ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags verdict , dover

Reply
Old 20th December 2005, 12:37 PM   #1
KingMerv00
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 14,458
Dover verdict is in!

Sweet.

http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/12/20/in...ign/index.html
KingMerv00 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th December 2005, 12:38 PM   #2
kmortis
Biomechanoid
Director of IDIOCY (Region 13)
Deputy Admin
 
kmortis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: New Texas (aka Southern Tier)
Posts: 30,666
**Dances a dance of joy**
I guess there IS some intelligent life here on earth.

ETA: Doubly so now that I've read the article

Quote:
Jones -- an appointee of President Bush, who backs the teaching of Intelligent Design -- defended his decision in personal terms.
__________________
-Aberhaten did it
- "Which gives us an answer to our question. What’s the worst thing that can happen in a pressure cooker?" Randall Munroe
-Director of Independent Determining Inquisitor Of Crazy Yapping
- Aberhaten's Apothegm™ - An Internet law that states that optimism is indistinguishable from sarcasm

Last edited by kmortis; 20th December 2005 at 12:41 PM.
kmortis is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th December 2005, 12:41 PM   #3
prewitt81
Notoriously Glorious
 
prewitt81's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,196
Fantastic! I just found out myself.
__________________
Knowledge is Power!

"If we want to teach the Moon is green cheese then we'll do it!" -- Eric Hovind defending his father's pro-creationist stance. (http://www.kent-hovind.com/)

"Believe those who seek the truth. Doubt those who find it."

prewitt81 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th December 2005, 12:46 PM   #4
HeyLeroy
Vegan Cannibal
 
HeyLeroy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 5,567
Quote:
"To be sure, Darwin's theory of evolution is imperfect. However, the fact that a scientific theory cannot yet render an explanation on every point should not be used as a pretext to thrust an untestable alternative hypothesis grounded in religion into the science classroom or to misrepresent well-established scientific propositions," Jones writes.
.

Gee, isn't this what we've been saying here all along?
__________________
Cows are in large numbers, and do not serve any other purpose, other than to eat grass, and moo -- makaya325
I my kids.
I ♠ my dog.
I ♣ my baby Harp Seal.
HeyLeroy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th December 2005, 12:47 PM   #5
Schneibster
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 3,966
* Schneibster does a happy dance.
Schneibster is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th December 2005, 12:50 PM   #6
Morrison's Lament
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 271
You guys have my heartfelt condolences that this is even an issue over there

--- G.
Morrison's Lament is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th December 2005, 01:01 PM   #7
kmortis
Biomechanoid
Director of IDIOCY (Region 13)
Deputy Admin
 
kmortis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: New Texas (aka Southern Tier)
Posts: 30,666
Originally Posted by HeyLeroy View Post
.

Gee, isn't this what we've been saying here all along?
[Eric Idle]No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, yes.[/Eric Idle]
__________________
-Aberhaten did it
- "Which gives us an answer to our question. What’s the worst thing that can happen in a pressure cooker?" Randall Munroe
-Director of Independent Determining Inquisitor Of Crazy Yapping
- Aberhaten's Apothegm™ - An Internet law that states that optimism is indistinguishable from sarcasm
kmortis is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th December 2005, 01:41 PM   #8
KingMerv00
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 14,458
Originally Posted by Morrison's Lament View Post
You guys have my heartfelt condolences that this is even an issue over there

--- G.
What's Berlin like this time of year? Can I stay at your place?
KingMerv00 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th December 2005, 01:48 PM   #9
Rockstar
Scholar
 
Rockstar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 91
Now that Intelijunt Desine is unconstitutional, the question is when will we get Creationism dressed up like something else again.

Eden Descent Theory?
Sudden Appearance From Nothing Theory?
__________________
A day without booze is like...well, actually I have no idea what that's like...

http://rockstarramblings.blogspot.com
Rockstar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th December 2005, 01:53 PM   #10
chance
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 430
What's the spin on this decision going to be from the YEC's and or ID proponents, i wonder?
chance is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th December 2005, 01:54 PM   #11
CFLarsen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 42,367
It's a good day.
CFLarsen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th December 2005, 01:57 PM   #12
Bronze Dog
Copper Alloy Canid
 
Bronze Dog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 4,993
Originally Posted by Rockstar View Post
Now that Intelijunt Desine is unconstitutional, the question is when will we get Creationism dressed up like something else again.

Eden Descent Theory?
Sudden Appearance From Nothing Theory?
We've been discussing what it'll get dressed up as.
__________________
Stop Sylvia Browne

Warning: Beware of contaminated water supplies! Suspected source of contamination: Sarah-I

A non-Rockstar Rambler and dissector of Doggerel
Bronze Dog is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th December 2005, 01:57 PM   #13
Ducky
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 11,933
I am now going to par-tay.

Par-tay like it's 1999 I tell you.



(I'm old.)



So how fast is the Kansas board gonne be sued about this?
Ducky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th December 2005, 02:00 PM   #14
Morrison's Lament
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 271
Originally Posted by KingMerv00 View Post
What's Berlin like this time of year? Can I stay at your place?
Berlin is cold but nice this time of year, unfortunately I'm moving to Reykja-***********-vik next week

Hey... that rhymes.

If you want a guided tour of the misery that is Reykjavik, you and any other JREF member are welcome, I might even be able to give you a mattress to sleep on

--- G.
Morrison's Lament is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th December 2005, 02:16 PM   #15
rwguinn
Penultimate Amazing
 
rwguinn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 16 miles from 7 lakes
Posts: 11,104
Originally Posted by chance View Post
What's the spin on this decision going to be from the YEC's and or ID proponents, i wonder?
they'll probably use something like this to show just how rapidly it happens...
"See--We said it was quicker than Evolution can explain"
__________________
"Political correctness is a doctrine,...,which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end."
"
I pointed out that his argument was wrong in every particular, but he rightfully took me to task for attacking only the weak points." Myriad http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=6853275#post6853275
rwguinn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th December 2005, 02:52 PM   #16
Ducky
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 11,933
I just read the decision in full. This part is particularly sweet:

Quote:
We will also issue a declaratory
judgment that Plaintiffs’ rights under the Constitutions of the United States and the
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania have been violated by Defendants’ actions.
Defendants’ actions in violation of Plaintiffs’ civil rights as guaranteed to them by
the Constitution of the United States and 42 U.S.C. § 1983 subject Defendants to
liability with respect to injunctive and declaratory relief, but also for nominal
damages and the reasonable value of Plaintiffs’ attorneys’ services and costs
incurred in vindicating Plaintiffs’ constitutional rights.

So not only did Jones say it's not science and that it violates the constitutional rights of students, but they left the defendants open to civil suit seeking compensation.

Nice message. Not only did the judge say "You're wrong" but he also said "and you can pay for it too."

That'll make IDers think twice...

ETA:
Sorry, I misread. It does not mean they are open to monetary damages per se, it means the defendants have to pay court costs and attorney's fees. That's standard.

Last edited by Ducky; 20th December 2005 at 02:55 PM.
Ducky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th December 2005, 03:14 PM   #17
HighRiser
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: High above Indianapolis
Posts: 1,856
I'm soooooo glad science and common sense have prevailed in this case!
HighRiser is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th December 2005, 03:31 PM   #18
Red Siegfried
Muse
 
Red Siegfried's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 584
Hahahaha. I just got banned from freerepublic.com during a thread about the Dover case for telling a guy who was pursuing a Master's degree in lab tech that "not caring whether he's right or wrong [about ID]" (his words) is pretty sad and that I hope my lab equipment doesn't start rounding pi to 3. Besides, if he didn't care if he was right or wrong, why was he arguing with me?

It's slightly annoying, but for a site that claims to love freedom of speech they are very quick to ban anyone who disagrees with ID, labelling them a troll. And I'm a pretty conservative guy who agrees with most of the rest of what they have on that site!

Funny how these boards let trolls blather on and on and on, on the off chance that they might have something important to say and in some cases they have to actually break the law before they get banned. Who is more tolerant in that case - skeptics or creationists? (I won't go calling all conservatives intolerant, however, because I know they're not - I AM a tolerant conservative - a REAL conservative.)

They are trying to frame the argument as saying that kids should be free to discuss ID in school. I agreed, saying that kids should be free to discuss just about anything in school, but ID still shouldn't be part of the science curriculum.

Maybe I went too far when I said that if kids want to believe ID is science and evolution is a conspiracy against them, that's cool with me because the world needs ditchdiggers too and I like getting my fries nice and hot. What do you think?

Tell me if you think I was out of line:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1544168/posts
__________________
Books are from the Devil and TV is twice as fast.
-Master Shake

Last edited by Red Siegfried; 20th December 2005 at 03:38 PM.
Red Siegfried is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th December 2005, 03:35 PM   #19
Ducky
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 11,933
Originally Posted by Red Siegfried View Post
Hahahaha. I just got banned from freerepublic.com during a thread about the Dover case for telling a guy who was pursuing a Master's degree in lab tech that "not caring whether he's right or wrong [about ID]" (his words) is pretty sad and that I hope my lab equipment doesn't start rounding pi to 3. Besides, if he didn't care if he was right or wrong, why was he arguing with me?

It's slightly annoying, but for a site that claims to love freedom of speech they are very quick to ban anyone who disagrees with ID, labelling them a troll. And I'm a pretty conservative guy who agrees with most of the rest of what they have on that site!

Funny how these boards let trolls blather on and on and on, on the off chance that they might have something important to say and in some cases they have to actually break the law before they get banned. Who is more tolerant in that case - skeptics or creationists? (I won't go calling all conservatives intolerant, however, because I know they're not - I AM a tolerant conservative - a REAL conservative.)

They are trying to frame the argument as saying that kids should be free to discuss ID in school. I agreed, saying that kids should be free to discuss just about anything in school, but ID still shouldn't be part of the science curriculum.

Maybe I went too far when I said that if kids want to believe ID is science and evolution is a conspiracy against them, that's cool with me because the world needs ditchdiggers too and I like getting my fries nice and hot. What do you think?

Tell you what: I'd buy you a beer for that banning if you were in the Twin Cities.

Nice job.
Ducky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th December 2005, 03:41 PM   #20
Red Siegfried
Muse
 
Red Siegfried's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 584
Guess what, dude? I am. I work in Roseville.

Thanks for the offer .. BTW, I was somewhat biting in my comments, but you guys can tell me if I'm out of line or not - I just edited my post above with a link to the thread.

Sorry, I just can't help baiting the fundies sometimes. Gets me in trouble once in a while.
__________________
Books are from the Devil and TV is twice as fast.
-Master Shake
Red Siegfried is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th December 2005, 03:42 PM   #21
BillC
Bazooka Joe
 
BillC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 3,745
Sweet. I expected the decision to favour the plaintiffs. but never remotely expected the judge's verdict would be anything like as damning as it was. Everyone seems to be posting their favourite excerpts, so here is mine:

The citizens of the Dover area were poorly served by the members of the Board who voted for the ID Policy. It is ironic that several of these individuals, who so staunchly and proudly touted their religious convictions in public, would time and again lie to cover their tracks and disguise the real purpose behind the ID Policy.
BillC is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th December 2005, 03:43 PM   #22
Ducky
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 11,933
Originally Posted by Red Siegfried View Post
Guess what, dude? I am. I work in Roseville.

Thanks for the offer .. BTW, I was somewhat biting in my comments, but you guys can tell me if I'm out of line or not - I just edited my post above with a link to the thread.

Sorry, I just can't help baiting the fundies sometimes. Gets me in trouble once in a while.

Understandable! We should get a Twin Cities meeting of skeptics together. We could all meet at the Liffey in St. Paul for Guinness and fun times.

That offer for a pint stands. Let me know if you're down by me sometime.
Ducky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th December 2005, 03:46 PM   #23
BillC
Bazooka Joe
 
BillC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 3,745
Originally Posted by Morrison's Lament View Post
Berlin is cold but nice this time of year, unfortunately I'm moving to Reykja-***********-vik next week

Hey... that rhymes.

If you want a guided tour of the misery that is Reykjavik, you and any other JREF member are welcome, I might even be able to give you a mattress to sleep on

--- G.
The Blue Lagoon is warm all year round!
BillC is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th December 2005, 03:48 PM   #24
Jon.
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 3,450
What a great judgment! I'm only about 2/3 of the way through reading it, but here are some highlights:

On whether the disclaimer is religious in nature:

Quote:
In summary, the disclaimer singles out the theory of evolution for special treatment, misrepresents its status in the scientific community, causes students to doubt its validity without scientific justification, presents students with a religious alternative masquerading as a scientific theory, directs them to consult a creationist text as though it were a science resource, and instructs students to forego scientific inquiry in the public school classroom and instead to seek out religious instruction elsewhere. Furthermore, as Drs. Alters and Miller testified, introducing ID necessarily invites religion into the science classroom as it sets up what will be perceived by students as a "God-friendly" science, the one that explicitly mentions an intelligent designer, and that the "other science," evolution, takes no position on religion. (p. 49)
On whether ID is science:

Quote:
After a searching review of the record and applicable caselaw, we find that while ID arguments may be true, a proposition on which the Court takes no position, ID is not science. We find that ID fails on three different levels, any one of which is sufficient to preclude a determination that ID is science. They are: (1) ID violates the centuries-old ground rules of science by invoking and permitting supernatural causation; (2) the argument of irreducible complexity, central to ID, employs the same flawed and illogical contrived dualism that doomed creation science in the 1980's; and (3) ID’s negative attacks on evolution have been refuted by the scientific community. As we will discuss in more detail below, it is additionally important to note that ID has failed to gain acceptance in the scientific community, it has not generated peer-reviewed publications, nor has it been the subject of testing and research. (p. 64)
On Of Pandas and People, the "textbook" referred to in the Dover School Board's "disclaimer":

Quote:
Accordingly, the one textbook to which the Dover ID Policy directs students contains outdated concepts and badly flawed science, as recognized by even the defense experts in this case. (pp. 86-87)
On the goals of the proponents of ID (referred to as the "IDM" for "Intelligent Design Movement"):

Quote:
After this searching and careful review of ID as espoused by its proponents, as elaborated upon in submissions to the Court, and as scrutinized over a six week trial, we find that ID is not science and cannot be adjudged a valid, accepted scientific theory as it has failed to publish in peer-reviewed journals, engage in research and testing, and gain acceptance in the scientific community. ID, as noted, is grounded in theology, not science. Accepting for the sake of argument its proponents’, as well as Defendants’ argument that to introduce ID to students will encourage critical thinking, it still has utterly no place in a science curriculum. Moreover, ID’s backers have sought to avoid the scientific scrutiny which we have now determined that it cannot withstand by advocating that the controversy, but not ID itself, should be taught in science class. This tactic is at best disingenuous, and at worst a canard. The goal of the IDM is not to encourage critical thought, but to foment a revolution which would supplant evolutionary theory with ID. (pp. 88-89)
Jon. is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th December 2005, 03:49 PM   #25
tkingdoll
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 12,382
DING DONG THE WITCH IS DEAD!

Does anyone else feel like 'we' won? I'm taking this victory really personally even though I'm childless and British.
tkingdoll is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th December 2005, 04:06 PM   #26
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 43,181


Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th December 2005, 04:10 PM   #27
Dragon
Graduate Poster
 
Dragon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,536
Originally Posted by Morrison's Lament View Post
You guys have my heartfelt condolences that this is even an issue over there

--- G.
I don't know about Germany or Iceland, but those of us in the UK have absolutely no reason to feel smug about this: - link

I have enjoyed following the Dover trial and the judgement is more than the icing on the cake - I'm with you, tkingdoll, it does feel like "we" won.
__________________
"We must favour verifiable evidence over private feeling. Otherwise we leave ourselves vulnerable to those who would obscure the truth."
Richard Dawkins - The Enemies of Reason
Dragon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th December 2005, 04:11 PM   #28
Panelman
Student
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 27
Anybody know where we could send some thanks or some attaboy's to Judge Jones.
Panelman is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th December 2005, 04:22 PM   #29
Diamond
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 4,726
I don't care who appointed Judge Jones, but the Judge appears to have the clear thinking of someone in clear command of his facts and not swayed by religious arguments. If this is a Conservative judge (and I've no reason to believe otherwise), then this is the type of Conservatism which I can admire and respect, because it deals head on with religious claims in a secular context without disparagement of religion but standing fully behind established legal precedent which is utterly uncontroversial all the way to the US Supreme Court.

What I hope this judgment does is spur people in Kansas to stand up for their rights under the First Amendment. I note that Red State Rabble is very excited.

Do you think Pat Robertson will issue a fatwa on Judge Jones?
Diamond is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th December 2005, 04:24 PM   #30
Diamond
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 4,726
Originally Posted by Dragon View Post
I don't know about Germany or Iceland, but those of us in the UK have absolutely no reason to feel smug about this: - link

I have enjoyed following the Dover trial and the judgement is more than the icing on the cake - I'm with you, tkingdoll, it does feel like "we" won.
We have no constitution, no separation of church and state - quite the opposite.
Diamond is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th December 2005, 04:30 PM   #31
hellaeon
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,488
PRAISE THE LORD

this rules, what a great day
hellaeon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th December 2005, 04:34 PM   #32
Hawk one
Emperor of the Internet
 
Hawk one's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Right below The Hat.
Posts: 13,685
But if we evolved from monkeys, how come TragicMonkey exists?
__________________
Boynott everything!

If only health care was like video games. Then the ones who could pay for it would get it, and the ones who couldn't would die, like nature intended for people without money. A perfect system, right? RIGHT?

Last edited by Hawk one; 20th December 2005 at 05:45 PM.
Hawk one is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th December 2005, 05:40 PM   #33
William Parcher
Show me the monkey!
 
William Parcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 22,929
I wonder what the courst costs and attorney fees are for this trial (the total liability for a civil suit against the previous Dover board members).

I'm not much pleased that there isn't a mechanism of our courts whereby a suit that is seeking a religious initiative is not allowed or is comprehensively informed that civil suits (to recover costs) would be entertained.
__________________
Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.
William Parcher is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th December 2005, 05:46 PM   #34
ranson
Scheme Monkey
 
ranson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,045
I'm still wary of the judge declaring ID "not science", though. It isn't of course, but allowing a judge to declare that one way or the other sets a dangerous precedent. I know it's been discussed here at length, but I keep picturing oil companies suing climate researchers over global warming . . .
ranson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th December 2005, 05:46 PM   #35
Ducky
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 11,933
Originally Posted by William Parcher View Post
I wonder what the courst costs and attorney fees are for this trial (the total liability for a civil suit against the previous Dover board members).

I'm not much pleased that there isn't a mechanism of our courts whereby a suit that is seeking a religious initiative is not allowed or is comprehensively informed that civil suits (to recover costs) would be entertained.

If I'm not mistaken, they can in fact be held accountable for damages. There would need to be a suit showing damages, but those found to be violating civil rights are held to civil accountability.

I think, in this case, since no damages were sought, none are awarded other than the standard court/attorney costs.

I might be mistaken. I never read the initial complaint.
Ducky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th December 2005, 05:51 PM   #36
patchbunny
Graduate Poster
 
patchbunny's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Right about... here.
Posts: 1,853
Originally Posted by Hawk one View Post
But if we evolved from monkeys, how come TragicMonkey exists?
It's a tragedy, I tell you. A tragedy.

I called into a talk radio program discussing the decision this afternoon and read off the judge's wonderful quote:

"The breathtaking inanity of the Board’s decision is evident when considered against the factual backdrop which has now been fully revealed through this trial. The students, parents, and teachers of the Dover Area School District deserved better than to be dragged into this legal maelstrom, with its resulting utter waste of monetary and personal resources."

Ahh... 'tis a good day.
__________________
"So, they laugh at my boner, will they? I'll show them! I'll show them how many boners the Joker can make!" -- The Joker, Batman #66
patchbunny is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th December 2005, 06:03 PM   #37
Red Siegfried
Muse
 
Red Siegfried's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 584
Originally Posted by fowlsound View Post
If I'm not mistaken, they can in fact be held accountable for damages. There would need to be a suit showing damages, but those found to be violating civil rights are held to civil accountability.

I think, in this case, since no damages were sought, none are awarded other than the standard court/attorney costs.

I might be mistaken. I never read the initial complaint.
Rhetorical question: What price should one pay for attempted murder of the truth?
__________________
Books are from the Devil and TV is twice as fast.
-Master Shake
Red Siegfried is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th December 2005, 06:11 PM   #38
William Parcher
Show me the monkey!
 
William Parcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 22,929
Originally Posted by ranson View Post
I'm still wary of the judge declaring ID "not science", though. It isn't of course, but allowing a judge to declare that one way or the other sets a dangerous precedent. I know it's been discussed here at length, but I keep picturing oil companies suing climate researchers over global warming . . .
This might be different. I don't think Judge Jones ruled that ID isn't science... he ruled that it is religion. In a case of oil companies vs. climate researchers it would be science vs. science (with one of them presumably being faulty or meaningfully incomplete science).

I'm concerned that judges might be required to determine if something is religious.
__________________
Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.
William Parcher is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th December 2005, 06:18 PM   #39
patchbunny
Graduate Poster
 
patchbunny's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Right about... here.
Posts: 1,853
Originally Posted by William Parcher View Post
This might be different. I don't think Judge Jones ruled that ID isn't science... he ruled that it is religion. In a case of oil companies vs. climate researchers it would be science vs. science (with one of them presumably being faulty or meaningfully incomplete science).

I'm concerned that judges might be required to determine if something is religious.
I believe he did declare ID isn't science.

"The proper application of both the endorsement and Lemon tests to the facts of this case makes it abundantly clear that the Board’s ID Policy violates the Establishment Clause. 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." (p.136)
__________________
"So, they laugh at my boner, will they? I'll show them! I'll show them how many boners the Joker can make!" -- The Joker, Batman #66
patchbunny is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th December 2005, 06:20 PM   #40
ranson
Scheme Monkey
 
ranson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,045
Page 64 of the decision begins a whole section on why ID isn't science. That it is religion was discussed as an earlier part of the decision.
ranson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:27 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.