Evolutionist Misrepresents History on Intelligent Design Trials

Once again, it is worth asking that if evolution is a scientific fact with a mountain of evidence, why does it need to be protected from challenges and scrutiny? In 2004, the Kitzmiller v Dover lawsuit was filed because the school district wanted teachers to say that there were problems with evolution. It also referred to the Of Pandas and People textbook that proposed Intelligent Design as an alternative. Katie, bar the door! Someone has the gall, the unmitigated audacity, to doubt Darwin and have students actually think! Evolution must be protected!

It has been twenty years since the ruling which is praised by atheists and other evolutionists. They continue to promote myths, probably because reasoning is difficult for them. One tinhorn from Michigan State University wrote an article that told several blatant falsehoods and misrepresented history. He was an expert witness at that trial.

One of the most common lies from anti-creationists and anti-ID folks is that ID is just another variation of creation science. That'll be the day! The Intelligent Design Movement makes the differences between the camps clear, and this article from Creation Ministries International seems similar to material from other creationists: ID and creation science and two different things. Still, fundamentalist evolutionist tinhorns in the secular science industry still tell the opposite of the truth. Then there are those other falsehoods and misrepresentations...

Michigan State University professor of philosophy Robert Pennock testified during the Dover trial as an expert witness in support of the plaintiffs who sought to ban the teaching of intelligent design. He recently wrote a triumphalist article in the journal American Scientist linking the 100th anniversary of the Scopes trial and the 20th anniversary of the Kitzmiller v. Dover ruling. Unfortunately, Pennock’s article omits key facts about both.

Before I send you to that article to finish reading (or to hear the audio, click the speaker icon), I need to say that it's from an ID site. The authors believe in millions of years in Earth's geologic history, some have beliefs resembling theistic evolution. Also, there is a remark about the early 1980s, "...'creationism' was not strongly associated with young-earth creationism but carried the more generic sense of “belief in a creator.” That doesn't seem right, as the Institute for Creation Research was formed in 1970, and the Creation Research Society began in 1963. In the UK, the Evolution Protest Movement (now the Creation Science Movement) began in 1932.

Despite these things, I reckon that article is worth considering. Ready? The ID article is located at "On Scopes and Dover Trials, Philosopher Robert Pennock Twists History and Science." Of course, I have other items of interest for y'all: Limits of the Intelligent Design Movement and "Inside the Scopes Monkey Trial." And of course others linked within the post above.