Changes

<div style="float:right; width:50%"><center>'''The text of the statement'''<ref name="Memo"> [http://www.pamd.uscourts.gov/kitzmiller/kitzmiller_342.pdf Memorandum Opinion] 20th December, 2005.</ref></center>{{QuoteBox|<p>The Pennsylvania Academic Standards require students to learn about Darwin's Theory of Evolution and eventually to take a standardized test of which evolution is a part.</p>

<div style="float:right; width:50%"><center>'''The text of the statement'''<ref name="Memo">[http://www.pamd.uscourts.gov/kitzmiller/kitzmiller_342.pdf Memorandum Opinion] 20th December, 2005.</ref></center>{{QuoteBox|<p>The Pennsylvania Academic Standards require students to learn about Darwin's Theory of Evolution and eventually to take a standardized test of which evolution is a part.</p>

<p>Because Darwin's Theory is a theory, it continues to be tested as new evidence is discovered. The Theory is not a fact. Gaps in the Theory exist for which there is no evidence. A theory is defined as a well-tested explanation that unifies a broad range of observations.</p>

<p>Because Darwin's Theory is a theory, it continues to be tested as new evidence is discovered. The Theory is not a fact. Gaps in the Theory exist for which there is no evidence. A theory is defined as a well-tested explanation that unifies a broad range of observations.</p>

<p>Intelligent Design is an explanation of the origin of life that differs from Darwin's view. The reference book, Of Pandas and People, is available for students who might be interested in gaining an understanding of what Intelligent Design actually involves.</p>

<p>Intelligent Design is an explanation of the origin of life that differs from Darwin's view. The reference book, Of Pandas and People, is available for students who might be interested in gaining an understanding of what Intelligent Design actually involves.</p>

{{QuoteBox|[[Discovery Institute]]: Judge Jones's Kitzmiller decision was based upon faulty reasoning, non-existent evidence, and a serious misrepresentation of the scientific theory of intelligent design. Despite Judge Jones's protestations to the contrary, his attempt to use the federal bench to declare evolution a sacred cow turns out to be a textbook case of good-old-American judicial activism. [http://www.discovery.org/csc/traipsing/]}}

{{QuoteBox|[[Discovery Institute]]: Judge Jones's Kitzmiller decision was based upon faulty reasoning, non-existent evidence, and a serious misrepresentation of the scientific theory of intelligent design. Despite Judge Jones's protestations to the contrary, his attempt to use the federal bench to declare evolution a sacred cow turns out to be a textbook case of good-old-American judicial activism. [http://www.discovery.org/csc/traipsing/]}}

The [[Discovery Institute]] found that in his decision Jones has copied verbatim from the [[ACLU]]'s proposed findings of fact. Casey Luskin, a scholar of [[intelligent design]] at the Discovery Institute, has shown that the decision amounts to judicial activism, although Judge Jones has denied this.<ref name="Activ" />

The [[Discovery Institute]] found that in his decision Jones has copied verbatim from the [[ACLU]]'s proposed findings of fact. Casey Luskin, a scholar of [[intelligent design]] at the Discovery Institute has shown that the decision amounts to judicial activism, although Judge Jones has denied this.<ref name="Activ" />

Judge Jones gave many public statements and speeches after his ruling.  On one occasion he stated, "Those who disagree with our holding will likely mark it as the product of an activist judge. If so, they will have erred as this is manifestly not an activist Court.  Rather, this case came to us as the result of the activism of an ill-informed faction on a school board, aided by a national public interest law firm eager to find a constitutional test case on ID, who in combination drove the Board to adopt an imprudent and ultimately unconstitutional policy. 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."<ref name="Memo" /><ref>http://www.adl.org/Civil_Rights/speech_judge_jones.asp</ref>

Judge Jones gave many public statements and speeches after his ruling.  On one occasion he stated, "Those who disagree with our holding will likely mark it as the product of an activist judge. If so, they will have erred as this is manifestly not an activist Court.  Rather, this case came to us as the result of the activism of an ill-informed faction on a school board, aided by a national public interest law firm eager to find a constitutional test case on ID, who in combination drove the Board to adopt an imprudent and ultimately unconstitutional policy. 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."<ref name="Memo" /><ref>http://www.adl.org/Civil_Rights/speech_judge_jones.asp</ref>