Changes

Design Theory enjoys broad support within the scientific community which is steadily growing. From 2001 to 2007 over 700 notable scientists had signed the pro-Intelligent Design manifesto ''A Scientific Dissent From Darwinism'' published by the leaders of the design movement, the Discovery Institute. [http://www.dissentfromdarwin.org/] This is largely due to much new scientific evidence from many scientific disciplines such as cosmology, physics, biology that has caused scientists to question the claim of a largely atheistic scientific community that evolution is the best explanation for the origin of life and call for public school science students to study the evidence supporting it in greater detail.

Design Theory enjoys broad support within the scientific community which is steadily growing. From 2001 to 2007 over 700 notable scientists had signed the pro-Intelligent Design manifesto ''A Scientific Dissent From Darwinism'' published by the leaders of the design movement, the Discovery Institute. [http://www.dissentfromdarwin.org/] This is largely due to much new scientific evidence from many scientific disciplines such as cosmology, physics, biology that has caused scientists to question the claim of a largely atheistic scientific community that evolution is the best explanation for the origin of life and call for public school science students to study the evidence supporting it in greater detail.

Though a recent trail in Dover, PA ruled that Intelligent Design was not valid science and "cannot uncouple itself from its creationist, and thus religious, antecedents" this was the product of an activist judge,  John E. Jones III, whose ruling has been described by influential opinion-makers as "biased and religiously bigoted." [http://www.townhall.com/columnists/PhyllisSchlafly/2006/01/02/false_judge_makes_mockery_of_case_for_intelligent_design]

Though a recent trial in Dover, PA ruled that Intelligent Design was not valid science and "cannot uncouple itself from its creationist, and thus religious, antecedents" critics have claimed that this was the product of an activist judge,  John E. Jones III, whose ruling has been described as "biased and religiously bigoted." [http://www.townhall.com/columnists/PhyllisSchlafly/2006/01/02/false_judge_makes_mockery_of_case_for_intelligent_design] In a speech to the Anti-Defamation League, Jones replied that "had I decided the Dover matter in a different way, I would have then engaged in just the kind of judicial activism which critics decry," stating that he was bound by "over a half century of strong legal precedents."[http://www.adl.org/Civil_Rights/speech_judge_jones.asp]