Changes

A minor piece of the defense (Pro-intelligent design) was a book called [[Of Pandas and People]], a science textbook for middle and high school children. During the trial, previous copies of the book were subpoenaed for review. It was discovered that previous versions of the book had the words "creationist," "creationism" and other similar words and phrases in place of every use of the words "intelligent design" and similar words and phrases in later editions. In a single, isolated case, it was shown that the word "creationists" had been partially replaced with "design proponents," strangely resulting in "cdesign proponentsists".

A minor piece of the defense (Pro-intelligent design) was a book called [[Of Pandas and People]], a science textbook for middle and high school children. During the trial, previous copies of the book were subpoenaed for review. It was discovered that previous versions of the book had the words "creationist," "creationism" and other similar words and phrases in place of every use of the words "intelligent design" and similar words and phrases in later editions. In a single, isolated case, it was shown that the word "creationists" had been partially replaced with "design proponents," strangely resulting in "cdesign proponentsists".

The presentation of this information was inherently deceitful, as the litigants failed to mention that the change was made during a long process of adapting areligious elements from creationist sources into the new book, not a mere rebranding.

The presentation of this information was inherently deceitful, as the litigants failed to mention that the change was made during a long process of adapting areligious elements from creationist sources into the new book, not a mere rebranding. The books editor, Charles Thaxton<ref>[http://www.evolutionnews.org/2006/09/response_to_barbara_forrests_k_4.html]</ref>:

[[John E. Jones III]]'s widely condemned verdict was that intelligent design was the same as creationism and that Dover School Board's attempt to allow it to be taught in schools violated the Establishment Clause of the U.S. Constitution's First Amendment.<ref>[http://www.pamd.uscourts.gov/kitzmiller/kitzmiller_342.pdf]</ref>

[[John E. Jones III]]'s widely condemned verdict was that intelligent design was the same as creationism and that Dover School Board's attempt to allow it to be taught in schools violated the Establishment Clause of the U.S. Constitution's First Amendment.<ref>[http://www.pamd.uscourts.gov/kitzmiller/kitzmiller_342.pdf]</ref>