• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Dover verdict is in!

**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

Jones -- an appointee of President Bush, who backs the teaching of Intelligent Design -- defended his decision in personal terms.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
"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.
Click to expand...
.

Gee, isn't this what we've been saying here all along?
 
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?
 
What's the spin on this decision going to be from the YEC's and or ID proponents, i wonder?
 
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?
 
KingMerv00 said:
What's Berlin like this time of year? Can I stay at your place?
Click to expand...

Berlin is cold but nice this time of year, unfortunately I'm moving to Reykja-****ing-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.
 
I just read the decision in full. This part is particularly sweet:

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.
Click to expand...


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:
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
 
Last edited:
Red Siegfried said:
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?
Click to expand...


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

Nice job.
 
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.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom