[continued from previous message]

state. Santorum initially supported the Dover creationists in teaching
ID, but when the Discovery Institute started running the bait and
switch, Santorum flip-flopped on the issue during his reelection
campaign. As sad as it was Santorum's Republican opponents in the
primaries questioned Santorum's religious convictions when he stopped supporting teaching intelligent design in Dover. The other Republican candidates understood that teaching ID was a religious issue. Santorum
lost his bid to be reelected, and when he ran for President he no longer supported intelligent design, but claimed to support Biblical creationism.

This is the background history that TO participants need to understand
as they try to recollect what happened with the ID scam on TO for over 2 decades.

The Discovery Institute ID perps have been perpetrating the bait and
switch on their Biblical creationist support base for over 20 years.
They are still using ID as bait, and have never produced any viable ID
science nor done anything positive with their "best evidence" for ID.
They have just kept presenting the bait knowing that, that is all that
ID will ever be.

The current Teach ID propaganda, originally authored by West and Luskin
after Kitzmiller, is likely going to be updated again in 2024 (last
updated in 2021), and Luskin is now associate director of the ID scam
unit of the Discovery Institute, while West is Managing Director of the
CSC, and Vice President of the Discovery Institute. Both authors wanted
to keep using ID as bait after Kitzmiller. Using ID as bait was institutionalized by the Discovery Institute years before Kitzmiller. No
ID science has ever been produced, and nothing positive was ever done
with their "best evidence". All that they have done with ID is use it
as bait for over 20 years. None of the CRSC/CSC fellows have protested
the bait and switch strategy, and none of them have resigned because of
it. More have joined in order to keep using ID as bait. Can anyone demonstrate that fellows like Bechly and Sternberg, who joined in the
scam after Dover, have ever produced any legitimate ID science or done
anything positive with the best evidence for ID that the Discovery
Institute claims to have? All that ID has been for the Discovery
Institute for over 20 years is bait to draw in the rubes. The
obfuscation and denial switch scam is all that they are willing to give
to the rubes at this time, and they tell the rubes that the switch scam
has nothing to do with their ID science.

Using ID as bait was not due to the act of some deranged flunky of the Discovery Institute. Meyer was the director of the ID scam unit of the Discovery Institute at the time he wrote the booklet that the Thomas
More Lawyer quoted from, and when West continued to offer up ID as bait
after Kitzmiller (2007 first edition) he was listed as associate
director of the ID scam unit, and in the teach ID propaganda his
credentials were Vice President for Public Policy and Legal Affairs
Center for Science and Culture, Discovery Institute.

https://web.archive.org/web/20081227132545/http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/filesDB-download.php?command=download&id=1453

By the time West authored the briefing packet for educators, using ID as
bait had been institutionalized by the Discovery Institute. No group of creationists had ever gotten any ID science to teach from the Discovery Institute for half a decade by 2007.

If anyone still wants to remain willfully ignorant of what the ID scam
has been for the last 2 decades, all they should need to do is to try to imagine what things would be like if the Discovery Institute had not
started running the bait and switch scam. The Ohio creationist rubes
would have tried to teach the ID science, then Senator Santorum would
have been cheering them on, and the ID scam would have been tested in
the Federal courts years before Dover. Like the scientific
creationists, even if the Ohio IDiots had decided not to appeal a
Federal court loss there would have been other creationist groups in
other states that would have taken the issue to the Supreme Court, and
there is no evidence that the decision would have been any different
than it had been for the scientific creationists. The Discovery
Institute's Top Six god-of-the-gaps denial arguments had been used by
and had failed the scientific creationists in 1987. There is no reason
to believe that the IDiots would have done any better with the court
that existed at the turn of the century.

Phillip Johnson's admissions after Kitzmiller should leave no doubt that
any honest evaluation would have ended in the failure of the creationist
ID political ploy. The other ID perps have understood that fact for
over 20 years, so all they use ID for is bait. Kitzmiller would have
never needed to have happened because the ID scam would have ended years before, and ID would not have been useful as bait any longer. Like the Institute for Creation Research the Discovery Institute's ID scam unit
might still exist, but like the ICR, existing is about all they would be
doing. The situation would obviously be worse for them than it is at
this time, since they currently continue to use ID as bait.

Ron Okimoto

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

[continued from previous message]

teaching ID in the public schools.  Santorum wrote an editorial before
the bait and switch went down March 14, 2002.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Santorum_Amendment

https://www.arn.org/docs/ohio/washtimes_santorum031402.htm

QUOTE:
"I hate your opinions, but I would die to defend your right to express
them." This famous quote by the 18th-century philosopher Voltaire
applies to the debate currently raging in Ohio. The Board of Education
is discussing whether to include alternate theories of evolution in the classroom. Some board members however, are opposed to Voltaire's defense
of rational inquiry and intellectual tolerance. They are seeking to
prohibit different theories other than Darwinism, from being taught to students. This threatens freedom of thought and academic excellence.

Today, the Board of Education will discuss a proposal to insert
"intelligent design" alongside evolution in the state's new teaching standards.
END QUOTE:

QUOTE:
This opposition to intelligent design is surprising since there is an increasing body of theoretical and scientific evidence that suggests an alternate theory is possible. Research has shown that the odds that even
one small protein molecule has been created by chance is 1 in a billion. Thus, some larger force or intelligence, or what some call agent
causation, seems like a viable cause for creating information systems
such as the coding of DNA. A number of scientists contend that alternate theories regarding the origins of the human species - including that of
a greater intelligence - are possible.

Therefore, intelligent design is a legitimate scientific theory that
should be taught in science classes.
END QUOTE:

QUOTE:
At the beginning of the year, President Bush signed into law the "No
Child Left Behind" bill. The new law includes a science education
provision where Congress states that "where topics are taught that may generate controversy (such as biological evolution), the curriculum
should help students to understand the full range of scientific views
that exist." If the Education Board of Ohio does not include intelligent design in the new teaching standards, many students will be denied a first-rate science education. Many will be left behind.
END QUOTE:

Senator Santorum, obviously, did not know that the bait and switch was
going to go down.  He expected the Discovery Institute to follow through with the teach ID Wedge strategy, and the bait and switch obviously was
run on Santorum as well as the Ohio State school board that day.  The
sad thing is that the Discovery Institute had to run the bait and switch
on Santorum again when the Dover fiasco hit the fan in Santorum's home
state. Santorum initially supported the Dover creationists in teaching
ID, but when the Discovery Institute started running the bait and
switch, Santorum flip-flopped on the issue during his reelection
campaign. As sad as it was Santorum's Republican opponents in the
primaries questioned Santorum's religious convictions when he stopped supporting teaching intelligent design in Dover.  The other Republican candidates understood that teaching ID was a religious issue.  Santorum
lost his bid to be reelected, and when he ran for President he no longer supported intelligent design, but claimed to support Biblical creationism.

This is the background history that TO participants need to understand
as they try to recollect what happened with the ID scam on TO for over 2 decades.

The Discovery Institute ID perps have been perpetrating the bait and
switch on their Biblical creationist support base for over 20 years.
They are still using ID as bait, and have never produced any viable ID science nor done anything positive with their "best evidence" for ID.
They have just kept presenting the bait knowing that, that is all that
ID will ever be.

The current Teach ID propaganda, originally authored by West and Luskin
after Kitzmiller, is likely going to be updated again in 2024 (last
updated in 2021), and Luskin is now associate director of the ID scam
unit of the Discovery Institute, while West is Managing Director of the
CSC, and Vice President of the Discovery Institute.  Both authors wanted
to keep using ID as bait after Kitzmiller.  Using ID as bait was institutionalized by the Discovery Institute years before Kitzmiller. No
ID science has ever been produced, and nothing positive was ever done
with their "best evidence".  All that they have done with ID is use it
as bait for over 20 years.  None of the CRSC/CSC fellows have protested
the bait and switch strategy, and none of them have resigned because of
it.  More have joined in order to keep using ID as bait.  Can anyone demonstrate that fellows like Bechly and Sternberg, who joined in the
scam after Dover, have ever produced any legitimate ID science or done anything positive with the best evidence for ID that the Discovery
Institute claims to have?  All that ID has been for the Discovery
Institute for over 20 years is bait to draw in the rubes. The
obfuscation and denial switch scam is all that they are willing to give
to the rubes at this time, and they tell the rubes that the switch scam
has nothing to do with their ID science.

Using ID as bait was not due to the act of some deranged flunky of the Discovery Institute.  Meyer was the director of the ID scam unit of the Discovery Institute at the time he wrote the booklet that the Thomas
More Lawyer quoted from, and when West continued to offer up ID as bait
after Kitzmiller (2007 first edition) he was listed as associate
director of the ID scam unit, and in the teach ID propaganda his
credentials were Vice President for Public Policy and Legal Affairs
Center for Science and Culture, Discovery Institute.

https://web.archive.org/web/20081227132545/http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/filesDB-download.php?command=download&id=1453

By the time West authored the briefing packet for educators, using ID as
bait had been institutionalized by the Discovery Institute.  No group of creationists had ever gotten any ID science to teach from the Discovery Institute for half a decade by 2007.

If anyone still wants to remain willfully ignorant of what the ID scam
has been for the last 2 decades, all they should need to do is to try to imagine what things would be like if the Discovery Institute had not
started running the bait and switch scam.  The Ohio creationist rubes
would have tried to teach the ID science, then Senator Santorum would
have been cheering them on, and the ID scam would have been tested in
the Federal courts years before Dover.  Like the scientific
creationists, even if the Ohio IDiots had decided not to appeal a
Federal court loss there would have been other creationist groups in
other states that would have taken the issue to the Supreme Court, and
there is no evidence that the decision would have been any different
than it had been for the scientific creationists.  The Discovery
Institute's Top Six god-of-the-gaps denial arguments had been used by
and had failed the scientific creationists in 1987.  There is no reason
to believe that the IDiots would have done any better with the court
that existed at the turn of the century.

Phillip Johnson's admissions after Kitzmiller should leave no doubt that
any honest evaluation would have ended in the failure of the creationist
ID political ploy.  The other ID perps have understood that fact for
over 20 years, so all they use ID for is bait.  Kitzmiller would have
never needed to have happened because the ID scam would have ended years before, and ID would not have been useful as bait any longer.  Like the Institute for Creation Research the Discovery Institute's ID scam unit
might still exist, but like the ICR, existing is about all they would be doing.  The situation would obviously be worse for them than it is at
this time, since they currently continue to use ID as bait.

Ron Okimoto

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)