You are hereProving ID = Creationism
Proving ID = CreationismNCSE staff worked behind the scenes, using NCSE archives and subpoenaed documents, to find the missing links tying "intelligent design" to its creationist roots.Hurst v. Newman
On January 10, 2006, Americans United for Separation of Church and State filed a lawsuit on behalf of eleven parents against the school board, superintendent, and a teacher in the El Tejon School District in Lebec, California.
Critique: "Icons of Evolution"
Discovery Institute fellow Jonathan Wells is a major purveyor of misleading, inaccurate, and incorrect statements about evolution. His book Icons of Evolution (2000) is notorious for its distortions and false claims about evolution. Here are resources to help you understand and respond to the misleading claims made by Wells, especially in Icons. Forrest's Testimony: "Creationism" and "ID"
Here are the now-famous word-count charts used by Barbara Forrest in her testimony in Kitzmiller v. Dover. These charts showed that the words "creation" and "creationist" were systematically changed to "intelligent design" and "design proponent" in the drafts for the book Of Pandas and People, in the aftermath of the 1987 Supreme Court case Edwards v. Aguillard .
Click the images for an enlarged view: The "Pandas" Drafts
An excerpt from Nicholas Matzke's article Design on Trial: How NCSE Helped Win the Kitzmiller Case. Reports of the National Center for Science Education 26(1-2), 37-44. (Some HTML links have been added, otherwise the text is original.) Padian's Expert Testimony
Kevin Padian's testimony and slides in the Kitzmiller caseThe expert witness testimony given by paleontologist Kevin Padian was a highlight of the Kitzmiller v. Dover trial. His testimony and the slides he showed to the court are now available here, via the links at the bottom of his page. Farewell to the Santorum Amendment?Title: Farewell to the Santorum Amendment? Issue: 1–2 Despite the claims of creationists and other ideological opponents of evolution, the so-called Santorum Amendment - which, by singling out evolution as uniquely "controversial", was apparently intended to discourage evolution education - was not included in the No Child Left Behind Act, passed by Congress in late 2001 and signed into law by President Bush in early 2002. Although the Joint Explanatory Statement of the Committee of Conference contains a brief and not as objectionable mention of evolution, the Joint Explanatory Statement is not part of the law as enacted. Year: 2002 Date: January–April topics: This version might differ slightly from the print publication. What Design Looks LikeTitle: What Design Looks Like Issue: 5–6 They think you just have to move on the face of the waters and wave your hands a bit. It’s not like that at all. —Terry Pratchett, Eric Year: 2003 Date: September–December topics: This version might differ slightly from the print publication. Eight Challenges for Intelligent Design AdvocatesTitle: Eight Challenges for Intelligent Design Advocates Issue: 5–6 Thus far, "intelligent design" advocates have produced many popular books, but essentially no scientific research. (See, for example, Gilchrist 1997; Forrest 2001.) Future success for the movement depends critically on some genuine achievements. In this article, we provide some challenges for intelligent design advocates, particularly William Dembski.
1 Publish a mathematically rigorous definition of CSIYear: 2003 Date: September–December topics: This version might differ slightly from the print publication. Pages
|
