(Un)Intelligent Design guest lecture by Professor John Wise (SMU Biology) 17 April 2006

Kitzmiller et al. vs. Dover Area School District et al. Memorandum Opinion 20 Dec 2005 by Judge John E. Jones III

Intelligent Design (a.k.a Creationism version 2.0)

• Intelligent Design (ID) from The Skeptic's Dictionary.
• Intelligent Design (ID) from Wikipedia. See also
  • Wedge Strategy
  • Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District
  • Of Pandas and People
  • Irreducible Complexity
  • Discovery Institute
• National Center for Science Education Defending the Teaching of Evolution in the Public Schools
  • 10 Answers to Jonathan Wells' "10 Questions to Ask Your Biology Teacher"
  • ICONS OF EVOLUTION? Why much of what Jonathan Wells writes about evolution is wrong by Alan D. Gishlick
• Creation and Intelligent Design Watch from CSICOP
• The Wedge Strategy from AntiEvolution.org - The Critic's Resource on AntiEvolution
• Scientific Societies Rejecting Intelligent Design
• Show Me the Science - By Daniel C. Dennett in The New York Times 28 August 2005
• Intelligent Design from An Index to Creationist Claims at The TalkOrigins Archive
• Intelligent Design 101: Short on science, long on snake oil by James Curtsinger, The Minnesota Daily 11 October 2005
• Prominent biology professor defends evolution, criticizes intelligent design by Chintan Desai in The California Aggie 05 April 2007
• Trial transcript of Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District Dover, Pennsylvania Intelligent Design Case from The TalkOrigins Archive
• Threw the Book at 'Em from the Scientific American blog 20 December 2005
• Thank you, Michael Behe by PZ Myers 20 December 2005
• Three years and counting by PZ Myers 7 April 2007
• Intelligent design - a pig that doesn't fly
• The Flagellum Unspun - The Collapse of "Irreducible Complexity" by Kenneth R. Miller
• The Emperor's New Designer Clothes by Victor J. Stenger
• Devolution - Why intelligent design isn't by H. Allen Orr
• Behe's Empty Box by John Catalano
• A reducibly complex mousetrap by John H. McDonald
  Quoting from the website:
  'To illustrate the concept of irreducible complexity, Behe uses the common snap mousetrap. "If any one of the components of the mousetrap (the base, hammer, spring, catch, or holding bar) is removed, then the trap does not function. In other words, the simple little mousetrap has no ability to trap a mouse until several separate parts are all assembled. Because the mousetrap is necessarily composed of several parts, it is irreducibly complex." (Behe, 1996).'
  WRONG!
• Evolution for ID-iots on YouTube
• Evangelical Scientists Refute Gravity With New 'Intelligent Falling' Theory - parody of Intelligent Design from the Onion.
• Evolution Is Not Up For Debate -- Except at Republican Debates
• INTELLIGENT DESIGN: CREATIONIST ASTRONOMER DENIED TENURE
  Guillermo Gonzalez was denied tenure at Iowa State University. The Discovery Institute was shocked at this blatant disregard of the cherished principle of "viewpoint diversity." With Jay Richards, a theologian, Gonzalez wrote The Privileged Planet: How Our Place in the Cosmos is Designed for Discovery. It's a daffy twist on the anthropic principle, which was already daffy enough. The simple fact is that his colleagues voted him off the island. It's not like he was tenured and then fired.

The SMU "Darwin vs. Design" event - 13,14 April 2007

Comments in the Dallas Morning News

• Intelligent design event spurs protests - Dallas Morning News article by Jeffrey Weiss 24 March 2007
• Letters in response - Dallas Morning News 28 March 2007
  
  (Science 0 : Pseudoscience 3) All from very religious people. Is Intelligent Design religion? If Intelligent Design is science, then why are so many religious people upset? I'll bet that not a single one of the letter writers has read Charles Darwin's Origin of Species, or has an idea what evolution means. Evolution has nothing to say about God -- it is neutral on the God question.
• Ivory tower hysterics from The Dallas Morning News, 31 March 2007, "Hits and Misses" on the editorial page.
  
  Who said this was going to be a "debate"? All four speakers are pro-Intelligent Design! The name of the presentation should be changed from "Darwin vs. Design" to "Design, Design, Design, and more Design"! Hey, Dallas Morning News, whatever happened to due diligence and fact checking?
• A problem at its genesis by Lee Cullum, Dallas Morning News Opinion Viewpoints 4 April 2007.
• Viewpoint 5 April 2007 sent to the Dallas Morning News by 24 members of the SMU faculty.
• More letters to the editor Dallas Morning News 9 April 2007
  (Science 1 : Pseudoscience 2) Well, at least one was favorable to the science position this time.
• Are the Darwinists afraid to debate us? Dallas Morning News Viewpoint 10 April 2007
  When you say "Darwinist" do you mean "rational thinking person"? No, we're not afraid to debate you; we're afraid that a debate on a university campus will lend legitimacy to your nonsense. We don't debate the AIDS deniers or the flat earthers either. ID has been defeated in science and in the courts; how many more times do we need to fight this battle? "Life is too short to occupy oneself with the slaying of the slain more than once." -- Thomas Huxley
• Sunday letters: SMU and evolution science Dallas Morning News 15 April 2007
  (Science 2 : Pseudoscience 1) Hey, we're ahead for once!

  Comments in the SMU Daily Campus Newspaper

• Open debate in jeopardy SMU Daily Campus editorial 4 April 2007 written by
  • Sarah Levy, a third year law student at SMU and president of the Christian Legal Society which invited the Discovery Institute to SMU (Thanks a pantsfull for that!) and
  • Anika Smith, Press Contact for the Discovery Institute, a detail she omitted from her information at the bottom of the article. She listed only "recent graduate of Seattle Pacific University" with an SPU email address. Are you trying to hide something, Anika? Does ID stand for Intentional Deception?
    
    Once again, this is NOT going to be a "debate". All four speakers are pro-Intelligent Design! But of course you KNEW this already, didn't you, ladies?
• Reply from Professor John Wise, SMU Biological Sciences
• Reply from Professor Randall J. Scalise, SMU Physics
• Freedom of Speech vs. License SMU Daily Campus letter by Professor Ronald Wetherington (SMU Anthropology) 11 April 2007
• The Discovery Institute: harming us with pseudoscience by Ben Wells, SMU Daily Campus editorial 13 April 2007
• Censorship at Darwin vs. Design conference by Ken Ueda 17 April 2007
• Darwin vs. Design conference: A perspective from one group of students 17 April 2007
• The delicate balance of free speech by R. Gerald Turner, President of SMU 17 April 2007
• New name, similar face Intelligent Design may have a theory, but it's not scientific, By: The Daily Campus Ed Board 18 April 2007
• Response to Professor Wise about Intelligent Design 18 April 2007
• No faith in ID - letter to the editor by Daniel Palos 24 April 2007
• Letter to the Editor by Christopher Strganac 25 April 2007
• Letter to the Editor by Professor John Wise 25 April 2007
• ID claims don't hold up by Professors John Wise and Pia Vogel 26 April 2007
• Why ID is false by Patrick McDonald 30 April 2007
• Rant from Casey Luskin, Esq. at discovery.org 5 May 2007
  • Here's an interesting strategy: When your argument is absolutely devoid of science, attack John Wise.
• Intelligent Design is not science: why this matters by Professor John Wise 5 May 2007

  Other comments

• Are Darwinists Afraid to Debate? by Michael D. Lemonick - Eye on Science Blog from Time Magazine, with CNN
• Science Professors at SMU Protest Intelligent-Design Conference - from The Chronicle of Higher Education News Blog
  
  "And, finally, I'm thrilled that SMU is hosting this little band of lawyers, philosophers, Christian apologists and the lone scientist, Mike Behe, who singlehandedly lost the Kitzmiller case for 'intelligent design' by equating, under oath, that 'intelligent design' and astrology were both scientific concepts. Thank you, Mike, biochemist and palm reader.
  I only hope they provide popcorn."
  --Doc Bill, 27 March 2007
• Vacuity of ID: SMU profs upset about upcoming intelligent design conference from The Panda's Thumb
• Duty to speak out against intelligent design from Millard Fillmore's Bathtub
  • Have you spoken against intelligent design, or other dangerous superstition, today?
  • Fearful IDists can't meet ethics challenge in Dallas
• The same nonsense in Knoxville, TN, 24 March 2007 debunked by Jason Rosenhouse
  • Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, and Part 5

Intelligent Design Proponents (IDiots)

• Phillip Johnson - father of the Intelligent Design movement and AIDS denier.
• Michael Behe - professor of biochemistry at Lehigh University
  but read the Biochemistry Department Position on Evolution and "Intelligent Design"
• William Dembski
• Jonathan Wells
• Scott Minnich
• Steve Fuller
• Stephen Meyer

Intelligent Design Opponents

• Eugenie Scott
• Ken Miller
• Barbara Forrest

Books

Read these and learn some science

• The Origin of Species: By Means of Natural Selection or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life by Charles Darwin
  Read it online for free!
• Creationism's Trojan Horse: The Wedge of Intelligent Design by Barbara Forrest and Paul R. Gross
• Evolution vs. Creationism : An Introduction by Eugenie C. Scott
• Not in Our Classrooms: Why Intelligent Design Is Wrong for Our Schools by Eugenie C. Scott and Glenn Branch
• Why Intelligent Design Fails: A Scientific Critique of the New Creationism edited by Matt Young and Taner Edis
• The Blind Watchmaker: Why the Evidence of Evolution Reveals a Universe Without Design by Richard Dawkins
• Why Darwin Matters: The Case Against Intelligent Design by Michael Shermer
  
  or read these and get stoopider
  
  
• Intelligent Design: The Bridge Between Science & Theology by William Dembski
• The Design Revolution: Answering the Toughest Questions About Intelligent Design by William A. Dembski
• Darwin's Black Box: The Biochemical Challenge to Evolution by Michael J. Behe
• Icons of Evolution: Science or Myth? Why Much of What We Teach About Evolution is Wrong by Jonathan Wells

Quotations:

• "In making this determination, we have addressed the seminal question of whether ID is science. We have concluded that it is not, and moreover that ID cannot uncouple itself from its creationist, and thus religious, antecedents."
  --Judge John E. Jones III, Kitzmiller et al. vs. Dover Area School District et al. Memorandum Opinion 20 Dec 2005
  
  
• "Intelligent design isn't science, even though it pretends to be. If you want to teach it in schools, intelligent design should be taught when religion or cultural history is taught, not science."
  --Reverend George V. Coyne, director of the Vatican Observatory
  
  
• "Evolution is the cornerstone of modern biology" and "intelligent design is not a scientific concept."
  --John Marberger, President George W. Bush's science adviser, responding to Bush's suggestion that we teach intelligent design in the schools
  
  
• "To explain the origin of the DNA/protein machine by invoking a supernatural Designer is to explain precisely nothing, for it leaves unexplained the origin of the Designer. You have to say something like 'God was always there', and if you allow yourself that kind of lazy way out, you might as well just say 'DNA was always there', or "Life was always there', and be done with it."
  --Richard Dawkins, The Blind Watchmaker : Why the Evidence of Evolution Reveals a Universe without Design p. 141
  
  
• "While we respect Prof. Behe's right to express his views, they are his alone and are in no way endorsed by the department. It is our collective position that intelligent design has no basis in science, has not been tested experimentally, and should not be regarded as scientific."
  --Lehigh University Biochemistry Department Position on Evolution and "Intelligent Design"
  
  
• "Dembski's law of conservation of information and the rest of Intelligent Design are not just pseudoscience, they are wrong pseudoscience."
  --Victor J. Stenger in The Emperor's New Designer Clothes
  
  
• "Incorporating intelligent design into science classrooms is an obvious impediment to scientific progress."
  --Alan J. Scott in Skeptical Inquirer, Vol. 31, No. 3, May/June 2007
  
  
• "... putting intelligent design in opposition to Darwin is like offering a program on faith healing versus oncology. Faith healing is worth discussing, but not as a scientific alternative to medical treatment ..."
  --Lee Cullum, "A problem at its genesis," Dallas Morning News Opinion Viewpoints 4 April 2007.
  
  Quotations from ID proponents (IDiots)
  I thought you guys claim that ID is science and not religion. Your own words say something quite different:
  
  
• "Intelligent design is just the Logos theology of John's Gospel restated in the idiom of information theory."
  --William Dembski, Signs of intelligence: A primer on the discernment of intelligent design. Touchstone 12(4) (Jul/Aug 1999): 76-84.
  
  
• "the conceptual soundness of a scientific theory cannot be maintained apart from Christ"
  --William Dembski, Intelligent Design: The Bridge between Science and Theology, 1998, p. 209
  
  
• "Our strategy has been to change the subject a bit so that we can get the issue of intelligent design, which really means the reality of God, before the academic world and into the schools."
  --Phillip Johnson, American Family Radio, 10 January 2003.
  
  
• "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."
  --Michael Behe, 2005
  
  
• Eric Rothschild: But you are clear, under your definition, the definition that sweeps in intelligent design, astrology is also a scientific theory, correct?
  Michael Behe: Yes, that's correct.
  --Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, Trial transcript: Day 11 (October 18, 2005), PM Session, Part 1
  
  
• "We've been attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of the culture."
  --Ray Mummert, Dover PA pastor
  
  
• More quotations from ID proponents can be found in The Horse's Mouth by Brian Poindexter, 2003.
  
  

Back to the Debunking Pseudoscience Page