Nick Matzke, Darwin Day – O4R/WU – Feb. 9, “Creationism on Trial” Creationism on Trial - Kitzmiller vs. Dover Evolution Case The New Yorker, Dec Darwin Day 2007 Oregonians for Rationality and Willamette University Feb. 9, 2007 Nick Matzke National Center for Science Education

Nick Matzke, Darwin Day – O4R/WU – Feb. 9, “Creationism on Trial” National Center for Science Education What we do: Watchdog group Creationism/evolution archives Networking during crises Information Resource for Teachers Students Media

Nick Matzke, Darwin Day – O4R/WU – Feb. 9, “Creationism on Trial” Time magazine (summer 2005) Dover, PA

Nick Matzke, Darwin Day – O4R/WU – Feb. 9, “Creationism on Trial”

“Intelligent design” “Creation science” Bans on teaching evolution widespread Rise of public education, evolution teaching -Origin of Species History of Evolution & Antievolution : Scopes v. Tennessee The Monkey Trial 1968: Epperson v. Arkansas 1981: McLean v. Arkansas 1987: Edwards v. Aguillard 2005: Kitzmiller v. Dover

Nick Matzke, Darwin Day – O4R/WU – Feb. 9, “Creationism on Trial” Of Pandas and People (1989) Creationists saw hope in one line of Edwards “Intelligent Design” (ID) is born as the new buzzword in the 1989 book Of Pandas and People by Davis and Kenyon Author 1 - Dean Kenyon: Pro- creationism affidavit in Edwards Author 2 - Percival Davis: The Case for Creation (1967, 1983)

Nick Matzke, Darwin Day – O4R/WU – Feb. 9, “Creationism on Trial” McLean v. Arkansas – Dean Kenyon Dropped out of McLean case at the last minute

Nick Matzke, Darwin Day – O4R/WU – Feb. 9, “Creationism on Trial” Of Pandas and People Of Pandas and People (1989), pp

Nick Matzke, Darwin Day – O4R/WU – Feb. 9, “Creationism on Trial” Of Pandas and People Pandas 1989, pp

Nick Matzke, Darwin Day – O4R/WU – Feb. 9, “Creationism on Trial” Dover Area School District

Nick Matzke, Darwin Day – O4R/WU – Feb. 9, “Creationism on Trial” Kitzmiller et al. versus Dover Area School District

Nick Matzke, Darwin Day – O4R/WU – Feb. 9, “Creationism on Trial” Kitzmiller v. Dover

Nick Matzke, Darwin Day – O4R/WU – Feb. 9, “Creationism on Trial” Kitzmiller v. Dover

Nick Matzke, Darwin Day – O4R/WU – Feb. 9, “Creationism on Trial” Kitzmiller v. Dover

Nick Matzke, Darwin Day – O4R/WU – Feb. 9, “Creationism on Trial” ID Not Science

Nick Matzke, Darwin Day – O4R/WU – Feb. 9, “Creationism on Trial” Expert Witnesses for Plaintiffs Ken Miller Biology, Brown Univ. Barbara Forrest History, SELU Kevin Padian Paleontology, Berkeley Robert Pennock Philosophy of Science, Michigan Brian Alters Education, McGill Jack Haught Theology, Georgetown

Nick Matzke, Darwin Day – O4R/WU – Feb. 9, “Creationism on Trial” Expert Witnesses for Defendants Dropped out: John Angus Campbell (rhetoric) William Dembski (Leading ID proponent) Stephen Meyer (Director, Discovery Institute ID program) Dick Carpenter (education) Warren Nord (theology) Michael Behe (biochemistry, Lehigh Univ. Scott Minnich (microbiology, Univ. of Idaho) Steve Fuller (sociology of science, Univ. Warwick, UK)

Nick Matzke, Darwin Day – O4R/WU – Feb. 9, “Creationism on Trial” Does scientific literature exist? Michael Behe, Darwin’s Black Box, 1996: “We can look high or we can look low, in books or in journals, but the result is the same. The scientific literature has no answers to the question of the origin of the immune system.” Michael Behe (biochemistry, Lehigh Univ.

Nick Matzke, Darwin Day – O4R/WU – Feb. 9, “Creationism on Trial” Does scientific literature exist? Michael Behe, Darwin’s Black Box, 1996: “We can look high or we can look low, in books or in journals, but the result is the same. The scientific literature has no answers to the question of the origin of the immune system.”

Nick Matzke, Darwin Day – O4R/WU – Feb. 9, “Creationism on Trial” Does scientific literature exist? In fact, on cross-examination, Professor Behe was questioned concerning his 1996 claim that science would never find an evolutionary explanation for the immune system. He was presented with fifty-eight peer-reviewed publications, nine books, and several immunology textbook chapters about the evolution of the immune system; however, he simply insisted that this was still not sufficient evidence of evolution, and that it was not “good enough.” (23:19 (Behe)). We find that such evidence demonstrates that the ID argument is dependent upon setting a scientifically unreasonable burden of proof for the theory of evolution. -- Judge Jones

Nick Matzke, Darwin Day – O4R/WU – Feb. 9, “Creationism on Trial” Does scientific literature exist?

Nick Matzke, Darwin Day – O4R/WU – Feb. 9, “Creationism on Trial” The New Yorker, Dec Caption: “At the trial, Michael Behe, the leading intellectual of intelligent design, was cross- examined with cheerful mercilessness by Eric Rothschild. For six weeks, the courtroom of Judge John E. Jones was like the biology class you wished you could have taken.” Rothschild cross-examines Behe

Nick Matzke, Darwin Day – O4R/WU – Feb. 9, “Creationism on Trial” Q. And one of the peer reviewers you mentioned yesterday was a gentleman named Michael Atchison? A. Yes, I think that's correct. Q. I think you described him as a biochemist at the Veterinary School at the University of Pennsylvania? A. I believe so, yes. Q. He was not one of the names you suggested, correct? A. That is correct. Q. In fact, he was selected because he was an instructor of your editor's wife? A. That's correct. My editor knew one biochemistry professor, so he asked, through his wife, and so he asked him to take a look at it as well. Q. And you found out his name later, correct? A. That's right, yes. Rothschild cross-examines Behe Michael Behe

Nick Matzke, Darwin Day – O4R/WU – Feb. 9, “Creationism on Trial” Rothschild cross-examines Behe

Nick Matzke, Darwin Day – O4R/WU – Feb. 9, “Creationism on Trial” Q. Professor Behe, I've shown you an exhibit marked P-754, and that's an article titled -- or a writing titled Mustard Seeds by Dr. Michael Atchison? A. Yes. [...] Q. Professor Behe, I'd like you to look at the […] last paragraph on the first page, and I'm going to read this for the record. This is what Professor Atchison wrote. While I was identifying myself as a Christian -- MR. MUISE: Objection, Your Honor. […] My looking at this, it appears that he's just try to make an attack against Professor Atchison because he apparently has some religious views, which apparently is a theme throughout this case. ROTHCHILD: That is absolutely not the case, Your Honor. And I think that will become clear as we go through the document. THE COURT: All right. Inasmuch as this is a bench trial, I'm going to give Mr. Rothschild some latitude. I'll overrule the objection. Rothschild cross-examines Behe

Nick Matzke, Darwin Day – O4R/WU – Feb. 9, “Creationism on Trial” Q. “The editor was not certain that this manuscript was a good risk for publication. There were clearly theological issues at hand, and he was under the impression that these issues would be poorly received by the scientific community. If the tenets of Darwinian evolution were completely accepted by science, who would be interested in buying the book?” “The editor shared his concerns with his wife. His wife was a student in my class. […] She advised her husband to give me a call. So unaware of all this, I received a phone call from the publisher in New York. We spent approximately ten minutes on the phone. After hearing a description of the work, I suggested that the editor should seriously consider publishing the manuscript.” “I told him that the origin of life issue was still up in the air. It sounded like this Behe fellow might have some good ideas, although I could not be certain since I had never seen the manuscript. We hung up, and I never thought about it again, at least until two years later.” Rothschild cross-examines Behe

Nick Matzke, Darwin Day – O4R/WU – Feb. 9, “Creationism on Trial” ID Not Science

Nick Matzke, Darwin Day – O4R/WU – Feb. 9, “Creationism on Trial” ID struck down – creationism relabeled Barbara Forrest History, SELU

Nick Matzke, Darwin Day – O4R/WU – Feb. 9, “Creationism on Trial” Early Pandas evidence #1

Nick Matzke, Darwin Day – O4R/WU – Feb. 9, “Creationism on Trial” Intelligent Design = Creation science

Nick Matzke, Darwin Day – O4R/WU – Feb. 9, “Creationism on Trial” Intelligent Design = Creation science

Nick Matzke, Darwin Day – O4R/WU – Feb. 9, “Creationism on Trial” Intelligent Design = Creation science

Nick Matzke, Darwin Day – O4R/WU – Feb. 9, “Creationism on Trial” The lineage of Pandas Creation Biology (1983) Biology and Creation (1986) Biology and Origins (1987)

Nick Matzke, Darwin Day – O4R/WU – Feb. 9, “Creationism on Trial” The lineage of Pandas Of Pandas and People (1987) (creationist version) Of Pandas and People (1987) (“intelligent design” version) Of Pandas and People (1989, 1st ed.) Of Pandas and People (1993, 2nd ed.)

Nick Matzke, Darwin Day – O4R/WU – Feb. 9, “Creationism on Trial” Biology and Creation 1986 ID = creationism relabeled Of Pandas and People 1987, version 1 Biology and Origins 1987 Of Pandas and People 1987, version 2

Nick Matzke, Darwin Day – O4R/WU – Feb. 9, “Creationism on Trial” Intelligent Design = Creation science

Nick Matzke, Darwin Day – O4R/WU – Feb. 9, “Creationism on Trial” The evolution of Pandas (Biology and Creation, p. 3-33) 1986: 1987a: (Biology and Origins, p. 3-38) 1987b: (Of Pandas and People p. 3-40) 1987c: (Of Pandas and People, p. 3-41) (Creation Biology, p. 3-34) 1983: The missing link!

Nick Matzke, Darwin Day – O4R/WU – Feb. 9, “Creationism on Trial” Win!

Nick Matzke, Darwin Day – O4R/WU – Feb. 9, “Creationism on Trial” Win!

Nick Matzke, Darwin Day – O4R/WU – Feb. 9, “Creationism on Trial”

Controversy!