"Breathtaking inanity"

So said Judge John E. Jones, describing the Dover, PA policy of including a disclaimer about Intelligent Design in their science curriculum. His ruling shot down the policy; really, not just shot down, but attacked, deflated, destroyed the argument. His decision included some lovely comments, quoted from the AP article:

"It is ironic that several of these individuals, who so staunchly and proudly touted their religious convictions in public, would time and again lie to cover their tracks and disguise the real purpose behind the ID Policy."

"We find that the secular purposes claimed by the board amount to a pretext for the board's real purpose, which was to promote religion in the public school classroom."

"overwhelming evidence" establishing that intelligent design "is a religious view, a mere re-labeling of creationism, and not a scientific theory."

"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."

Mind you, this judge is a Republican, a churchgoer, and a Bush appointee. He's also heard much, much more about this argument than you or I have. Wow.

Hour 2 of today's Radio Times had a discussion of this whole issue, with both sides weighing in. It's interesting to now hear the Discovery Institute backpedal on the whole thing, saying that the Dover School Board had a fundamental misunderstanding of Intelligent Design. Casey Luskin, Program Officer, Public Policy and Legal affairs of the Discovery Institute, the ID "thinktank", said this morning that "We did not like the wording of their (Dover's school board) policy, we actually opposed the wording of their policy and felt that it was not a clear policy and it was confusing to students. So, I don't necessarily support exactly what the Dover Area School District did." (Approx. 30 min. into the RealAudio broadcast.) Bet he would have loved them if they had won.

He also said, "This is not an issue that a court is supposed to rule on. Whether or not evolution is a solid theory or not, these are matters that are not for the judiciary to decide. These are matters which are to be decided by the scientific community and also for the local control of school boards to decide." Yeah, well, the scientific community has spoken, and they think it's not science. The school board that set this policy has been voted out, so I guess local control of the school board decided. And if it's not for the judiciary to decide, why does the Discovery Institute have a Program Officer for Public Policy and Legal Affairs?

If you want to teach your kids about an intelligent designer for life, the universe and everything, you absolutely should do so. There are these big buildings called churches where they have religious education, and you can probably find one that matches your beliefs closely. They usually do good works too, like feeding the poor, so support that while you're there. But science is science, and religion is religion, and we should keep 'em separate.

Update 10AM 12/22: If you would like to read the whole decision, it's here. And let me say again: attacked, deflated, destroyed the argument for Intelligent Design. Breathtakingly inane, indeed.