local and national Boy Scouts of America, political buddy of Governor Tom Ridge (who in turn is deep in George W. Bush’s circle of power), and finally was appointed by GW hisself. Senator Rick Santorum is a Pennsylvanian in the same circles (author of the “Santorum Language” that encourages schools to teach the controversy) and last but far from least, George W. Bush hisself drove a stake in the ground saying teach the controversy. Unless Judge Jones wants to cut his career off at the knees he isn’t going to rule against the wishes of his political allies. Of course the ACLU will appeal. This won’t be over until it gets to the Supreme Court. But now we own that too."
http://www.uncommondescent.com/index.php/archives/371

Heh. I'll bet the Moran that wrote that is not a happy camper today!

this is what they want, another wedge issue, one more stupid thing driving americans apart.

"Activist, anti-religion judge" doncha know. Snicker. The judge predicted exactly what they would say.

This morning on NPR, one of the lawyers pointed out that they got hold of an early draft of the ID book, that Panda thing, and there were 142 mentions of creationism. By the time it was published, they did a universal search and replace, and substituted ID in all 142 cases.

The judge was wondering why these supposedly religious people felt it necessary to lie like rugs about their motivations.

:evilgrin:

Oh, them. Here's their response (probably one of two pre-written responses) about an hour after yesterday's ruling:


Hey "Dr." West? You just got SPIKED by da judge!

(repeat from yesterday)

Doncha just love his false bravado? "it won't work"

Hey "Dr." West, it just DID work, REAL science has prevailed, and funding for your Institute will soon go south, just like it did for the Christian Coalition.

Did I mention that I'm :bounce: today?

A particularly good comment:
Seriously, this is a better result that I could have imagined. Going in, the question was whether teachers would be required to reference ID. With this result, it has actually been found unconstitutional to do so. No wonder the DI is pissed; this has left them with less than they had going in.

Favorite excerpts from judge's decision, (from http://jakobknits.blogspot.com/2005/12/voters-delivered-jab-now-judge-jones.html
...Professor Behe remarkably and unmistakably claims that the plausibility of the argument for ID depends upon the extent to which one believes in the existence of God. (P-718 at 705) (emphasis added). As no evidence in the record indicates that any other scientific proposition's validity rests on belief in God, nor is the Court aware of any such scientific propositions, Professor Behe's assertion constitutes substantial evidence that in his view, as is commensurate with other prominent ID leaders, ID is a religious and not a scientific proposition.

and

It is notable that not one defense expert was able to explain how the supernatural action suggested by ID could be anything other than an inherently religious proposition.


A part of the judge's decision frequently quoted in the MSM (a goody, for sure):
"It is ironic that several of these individuals, who so staunchly and proudly touted their religious convictions in public, would time and again lie to cover their tracks and disguise the real purpose behind the ID Policy."

Here's a very good blog post, with citations by page number of the judge's opinion, titled "Behe, Dembski, ID get a royal smackdown:
Judge says Behe doesn’t even understand his own theory"
http://socraticgadfly.blogspot.com/2005/12/behe-dembski-id-get-royal-smackdown.html

Good summary post about the decision and the reaction on both sides, with LOTS of links:
http://thequestionableauthority.blogspot.com/2005/12/kitzcarnival.html

Another blog worth checking out:
http://www.pandasthumb.org/archives/legal_issues/index.html

this is the beginning of the end of the time of Intelligent Design.

next?

:hi:

Okay, what the hell were they calling it instead? I seem to remember the local freeper radio guy making some sort of argument that it was a (blank) instead of a religious issue. But damned if I can remember his phraseology.

They tried to hide their religious purpose in trying to get ID into the curriculum. The judge, in addition to being pissed about the lying of course, also wrote contemptuously that pro-ID board members who went along with the 2 ringleaders admitted that they knew nothing about ID, made no effort to learn about it, ignored the science teachers' opinion on the issue and that at the board meetings proposing the curriculum change not one single comment was made as to how it was to improve science education. (because as we know, it was not at all about improving education, but was ALL about religion. The judge very clearly saw through it all.)

I read in the NYT that even their fellow Christians are gagging on the concept, as many don't see the conflict between believing evolution and being a Christian.

The whole thing is religion and against the first amendment. Just because right now a lot of the population proclaims to be Christian and/or believe in the Christian faith doesn't mean it'll always be this way since we have no national religion and freedom of and from religion. It purely goes against the first amendment and will be forcing kids to learn something which they might not understand or want to understand. I someday want to have children and when they attend school I want to be the one to introduce them to religion and answer their question's and help them on their journey of life and not someone else. Than when they are old/mature enough I want them to make up their mind about what to believe in or lack thereof. These people wanting "ID" taught in schools are forcing religion on someone and will fail them possibly by not believing what they do and that is taking away freewill and it's wrong.

Score one for the modern age!

before them in other districts/circuits.

This opinion set a great precedent in that jurisdiction and other Judges can look to it, if they so choose, and refer to it in upcoming cases.

It's a good thing.

reaching (in addition to being SCATHING against the dishonesty of many of the witnesses, and the stupidity of the pro-ID school board members who admitted that they really didn't know the least thing about ID. One board member repeatedly referred to it as "intelligence design" on the stand. Bwah!)

Just curious.

that he didn't know where the funding came from for the "Of Pandas and People" books. It came out at trial that the money had been raised in his church, the check *drawn on his account* and made out to the father of the other ID ringleader on the board, and the memo on the check said "Of Pandas and People" (pp 113-115 of the opinion).
There were other lies as well, but I need to head off to bed soon.

My biologist hubby, who read some of the trial transcripts online during the trial, said that the judge at one point became so disgusted with the dishonesty of one the witnesses that he actually took over questioning of the witness himself.

That ol' Commandment about not bearing false witness sure is a tough one, eh?

Methinks the fokkers should be brought up on perjury charges.

for these folks eventually. To represent oneself as a Christian, and then pull such utter crap. Blows the mind, it does.

I'm trying to remember now how these people, and other Freepers I've heard, were trying to sell Intelligent Design as not being a religious issue, but some other issue instead. Something about the design being the key, and not that the deity had to be specified.

Thing is, the ID people were having trouble even selling the concept to their fellow Christians at Christian colleges and such. Many just don't see the conflict between being a Christian and believing in evolution as a process, as long as you're not a literalist, or at the least can ask the question "how long is a day to God?"

It is a thing of BEAUTY. I encourage all who are interested in this issue to read it in its entirety.

Biologist hubby read it at work yesterday, and sent me the paragraph in my OP. Then last night I read the whole thing, yelling out the best parts to him in the next room. He eventually came in and re-read the last half of it with me over my shoulder. Very exciting. Here in red state hell, hubby's written a few letters-to-the-editor each time the fundies try to get anti-evolution stickers into biology textbooks here. Also was incensed when the place where he works hired a creationist to a fairly high level administrative position - ack!

and how the trial unfolded, history of the TMLC (attorneys for the defendents) and how they'd been looking for such a case for years, and the plaintiffs' legal team:
http://www.skeptic.com/eskeptic/05-12-20.html

and now I'm really am off to bed...