ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT

The Dover Downs

We?ve finally seen the first full week of witnesses for the defense in Kitzmiller vs. the Dover area school board. Lawyers defending the board called intelligent design shogun, Michael Behe. The biochemist, unsupported by his Lehigh University employers, argued for three days that ID is not creationism ? that ID doesn?t specify a creator, leaving room for a god or gods, past or present, that must have gotten this whole crazy thing started. But oddly enough his ?because-I-said-so,? argument ac

Brendan Maher
We?ve finally seen the first full week of witnesses for the defense in Kitzmiller vs. the Dover area school board. Lawyers defending the board called intelligent design shogun, Michael Behe. The biochemist, unsupported by his Lehigh University employers, argued for three days that ID is not creationism ? that ID doesn?t specify a creator, leaving room for a god or gods, past or present, that must have gotten this whole crazy thing started. But oddly enough his ?because-I-said-so,? argument actually sounds a lot stronger than the defense of Dover District Superintendent, Richard Nilsen. His defense as to whether or not creation was brought up repeatedly at school board meetings and retreats ranged from?I don?t remember? to ?I don?t know.? And when that couldn?t get him out of a corner, he blamed the media.News reports last year from the York Dispatch and the York Daily Record stated that board...

Interested in reading more?

Become a Member of

Receive full access to more than 35 years of archives, as well as TS Digest, digital editions of The Scientist, feature stories, and much more!
Already a member?
ADVERTISEMENT