Difference between revisions of "Cdesign proponentsists"
Reg32Idaho (talk | contribs) (Clarify role of 'Pandas' book in Kitzmiller lawsuit. Was textbook defendants wanted to specifically recommend to students (not "minor piece of the defense").) |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | The term "'''cdesign proponentsists'''" came into vogue use by evolutionists during and after the [[Kitzmiller vs. Dover Area School District]] trial in [[Pennsylvania]] over the legitimacy of intelligent design as a science. The Dover (Pennsylvania) Area School District had intended a statement be read to ninth grade biology students directing them to a book called [[Of Pandas and People]], an [[intelligent design]] textbook for middle and high school children. During the trial, previous drafts 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 | + | The term "'''cdesign proponentsists'''" came into vogue use by evolutionists during and after the [[Kitzmiller vs. Dover Area School District]] trial in [[Pennsylvania]] over the legitimacy of intelligent design as a science. The Dover (Pennsylvania) Area School District had intended a statement be read to ninth grade biology students directing them to a book called [[Of Pandas and People]], an [[intelligent design]] textbook for middle and high school children. During the trial, previous drafts 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 one notable case, it was shown that the word "creationists" had been partially replaced with "design proponents," strangely resulting in "cdesign proponentsists". |
([[John E. Jones III]]'s 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 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>) | ||
Revision as of 18:51, August 14, 2009
The term "cdesign proponentsists" came into vogue use by evolutionists during and after the Kitzmiller vs. Dover Area School District trial in Pennsylvania over the legitimacy of intelligent design as a science. The Dover (Pennsylvania) Area School District had intended a statement be read to ninth grade biology students directing them to a book called Of Pandas and People, an intelligent design textbook for middle and high school children. During the trial, previous drafts 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 one notable case, it was shown that the word "creationists" had been partially replaced with "design proponents," strangely resulting in "cdesign proponentsists".
(John E. Jones III's 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.[1])