HARRISBURG, Pa., Sept. 27 /PRNewswire/ -- The case of Kitzmiller v. Dover
Area School District opened in federal court yesterday with the ACLU calling
its first expert witness in an effort to tell the court how it should define
science. The ACLU is suing the school board of Dover, Pennsylvania for
adopting a policy that requires students to listen to a three-paragraph
statement about the theory of intelligent design.
The ACLU's first expert witness, Dr. Kenneth Miller, testified that the
scientific theory of intelligent design is untestable and therefore
unscientific. Later he contradicted himself by proceeding to discuss how he
has made various arguments in scientific forums testing design theory.
"Most of Dr. Miller's testimony today against intelligent design was
simply based upon a misrepresentation of the scientific theory of intelligent
design," said scientist Casey Luskin, program officer for public policy and
legal affairs with Discovery Institute's Center for Science & Culture.
"Dr. Miller's testimony is disturbing because it demands that the Court
rule on the nature of science and the validity of scientific
theories -- matters which should be left to scientific experts and not be
decided by courts," added Luskin.
Miller also blatantly mischaracterized intelligent design theory as an
argument for a "supernatural agent."
"The scientific method has been used in many fields to detect the action
of intelligence in the natural world," explained Luskin. "Actual statements
by intelligent design proponents clearly show that the scientific theory of
intelligent design does not attempt to address religious questions such as the
nature and identity of the designer, and thus it avoids such untestable
Even the textbook under debate, "Of Pandas and People" (Pandas) makes it
eminently clear that a scientific theory like intelligent design cannot
identify the designer, and cannot state if the designer was supernatural or
natural (see pages 7, and 127-127).
Miller also claimed that "Pandas" offers no positive case for design, even
though the textbook clearly states that "[i]f experience has shown that a
certain class of phenomena results from intelligent causes and then we
encounter something new but similar, we conclude its origin also to be from an
intelligent cause" (page ix).
The trial continues and Discovery Institute Fellows will continue
reporting on the trial at www.evolutionnews.org.
SOURCE Discovery Institute