Dean's World

From regular commenter Jaymaster, quoted:

Hello Dean,

Thought you might want to know that local TV news just reported that the entire 8 member, Pro-ID statement Dover school board was voted out tonight. Very interesting.

I haven't found any confirmation of such on the web, but I'll let you know if I do. Now its bed time....

jaymaster

I'm not usually one to pass on rumors but this was too good to pass up.

If true it's hard not to feel celebratory, as voters prove (as they usually do) that they're capable of making rational choices. ID isn't ready for prime time and probably never will be, but it's much, much better if we let voters decide that rather than ramming our will down people's throats via court edicts.

Then again, this might just kick the can further down the road, and mean there'll be other lawsuits in the future. Pft. Ah well. It's still something to celebrate if if it's true.

All Related Posts (on one page) | Some Related Posts:

Vatican Science
The Woodstock of Evolution
Where it belongs
From the Mailbag: Dover School Board Out?
NeoDarwinism, PostDarwinism, The Pope, and Other Dangerous Ideas...
Bring It? Okay, It's Been Brought
More Discussion
A Voice of Sanity on Intelligent Design

(link)

Kevin D (mail) (www):

While I disagree with the assertion that ID "isn't ready for prime time" I have to respect the voice of the people. I'm glad this thing didn't have to go to court. Though, I'm quite confident it would have should the vote have gone the other way.

That this is the reality, I feel, renders the will of the people moot.

11.9.2005 2:38am

Jon P.:

There are actually 9 members on the Dover school board, 1 of whom wasn't up for reelection.

Turnout was pretty good for an off-year, too (33.8%); one can only assume that the issue simply didn't matter to those who didn't vote.

11.9.2005 3:47am

Roger R (mail):

Then again, this might just kick the can further down the road, and mean there'll be other lawsuits in the future.

Oh, certainly there will be other lawsuits, the outcome of the Dover case not withstanding. The nature of the application of the first prong of the Lemon test pretty much breeds these type of cases.

11.9.2005 5:08am

Dean Esmay:

Yeah. I note that over on Dembski's blog he's talking up a school policy that's likely to be picked up other places and looks even more likely to pass court muster:

Teaching the Controversy in Wisconsin.

In reading that I frankly have no problem with it at all, at all. Despite the fulminating "science must be taught to children as received wisdom from on high" folks, like a dogmatic religion--and I must say, I truly HATED teachers like that when I was a kid--this is teaching what's far more important: that questioning is part of the process, that exploring is the most important part.

The "danger" of this is that supposedly the kids will walk away with "dangerous ideas" of their own, that these questions are "beyond their level of sophistication." Horseshit, they walk away with dangerous ideas now, including the idea that scientists lie to them, or that they have to accept on faith anything that someone with a science degree tells them. The important part is the process, and learning how to question, how to frame the questions and how to test for them and how to say "I don't know" or "we don't know yet."

Who (other than biologists) really remembers everything from junior high biology? Does it matter unless you're going to be a biologist? It's learning to think, learning what the scientific method is all about, that's important.

11.9.2005 5:39am

Aziz (mail) (www):

There's an excellent, excellent, excellent writeup on the latest on the K vs D trial over at Panda's Thumb. It's a must read.

11.9.2005 6:50am

Elizabeth Reid:

I just realized that I totally forgot to tell you guys something. After reading the first half of _Of Pandas and People_ this weekend, I realized that two of the claims in the book lead to an eminently testable prediction. Although I don't predict the outcome would turn out to be particularly positive for ID, it's doable.

So the question is, would ID rather be a falsified scientific theory, or a unfalsifiable conjecture? (I promise, it's not a trivial or silly prediction and I'm not just making fun of ID. I don't have time to pull out the book and write this up right this second, but I can do it later today.)

11.9.2005 7:35am

I'll be interested in seeing that. All I know of it was the first chapter. (Although I've seen other creationist books, and I understand this one's similar to those.)

Dembski, at least, claims that the book is badly out of date and that the field's still evolving. One thing I still cannot quite figure out: some sources stress that this entire thing was forced because the Discovery Institute specifically pushed to get this book into the schools. Yet they vociferously and repeatedly deny this in numerous printed statements, and in rather unequivocal terms. I'm not sure what to make of that.

11.9.2005 8:06am

Dean,

I'll write it up and send it to you in email and let you decide what to do with it. I understand that the book does not represent the cutting edge of ID or the views of Behe in particular very well, but since the court case is about the book, it seems reasonable to look at the book itself.

11.9.2005 9:08am

Eric R. Ashley (mail) (www):

Well, we sorta let democracy rule, which is a step in the right direction. Do I, in addition, think democracy made the wrong decision?

Probably so, but accepting that and moving on to try to persuade (rather than gun and court order people) the people in preparation for the next election is the game.

And this is a game that in the end cools off opponents, makes them civil, rather than turning them into partisans in a civil war.

Do I hope that the courts will let (or be told to shut up...like that better) democracy stand, even if the result is against their view, the next time this issue comes up? Yes.

So I will give one, mild cheer this morning.

11.9.2005 10:00am

jaymaster (mail):

It be true. Here's link to a short summary.

http://www.wgal.com/news/5283559/detail.html

11.9.2005 11:09am

Steven Malcolm Anderson (www):

Had I lived there, I would have voted the other way, but I don't live there and if the majority want only evolution taught in their schools, then that's the way it must be. As Alan Stang noted, the only way to keep the Establishment from grabbing all the power is to keep the power local.

11.9.2005 1:10pm

Pixy Misa (mail) (www):

Had I lived there, I would have voted the other way, but I don't live there and if the majority want only evolution taught in their schools, then that's the way it must be.

But that's not the way it is. The new board intends to remove ID from the science curriculum, based on the straightforward reasoning that it isn't science. They have nothing against it being taught in an elective subject such as comparative religion.

Meanwhile in Kansas, the school board redefined the meaning of "science" to include, well, pretty much anything.

11.9.2005 8:50pm