Valentine Pontifex
August 10, 2005, 09:12 PM
This is from a brief opposing the defendant's request for summary judgment in the Dover Case. Jon Buell is the publisher of Of Pandas and People (http://www.ncseweb.org/article.asp?category=21) which is the book that introduced the terminology Intelligent design (http://www.ncseweb.org/resources/articles/996_intelligent_design_not_accep_9_10_2002.asp).
Intelligent design followed the Supreme Court’s rejection of creation science as night follows day: At the time that Edwards was decided, the Foundation for Thought and Ethics (a publisher of Christian texts) had been developing Of Pandas and People as a creationist work to advance the FTE’s religious and cultural mission.44 After the Supreme Court rejected the proffered expert opinions in Edwards claiming that creation science is ‘science,’ Kenyon and FTE took their draft textbook (which advocated for creationism) and, with all the elegance of a word processor’s algorithm, replaced references to ‘creationism’ with the new label ‘intelligent design.’45 When they issued Pandas’s first edition just two years later, they presented intelligent design as if it were a new intellectual endeavor rather than merely a rechristening of creationism. But Pandas defines ‘intelligent design’ exactly as an earlier draft had defined ‘creationism.’46
44. Buell 07/14/2005 Testimony at 87; see also Forrest Suppl. Rep. at 10-13.
45. Buell 07/14/2005 Testimony at 98-99; App. IV-G; Forrest Suppl. Rep. at 4-8.
46. Buell 07/14/2004 Testimony at 98-99; Forrest Suppl. Rep. at 5.
Panda's Thumb: Revelations in Kitzmiller v. Dover (http://www.pandasthumb.org/archives/2005/08/revelations_in.html)
NCSE Kitzmiller v. Dover Site (http://www.ncseweb.org/kitzmiller/) (includes document which the above came from)
Intelligent design followed the Supreme Court’s rejection of creation science as night follows day: At the time that Edwards was decided, the Foundation for Thought and Ethics (a publisher of Christian texts) had been developing Of Pandas and People as a creationist work to advance the FTE’s religious and cultural mission.44 After the Supreme Court rejected the proffered expert opinions in Edwards claiming that creation science is ‘science,’ Kenyon and FTE took their draft textbook (which advocated for creationism) and, with all the elegance of a word processor’s algorithm, replaced references to ‘creationism’ with the new label ‘intelligent design.’45 When they issued Pandas’s first edition just two years later, they presented intelligent design as if it were a new intellectual endeavor rather than merely a rechristening of creationism. But Pandas defines ‘intelligent design’ exactly as an earlier draft had defined ‘creationism.’46
44. Buell 07/14/2005 Testimony at 87; see also Forrest Suppl. Rep. at 10-13.
45. Buell 07/14/2005 Testimony at 98-99; App. IV-G; Forrest Suppl. Rep. at 4-8.
46. Buell 07/14/2004 Testimony at 98-99; Forrest Suppl. Rep. at 5.
Panda's Thumb: Revelations in Kitzmiller v. Dover (http://www.pandasthumb.org/archives/2005/08/revelations_in.html)
NCSE Kitzmiller v. Dover Site (http://www.ncseweb.org/kitzmiller/) (includes document which the above came from)