Federal Judge Rules Against Intelligent Design 2443
evil agent writes "CNN is reporting that U.S. District Judge John E. Jones III has ruled that Intelligent Design cannot be discussed in Dover, Pennsylvania biology classes. Dover Area School Board members had previously mandated that Intelligent Design be included in the biology curriculum. According to the judge, 'our conclusion today is that it is unconstitutional to teach ID as an alternative to evolution in a public school science classroom.'" Update: 12/20 23:40 GMT by J : eSkeptic has a look back at the trial and what led to it. And the Discovery Institute has issued a press release.
On teh Nth day, G-d created Slashdot... (Score:0, Funny)
Well (Score:5, Funny)
Touched by his noodly appendage... (Score:3, Funny)
Not only has He used divine intervention in Dover but He has shown me the way! I await his presence in pirate heaven with the stripper factory and beer volcano.
Believe.
Let me be the first to say... (Score:2, Funny)
I am offended (Score:1, Funny)
Re:Well good (Score:5, Funny)
The Dover school board need just introduce a new course "Mysticism, Superstition and Things That Go Bump in the Night". Then they could teach ID.
Re:Links to more information: (Score:5, Funny)
Seems Pat wanted to see a smackdown of a different sort.
Rats ! global warming education setback (Score:1, Funny)
Signed - Snow Miser
This is a defeat for pasta (Score:5, Funny)
What about? (Score:1, Funny)
Re:Touched by his noodly appendage... (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Well good (Score:1, Funny)
Re:Teach all (Score:5, Funny)
if intelligent design is true ..... (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Well good (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Touched by his noodly appendage... (Score:5, Funny)
From the book of Noodle Ch. 3 verse 17-19 So said FSM, so it shall be DONE.
Re:one down, a zillion to go (Score:4, Funny)
Re:An important part of the ruling (Score:5, Funny)
Intelligent Design is as scientific an explanation for the evolution of man, as Angels Bowling is as an explanation for thunder. Both are possible, but neither is science.
Re:Links to more information: (Score:3, Funny)
What I imagine will happen is that they move and hope to find a challenge that they can actually defend. What is defendable? I have no idea. I will be amazed if an ID challenge gets as high as the supreme court before being smacked down in the next 10 years. Even if they managed to get it to the Supreme Court, you can pretty much guarantee that the Supreme Court would smack them down. The Supreme Court (yes, even the Republicans) take this stuff very seriously and will step on it regardless of their personal feelings.
IDs only hope is to conduct a scientifically verifiable experiment. I laugh at the prospects of ID ever getting published in Nature. If scientists record the hand of God, Zeus, UFOs, or His Noodleness spontaneously converting one species to another spices, we will all eat our words. Until then, the ID folks can expect to be laughed out of court and any scientific journal of any repute.
Personally, I hope they try again. Reading some of damning excerpts from this ruling makes the whole exercise seem worthwhile.
Before the ID'ers come and dipsute evolution... (Score:3, Funny)
So, we can talk about STUPID design? (Score:1, Funny)
Science is not scientific (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Just a theory? (Score:1, Funny)
> between 100,000,000 and 25,000,000 million years old that says
No. It must be 6009 years and 42 days old.
Re:And evolution is? (Score:1, Funny)
If you have a room full of monkeys and type writers, given enough time you will have a room full of dead monkeys. Hint, it's worth feeding the monkeys once in a while.
Posted as AC because of mod points
Re:Well good (Score:4, Funny)
This is an outrage! (Score:2, Funny)
Well... (Score:3, Funny)
Only if you slam a 40 and overload your bladder...
Re:Don't go jumping up and down just yet (Score:2, Funny)
"Then you can blame CNN. The quotes came from their site."
So, um, you're saying you, um, didn't RTFA?
Re:And evolution is? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Well good (Score:5, Funny)
When all else fails, attribute it to Oscar Wilde.
For the record, "not collecting stamps" is a hobby. It is one of several I have, actually.
Re:This is a defeat for pasta (Score:2, Funny)
Avast ye mateys! Thar be salvation and bounty on the seas!
Re:Co-equal (Score:3, Funny)
Re:And evolution is? (Score:3, Funny)
llamaluvr wrote:
Stop right there. In these discussions, the only definition of ``universe'' that is any way useful is ``everything that exists.'' What Dr. Sagan called the Cosmos.
And there're plenty of things that really, truly, are impossible in any universe (assuming there's more than one) in the Cosmos. Making 1 + 1 equal anything other than 2 (using the most common definitions of those terms) would be one of them, for example.
Exactly. Logic is the rock that even God can't lift. So, if even God's hands are bound by logic, then logic is stronger than God. And who created logic, thus forever defeating God? God couldn't have, for--as we see everywhere we turn--logic is greater than he is.
The only solution to these problems is to realize that the premises are faulty. Don't ask, ``Who created the universe?'' Instead, ask, ``Is there even any possibility that the universe was created?'' The answer, clearly being, ``No,'' makes the first one moot. And, at that point, the idea that there's some all-powerful entity within the universe...but that this entity didn't create it...well, it's instantly obvious just how silly the whole thing is. Might as well talk about turtles springing from the navel of a flower.
Cheers
b&