Pharyngula

Pharyngula has moved to http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/

Tuesday, December 20, 2005

"unconstitutional to teach ID as an alternative to evolution in a public school science classroom"

The judge in Dover strikes down ID. It's a solid and scathing judgment that declares teaching Intelligent Design in the schools is unconstitutional. The decision by Judge Jones is available—it's joyful reading for us on the side of science. Here are a few excerpts:

Plaintiffs accurately submit that the disclaimer mimics the one that the Fifth Circuit struck down as unconstitutional in Freiler in two key aspects. First, while encouraging students to keep an open mind and explore alternatives to evolution, it offers no scientific alternative; instead, the only alternative offered is an inherently religious one, namely, ID. 43 Freiler, 185 F.3d at 344-47 (disclaimer urging students to "exercise critical thinking and gather all information possible and closely examine each alternative toward forming an opinion" referenced "Biblical version of Creation" as the only alternative theory, thus "encourag[ing] students to read and meditate upon religion in general and the "Biblical version of Creation" in particular.) Whether a student accepts the Board's invitation to explore Pandas, and reads a creationist text, or follows the Board's other suggestion and discusses "Origins of Life" with family members, that objective student can reasonably infer that the District"s favored view is a religious one, and that the District is accordingly sponsoring a form of religion. Second, by directing students to their families to learn about the "Origins of Life," the paragraph performs the exact same function as did the Freiler disclaimer: It "reminds school children that they can rightly maintain beliefs taught by their parents on the subject of the origin of life," thereby stifling the critical thinking that the class's study of evolutionary theory might otherwise prompt, to protect a religious view from what the Board considers to be a threat. Id. at 345 (because disclaimer effectively told students "that evolution as taught in the classroom need not affect what they already know," it sent a message that was "contrary to an intent to encourage critical thinking, which requires that students approach new concepts with an open mind and willingness to alter and shift existing viewpoints").

This is the best part to me…

To be sure, Darwin's theory of evolution is imperfect. However, the fact that a scientific theory cannot yet render an explanation on every point should not be used as a pretext to thrust an untestable alternative hypothesis grounded in religion into the science classroom or to misrepresent well-established scientific propositions.

The citizens of the Dover area were poorly served by the members of the Board who voted for the ID Policy. 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.

With that said, we do not question that many of the leading advocates of ID have bona fide and deeply held beliefs which drive their scholarly endeavors. Nor do we controvert that ID should continue to be studied, debated, and discussed. As stated, our conclusion today is that it is unconstitutional to teach ID as an alternative to evolution in a public school science classroom.

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.

Merry Kitzmas, everyone!


Trackback url: http://pharyngula.org/index/trackback/3596/3LxhC0wf/

Comments:
#54372: — 12/20  at  10:22 AM
(º)(º)



#54373: — 12/20  at  10:26 AM
A great day for science!



#54374: — 12/20  at  10:29 AM
Another kicking of creationist butt in court. Oh Discovery Institute? Are you picking up Dover's legal tab, as you once promised?



#54375: — 12/20  at  10:31 AM
My <a href="http://znfl.blogspot.com/2005/12/my-favorite-quote.html">favorite<a> quote from the article:

Several members repeatedly lied to cover their motives even while professing religious beliefs, [U.S. District Judge John E. Jones III] said.



#54376: — 12/20  at  10:32 AM
Anybody check to see if Buffalo Billy Dembski has been put on suicide watch yet?



#54377: Mike Nilsen — 12/20  at  10:33 AM
Ooops. Screwed up that href tag. Sorry.



#54378: Evan Murdock — 12/20  at  10:34 AM
I particularly enjoy the repeated "Any reasonable observer, adult or child," given that the legal standard required only the first.

He seems to take considerable pleasure in the writing.



#54379: — 12/20  at  10:34 AM
fantastic! This part nearly made me choke on my coffee:

The breathtaking inanity of the Board’s decision is evident


I think I'm going to print that bit out and frame it...

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.



#54380: Charles Bailey — 12/20  at  10:35 AM
Bind this decision and distribute it to every school board in the country!



Trackback: Judge Rules Against ‘Intelligent Design’ Tracked on: The Politburo Diktat (216.227.210.33) at 2005 12 20 10:36:43
Judge Rules Against ‘Intelligent Design’ Can this agnostic say “Thank God!” “Intelligent design” cannot be mentioned in biology classes in a Pennsylvania public school district, a federal judge said Tuesday, rulin...



#54381: — 12/20  at  10:37 AM
RAmen!



#54382: The Rev. Schmitt. — 12/20  at  10:37 AM


Take a bow, Dr Behe. This victory was all yours.

-The Rev. Schmitt.



Trackback: Dover judge rules against "intelligent design" creationism Tracked on: Respectful Insolence (66.159.239.140) at 2005 12 20 10:38:22
Ow. That's gotta sting...



#54383: Jeff Fecke — 12/20  at  10:38 AM
Yeah, but you still can't explain PYGMIES and DWARVES.

So there.

:D



#54384: Orac — 12/20  at  10:39 AM
I can't wait to see how ID proponents try to spin this.

--
Orac “A statement of fact cannot be insolent.”
http://oracknows.blogspot.com



#54385: — 12/20  at  10:39 AM
Yay! This brought a huge smile to my face this morning.

--Chris



#54386: Charles Bailey — 12/20  at  10:40 AM
fixed url



Trackback: Judge hands D'ohver Board of Education its ass Tracked on: Catch (66.220.23.241) at 2005 12 20 10:42:49
http://pharyngula.org/index/weblog/comments/unconstitutional_to_teach_id/



#54387: — 12/20  at  10:44 AM
*** D*MBSKI REMINDER ***

Incase you forgot, Bill “I infer from the probabilities” made predictions based on his field of, erm, expertise:

http://www.uncommondescent.com/index.php/archive…

“As I see it, there are three possible outcomes:

1. The Dover policy, in which students are informed that the ID textbook Of Pandas and People is in their library, is upheld.
2. The Dover policy is overturned but the scientific status of ID is left unchallenged.
3. The Dover policy is not only overturned but ID is ruled as nonscientific.

For what it’s worth, my subjective probabilities are that outcome 1. has about a 20% probability, outcome 2. has about an 70% probability, and outcome 3. has less than a 10% probability. (Part of what prompts these numbers is that the ACLU is completely outmanning the Thomas More Law Center, which is defending the Dover policy. When I was an expert witness in the case, TMLC had one full-time person on the case and two or three part-timers. The ACLU, by contrast, had at least twelve full-timers on the case.)”

So, that’s P (The Dover policy is not only overturned but ID is ruled as nonscientific)< 10%.



#54390: — 12/20  at  10:50 AM
just skim reading through the ruling... this is great stuff. Absolute must read (and cite, frequently): section 4 "Whether ID is Science" starting at page 64.



#54392: greensmile — 12/20  at  10:57 AM
Such a clear result. Now we can use the event as a yardstick for the denial and intransigence of the IDiots...we can see how they press on with further legal action or interpret this as a success for their side.

So what is wrong with Kansas?



#54394: — 12/20  at  11:06 AM
Dembski's vise strategy

When interrogating Darwinists with the goal of opening up discussion in the high school biology curriculum about evolution (i.e., strengths, weaknesses, and alternatives), I therefore propose subjecting them to a sustained line of questioning about what they mean by each of these five terms: science, nature, creation, design, and evolution. In addition, it will help to keep in mind that for the purposes of interrogation, there are three types of Darwinists:

(1) The Richard Dawkins Darwinist (abbreviated RD Darwinist), who is virulently against religion of any stripe and uses evolution as a club to beat religious believers. Richard Dawkins Darwinists despise religious belief and regard religious believers as having to check their brains at the door if they are want to maintain both their faith and evolutionary theory.

(2) The Eugenie Scott Darwinist (abbreviated ES Darwinist), who is not religious in any traditional sense (in particular, this type of Darwinist does not think God does or can act in any way that makes a difference in the natural world) but at the same time thinks it is ill-advised to antagonize religious believers by using evolutionary theory as a club. The Eugenie Scott Darwinist wants to placate religious believers by assuring them that they can be good followers of their faith as well as good Darwinists.

(3) The Kenneth Miller Darwinist (abbreviated KM Darwinist), who is a traditional Judeo-Christian believer, holds that God has acted miraculously in salvation history (with such miracles as the parting of the Red Sea, the resurrection of Christ, the Virgin Birth, etc.) but denies that God’s activity in natural history is scientifically detectable. The Kenneth Miller Darwinist is an orthodox religious believer and an orthodox Darwinist. He is the poster child for the Eugenie Scott Darwinist.

The vise strategy consists in subjecting each of these types of Darwinists to a sustained line of questioning about these five key terms, questions that they have no choice but to answer (hence the “vise” metaphor). The aim of this line of questioning is to make clear to those reading or listening to the Darwinists’ testimonies that their defense of evolution and opposition to ID are prejudicial, self-contradictory, ideologically driven, and above all insupportable on the basis of the underlying science.

It's too bad Dembski forewent his own opportunity to be subjected to a sustained line of questioning like Michael 'astrology boy' Behe did.



's avatar #54395: — 12/20  at  11:09 AM
The ruling is a great relief, but does anybody see the
possibility of Schiavo-scale political manuvering by the IDists to get back in the game?

You can't take your eyes off them for a miute..



#54397: — 12/20  at  11:15 AM
Man, I thought graduating this week was Christmas present enough. But THIS is some DELICIOUS icing.



Trackback: The Voters Delivered the Jab, Now Judge Jones Give Tracked on: Jakbische Rants (72.9.234.70) at 2005 12 20 11:15:54
The judge thoroughly spanked the ID proponents, as can be seen from the decision. Here are some of my favourite bits:



Page 1 of 3 pages  1 2 3 >

Next entry: The bottom line in Dover

Previous entry: The Panda's Thumb and Mirecki

<< Back to main

Info

email PZ Myers
Search
Archives
UMM—America's best public liberal arts college