ID and public education

You are wondering? Did you forget to use your Sardonic Font again?

To more fully provide relevant details, the Discovery Institute had originally advised the School board to choose a different approach. But God works in mysterious ways! The pro-I.D. camp insisted on pressing on and pro-I.D. folks rallied to help as best they could.

To everyone’s surprise, the next election unseated all of the sitting Pro-I.D. folks… thus eliminating virtually any attempt to push the case up to higher courts. The only body that had standing was now thoroughly run and operated by people who had been elected to avoid any further efforts to pursue pro-I.D. goals.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Witnesses for the defense
October 17–19
Michael Behe was the first witness for the defense. Behe is professor of biochemistry at Lehigh University in Pennsylvania, and a leading intelligent design proponent who coined the term irreducible complexity and set out the idea in his book Darwin’s Black Box.[26 Darwin's Black Box - Wikipedia ]

As a primary witness for the defense, Behe was asked to support the idea that intelligent design was legitimate science. Behe’s critics have pointed to a number of key exchanges under cross examination, where he conceded that, “There are no peer reviewed articles by anyone advocating for intelligent design supported by pertinent experiments or calculations which provide detailed rigorous accounts of how intelligent design of any biological system occurred.”[27]

In response to a question about astrology he explained: “Under my definition, a scientific theory is a proposed explanation which focuses or points to physical, observable data and logical inferences. There are many things throughout the history of science which we now think to be incorrect which nonetheless… would fit that definition. Yes, astrology is in fact one, and so is the ether theory of the propagation of light, and… many other theories as well.”[28]

His simulation modelling of evolution with David Snoke described in a 2004 paper had been listed by the Discovery Institute amongst claimed “Peer-Reviewed & Peer-Edited Scientific Publications Supporting the Theory of Intelligent Design”,[29] but under oath he accepted that it showed that the biochemical systems it described could evolve within 20,000 years, even if the parameters of the simulation were rigged to make that outcome as unlikely as possible.[30][31]

Further information: Michael Behe § Dover testimony
[ Michael Behe - Wikipedia ]