Wednesday, January 18, 2006

But, but, Mr. Luskin, it's a philosophy course

Looks like my question about the limits of the Dover decision will have to wait for another day. As Discovery Institute counsel Casey Luskin makes clear, the ID folks don't want their cover blown by folks who, to their credit, are at least honest enough to own up to their core beliefs:
Intelligent design is very different from young earth creationism. We at the Discovery Institute believe that intelligent design is constitutional to teach as a science. I understand that Americans United probably disagrees with that. But the fact is that this course originally mixed up intelligent design with the young earth creationist viewpoint. I want you to know that we support your efforts to present different views about biological origins in this philosophy course. We also applaud your efforts to remove the legally problematic creationist materials from the course. But the fact of the matter is that even if this course has been changed and improved, its past history as originally having been formulated to promote Biblical creationism as scientific fact makes this case legally problematic. Unless you get a very sympathetic judge, this course will be struck down as unconstitutional because of its problematic history.
But if you do not cancel this course, and if you let this lawsuit go forward, you are going to lose and there will be a dangerous legal precedent set which could threaten the teaching of intelligent design on the national level. Such a decision would also threaten the scientific research of many scientists who support intelligent design.

Because of the young earth creationist history of this course, this course is not legally defensible and it should be cancelled. Thank you.

Shorter Luskin: "Pay no attention to that theory behind the curtain! We are the Great and Scientific Intelligent Design!"

(Link via the Great, Scientific and Humble PZ Myers at Pharyngula)


Post a Comment

<< Home

see web stats