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 books editor, Charles Thaxton<ref>[http://www.evolutionnews.org/2006/09/response_to_barbara_forrests_k_4.html ''Response to Barbara Forrest's Kitzmiller Account Part V: Phillip Johnson and Of Pandas and People'', Evolution News & Views]</ref>:

The presentation of this information was regarded as 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 ''Response to Barbara Forrest's Kitzmiller Account Part V: Phillip Johnson and Of Pandas and People'', Evolution News & Views]</ref>:

<blockquote>"I wasn’t comfortable with the typical vocabulary that for the most part creationists were using because it didn’t express what I was trying to do. They were wanting to bring God into the discussion, and I was wanting to stay within the empirical domain and do what you can do legitimately there."</blockquote>

<blockquote>"I wasn’t comfortable with the typical vocabulary that for the most part creationists were using because it didn’t express what I was trying to do. They were wanting to bring God into the discussion, and I was wanting to stay within the empirical domain and do what you can do legitimately there."</blockquote>